Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/680,636

DEVICE FOR TRANSCATHETER GRABBING AND SECURING A NATIVE MITRAL VALVE LEAFLET TO A PROSTHESIS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Feb 25, 2022
Examiner
BLASS, PARIS MARIE
Art Unit
3774
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
The Regents of the University of California
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
59%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 59% of resolved cases
59%
Career Allow Rate
13 granted / 22 resolved
-10.9% vs TC avg
Strong +47% interview lift
Without
With
+47.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
70
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
48.4%
+8.4% vs TC avg
§102
30.8%
-9.2% vs TC avg
§112
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 22 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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. Response to Amendment The amendment filed 01/27/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 4-10, and 13-21 are pending in the application. Claims 10 and 13-20 remain withdrawn from the application. Claim 21 has been added. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 01/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Zhang fails to disclose that “(i) an actuator operatively coupled to the first grasping component and configured to move it to grab chordae tendineae, and (ii) a prosthetic component comprising a stent that is separately deliverable from the grasping device”, as now required by amended claim 1. However, the Examiner disagrees as Zhang discloses that the anchoring element and valve can be separate components that can be delivered separately from one another (see paragraph [0011] denoting the valve and the anchoring element 120 can be completely separate from one another, see paragraph [0124] saying that the anchoring element and the valve can be delivered in two separate operations). Additionally, Zhang discloses an actuator (395c) operatively coupled to the first grasping component, as the first grasping component is one of the hooks and the actuator is the disclosed anchored control sleeves that are connected to the hooks that enable movement and manipulation of the hooks (see delivery system 300 and actuator 395c in Figure 11B and 11C below, see also paragraph [0133] denoting distal end of each of the anchor control sleeves 395a, 395b, and 395c can enclose or be coupled to a hook of the anchoring element 304, see also paragraph [0130] denoting that the delivery system 300 could deliver a prosthetic valve 302 that is the same as prosthetic valve 100). Zhang additionally discloses wherein the actuator is configured to actuate movement of the first grasping component to grab the chordae tendineae, as the “actuator” allows the physician to move and properly position the hooks into the annulus during the placement operation (see paragraph [0138] denoting that the hooks of the anchoring element 304 can be releasably or reversibly connected to an anchor control sleeve 395a, 395b, and c (e.g., a hook is enclosed by an anchor control sleeve 395a, 395b, and 395c) and the physician can move the anchoring element 304 along either the rotational or longitudinal axis in order to properly position the anchoring element 304 within the native valve annulus prior to positioning and releasing the valve component). Regarding claims 6 and 7, Applicant argues that the Office Action does not provide an articulated, evidence based rationale explaining why a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify Zhang’s self-expanding prosthetic mitral valve system to incorporate Dixon’s actuator-driven grasping structure. The Examiner considers this argument moot in view of the new ground of rejection of claim 6 set forth below over US 20170128203 A1 (hereafter --Zhang--), and the new rejection of claim 7 set forth below over US 20170128203 A1 (hereafter --Zhang--) in view of US 20200078002 A1 (hereafter -- Hacohen--). 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. Claim 6 and 7 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. Claim 6 recites the limitations "the first end" and "the second end" in lines 6 and 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as there is no “first end” or “the second end” of the arm introduced in the claim or the claim from which it depends on. Claim 7 is rejected due to its dependence on claim 6. 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. Claims 1, 4-6, 8-9, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20170128203 A1 (hereafter --Zhang--). Regarding Claim 1, Zhang discloses a grasping device (120) for securing a leaflet component of a native mitral valve, wherein the leaflet component comprises a leaflet and chordae tendineae associated with the leaflet (see paragraph [0091]), the device comprising: a) a first grasping component (see annotated first grasping component in Figure 5 below) configured to grab chordae tendineae of said leaflet component of a native mitral valve (see paragraph [0091]); b) an actuator (395c) operatively coupled to the first grasping component (see delivery system 300 and actuator 392c in Figure 11B and 11C below, see also paragraph [0133] denoting distal end of each of the anchor control sleeves 395a, 395b, and 395c can enclose or be coupled to a hook of the anchoring element 304, see also paragraph [0130] denoting that the delivery system 300 could deliver a prosthetic valve 302 that is the same as prosthetic valve 100), wherein the actuator is configured to actuate movement of the first grasping component to grab the chordae tendineae (see paragraph [0138] denoting that the hooks of the anchoring element 304 can be releasably or reversibly connected to an anchor control sleeve 395a, 395b, and c (e.g., a hook is enclosed by an anchor control sleeve 395a, 395b, and 395c) and the physician can move the anchoring element 304 along either the rotational or longitudinal axis in order to properly position the anchoring element 304 within the native valve annulus prior to positioning and releasing the valve component) c) a second grasping component configured to anchor the leaflet component to a prosthetic component (see paragraph [0113], see also annotated second grasping component in Figure 5 below), wherein the prosthetic component is a stent that is independent of the grasping device (see annotated stent in Figure 5 below, see also paragraphs [0111] and [0113]) and is configured to be delivered separately from the grasping device (see paragraph [0011] denoting the valve and the anchoring element 120 can be completely separate from one another, see paragraph [0124] saying that the anchoring element and the valve can be delivered in two separate operations). PNG media_image1.png 578 894 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 582 743 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 4, Zhang discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the second grasping component comprises a hook to grasp the prosthesis (see paragraph [0113]). The term “hook” is being given its broadest reasonable interpretation, and is being interpreted under the definition “a curved or bent device for catching, holding, or pulling” (see Merriam Webster online, definition 1a). The sutures of the connecting portion 122 are “curved or bent” for holding, catching, and pulling as they connect the two components together. Regarding Claim 5, Zhang discloses the device of claim 4, wherein the hook to grasp the prosthesis further comprises a prosthesis hook actuator and a second detachment region (see annotated prosthesis hook actuator and first detachment region in Figure 11B and 11C above, see also paragraph [0130] denoting that the delivery system 300 could deliver a prosthetic valve 302 that is the same as prosthetic valve 100), wherein the hook is actuated by the prosthesis hook actuator, wherein the hook to grasp the prosthesis, upon anchoring to the prosthetic component, detaches from the prosthesis hook actuator at the second detachment region (see Figures 11B and 11C above, denoting that the hooks that attach the grasping device and the stent are “actuated once the stent is released from the cone 330, as the stent goes into the grasping device upon release). Regarding Claim 6, Zhang discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the first grasping component comprises a grasping arm (see annotated grasping arm in Figure 5 below) comprising a memory wire disposed lengthwise and attached to a surface of the arm (see annotated memory wire in Figure 5 below, see also paragraph [0091] denoting the entire hook 200 is made of shape memory material, the arm therefore comprising “a memory wire” as that is what the entire hook is made out of, the wire being the annotated piece of wire that connects the two pieces of the hook at the tip), wherein the arm is configured to transition from a non-extended state to an extended state to a grasping state (see paragraph [0091] denoting “the hook 200 can expand toward the chordae tendineae during valve prosthesis delivery, their design with shape memory metal allows them to expand and hook between and/or around the chordae tendineae. Optionally, the hooks of the lower support 152 can be pulled toward the chordae tendineae during valve prosthesis delivery, their design with shape memory metal allows them to expand and hook between and/or around the chordae tendinea”, illustrating that the hooks are able to transition from different shapes and angles due to the shape memory material they are made out of). PNG media_image3.png 462 586 media_image3.png Greyscale The limitation “wherein transitioning from the extended state to the grasping state comprises pulling the memory wire to curl the arm such that the first end meets or overlaps the second end of the arm” is given limited patentable weight. The prior art is not required to disclose this function, but merely have the capability of performing the recited function. Since it is explicitly discloses that the hook 200 (comprising of the grasping arm and memory wire) can be pulled toward the chordae tendineae during valve prosthesis delivery, as its design with shape memory metal allows it to expand and hook between and/or around the chordae tendinea (see paragraph [0091]), the grasping arm is able to be pulled on by the memory wire to curl the arm such that the first end meets or overlaps the second end of the arm. Regarding Claim 8, Zhang discloses the device of claim 4, wherein the hook to grasp the prosthesis is disposed at a distal end of the device (see annotated second grasping component and distal/proximal ends in Figures 5 and 6 above). Regarding Claim 9, Zhang discloses the device of claim 8, further comprising a second slide lock adapted to slide between a locked position and an unlocked position along the device (see annotated second slide lock 140 (skirt) in Figures 5 and 6 above, see also paragraph [0094] denoting that 140 is a “skirt”, see paragraph [0104] denoting that the skirt acts as a lock between the two “subassemblies”, meaning the stent and the grasping device), wherein the locked position closes the hook to grasp the prosthesis (see paragraph [0104] denoting that the skirt 140 acts as a lock that locks the anchor (grasping device) to the valve), and wherein the unlocked position allows the hook to grasp the prosthesis to anchor the native mitral leaflet component to the prosthetic component (see paragraph [0104] denoting that elasticity from both the fabric and the native tissue lets the hooks slip into their intended anchor points and then rebound to lock in place). Regarding Claim 21, Zhang discloses a grasping device (120) for securing a leaflet component of a native mitral valve, wherein the leaflet component comprises a leaflet and chordae tendineae associated with the leaflet (see paragraph [0091]), the device comprising: a) a first grasping component (see annotated first grasping component in Figure 5 below) configured to grab chordae tendineae of said leaflet component of a native mitral valve (see paragraph [0091]); b) an actuator (395c) operatively coupled to the first grasping component (see delivery system 300 and actuator 392c in Figure 11B and 11C below, see also paragraph [0133] denoting distal end of each of the anchor control sleeves 395a, 395b, and 395c can enclose or be coupled to a hook of the anchoring element 304, see also paragraph [0130] denoting that the delivery system 300 could deliver a prosthetic valve 302 that is the same as prosthetic valve 100) to grab the chordae tendineae (see paragraph [0138] denoting that the hooks of the anchoring element 304 can be releasably or reversibly connected to an anchor control sleeve 395a, 395b, and c (e.g., a hook is enclosed by an anchor control sleeve 395a, 395b, and 395c) and the physician can move the anchoring element 304 along either the rotational or longitudinal axis in order to properly position the anchoring element 304 within the native valve annulus prior to positioning and releasing the valve component); and c) a second grasping component configured to anchor the leaflet component to a prosthetic component (see paragraph [0113], see also annotated second grasping component in Figure 5 below), wherein the prosthetic component is a stent that is independent of the grasping device (see annotated stent in Figure 5 below, see also paragraphs [0111] and [0113]). PNG media_image1.png 578 894 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 582 743 media_image2.png Greyscale 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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170128203 A1 (hereafter --Zhang--), as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of US 20200078002 A1 (hereafter -- Hacohen-). Regarding Claim 7, Zhang discloses the device of claim 6. Zhang fails to disclose a first slide lock adapted to slide between a locked position and an unlocked position along the device, wherein the unlocked position of the first slide lock permits the arm to transition from the non-extended state to the extended state, wherein the locked position of the first slide lock keeps the arm in the non-extended state or the grasping state. Hacohen discloses a grasping device (see grasping device 80 in Figure 11D below) for securing a leaflet component of a native mitral valve (see paragraph [0480]), wherein the leaflet component comprises a leaflet and chordae tendineae associated with the leaflet (see annotated leaflet and chordae in Figure 11D below), the device comprising: a) a first grasping component configured to grab chordae tendineae of said leaflet component of a native mitral valve; and b) a second grasping component configured to anchor the leaflet component to a prosthetic component (see annotated second grasping component in Figure 11D below, see also paragraph [0534] denoting that barbs or hooks can protrude from the grasping device and into the prosthesis 40 to facilitate coupling). Hacohen teaches further comprising a first slide lock adapted to slide between a locked position and an unlocked position along the device (see locked and unlocked positions and first slide lock in Figures 5B and 5D below). The word “slide” is being given its broadest interpretation by interpreting the term to mean “to change position.” PNG media_image4.png 426 920 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 555 782 media_image5.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the device further comprise a first slide lock adapted to slide between a locked position and an unlocked position along the device, as taught by Hacohen, as by doing so would further anchor and/or provide sealing for the prosthetic valve (see paragraph [0496]) to the native valve, as well as would seal the arm of the grasping component if applied onto it, as it is taught by Hacohen that the slide locks are closed such that what is within the locks are grasped and sealed by the slide locks (106a, 106b) (see paragraph [0494]). The limitation “wherein the unlocked position of the first slide lock permits the arm to transition from the non-extended state to the extended state, wherein the locked position of the first slide lock keeps the arm in the non-extended state or the grasping state” is treated as functional language, that is given limited patentable weight. The prior art is not required to disclose this function, but merely have the capability of performing the recited function. As modified, the device of Zhang discloses a grasping arm and a memory wire attached. The first slide lock can be placed on top of the grasping arm so that when the lock is unlocked (see Figure 5B above), the two arms (and therefore the two ends of the grasping arm) of the lock are able to be opened, making the ends of the grasping arm to be extended away from each other, which can be considered “permitting” movement of the arm from an “non-extended state” to an “extended state.” When the lock is in the locked configuration (see Figure 5D above), the arms of the lock (and therefore the ends of the grasping arms) are pressed together, keeping the arm in the grasping state or non-extended state (depending on if the arms of “grasping” something or not). Therefore, since the grasping arm and slide lock have all the structural features, and since the grasping arm is able to be within the slide lock in Zhang as modified, the position of the lock is able to directly permit the transition and position of the grasping arm as claimed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PARIS MARIE BLASS whose telephone number is (703)756-5375. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9 a.m. - 7 p.m. ET. 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, Melanie Tyson can be reached on 571-272-9062. 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. /PARIS MARIE BLASS/ Examiner, Art Unit 3774 /MELANIE R TYSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3774
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 25, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jul 02, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 25, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jan 27, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 19, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12569334
WINGED GRAFTS FOR TYMPANIC MEMBRANE REPAIR AND AUGMENTATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564488
OSSICULAR REPLACEMENT PROTHESIS WITH CONTROLLABLE STAPEDIAL CONFORMING FUNCTION, MANUFACTURE METHOD THEREOF AND APPLICATOR DEVICE THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12539217
GLENOID IMPLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12478466
Intraocular Lens Punch
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12458498
IMPLANTING GRAFTS TO VALVE LEAFLETS FOR CARDIAC PROCEDURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 04, 2025
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
59%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+47.4%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 22 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