Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/339,103

METHOD AND SYSTEMS FOR CLEARING BLOOD OF ACTIVE PATHOGENS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 04, 2021
Examiner
DEAK, LESLIE R
Art Unit
3799
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Levine Machine L L C
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
693 granted / 924 resolved
+5.0% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
967
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
47.9%
+7.9% vs TC avg
§102
25.1%
-14.9% vs TC avg
§112
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 924 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Response to Arguments Applicant’s amendments and arguments, filed 4 April 2025, with respect to the rejections of the pending claims over Goodrich have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of Hirsch, as presented below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by WO 2021/203015 to Hirsch. In the specification and figures, Hirsch discloses the method as claimed by Applicant. With regard to claims 1 and 4, Hirsch discloses injecting treated blood into a patient, wherein the blood has been treated with a catalyst (riboflavin), and the blood has been exposed to UV radiation (see pages 6, 25, Table 4, claim 45). With regard to claims 2 and 5, Hirsch discloses that the types of radiation may comprise UVA, UVB, and UVC light (see Table 2). With regard to claim 17, Applicant is not setting forth a step of a method, but is reciting a property of the blood used in the method. Hirsch teaches that the patient whose blood is being treated may have an infection (see p25, claim 1). With regard to claims 18-19, Hirsch discloses that the patient may have a pathogen, including SARS-CoV-2, and the pathogen is inactivated, improving patient outcome (see p 26, claim 11). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by WO 2021/203015 to Hirsch. With regard to claim 3, Hirsch does not disclose that the blood is outside the patient for a predetermined amount of time. However, the amount of time the blood is outside the patient depends on at least treatment volume and flow rate. Hirsch discloses that the treatment volume is variable, which necessarily affects the length of time blood is outside the patient. (see p15 line 31 to p16 line 3). One having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing would have been capable of modifying a treatment volume in order to optimize treatment outcomes, including the amount of time blood was outside a patient’s body. Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by WO 2021/203015 to Hirsch in view of WO 2017/205590 to Sowemimo-Coker et al. In the specification and figures, Hirsch discloses the method substantially as claimed by Applicant. With regard to claims 6-8, Hirsch discloses the steps claimed by Applicant, but not the claimed concentration of riboflavin. Sowemimo-Coker discloses a method of inactivating blood pathogens comprising the steps of adding riboflavin to a blood product in the concentration/ratio of 40-60µM (establishing a ratio of blood product to riboflavin) and irradiating the combined product with UV light between 265-400nm, demonstrating that the reference is relevant to Applicant’s invention as well as the Hirsch reference (see Sowemimo-Coker ¶0077). The concentration (molarity) of riboflavin in the patient as disclosed by Sowemimo-Coker is a dosage. The amount of riboflavin and the resulting ratio of bodily fluid to riboflavin claimed by Applicant is also a dosage. Sowemimo-Coker discloses that the dosage of riboflavin is variable to achieve a desired patient result (i.e., reduction in hemolysis, see ¶0015). It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A). In the instant case, attaining the concentration claimed by Applicant is within the skill of a worker in the art to alter the concentration or ratio of riboflavin combined with patient blood to achieve maximum pathogen activation with minimum hemolysis. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: WO 2014/028688 Erickson Autologous blood transfusion using UV and riboflavin Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LESLIE R DEAK whose telephone number is (571)272-4943. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am to 5:30pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James Kish can be reached on 571-272-5554. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /LESLIE R DEAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799 14 April 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 04, 2021
Application Filed
Oct 11, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 04, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599497
IMPLANTS WITH CONTROLLED DRUG DELIVERY FEATURES AND METHODS OF USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594186
AQUEOUS HUMOR DRAINAGE DEVICE WITH ADJUSTABLE TUBE DIAMETER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12575972
GLAUCOMA STENT AND METHODS THEREOF FOR GLAUCOMA TREATMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569604
METHOD AND DEVICES FOR DETERMINING A TIME POINT FOR MEASURING PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569654
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TREATMENT OF FLUID OVERLOAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+18.0%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 924 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month