Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/533,933

HANDHELD PRINTER FOR ENHANCED MIXING AND DELIVERY OF MULTI-COMPONENT POLYMERS/BIOMATERIALS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Nov 23, 2021
Examiner
STIGELL, THEODORE J
Art Unit
3783
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Rowan University
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
975 granted / 1245 resolved
+8.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
1290
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
31.3%
-8.7% vs TC avg
§102
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
§112
21.1%
-18.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1245 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Species F (claims 17-22) in the reply filed on 8/26/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 8/26/2025. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 8/26/2025 and 4/29/2022 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 4 of claim 17, “each terminating” should read “each conduit terminating” to correct a minor informality. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. On line 7 of claim 17, there is no antecedent basis for “said at least two passages”. The examiner is assuming that applicant is referring to the previously recited fluid passages but ambiguity remains. Appropriate amendments are required. The dependent claims are rejected by virtue of their dependency on the rejected independent claim. 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. Claim(s) 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Han et al. (US 2010/0217231; hereafter Han). In regard to claim 17, Han discloses an injector (20) for a printer (10) for depositing material from syringes having a barrel and a plunger for dispensing material from the barrel via an outlet (the examiner notes that the printer and syringes are functionally recited), said injector (20) comprising: at least two separate conduits (14, 18), each terminating in a respective connector (24, 22), each connector being configured to connect to a respective syringe (see par. [0059]), each conduit defining a respective fluid passage (16, 28); and a coextending portion (12) in which said at least two passages extend coaxially within an outer conduit wall (wall of 18), and are separated from one another by an inner conduit wall (wall of 14); said inner conduit wall defining at least one opening (66) permitting lateral flow from one of said at least two passages to another of said at least two passages in a direction transverse to a direction of elongation of said at least two passages (see par. [0061]). In regard to claim 18, Han discloses wherein said inner conduit wall defines a plurality of openings (66) permitting lateral flow from one of said at least two passages to another of said at least two passages in a direction transverse to a direction of elongation of said at least two passages (see par. [0061]; 66 is described as “at least one hole or opening implying a plurality as one embodiment). 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han in view of Lewis et al. (US 2003/002320; hereafter Lewis). In regard to claim 19, Han fails to expressly disclose wherein said plurality of openings are spaced longitudinally along a length of said coextending portion. In a similar art, Lewis teaches an inner tubular device with a plurality of openings (90) that are spaced longitudinally along a length of a coextending portion (see Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Han with the opening configuration of Lewis in order to provide a known configuration for a plurality of openings. The modification of Han with the feature of Lewis would predictably be successful because the openings would allow the materials from lumen (28) of Han to mix with the materials in lumen (16) of Han. In regard to claims 20 and 21-22, Han further fails to expressly disclose wherein pairs of said plurality of openings are arranged in axial alignment on opposite sides of said inner conduit wall. In a similar art, Lewis teaches an inner tubular device with a plurality of openings (90) that are spaced longitudinally along a length of a coextending portion (see Fig. 2) and wherein pairs of said plurality of openings (90) are arranged in axial alignment on opposite sides of said inner conduit wall (see Fig. 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Han with the opening configuration of Lewis in order to provide a known configuration for a plurality of openings. The modification of Han with the feature of Lewis would predictably be successful because the openings would allow the materials from lumen (28) of Han to mix with the materials in lumen (16) of Han. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE J STIGELL whose telephone number is (571)272-8759. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5:30 EST. 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, Michael Tsai can be reached at 571-270-5246. 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. THEODORE J. STIGELL Primary Examiner Art Unit 3783 /THEODORE J STIGELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 23, 2021
Application Filed
Apr 10, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594379
Backflow Prevention Mechanism for Drug Delivery Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589231
SUBCUTANEOUSLY CHANGEABLE VASCULAR ACCESS PORT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582440
INSTRUMENT ENTRY GUIDE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582811
Instrument Delivery Device with Nested Housing
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569672
DEVICE, SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TREATING A CORNEAL TISSUE
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+14.6%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1245 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month