Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 17/959,683

METHOD OF HUB COMMUNICATION WITH SURGICAL INSTRUMENT SYSTEMS

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Oct 04, 2022
Priority
Oct 30, 2017 — provisional 62/578,855 +30 more
Examiner
IGBOKO, CHIMA U
Art Unit
3771
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Cilag GmbH International
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
328 granted / 419 resolved
+8.3% vs TC avg
Strong +40% interview lift
Without
With
+40.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
464
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
74.4%
+34.4% vs TC avg
§102
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
§112
6.1%
-33.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 419 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/28/26 has been entered. Response to Amendment The Amendment filed 05/28/26 has been entered. Claim 28 has been amended, and claims 21-27 and 35-40 remain withdrawn. Claims 28-34 are addressed in the following office action. 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. Claims 28-34 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 28, applicant’s original disclosure fails to detail “determining a spatial characteristic associated with the plurality of deployed staples, wherein the spatial characteristic is determined based on analyzing the plurality of deployed staples within the image; identifying a staple pattern associated with a previous surgical task based on the determined spatial characteristic”. More specifically, there is no disclosure of the spatial characteristic. Hence, the limitations are considered new matter. Claims 29-34 are rejected for the same reasons as claim 28 by virtue of dependency on claim 28. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see page 1, filed 05/28/26, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 USC § 102 & 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of new matter. Conclusion 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 June 26, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 3 earlier events
Dec 30, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 03, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112
Apr 30, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 30, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
May 04, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
May 28, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 04, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12661218
HAPTIC OPTIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM UTILIZING ROTATING CAMS
3y 7m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12622777
HAPTIC MANAGEMENT FOR SURGICAL IMPLANTS
3y 9m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12611220
RECIPROCATING SERRATED BLADE FOR PRECISION DISSECTION
4y 1m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12599499
DEVICES AND METHODS FOR CREATING A CAPSULORHEXIS
3y 11m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12569362
DELIVERY DEVICE AND METHOD OF DELIVERY
5y 11m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+40.1%)
3y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 419 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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