Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/930,504

TRAY AND METHODS FOR MEDICAL PRODUCTS PACKAGING, STORAGE AND ACCESS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Sep 08, 2022
Examiner
KIM, ERIN ASA
Art Unit
3781
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Potrero Medical Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
59 granted / 82 resolved
+2.0% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+31.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
107
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
59.7%
+19.7% vs TC avg
§102
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
§112
17.3%
-22.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 82 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 8/18/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-28 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Beddow (US 4226328 A). Beddow was included in the IDS filed 8/8/2025, prompting the new ground(s) of rejection in this final action. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Serany et al. (US 3329261 A, hereafter “Serany”) in view of Beddow (US 4226328 A). Regarding claim 1, Serany discloses a multi-level packaging assembly (fig. 5), comprising: a top tray level (12); a lower tray level (10) upon which the top tray level (12) is removably positioned (column 2 lines 33-35); a base (A, annotated fig. 7) of a compartment (44); wherein the base (A, annotated fig. 7) is uninclined relative to the bottom of a tray level (12, surface A is flush with the bottom of other compartments 28 and 32 forming a flat bottom surface, column 4 lines 41-46); and at least one layer of wrap (14) sized so as to fold over and enclose both the lower tray (10) level and the top tray level (24) when the top tray level (12) is positioned upon the lower tray level (10, column 1 lines 60-63) such that unfolding of the at least one layer of wrap reveals the top tray level (12, column 2 lines 1-8). PNG media_image1.png 246 280 media_image1.png Greyscale Put simply, Serany discloses a catheterization tray with two levels that separate the catheter on the bottom level from the preparatory materials like gloves and other items needed for the procedure on an upper level. However, Serany fails to disclose one or more compartment barriers which define a first compartment within the lower tray level such that the first compartment is sized to accommodate a single syringe, wherein the first compartment barriers have a continuous ledge at a constant level with respect to a bottom of the lower tray level, the base defined within the first compartment, and wherein the base is uninclined relative to the bottom of the lower tray level. Beddow teaches a similar device in the same field of endeavor with one or more compartment barriers (Z, annotated fig. 1) which define a first compartment (Y, annotated fig. 1) within the lower tray level (11) such that the first compartment (Y) is sized to accommodate a single syringe (14), wherein the first compartment barriers (Z) have a continuous ledge at a constant level with respect to a bottom of the lower tray level (annotated fig. 1) defined within the first compartment (Y, column 2 lines 47-55). Put simply, Beddow discloses a catheterization tray with two levels and the syringe is housed in the bottom tray. Sereny discloses a syringe but it is housed in the top tray; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bottom tray level of Sereny and incorporate the syringe compartment of Beddow to utilize the bottom space. Further, it would have been obvious to move the syringe to the bottom compartment as taught by Beddow since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art and the placement of the syringe in the it is not integral to the function of the assembly. PNG media_image2.png 603 530 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the assembly of claim 1. Serany further discloses where folds or corners (18a, 18b, 18c, figs. 2, 2a) of the at least one layer of wrap (14) are free of any items (column 2 lines 1-21). Regarding claim 3, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the assembly of claim 2. Serany further discloses wherein folds or corners (18a, 18b, 18c, figs. 2, 2a) of the at least one layer of wrap (14) are free of hand sanitizer, additional wrap, and instructions (figs. 2, 2a, column 2 lines 1-21). Regarding claim 4, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the assembly of claim 1. Serany further discloses wherein the top tray level (12) comprises at least one ridge (26) along a surface (C, side edge surface, annotated fig. 6) of the top tray level (12). PNG media_image3.png 367 393 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding claim 5, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the assembly of claim 1. Serany further discloses further comprising at least one pair of gloves (22) positioned upon the top tray level (24, fig. 5, column 2 lines 29-33). Regarding claim 6, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the assembly of claim 1. Serany further discloses further comprising at least one drape (24) in a folded configuration positioned upon the top tray level (12, fig. 5). Regarding claim 7, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the assembly of claim 1. However, Serany fails to disclose further comprising a single syringe positioned within the first compartment. Beddow teaches further comprising a single syringe (14) positioned within the first compartment (Y, column 2 lines 47-55). Put simply, Beddow discloses a catheterization tray with two levels and the syringe is housed in the bottom tray. Sereny discloses a syringe but it is housed in the top tray; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bottom tray level of Sereny and incorporate the syringe compartment of Beddow to utilize the bottom space. Further, it would have been obvious to move the syringe to the bottom compartment as taught by Beddow since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art and the placement of the syringe in the it is not integral to the function of the assembly. Regarding claims 8 and 9, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the assembly of claim 1. However, Serany fails to disclose (claim 8) wherein the lower tray level further defines a second compartment adjacent to the first compartment and (claim 9) wherein the second compartment is sized for receiving a sample bottle. Beddow teaches wherein the lower tray level (11) with first compartment (Y, annotated fig. 1), but Beddow does not expressly disclose a second compartment. Both Beddow and Serany teach a sample bottle, but is housed in the upper trays not the lower trays. Beddow teaches a lower tray with a compartment housing the syringe but does not teach another compartment; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to move the sample bottle to the lower tray as an obvious rearrangement of the included items in the kit with predictable and reasonable results. Further, it would have been obvious to duplicated a similar compartment as Beddow’s syringe compartment to house the sample bottle, since it has been held that mere duplication of the working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. Further, no new or unexpected result is likely to be produced. Regarding claims 10-12, the combination of Serany and Beddow teaches the assembly of claim 8. However, Serany fails to disclose: (claim 10) wherein the lower tray level further defines a third compartment having one or more additional compartment barriers defined within the third compartment. (claim 11) comprising one or more instruments positioned within the third compartment. (claim 12) wherein the one or more instruments comprise a catheter, a drainage line, a fluid receptacle, a drainage bag, or combinations thereof. Beddow teaches: (claim 10) wherein the lower tray level (11) further defines a third compartment (X) having one or more additional compartment barriers (16, column 2 lines 47-55) defined within the third compartment (X). (claim 11) comprising one or more instruments (fluid receptacle, column 3 lines 28-38) positioned within the third compartment (X, annotated fig. 1, fig. 3). (claim 12) wherein the one or more instruments comprise a catheter, a drainage line, a fluid receptacle (column 3 lines 28-38, fig. 3), a drainage bag, or combinations thereof. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bottom tray of Serany and incorporate the third compartment of Beddow to house a fluid receptacle. Serany already discloses a catheter and fluid receptacle in the lower tray but does not specifically put it in a third compartment. But, incorporating a third compartment to house that instrument would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 13, Serany discloses a method of using a multi-level packaging assembly figs. 2, 5), comprising: unfolding at least one layer of wrap (14) enclosing a top tray level (12) positioned upon a lower tray level (10, column 1 lines 60-63) to reveal the top tray level (12, fig. 3); removing the top tray level (12) from the lower tray level (10) to access the lower tray level (column 2 lines 33-38); wherein the base (A, annotated fig. 7) is uninclined relative to the bottom of the lower tray level (surface A is flush with the bottom of other compartments 28 and 32 forming a flat bottom surface, column 4 lines 41-46). However, Serany fails to disclose wherein the lower tray level comprises one or more compartment barriers having a continuous ledge at a constant level with respect to a bottom of the lower tray level and which define a first compartment having a single syringe positioned within the first compartment. Beddow teaches wherein the lower tray level (11) comprises one or more compartment barriers (Z, annotated fig. 1) having a continuous ledge at a constant level with respect to a bottom of the lower tray level (annotated fig. 1 and fig. 2) and which define a first compartment (Y) having a single syringe (14) positioned within the first compartment (Y, column 2 lines 47-55). Put simply, Beddow discloses a catheterization tray with two levels and the syringe is housed in the bottom tray. Sereny discloses a syringe but it is housed in the top tray; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bottom tray level of Sereny and incorporate the syringe compartment of Beddow to utilize the bottom space. Further, it would have been obvious to move the syringe to the bottom compartment as taught by Beddow since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art and the placement of the syringe in the it is not integral to the function of the assembly. Regarding claim 14, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 13. Serany further discloses wherein unfolding at least one layer of wrap (14) comprises revealing at least one pair of gloves (22) positioned upon the top tray level (12, column 2 lines 21-29). Regarding claim 15, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 13. Serany further discloses wherein unfolding at least one layer of wrap (14) comprises revealing at least one drape (24) in a folded configuration positioned upon the top tray level (12, column 2 lines 21-33). Regarding claim 16, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 13. However, Serany fails to disclose comprising accessing a single syringe positioned within the first compartment. Beddow teaches comprising accessing a single syringe (14) positioned within the first compartment (Y). Put simply, Beddow discloses a catheterization tray with two levels and the syringe is housed in the bottom tray. Sereny discloses a syringe but it is housed in the top tray; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bottom tray level of Sereny and incorporate the syringe compartment of Beddow to utilize the bottom space. Further, it would have been obvious to move the syringe to the bottom compartment as taught by Beddow since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art and the placement of the syringe in the it is not integral to the function of the assembly. Regarding claim 17, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 13. Serany further discloses comprising accessing one or more instruments (48) positioned within an additional compartment (fig. 6) defined within the lower tray level (10, column 3 lines 23-26). Regarding claim 18, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 17. Serany further discloses wherein accessing one or more instruments further comprises accessing a catheter (48, column 3 lines 23-26), a drainage line, a fluid receptacle, a drainage bag, or combinations thereof from within the lower tray level. Regarding claim 19, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 17. Serany further discloses wherein unfolding at least one layer of wrap (14) comprises unfolding folds or corners (18a, 18b, 18c) of the at least one layer of wrap (14) which are free of any items (figs. 2, 2a, 3, column 2 lines 1-21). Regarding claim 20, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 17. Serany further discloses wherein unfolding at least one layer of wrap (14) comprises unfolding folds or corners (18a, 18b, 18c) of the at least one layer of wrap (14) which are free of hand sanitizer, additional wrap, and instruction (figs. 2, 2a, 3, column 2 lines 1-21). Regarding claim 21, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 17. Serany further discloses wherein the top tray level (12) comprises at least one ridge (26) along a surface C, side edge surface, annotated fig. 6) of the top tray level (12). Regarding claim 22, Serany discloses a method of producing a multi-level packaging assembly (fig. 5), comprising: providing a lower tray level (11) and wherein the base (A, annotated fig. 7) is uninclined relative to the bottom of the lower tray level (surface A is flush with the bottom of other compartments 28 and 32 forming a flat bottom surface, column 4 lines 41-46). However, Serany fails to disclose one or more compartment barriers and a base which together define a first compartment within the lower tray level, wherein the one or more compartment barriers have a continuous ledge at a constant level with respect to a bottom of the lower tray level; and securing a single syringe within the first compartment and one or more instruments within the lower tray level. Beddow teaches one or more compartment barriers (Z, annotated fig. 1) and a base (W, annotated fig. 1) which together define a first compartment (Y, annotated fig. 1) within the lower tray level (11), wherein the one or more compartment barriers (Z, annotated fig. 1) have a continuous ledge at a constant level with respect to a bottom of the lower tray level (annotated fig. 1 and fig. 2); and securing a single syringe (14) within the first compartment (Y) and one or more instruments (fluid receptacle) within the lower tray level (11, column 3 lines 28-38, fig. 3). Put simply, Beddow discloses a catheterization tray with two levels and the syringe is housed in the bottom tray. Sereny discloses a syringe but it is housed in the top tray; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bottom tray level of Sereny and incorporate the syringe compartment of Beddow to utilize the bottom space. Further, it would have been obvious to move the syringe to the bottom compartment as taught by Beddow since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art and the placement of the syringe in the it is not integral to the function of the assembly. Regarding claim 23, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 22. Serany further discloses wherein securing one or more instruments (48) within the lower tray level (10) comprises positioning a catheter (48, column 3 lines 23-36), a drainage line, a fluid receptacle, a drainage bag, or combinations thereof. Regarding claim 24, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 22. Serany further discloses wherein positioning the removable top tray level (12) further comprises positioning at least one pair of gloves (22) upon the top tray level (12) prior to enclosing the lower tray level (10) and top tray level (12, column 2 lines 22-33). Regarding claim 25, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 22. Serany further discloses wherein positioning the removable top tray level (12) further comprises positioning at least one drape (24) in a folded configuration (fig. 5) positioned upon the top tray level (12) prior to enclosing the lower tray level and top tray level (column 2 lines 22-33). Regarding claim 26, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 22. Serany further discloses where folds or corners (18a, 18b, 18c) of the at least one layer of wrap (14) are free of any items (figs. 2, 2a, 3, column 2 lines 1-21). Regarding claim 27, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 26. Serany further discloses wherein folds or corners (18a, 18b, 18c) of the at least one layer of wrap (14) are free of hand sanitizer, additional wrap, and instructions (figs. 2, 2a, 3, column 2 lines 1-21). Regarding claim 28, the combination of Serany and Beddow discloses the method of claim 22. Serany further discloses wherein the top tray level (12) comprises at least one ridge (26) along a surface (C, side edge surface, annotated fig. 6) of the top tray level (12). Conclusion Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 8/18/2025 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). 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 ERIN A KIM whose telephone number is (703)756-4738. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm (EST). 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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at (571)270-1775. 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. /ERIN A KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 3781 /SUSAN S SU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781 21 October 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 08, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 18, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 21, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594399
CATHETER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582545
CUP FOR AUTOMATIC EXCRETION TREATING APPARATUS AND AUTOMATIC EXCRETION TREATING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576251
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR THE CONDITIONING OF CEREBROSPINAL FLUID
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569330
Percutaneous Potts Shunt Devices and Related Methods
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569378
RESPONSIVE ABSORBENT ARTICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
72%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+31.3%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 82 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