Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 17/541,721

LUMINESCENCE PROBE FOR IN VIVO TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT AND CONTROL

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Dec 03, 2021
Examiner
BAKKAR, AYA ZIAD
Art Unit
3796
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Gyrus ACMI, Inc. D/B/A Olympus Surgical Technologies America
OA Round
6 (Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
111 granted / 179 resolved
-8.0% vs TC avg
Strong +43% interview lift
Without
With
+43.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
217
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
§103
49.4%
+9.4% vs TC avg
§102
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
§112
22.9%
-17.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 179 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 . 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) 1, 5, 13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by US 8,201,997 Salour, hereinafter “Salour”. Regarding claim 1, Salour discloses an endoscope (Col. 1, lines 50-51 and Col. 4, lines 24-27), comprising: an endoscope body (Col. 1, lines 50-51 and Col. 4, lines 24-27), including a distal portion (Figure 3, element is the temperature sensing probe that would be located at the distal end of an endoscope) configured for at least partial insertion into a patient (Col. 4, lines 17-27); a laser fiber extendable distally from the distal portion of the endoscope body (Figure 3, element 210; Col. 4, lines 17-27 this medical system can be in the form of an endoscope that is extended into the human body), the laser fiber being configured to at least one of optically sample or treat a target in an internal site of the patient (Figure 3, element 220 and 240 and Col. 3, lines 13-25; used for optical sampling, i.e. imaging); a luminescent mark located on a distal end of the endoscope body (Figure 3, element 290), the luminescent mark having a luminescent characteristic correlative to temperature when the luminescent mark is illuminated (Col. 3, lines 26-27); a light source (Figure 3, element 300) configured to illuminate the target and the luminescent mark with illumination (Col. 3, lines 26-37), the illumination propagating from the light source to the luminescent mark along an illumination optical path disposed outside the laser fiber (See Figure 3, the light transmitted from LED 300 travels along optical path 280 going into optical fiber 200 separate from laser fiber 210), the luminescent mark being configured to generate luminescent light in response to the illumination (Col. 3, lines 26-37), the laser fiber being configured to direct the luminescent light proximally away from the endoscope body (Figure 3, element 320; the light path from 290 is away from the endoscope end); and a sensor located away from the endoscope body (Figure 3, element 330), the sensor being configured to receive the luminescent light from a proximal end of the laser fiber (Figure 3, element 330 receives light 320) and generate a luminescence response signal in response to the luminescent light (Col. 4, lines 6-10), the luminescence response signal providing an indication of a temperature of a target medium proximate the target in the internal site of the patient (Col. 4, lines 6-10, Col. 2, lines 60-65, and Col. 3, lines 26-37). Regarding claim 5, Salour discloses a signal analyzer (Figure 3, element 340; Col. 4, lines 6-10, Col. 2, lines 60-65) coupled to the sensor for analyzing the luminescence response signal and generating a resulting indication of the temperature at the target medium (Col. 4, lines 6-10, Col. 2, lines 60-65, and Col. 3, lines 26-37). Regarding claim 13, Salour discloses the luminescent light comprises at least one of photoluminescence, candoluminescence, or thermoluminescence (Col. 3, lines 33-37; photoluminescence). Regarding claim 15, Salour discloses a feedback analyzer coupled to the sensor (Figure 3, element 340) and including signal processing circuitry (Figure 3, element 340). Regarding claim 16, Salour discloses a controller configured to interpret the luminescence response signal (Figure 3, element 340). 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(s) 6-8, 11-12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,201,997 Salour, hereinafter “Salour”, in view of US 2005/0203497 Speeg et al., hereinafter “Speeg” (cited previously). Regarding claim 6, Salour discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Salour does not disclose a laser system having a controller configured to control the laser fiber for treating the target at the internal site of the patient. However, Speeg discloses a medical apparatus (Abstract) that uses luminescent marks to determine temperature (Para 37) and teaches a laser system (Figure 1, element 10 and Para 21) having a controller (Para 8 and Figure 2, element 25) configured to control the laser fiber for treating the target at the internal site of the patient (Figure 4, element 13 and Para 45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have included the controller and treatment as taught by Speeg, in the invention of Salour, in order to deliver energy treatment in a temperature controlled environment (Speeg; Para 8 and 45). Regarding claim 7, Salour discloses an endoscope (Col. 1, lines 50-51 and Col. 4, lines 24-27), comprising: an endoscope body (Col. 1, lines 50-51 and Col. 4, lines 24-27), including a distal portion (Figure 3, element is the temperature sensing probe that would be located at the distal end of an endoscope) configured for at least partial insertion into a patient (Col. 4, lines 17-27); a laser fiber extendable distally from the distal portion of the endoscope body (Figure 3, element 210; Col. 4, lines 17-27 this medical system can be in the form of an endoscope that is extended into the human body), the laser fiber being configured to at least one of optically sample or treat a target in an internal site of the patient (Figure 3, element 220 and 240 and Col. 3, lines 13-25; used for optical sampling, i.e. imaging); a luminescent mark located on a distal end of the endoscope body (Figure 3, element 290), the luminescent mark having a luminescent characteristic correlative to temperature when the luminescent mark is illuminated (Col. 3, lines 26-27); a light source (Figure 3, element 300) configured to illuminate the target and the luminescent mark with illumination (Col. 3, lines 26-37), the luminescent mark being configured to generate luminescent light in response to the illumination (Col. 3, lines 26-37), the laser fiber being configured to direct the luminescent light proximally away from the endoscope body (Figure 3, element 320; the light path from 290 is away from the endoscope end); and a sensor located away from the endoscope body (Figure 3, element 330), the sensor being configured to receive the luminescent light from a proximal end of the laser fiber (Figure 3, element 330 receives light 320) and generate a luminescence response signal in response to the luminescent light (Col. 4, lines 6-10), the luminescence response signal providing an indication of a temperature of a target medium proximate the target in the internal site of the patient (Col. 4, lines 6-10, Col. 2, lines 60-65, and Col. 3, lines 26-37). Salour does not disclose an actuator configured to adjust a position of the laser fiber; and a controller configured to cause the actuator to automatically adjust the position of the laser fiber based on the temperature of the target medium. However, Speeg teaches an actuator configured to adjust a position of the laser fiber (Para 42 and Figure 7); and a controller (Para 8) configured to cause the actuator to automatically adjust the position of the laser fiber based on the temperature of the target medium (Para 8, “The main processor can automatically control the positioning of the light-emitting section within the treatment site… in response to the measured temperature”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have included the actuator as taught by Speeg, in the invention of Salour, in order to deliver energy treatment in a temperature controlled environment (Speeg; Para 8 and 45). Regarding claim 8, Salour discloses all the limitations of claim 6. Salour does not disclose the controller is configured to adjust at least one setting of the laser system based at least in part on the indication of the temperature at the target medium. However, Speeg teaches the controller is configured to adjust at least one setting of the laser system based at least in part on the indication of the temperature at the target medium (Para 8 and claim 8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have included the controller and treatment as taught by Speeg, in the invention of Salour, in order to deliver energy treatment in a temperature controlled environment (Speeg; Para 8 and 45). Regarding claim 11, Salour discloses all the limitations of claim 6. Salour does not disclose the luminescent mark comprises at least one of a piece of crystal, a crystalline material, a polycrystalline material, an organic component, or an arrangement of quantum dots. However, Speeg teaches the luminescent mark comprises at least one of a piece of crystal, a crystalline material, a polycrystalline material, an organic component, or an arrangement of quantum dots (Para 47; the element 48 contains a known crystal alexandrite). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have included a crystalline material as taught by Speeg, in the invention of Salour, in order to employ light scattering (Speeg; Para 37). Regarding claim 12, Salour discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Salour does not disclose the luminescent mark comprises at least one of crystalline phosphor ceramics, organic components, quantum dots, or nanostructures. However, Speeg teaches the luminescent mark comprises at least one of crystalline phosphor ceramics, organic components, quantum dots, or nanostructures (Para 37; the alexandrite particles can be interpreted as nanostructures as that term is very broad). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have included a nanostructures as taught by Speeg, in the invention of Salour, in order to employ light scattering (Speeg; Para 37). Regarding claim 14, Salour discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Salour does not disclose the luminescent mark has a diameter of about 100 nm or less. However, Speeg teaches the luminescent mark has a diameter of about 100 nm or less (Para 37; alexandrite particles are nanostructures; they can be seen in Figure 6 to compare size with the optical fiber that is meant to be inserted into a human’s veins; it is inherent that the particles are 100 nm or less). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have included a nanostructures as taught by Speeg, in the invention of Salour, in order to employ light scattering (Speeg; Para 37). Claim(s) 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2005/0203497 Speeg et al., hereinafter “Speeg”, in view of US 8,201,997 Salour, hereinafter “Salour”. Regarding claim 17, Speeg discloses a method of monitoring temperature near a target (Abstract) the method comprising: providing a laser fiber (Figure 1, element 13 and Para 34) extendable distally from a distal portion of a medical probe (Figure 1, element 13 being distal from element 12), the laser fiber being configured to at least one of optically sample or treat the target (Figure 4, Figure 1, element 13 and Para 42; The therapeutic device is the optical fiber 13 that is being used to treat a patient in an internal site (see for example Para 44). The positioning device 70 uses rollers to roll, in and out, the optical fiber 13, i.e. the therapeutic device; optical fiber 13 treats a patient); situating a luminescent mark on a distal end of the medical probe (Para 28 discuses that the optical fiber 13 is actuatable to extend distally past element 64, see Figure 4. The luminescent marks are on the distal end of the optical fiber 13 as shown in Figure 6, element 48); illuminating the luminescent mark with illumination to induce luminescence (Para 37) of the luminescent mark (Figure 6, element 48 and Para 37), the luminescent mark having a luminescent characteristic correlative to temperature (Para 37 and 45); and determining a temperature of the target based at least in part on the luminescence signal (Para 37). Speeg does not disclose an endoscope body; the illumination propagating from a light source to the luminescent mark along an illumination optical path disposed outside the laser fiber; the luminescent mark generating luminescent light in response to the illumination, directing the luminescent light proximally away from the endoscope body along the laser fiber; receiving the luminescent light from a proximal end of the laser fiber with a sensor located away from the endoscope body; generating, with the sensor, a luminescence response signal in response to the luminescent light, the luminescence response signal providing an indication of a temperature of a target medium proximate the target; and determining a temperature of the target based at least in part on the luminescence response signal. However, Salour teaches an endoscope body (Col. 1, lines 50-51 and Col. 4, lines 24-27); the illumination propagating from a light source to the luminescent mark along an illumination optical path disposed outside the laser fiber (See Figure 3, the light transmitted from LED 300 travels along optical path 280 going into optical fiber 200 separate from laser fiber 210); the luminescent mark generating luminescent light in response to the illumination (Col. 3, lines 26-37), directing the luminescent light proximally away from the endoscope body along the laser fiber (Figure 3, element 320; the light path from 290 is away from the endoscope end); receiving the luminescent light from a proximal end of the laser fiber with a sensor (Figure 3, element 330) located away from the endoscope body (Figure 3, element 330 receives light 320); generating, with the sensor, a luminescence response signal in response to the luminescent light (Col. 4, lines 6-10), the luminescence response signal providing an indication of a temperature of a target medium proximate the target; and determining a temperature of the target based at least in part on the luminescence response signal (Col. 4, lines 6-10, Col. 2, lines 60-65, and Col. 3, lines 26-37). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have included an endoscope and luminescence response as taught by Salour, in the invention of Speeg, in order to measure temperature when a user is undergoing an endoscopic examination (Salour; Col. 4, lines 17-27). Regarding claim 18, Speeg discloses determining the temperature of the target comprises correlating the luminescent light to temperature based on a lookup table (Para 8 and 37). Regarding claim 19, Speeg discloses the luminescent light comprises at least one of photoluminescence, candoluminescence, or thermoluminescence (Para 37 and 47; photoluminescence). Regarding claim 20, Speeg discloses adjusting at least one setting associated with a treatment device based at least in part on the determined temperature (Para 8 and claim 8). Claim(s) 21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,201,997 Salour, hereinafter “Salour”, in view of US 5,419,312 Arenberg et al., hereinafter “Arenberg”. Regarding claim 21, Salour discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Salour does not disclose the sensor includes a spectrometer configured to generate the luminescence response signal in response to a spectrum of the luminescent light. However, Arenberg discloses an endoscope device capable of diagnosis and treatment (Abstract) and teaches the sensor includes a spectrometer (Col. 20, lines 40-45) configured to generate the luminescence response signal in response to a spectrum of the luminescent light (Col. 21, lines 41-42, 47-51, Col. 22, lines 4-9 and 23-30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have disclosed a spectrometer as taught by Arenberg, in the invention of Salour, in order to allow the spectrometer to read the amount and spectrum of fluorescent light and to determine fluid pressure and temperature levels within the selected body cavity (Arenberg; Col. 22, lines 23-30). Claim(s) 22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 8,201,997 Salour, hereinafter “Salour”, in view of US 2005/0203497 Speeg et al., hereinafter “Speeg”, further in view of US 5,419,312 Arenberg et al., hereinafter “Arenberg”. Regarding claim 22, Salour discloses all the limitations of claim 7. Salour does not disclose the sensor includes a spectrometer configured to generate the luminescence response signal in response to a spectrum of the luminescent light. However, Arenberg discloses an endoscope device capable of diagnosis and treatment (Abstract) and teaches the sensor includes a spectrometer (Col. 20, lines 40-45) configured to generate the luminescence response signal in response to a spectrum of the luminescent light (Col. 21, lines 41-42, 47-51, Col. 22, lines 4-9 and 23-30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have disclosed a spectrometer as taught by Arenberg, in the invention of Salour, in order to allow the spectrometer to read the amount and spectrum of fluorescent light and to determine fluid pressure and temperature levels within the selected body cavity (Arenberg; Col. 22, lines 23-30). Claim(s) 23 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable US 2005/0203497 Speeg et al., hereinafter “Speeg”, in view of US 8,201,997 Salour, hereinafter “Salour”, further in view of US 5,419,312 Arenberg et al., hereinafter “Arenberg”. Regarding claim 23, Speeg discloses all the limitations of claim 17. Speeg does not disclose the sensor includes a spectrometer configured to generate the luminescence response signal in response to a spectrum of the luminescent light. However, Arenberg discloses an endoscope device capable of diagnosis and treatment (Abstract) and teaches the sensor includes a spectrometer (Col. 20, lines 40-45) configured to generate the luminescence response signal in response to a spectrum of the luminescent light (Col. 21, lines 41-42, 47-51, Col. 22, lines 4-9 and 23-30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have disclosed a spectrometer as taught by Arenberg, in the invention of Speeg, in order to allow the spectrometer to read the amount and spectrum of fluorescent light and to determine fluid pressure and temperature levels within the selected body cavity (Arenberg; Col. 22, lines 23-30). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection. Examiner agrees that neither Speeg nor Natarajan discloses endoscopes. For this reason, examiner changed the primary reference to US 8,201,997 Salour to disclose the newly amended limitations. Refer to rejections above for the newly rejected claims. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AYA ZIAD BAKKAR whose telephone number is (313)446-6659. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 am - 5:00 pm M-Th. 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, Carl Layno can be reached on (571) 272-4949. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /AYA ZIAD BAKKAR/ Examiner, Art Unit 3796 /CARL H LAYNO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 03, 2021
Application Filed
Mar 08, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Aug 15, 2024
Response Filed
Oct 26, 2024
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 16, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 03, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 07, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Sep 30, 2025
Interview Requested
Oct 09, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 09, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 09, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 11, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 30, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 03, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599446
ROBOTIC SURGICAL SYSTEM WITH REMOVABLE PORTION AND METHOD OF DISASSEMBLING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12564518
PERFORMING LASER VITREOLYSIS ON AN EYE WITH AN INTRAOCULAR LENS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12544135
APPARATUS AND TECHNIQUES FOR SURGICAL LASER DELIVERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12539069
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR WEARABLE DEVICE WITH EEG AND BIOMETRIC SENSORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12527965
EXTENDABLE AND RETRACTABLE LEAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+43.4%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 179 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