Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/759,554

MEDICAL DEVICE, SIGNAL PROCESSING DEVICE, SIGNAL PROCESSING METHOD, AND SIGNAL PROCESSING PROGRAM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 27, 2022
Examiner
PAZ ESTEVEZ, GUILLERMO G
Art Unit
3783
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Furukawa Electric Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
12%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 12m
To Grant
62%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 12% of cases
12%
Career Allow Rate
1 granted / 8 resolved
-57.5% vs TC avg
Strong +50% interview lift
Without
With
+50.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 12m
Avg Prosecution
59 currently pending
Career history
67
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
59.2%
+19.2% vs TC avg
§102
26.5%
-13.5% vs TC avg
§112
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 8 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 4-13, and 15-16 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/20/2025. Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-3 and 14 in the reply filed on 08/20/2025 is acknowledged. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McDonald (US 5009644 A). Regarding claim 1, McDonald discloses a medical device (implanted medical device, Fig 1) used for implanting in a body, comprising: a main body (body 14 , Fig 1); a container (reservoir 16, Fig 1) included in the main body (14); an insulating soft portion (septum 18, Fig 1; Col 1, lines 65-66) that closes an opening (opening closed by septum 18, Fig 1) of the container (16); an electrically conductive first conductive portion (contact plate 20, Fig 1) disposed on a bottom (bottom of container 16, Fig 1) of the container (16); and an electrically conductive second conductive portion (base plate 24, Fig 1) disposed on the main body (14), wherein the first conductive portion (20) and the second conductive portion (24) are electrically connected to each other (Col 1 line 68 - Col 2, line 3). Regarding claim 3, McDonald discloses the medical device according to claim 1, wherein the second conductive portion (24) has a rectangular shape (plate 24 has rectangular shape, See Fig 1 ), an annular shape, or a partially notched curved shape. 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 2 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McDonald (US 5009644 A) in view of Wortley et al. (US 20070078391 A1). Regarding claim 2, McDonald discloses the medical device according to claim 1, further comprising an injection part (portion of body (not shown) used to transmit the medicament to the catheter; Col 2, lines 6-7) to which a catheter is connected (catheter, not shown; Col 2, lines 6-7), the injection part being configured to inject a liquid in the container (liquid is injected in the container by a needle 32 and goes through the container 16 to catheter via a portion of portion of body (not shown) used to transmit the medicament to the catheter; Col 2, lines 6-7) However, McDonald is silent regarding the injection being into a blood vessel through the catheter. Wortley teaches a medical device (vascular access port 300, Fig 21) comprising an injection part (part containing exit lumen 320, Fig 17) to which a catheter (catheter 402, Fig 21) is connected the injection part (part containing exit lumen 320, Fig 17) being configured to inject a liquid (fluid injection; [0100]) in the container (reservoir 306, Fig 17) into a blood vessel (subclavian vein 404, Fig 23) through the catheter (402). Therefore, it would be prima facie obvious, before the effective filing date of the present invention, to modify the catheter dispensing location of device of McDonald with of a similar catheter insertion location as taught by Wortley for the purpose of deliver fluid medication into the venous system, resulting in a rapid systemic distribution of medical fluid ([0097]) Regarding claim 14, McDonald/Wortley discloses the medical device according to claim 2. McDonald discloses wherein the second conductive portion (24) has a rectangular shape (plate 24 has rectangular shape, See Fig 1 ), an annular shape, or a partially notched curved shape. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUILLERMO G PAZ ESTEVEZ whose telephone number is (703)756-5951. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00-5:00. 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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached on (571) 272-4965. 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. /GUILLERMO G PAZ ESTEVEZ/ Examiner, Art Unit 3783 /Lauren P Farrar/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 27, 2022
Application Filed
Aug 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12403264
DOSING SYSTEM FOR AN INJECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Sep 02, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 1 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
12%
Grant Probability
62%
With Interview (+50.0%)
3y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 8 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