Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 17/696,660

METHODS, SYSTEMS AND DEVICES FOR TREATMENT OF CEREBROSPINAL VENOUS INSUFFICIENCY AND MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Mar 16, 2022
Examiner
IGBOKO, CHIMA U
Art Unit
3771
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Exploramed Development, LLC
OA Round
4 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
319 granted / 408 resolved
+8.2% vs TC avg
Strong +46% interview lift
Without
With
+45.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
452
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
42.7%
+2.7% vs TC avg
§102
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
§112
21.8%
-18.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 408 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Response to Amendment The Amendment filed 05/09/25 has been entered. Claim 55 has been amended, and claims 42-54 remain withdrawn. Claims 55-62 are addressed in the following office action. Claim Objections Claim 55 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 26, “which between” should be “which is between”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. 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. Claims 55-62 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Concerning claim 55, the applicant’s original disclosure fails to divulge “an expansion limiting member where an entire length of the expansion limiting member extending between the longitudinal member and the longitudinally extending cross-member extends perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the implantable device” and “the expansion limiting member the entire length of which between the longitudinal member and the longitudinally extending cross-member extends perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the implantable device”. Hence, the limitations are considered new matter. Claims 56-62 are rejected for the same reasons as claim 55 by virtue of dependency on claim 55. Claim 55-62 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 55 recites the limitation "an expansion limiting member where an entire length of the expansion limiting member extending between the longitudinal member and the longitudinally extending cross-member extends perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the implantable device" in lines 9-12. It is unclear if the expansion limiting member or the longitudinally extending cross-member extends perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the implantable device. For examination purposes, the limitation will be read as “an expansion limiting member, wherein an entire length of the expansion limiting member, extending between the longitudinal member and the longitudinally extending cross-member, extends perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the implantable device”. Claims 56-62 are rejected for the same reasons as claim 55 by virtue of dependency on claim 55. NO PRIOR ART REJECTION Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see page 1, filed 05/09/25, with respect to the rejections of claims under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of amended claim interpretation. 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 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 Examiner Chima Igboko whose telephone number is (571)272-8422. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00am-6:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Jackie Ho, at (571) 272-4696. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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. /C.U.I/ Examiner, Art Unit 3771 /ASHLEY L FISHBACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771 September 15, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 16, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 02, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jun 14, 2024
Response Filed
Sep 16, 2024
Final Rejection — §112
Dec 18, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 22, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
May 09, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 08, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Apr 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599499
DEVICES AND METHODS FOR CREATING A CAPSULORHEXIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12569362
DELIVERY DEVICE AND METHOD OF DELIVERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569332
IOL INJECTOR WITH AUTOMATIC DRIVER OR ASSISTED MANUAL DRIVE FORCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569327
INTRAVASCULAR CATHETER HAVING AN EXPANDABLE INCISING PORTION AND EMBOLIC PROTECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12558096
FULL EVERSION ANASTOMOSIS JUNCTURE FORMATION AND SUTURING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+45.8%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 408 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month