Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/892,611

ELECTROSURGICAL GENERATOR HAVING AN INVERTER WITH IMPROVED DYNAMIC RANGE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Aug 22, 2022
Examiner
GOOD, SAMANTHA M
Art Unit
3794
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Olympus Winter & Ibe GmbH
OA Round
2 (Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
5y 1m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
316 granted / 465 resolved
-2.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
5y 1m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
498
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
38.6%
-1.4% vs TC avg
§102
23.3%
-16.7% vs TC avg
§112
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 465 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . 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. Claims 3 and 10 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 3 recites the limitation "the inverter cells" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim in light of the recitations of “at least two groups of inverter cells” in lines 7-8 of claim one. It is clear to which inverter cells the recitation of claim 3 is referring. Claim 10 recites the limitation "the inverter cells" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim in light of the recitations of “at least two groups of inverter cells” in lines 7-8 of claim one. It is clear to which inverter cells the recitation of claim 10 is referring. Claim Objections Claims 6, 9 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6 recites “a modulator” in line 3, which should recite “the modulator” in order to provide proper antecedence. Claims 9 and 10 recite “the preset parameter” in line 2, which should recite “the at least one preset parameter” in order to provide proper antecedence. Claim 9 recites “a modulator” in line 3, which should recite “the modulator” in order to provide proper antecedence. Appropriate correction is required. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 11-19 are allowed. The prior art of record fails to fairly teach or disclose “wherein the at least two groups of the inverter cells include a first group supplied with a lower DC voltage than a different, second group of the at least two groups” in the context of the claim as a whole. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-15, filed November 26, 2025, with respect to claims 1 and 3-19 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of May 28, 2025 has been withdrawn. A phone call was made to Arun Shome on March 2, 2026 to correct the pending issues, but no return call was received. 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 SAMANTHA M GOOD whose telephone number is (571)270-7480. The examiner can normally be reached Mon to Wed, 7am to 3pm. 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, Linda Dvorak can be reached at 571-272-4764. 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. /SAMANTHA M GOOD/Examiner, Art Unit 3794 /MICHAEL F PEFFLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 22, 2022
Application Filed
May 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Nov 26, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12533178
SURGICAL SYSTEM HAVING INTERCHANGEABLE TOOL TIPS AND METHODS OF USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12527614
System and Method for Measurement of an Impedance Using a Catheter Such as an Ablation Catheter
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12521175
SYSTEMS FOR FORMING A FISTULA
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12440262
POWER-CONTROLLED WAVEFORM IN ELECTROSURGICAL SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 14, 2025
Patent 12433658
CRYOBALLOON CONTACT ASSESSMENT USING CAPACITIVE OR RESISTIVE SENSORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 07, 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
68%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+10.9%)
5y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 465 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