Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/844,638

SCISSOR SLEEVE ASSEMBLY PROTECTION

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jun 20, 2022
Examiner
MCEVOY, THOMAS M
Art Unit
3771
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Cilag GmbH International
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
704 granted / 994 resolved
+0.8% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+35.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
1049
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
50.3%
+10.3% vs TC avg
§102
28.0%
-12.0% vs TC avg
§112
17.0%
-23.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 994 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 19th 2025 has been entered. 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 1-6, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Staunton et al. (US 2014/0276949). Regarding claim 1, Staunton et al. disclose a device (76; Figures 32-38) capable of use as a sleeve extractor (it could attach to an appropriately structured sleeve component of a surgical instrument and pull it off of the instrument), comprising: a body (82) having a closed distal end and an open proximal end (evident from Figures 34A and 36 - the open proximal end at “80” in Figure 34A) defining a cavity (80) sized and shaped to receive a surgical instrument, the surgical instrument comprising a sleeve, a shaft, and a shaft adapter; (capable of receiving a sleeve in the same or similar way that member 78 is received - Figure 32); one or more longitudinally-extending fingers (84) defined in the body; and a tab (86) provided on an end of each finger and receivable within a notch defined in the shaft adapter or the shaft of a surgical instrument (as it is shown received within notch 98 of member 114 in Figure 37), the notch being located adjacent to a proximal end of the sleeve, wherein the sleeve is removed by locating the tab of each finger in a corresponding notch, engaging the proximal end of the sleeve with the tab of each finger, and retracting the body and the sleeve distally relative to the shaft adapter or the shaft (as can be seen in Figure 38, the tabs could engage a notch similar to groove 98, located proximal to a sleeve similar to member 78, and the body could then be retracted to remove such a sleeve; a sleeve, shaft and/or shaft adaptor are not positively recited nor structurally required by the claim). Regarding claims 2-6, the recited components are not structurally required by the claims. The extractor of Staunton et al. is capable of removing a sleeve as claimed with an appropriately constructed surgical tool having the claimed features. Regarding claim 10, the distal end of the body is closed (evident from Figures 34A and 36 - the open proximal end at “80” in Figure 34A). Regarding claim 11, the body is capable of containing the sleeve after extraction if used with an appropriately constructed surgical tool having an appropriately constructed sleeve. Claims 1- 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Morel (US 4,368,999). Regarding claim 1, Morel discloses a device (1/2/5; Figures 1-3) capable of use as a sleeve extractor (it could attach to an appropriately structured sleeve component of a surgical instrument and pull it off of the instrument - see drawing below), comprising: a body (1) having a closed distal end (at 8; col. 3, lines 4-8) and an open proximal end (at “1A” - Figure 1) defining a cavity (1A) sized and shaped to receive a surgical instrument (see drawing below), the surgical instrument comprising a sleeve, a shaft, and a shaft adapter; (see drawing below); one or more longitudinally-extending fingers (3) defined in the body; and a tab (9) provided on an end of each finger and receivable within a notch defined in the shaft adapter or the shaft of a surgical instrument (see drawing below), the notch being located adjacent to a proximal end of the sleeve, wherein the sleeve is removed by locating the tab of each finger in a corresponding notch, engaging the proximal end of the sleeve with the tab of each finger, and retracting the body and the sleeve distally relative to the shaft adapter or the shaft (as evident from Figures 1 and 2 and the drawing below, the tabs could engage a notch located proximal to a sleeve and the body could then be retracted to remove such a sleeve; a sleeve, shaft and/or shaft adaptor are not positively recited nor structurally required by the claim and the drawing below is one of enumerable, hypothetical PNG media_image1.png 530 411 media_image1.png Greyscale [AltContent: textbox (Shaft)][AltContent: textbox (Shaft Adapter)][AltContent: textbox (Notch)][AltContent: textbox (Sleevee)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]examples of how the device of Morel could be used as claimed). Regarding claims 2-6, the recited components are not structurally required by the claims. The extractor of Morel et al. is capable of removing a sleeve as claimed with an appropriately constructed surgical tool having the claimed features. Regarding claim 7, the sleeve extractor further comprises a cylindrical lock (5) extendable about the body, wherein the cylindrical lock is axially translatable relative to the body to locate the tab of each finger in the corresponding notch (Figures 1-2; col. 2 lines 22-45). Regarding claim 8, the cylindrical lock defines (is) a locking arm having an extension (6) receivable within a slot (7) defined on the body. Regarding claim 9, at least one of an inner radial surface of the cylindrical lock or an outer radial surface of the one or more longitudinally-extending fingers are tapered or angled (see angled surface at “3” in Figure 1) to urge the one or more longitudinally-extending fingers radially inward as the cylindrical lock advances. Regarding claim 10, the distal end of the body is closed (at 8; col. 3, lines 4-8). Regarding claim 11, the body contains the sleeve after extraction (capable of this due to the closed distal end; with an appropriately structured sleeve). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed December 19th 2025 have been fully considered but are either moot in view of the new grounds of rejection above or they are not persuasive. Applicant has argued that the tabs (86) of Staunton et al. are located in a groove (98) that is not adjacent to a sleeve of a surgical instrument and could therefore not be used to remove a sleeve as claimed. The tabs are located adjacent to and abutting a proximal end of a sleeve (78) as shown in Figure 38. It is highly likely that they assist in removing this sleeve based on the depicted arrangement (also see ¶[0158]). These disclosures are conclusive evidence that the body (76) could be used to remove a sleeve as claimed; if not already being used to remove sleeve 78. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thomas McEvoy whose telephone number is (571) 270-5034 and direct fax number is (571) 270-6034. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 9:00 am – 6:00 pm. 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, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Elizabeth Houston at (571) 272-7134. 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/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. /THOMAS MCEVOY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 20, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Jun 10, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Dec 19, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 13, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594069
Handle Assembly Providing Unlimited Roll
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12564405
BLOOD VESSEL COMPRESSION SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558242
ANATOMIC NEEDLE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12544072
TISSUE ANCHOR FOR SECURING TISSUE LAYERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12544106
Puncture guide needle
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+35.6%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 994 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