Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/004,485

System and Method Used to Detect or Differentiate Tissue or an Artifact

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jan 06, 2023
Examiner
MALAMUD, DEBORAH LESLIE
Art Unit
3792
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Briteseed LLC
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
666 granted / 847 resolved
+8.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
891
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.7%
-29.3% vs TC avg
§103
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
§102
43.5%
+3.5% vs TC avg
§112
15.4%
-24.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 847 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION The Examiner acknowledges the amendments received 17 October 2025. New claims 15-20 are added; claims 1-20 are pending. 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 . Specification In view of the amendments received 17 October 2025, the Examiner withdraws the objection to the Specification. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 17 October 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-6 and 13-14 under Chaturvedi 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Chaturvedi, with corrected citations. 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. Claims 1-6 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(1)(1) as being anticipated by Chaturvedi et al (U.S. 2019/0175158). Chaturvedi discloses (Figures 1-2) a surgical instrument and surgical system (par. 0042) comprising: at least one light emitter (110; par. 0044) disposed at a working end of the surgical instrument; an array of light sensors (112) disposed at the working end of the surgical instrument, individual light sensors in the array of light sensors adapted to generate a signal comprising a non-pulsatile component; and a controller coupled to the array of light sensors, the controller comprising an analyzer (par. 0053) configured to: determine a curve of the non-pulsatile components of the signals of each of the individual light sensors in the array of light sensors (splitter 116 separates the first pulsatile component from the second non-pulsatile component), to identify a plurality of regions of interest along the curve (par. 0081-0083; Figure 13; each dip in the non-pulsatile components are a region of interest), to determine one or more regions of interest of the plurality of regions of interest to consider further based on one or more measures of closeness between the plurality of regions of interest (symmetric metric is determine for each dip in each curve based on measured distances from the edges of each dip on the curve of the corresponding light source, and a combined symmetry metric is made at step 226, where said combined symmetry metric effectively amounts to a measure of closeness between a plurality of dips; the combined metric is then used as a selection/differentiation criteria), and to determine if one or more of the one or more regions of interest are more likely to be associated with a vessel or a tissue based on one or more parameters (par. 0095; using the symmetry metric and a ratio it is determined if a structure is representative of a ureter, a blood vessel, or other tissue). Regarding claim 2, Chaturvedi discloses (par. 0081-0083 and 0095) the one or more measures of closeness comprise a distance between consecutive starting locations, a distance between consecutive ending locations, and a distance between consecutive starting and ending locations. Regarding claim 3, Chaturvedi discloses (par. 0081-0083 and 0095) the one or more measures of closeness comprise a distance between mean locations of consecutive regions of the plurality of regions of interest. Regarding claim 4, Chaturvedi discloses (Figure 7) the analyzer is configured to adjust at least one of a starting location and an ending location of the one or more of the one or more regions of interest prior to determining if the one or more of the one or more regions of interest are more likely to be associated with a vessel or a tissue based on one or more parameters, the analyzer configured to compute a first order differential for the one or more of the one or more regions of interest, to normalize the first order differential by dividing by the maximum value of the one or more of the one or more regions of interest, and to analyze a slope at one or more locations within the one or more of the one or more regions of interest to adjust the at least one of the starting location and the ending location. Regarding claim 5, Chaturvedi discloses (par. 0081-0081 and 0095) the one or more parameters comprise one or more of the following: a width of a region; a standard deviation of the region; a ratio of a standard deviation of the region normalized by a mean of the region; a minimum intensity value within the region; a location of the region relative to ends of the sensor; a contrast at starting or ending locations of the region, where the contrast comprises a ratio of the minimum intensity value within the region to intensity values at the starting location or the ending location of the region; a width at half maximum of the region; a slope at the starting location of the region, where the slope at the starting location of the region comprises a ratio of a difference between an intensity value at the starting location and the minimum intensity value to a distance between the starting location and a location of the minimum intensity value; and a slope at the ending location of the region, where the slope at the ending location of the region comprises a ratio of a difference between an intensity value at the ending location and the minimum intensity value to a distance between the ending location and the location of the minimum intensity value. Regarding claim 6, Chaturvedi discloses (par. 0081-0083 and 0095) the one or more parameters consist of: a width of a region; a standard deviation of the region; a ratio of a standard deviation of the region normalized by a mean of the region; and a minimum intensity value within the region. Regarding claim 13, Chaturvedi discloses (par. 0083) the analyzer is configured to characterize an artifact based on the one or more of the one or more regions of interest determined to be more likely to be associated with a vessel or a tissue. Regarding claim 14, Chaturvedi discloses (par. 0040) the analyzer is configured to determine a diameter or an effective diameter of a vessel according to the one or more of the one or more regions of interest determined to be more likely to be associated with a vessel. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7-12 and 15-20 are allowed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEBORAH L MALAMUD whose telephone number is (571)272-2106. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 1:00-9:30 Eastern. 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, Unsu Jung can be reached on (571) 272-8506. 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. /DEBORAH L MALAMUD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 06, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Oct 17, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598433
VAGAL NERVE STIMULATION DEVICES AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594418
DEVICES AND METHODS FOR NERVE STIMULATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588868
BIPOLAR MAPPING SUCTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586687
SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF DEDUPLICATING DATA COLLECTED BY AN IMPLANTABLE MEDICAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575795
NON-INVASIVE PREDICTION OF RISK FOR SUDDEN CARDIAC DEATH
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+10.0%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 847 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