Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/681,796

CONTINGENT CARDIO-PROTECTION FOR EPILEPSY PATIENTS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Feb 27, 2022
Examiner
MALAMUD, DEBORAH LESLIE
Art Unit
3792
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Flint Hills Scientific LLC
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
666 granted / 847 resolved
+8.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
891
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.7%
-29.3% vs TC avg
§103
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
§102
43.5%
+3.5% vs TC avg
§112
15.4%
-24.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 847 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 20 November 2025 has been entered. Claim 2 is cancelled; claims 12-14 are withdrawn; claims 1 and 3-11 are pending. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 20 November 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Since they pertain to the amendments to the claims they will be addressed below in the prior art rejection. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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 and 3-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Osorio (U.S. 2012/0083700). Osorio discloses (Figure 1) the implantable medical device including a first electrode (par. 0181) coupled to a first cranial nerve structure and a second electrode coupled to a second cranial nerve structure, the method comprising: obtaining data (par. 0052) relating to at least a portion of a heart beat complex from a patient, the obtained data further related to a heart rate variability (par. 0044; Table 1); comparing the at least the portion of the heart beat complex to stored data relating to the patient; indicating an occurrence of a state change based upon a determination of the comparison; providing a first electrical signal to the first cranial nerve structure of the patient; determining that at least one heart beat complex shape fails to match a reference heart beat complex shape template (par. 0074); verifying the occurrence of the state change based upon the determination that the at least one heart beat complex shape fails to match the reference heart beat complex shape template; and providing a second electrical signal to the second cranial nerve structure. Regarding claim 3, Osorio discloses (par. 0112) the verification of the occurrence of the state change is based on a determination that a portion of data relating to the patient failed to match the portion of the heart beat complex. Regarding claim 4, Osorio discloses (par. 0215) determining a reference heart rate derived shape from the time series of cardiac data where the reference heart rate derived shape comprises a characteristic selected from a second number of phases relative to the reference heart rate derived shape; a number of positive phases relative to the reference heart rate derived shape; a number of negative phases relative to the reference heart rate derived shape; a number of extrema of the heart rate derivative; an area under a curve of a phase; or a number of directions of change of the heart rate derivative. Regarding claim 5, Osorio discloses (par. 0215) the identifying the occurrence of the state change is further based upon a determination that the reference heart rate derived shape matches a portion of the data relating to the patient. Regarding claim 6, Osorio discloses (par. 0215) the data relating to the patient is further related to a heart rate. Regarding claim 7, Osorio discloses (par. 0215) obtaining a time series of cardiac data from the patient; determining a reference heart rate derived shape from the time series of cardiac data where the reference heart rate derived shape comprises at least one characteristic selected from: a number of phases relative to the reference heart rate parameter; a number of extrema of a heart rate derivative; a number of directions of change of the heart rate derivative; an area under a first curve of a first phase; a number of positive phases; or a number of negative phases. Regarding claim 8, Osorio discloses (Table 1) the data relating to the patient comprises at least one of: an amplitude of a P wave; a polarity of the P wave; an amplitude of an R wave; a polarity of a Q wave; a polarity of the R wave; an amplitude of an S wave; a polarity of the S wave; an amplitude of a T wave; a polarity of the T wave; an area under a curve of the P wave; an area under a curve of the Q wave; an area under a curve of the R wave; an area under a curve of the S wave; an area under a curve of the T wave; a width of the P wave; a width of the Q wave; a width of the R wave; a width of the S wave; a width of the T wave; a morphology of the P wave; a morphology of the Q wave; a morphology of the R wave; a morphology of the T wave; a magnitude of a change in a distance from the P wave to the Q wave; a magnitude of a change in a distance from the P wave to the R wave; a magnitude of a change in a distance from the Q wave to the R wave; a magnitude of a change in a distance from the R wave to the S wave; a magnitude of a change in a distance from the R wave to the T wave; a magnitude of a change in a distance from the S wave to the T wave; a magnitude of an S-T segment elevation; a magnitude of an S-T segment depression; a magnitude of a Q-T segment elevation; a magnitude of a Q-T segment depression; a P-R interval; an R-S interval; an S-T interval; an R-T interval; and a Q-T interval. Regarding claim 9, Osorio discloses (par. 0052) the identifying the occurrence of the state change is based upon a determination that a match occurred between the heart beat complex and the stored data relating to the patient. Regarding claim 10, Osorio discloses (par. 0170) taking an action in response to the verification, wherein the action is at least one of: providing a warning of the seizure; logging a time of the seizure; computing one or more seizure indices; logging one or more computed seizure indices; providing at least one treatment of the seizure; and two or more thereof. Regarding claim 11, Osorio discloses (par. 0112) the obtaining further comprises obtaining data relating to at least a portion of a plurality of heart beat complex shapes and the verification is based upon a determination that at least one heart beat complex shape of the plurality of heart beat complex shapes fails to match the reference heart beat complex shape template. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEBORAH L MALAMUD whose telephone number is (571)272-2106. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 1:00-9:30 Eastern. 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, Unsu Jung can be reached on (571) 272-8506. 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. /DEBORAH L MALAMUD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 27, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 11, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Apr 10, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 28, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Jun 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 27, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Nov 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 23, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 26, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598433
VAGAL NERVE STIMULATION DEVICES AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594418
DEVICES AND METHODS FOR NERVE STIMULATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588868
BIPOLAR MAPPING SUCTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586687
SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF DEDUPLICATING DATA COLLECTED BY AN IMPLANTABLE MEDICAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575795
NON-INVASIVE PREDICTION OF RISK FOR SUDDEN CARDIAC DEATH
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+10.0%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 847 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