Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/631,819

METHOD FOR CONTROLLING THE AMOUNT OF ANTICOAGULANT PRESENT IN COLLECTED PLASMA AFTER APHERESIS

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Jan 31, 2022
Examiner
MENON, KRISHNAN S
Art Unit
1777
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Grifols Worldwide Operations Limited
OA Round
4 (Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
71%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
879 granted / 1475 resolved
-5.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
72 currently pending
Career history
1547
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
31.5%
-8.5% vs TC avg
§102
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
§112
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1475 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 and § 103 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. 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) 1, 4-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as anticipated by, or in the alternative, under 35 UCS 103 as unpatentable over Patel et al., (US 2020/0147289.) PNG media_image1.png 930 704 media_image1.png Greyscale Patel teaches a method of plasmapheresis, in which blood drawn from a donor is mixed with an anticoagulant and then separated to its components, to collect plasma and re-infuse the HCT back to the donor. Blood is mixed with AC at the base of the phlebotomy needle (36) from AC supply bag and pump (54.) The blood-AC mixture is separated into plasma and HCT in separator (14) using pump (56.) Plasma collects in container (28). HCT collects in separation chamber (reservoir 32,) which is then reinfused to the donor. Monitoring various flows, such as AC, plasma and HCT – see [0043] Patel uses an equation similar to that of applicant’s for calculating the Vac – see equation 7 in [0049]. Paragraphs [0016], [0017] and [0020] teach calculating Vac based on the anticoagulation ratio calculated based on Hct or as a modified FDA nomogram. In [0048], Patel clearly teaches that plasma collected is under the nomogram and based on patient’s Hct. Even though Patel in specified examples of 44% Hct starts with ACR of 16, all these “aspects” of the method described by Patel shows Vac being depended on the Hct of the patient, and the equation (7) used for ACR is also dependent on Hct. Contrary to applicant’s arguments on the presumption that the ACR in Patel is fixed at 16, Patel does not teach that the process must always start at ACR = 16. This anticipates, or at the least makes obvious, claim 1. Also, when ACR is 16, the value of R will be 17 as shown in the table below. Patel is also recalculating the R value and Vac in subsequent blood draw cycles – see [0063] and [0064], teaching that target volume of plasma product is periodically recalculated throughout the plasmapheresis procedure. Thus claims 1, 2. 9-11 and 14 are anticipated, since the calculated ratio matches that of applicant’s in at least one example. Applicant defines the value of R in page 4, lines 14-15, as “ratio of the anticoagulant composition to the donor's uncoagulated blood during the apheresis extraction process is 1 :R,” which definition is the same as in Patel, but then applicant redefined R using an equation that is different. A comparison of the definitions and the example cited therein is shown below: Applicant’s equation: Patel’s equation 7: PNG media_image2.png 95 235 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 45 312 media_image3.png Greyscale Or, ACR = (Vc/Vac – 1)/(1-Hct) = R-1 R value calculated in page 4, line 25 18.86 ACR value for the same example: 17.86 R value is 17.0 For ACR = 16.0 The aim is to calculate Vac using the equation for R as recited in the claims. Solving the equation for Vac gives: Vac = Vc/(R(1-Hct)+Hct). Compare this equation to Patel’s equation for Vac, above right. The denominator R(1-Hct)+Hct, when substituted for ACR = R-1 results in 1+ ACR.(1-Hct), as in Patel. (Note: Hct in Patel’s equation is expressed as %, which is converted to decimal fraction for subsequent analysis.) Applicant’s R value is Patel’s ACR +1, and the calculated volume of anticoagulant is the same as shown in the table Claims 4, 8: while repeating the process steps to claim 1, recite the amount of AC in collected plasma as 9.1% or less. Patel’s process (Id.) would have the same result, if started with the FDA nomogram of 1:16 ratio, or with Patel’s equation. Vb/Vac = 16. Therefore, (Vb+Vac)/Vac would be > 16. Claims 5-7: HCT value is determined initially externally and then internally as claimed. When external and internal values are the same, it is like a combination. Claims 9-11: while Patel does not teach this explicitly, the ratio would be in that range. Claim 13: blood plasma collected is not a patentable invention, but a routine process. The teaching of Patel also optimizes such collection – see the abstract. The plasmapheresis is fixed volume – see [0056]. See also [0014] and [0016]-[0018]. While Patel may not be describing the steps of claim 1 and claim 4 verbatim, it teaches the process in great details, and such steps are implicit. Moreover, applicant also admits in page 2, that this is a known and routine process. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered. They are addressed in the rejection. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISHNAN S MENON whose telephone number is (571)272-1143. The examiner can normally be reached Flexible, but generally Monday-Friday: 8:00AM-4:30PM. 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, Vickie Kim can be reached on 5712720579. 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. /KRISHNAN S MENON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 31, 2022
Application Filed
Jul 09, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Nov 12, 2024
Response Filed
Dec 11, 2024
Final Rejection — §102
May 06, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
May 08, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Aug 14, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 14, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 25, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 03, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Oct 28, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 28, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 01, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 05, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594366
TECHNIQUES FOR DIALYSIS BASED ON RELATIVE BLOOD VOLUME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582944
METHODS FOR TREATING POROUS MEMBRANES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577705
ASSEMBLY COMPRISING A CENTER-FLUID DISTRIBUTOR AND A MULTI-FIBER SPINNERET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577130
DRINKING WATER DISPENSER WITH ULTRAVIOLET DISINFECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12566160
PILLAR STRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
60%
Grant Probability
71%
With Interview (+11.7%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1475 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