Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/588,373

BRAIN NAVIGATION LEAD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 31, 2022
Examiner
JACOB, OOMMEN
Art Unit
3797
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Alpha Omega Engineering Ltd.
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
692 granted / 880 resolved
+8.6% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
917
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
§103
52.6%
+12.6% vs TC avg
§102
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
§112
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 880 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 arguments filed 11/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of new grounds of rejection. 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. Claims 1-10, 13-18, 20-23 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Younis [US 20040199235 A1] in view of Patil [US 20140081127 A1]. As per claim 1, Younis teaches a method for inferring at least one trajectory inside a brain tissue, comprising: recording a plurality of signals from said brain tissue by electrodes positioned at different spatial locations inside the brain along an insertion trajectory of a lead (Younis Figs 2, 4, ¶0021 sensing using electrodes) during the insertion of said lead into brain tissue (Younis ¶0086 “one or more measurements are made during insertion to ensure that the expected trajectory is being followed”); storing said recorded signals in a memory of a control system during the insertion of said lead (Younis ¶0094-¶0097, channels of signals displayed, ¶0155 “a memory for recording signals and/or signal characteristics of a plurality of leads”); analyzing using a control circuitry of said control system said signals by functionally mapping brain tissue surrounding said insertion trajectory (Younis ¶0051-¶0056, determining brain functions at different locations, Younis ¶0023-¶0024, ¶0077, ¶0084, automatic algorithms using computer), wherein said functionally mapping comprises assigning by said control circuitry a functional indication for a location along said insertion trajectory based on said signals (In view of applicant spec. page 57, functional indication relates to properties from electrophysical behavior as indication for location. Younis Fig 3B steps 356-358. Location assigned based on properties. ¶0098-¶0103, properties obtained from channel data) and using at least one mapping algorithm stored in a memory of said control system (Younis ¶0023 “automatic recognition algorithm”, requires memory); d. inferring by said control circuitry at least one spatially distinct trajectory or a segment thereof being spatially distinct from said insertion trajectory, at a distance from said insertion trajectory based on said functionally mapping (Younis "At 312 and 314, the axial (e.g., along the trajectory) and/or trans-axial (e.g., perpendicular to the trajectory) positioning of lead 206 are optionally adjusted, for example, to iteratively determine the position of location106 in a more exact manner". This implies that additional trajectories are inferred for the feedback loop, i.e. based on the functional mapping. Further any shift in axial position implies at least a segment is spatially distinct) Younis does not expressly teach the at least one spatially distinct trajectory is algorithmically derived from results of said functionally mapping, and delivering by said control system an indication during or after said recording regarding said inferred at least one spatially distinct trajectory. Patil, in a similar field of targeting electrode placement in the brain, teaches the at least one spatially distinct trajectory is algorithmically derived from results of said functionally mapping (Patil Fig 2 steps 206-220, or 228 algorithms form computing paths and alternate paths from virtual paths), and delivering by said control system an indication during or after said recording regarding said inferred at least one spatially distinct trajectory (Patil Fig 4A, l0031 “The virtual path shown in FIG. 3, along with several other nearby virtual paths 22 that were defined by the processor, are displayed in a two dimensional image plane shown in FIG. 4A.”, Figs 8-9). Younis does not discuss any algorithmic determination at step 312 of Fig 3A. Patil discussed algorithm for determining physical paths and alternate paths from a plurality of defined virtual paths, and displaying of the information. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify method in Younis by integrating real-time neural targeting system as in Patil. The motivation would be to improve the ease and accuracy, and reduce surgical risks for brain procedures and like DBS (Patil ¶0005). As per claim 2, Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said delivering comprises delivering said indication with a location of the at least one additional axis shifted trajectory (Patil Figs 8-9). As per claim 3, Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said delivering comprises delivering an indication for a more effective alternative trajectory (Patil Fig 9, ¶0007, ¶0061). As per claim 4, Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said functional mapping comprises calculating a series of functional tags based on the recorded plurality of signals (Younis ¶0108 “above steps use a database of neural traces and/or properties, for example from the same or from different patients”, Fig 7 step 704, ¶0104 “At 358, a location is assigned to each electrode, which associates an apparent functional behavior of the electrode”), and associating each functional tag of the series of functional tags to a depth position along the insertion trajectory (Younis ¶0051 “locating a position of a functional location in a brain”, ¶0116 “…the physical electrodes are grouped to define logical electrodes that have various effective depths of detection”). As per claim 5, Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said inferring comprises calculating by said control circuitry, functional tags associated with said at least one additional axis shifted trajectory or said part of an additional trajectory (Younis Fig 3A steps 312, 314) using signals recorded from a specific combination of said electrodes of said lead (Younis Fig 4, multiple electrodes, ¶0110 “ In this and other electrode designs, smaller electrodes (e.g., of sizes of 25 microns) are optionally used for stimulation and/or sensing of micro-volumes (e.g. single or small numbers of cells) and larger electrodes are used for stimulation and/or sensing of macro-volumes (e.g., multiple cells and general activity)”). As per claim 6, Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said at least one additional axis shifted trajectory comprises a plurality of additional axis shifted trajectories, each with different associated functional tags for a similar depth position (Younis Fig 3A, multiple recordings and feedback loop implies additional trajectories for fine tuning). As per claim 7, Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said analyzing comprising separately analyzing by said control circuitry each of said plurality of signals, and wherein said inferring comprising inferring a plurality of axially-shifted trajectories in a distance of at least 0.5 mm from said lead (Younis ¶0015, “a placement error and/or a desired sensing volume, for example, a length, width and/or depth of 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 20 mm, or any smaller, intermediate or larger dimension” placement and sensing at these distances require inferring trajectories at these distances). As per claim 8, Younis in view of Patil further teaches updating by said control circuitry an insertion step size of said lead based on said functionally mapping of said brain tissue following said analyzing (Younis ¶0021 “locating a brain location using one or more composite sensing steps, … a plurality of measurements are analyzed to determine an exact or more exact (than in a previous estimation) location. Then, a lead used for the measurements is optionally moved to provide another set of measurements. In an exemplary embodiment of the invention, when the lead is inserted, it is inserted in one step to a location … Alternatively or additionally, the lead may be moved in large jumps…”). As per claim 9, Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said recording comprising recording directional signals from sources located inside the brain in a distance of at least 0.2 mm from a measuring electrode on said lead (Younis ¶0015 “micro-electrodes is selected to match a placement error and/or a desired sensing volume, for example, a length, width and/or depth of 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 20 mm, or any smaller, intermediate or larger dimension.”). As per claim 10, Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said analyzing comprising analyzing by said control circuitry said plurality of signals in a single multi-channel model by a multi-channel algorithm (Younis ¶0095-¶0096, multichannel scanning and displaying, requires algorithm), and wherein inferring comprising inferring a single trajectory based on the results of said multi-channel algorithm (Younis Fig 3A, Step 312 after step 310, I a result of the multi-channel sensing). As per claim 13, Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said plurality of signals comprises a plurality of directional signals (Younis ¶0116 “a plurality of electrodes are shorted together to define various directional active channels of lead 206.”), and wherein said recording comprises recording said plurality of directional signals by at least two micro-electrode contacts or at least two macro-electrode contacts, of said lead (Younis Fig 4). As per claims 14-18, 20, they have limitations similar to claims 1-4, 7, 12 and are rejected for same reasons as above. Younis further teaches a brain navigation system, comprising: a lead having an elongated lead body with a distal end shaped to penetrate into brain tissue comprising at least two electrodes located at different circumferential angular positions on a circumference of said elongated lead body (Younis Figs 4A to 4E, ¶0119 “The electrodes may cover a large sector or a small sector, for example, 1o, 10o, 25o or 45o, or any smaller greater or intermediate angular size”), wherein said at least two electrodes are configured to record directional electrical signals from brain tissue surrounding said lead during navigation of said lead along an insertion trajectory (Younis ¶0116 “a plurality of electrodes are shorted together to define various directional active channels of lead 206.”);and a control system electrically connected to said lead (Younis ¶0046 “computing means for determining said location based on said correlation”). As per claim 21, Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said functional indication comprises a functional tag assigned to said location using said at least one mapping algorithm (Younis ¶0104 “At 358, a location is assigned to each electrode, which associates an apparent functional behavior of the electrode”). As per claim 22, Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said functional indication comprises a functional state assigned to said location using a mapping model which includes possible states and observations (Younis Fig 3B steps 356-358, ¶0104 “At 358, a location is assigned to each electrode, which associates an apparent functional behavior of the electrode”, This is based on model which uses properties as discussed in ¶0097-¶0103). As per claim 23, it has limitations similar to claim 1, and is rejected for same reasons as above. Claims 11-12, 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over , Younis in view of Patil as applied to claims 1, 14 above, and further in view of Molnar [US 20110264165 A1]. As per claims 11-12, 19, Younis in view of Patil teaches claims 1, 14 as discussed above. Younis in view of Patil further teaches wherein said recording comprises recording a plurality of directional signals by at least one micro-electrode contact (Younis Fig 4, ¶0116 “a plurality of electrodes are shorted together to define various directional active channels of lead 206””). Younis in view of Patil does not expressly teach at least one macro-electrode contact of said electrodes of said lead. Molnar teaches at least one macro-electrode contact of said electrodes of said lead (Molnar ¶0078 “leads 20 may include both macro electrodes (e.g., rings, segments adapted to sensing local field potentials and stimulation) and micro electrodes (e.g., adapted to sensing spike trains in the time domain) in any combination.”). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify method in Younis in view of Patil by integrating well known electrodes and combinations, as in Molnar for sensing and simulation. The motivation would be to provide leads of different shapes and electrode combinations capable of effectively treating patients (Molnar ¶0078). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OOMMEN JACOB whose telephone number is (571)270-5166. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:00. 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, ANNE M KOZAK can be reached at 571-270-0552. 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. /Oommen Jacob/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 31, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 01, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 08, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 08, 2024
Response Filed
Jun 03, 2024
Response Filed
Aug 26, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 29, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 04, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 18, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 05, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 13, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 18, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596845
SECURE ULTRASOUND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582342
Method and System to Assess Pulmonary Hypertension Using Phase Space Tomography and Machine Learning
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575752
MICROWAVE BREAST CANCER SCREENING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12557998
DERIVATION OF HEARTBEAT INTERVAL FROM REFLECTION SIGNAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12551134
DEVICES, SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TISSUE ANALYSIS, LOCATON DETERMINATION AND TISSUE ABLATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+17.4%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 880 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