Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/017,739

COMPOSITE MEDICAL BALLOON WITH HYBRID OUTER LAYER AND RELATED PRODUCTION METHOD

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jan 24, 2023
Examiner
SCHWIKER, KATHERINE H
Art Unit
3771
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
C R Bard Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
271 granted / 408 resolved
-3.6% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+35.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
453
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
42.9%
+2.9% vs TC avg
§102
17.2%
-22.8% vs TC avg
§112
31.0%
-9.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 408 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 Amendment This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 10/16/2025. As directed by the amendment: claims 1, 11, 15 and 16 have been amended and claim 24 has been added. Thus, claims 1-24 are presently pending in this application with claims 18-23 withdrawn. 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, 3-6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Davies et al. (US 20080183132 A1). Regarding claim 1 Davies discloses (fig. 5a-5f) a composite medical balloon, comprising: a base balloon layer 502 including first and second tapered portions and a barrel portion (center tubular portion of 502) therebetween (see fig. 5a and [0065]); and a hybrid layer (512+514) over the base balloon layer (see fig. 5d-5e), the hybrid layer comprising a seamless tube (center tubular portion of 514) for covering the barrel portion (see fig. 5d and [0068]) and a spiral wrapping 512 for covering at least one of the first and second tapered portions (see fig. 5d and [0065]). Regarding claim 3 Davies further discloses (fig. 5a-5f) the tube comprises a polyamide (see [0069]). Regarding claim 4 Davies further discloses (fig. 5a-5f) the base balloon layer comprises a polyamide (see [0051]). Regarding claim 5 Davies further discloses (fig. 5a-5f) the spiral wrapping 512 comprises a spirally wound ribbon of material extending from one end of the first or second tapered portion to another end of the corresponding tapered portion (see fig. 5d). Regarding claim 6 Davies further discloses (fig. 5a-5f) the spiral wrapping 512 overlaps with the tube at a transition from the first or second tapered portion to the barrel portion (see fig. 5d-5e). Regarding claim 8 Davies further discloses (fig. 5a-5f) a spiral wrapping 512 covering the other of the first or second tapered portions (see fig. 5d and [0065]). Regarding claim 9 Davies further discloses (fig. 5a-5f) the tube (center tubular portion of 514) is substantially equal in length to a length of the barrel portion (center tubular portion of 502) of the base balloon layer 502 (see fig. 5d and [0068]). Regarding claim 11 Davies discloses (fig. 5a-5f) a composite medical balloon, comprising: a balloon 502 including first and second tapered portions and a barrel portion (center tubular portion of 502) therebetween (see fig. 5a and [0065]); and a hybrid layer (512+514) adhesively (via 516) attached to the balloon (see [0068]), the hybrid layer comprising a tube (center tubular portion of 514) made of a first material (see [0068]) for covering the barrel portion (see fig. 5d and [0068]), a first spirally wrapped ribbon 512 made of a second material (see [0082]) for covering the first tapered portion (see fig. 5d and [0065]), and a second spirally wrapped ribbon (there are multiple of 512) made of the second material for covering the second tapered portion (see fig. 5d and [0065]); wherein the first material is different from the second material (see [0068] and [0082]). Regarding claim 13 Davies further discloses (fig. 5a-5f) the tube comprises a polyamide (see [0069]). Regarding claim 14 Davies further discloses (fig. 5a-5f) the balloon comprises a polyamide (see [0051]). Regarding claim 16 Davies further discloses (fig. 5a-5f) the tube (center tubular portion of 514) is substantially equal in length to a length of the barrel portion (center tubular portion of 502) of the base balloon layer 502 (see fig. 5d and [0068]). Claims 1, 2, 10, 11, 17, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Campbell et al. (US 20080033477 A1). Regarding claim 1 Campbell discloses (fig. 2) a composite medical balloon, comprising: a base balloon layer 38 including first and second tapered portions and a barrel portion (center tubular portion of 38) therebetween (see fig. 38 and [0022]); and a hybrid layer (40+42+44) over the base balloon layer 38 (see fig. 2), the hybrid layer comprising a seamless tube 40 for covering the barrel portion (see fig. 2 and [0022]) and a spiral wrapping 42 for covering at least one of the first and second tapered portions (see fig. 2, [0022]; 42 is capable of covering at least one of the first and second tapered portions). The language “a spiral wrapping for covering at least one of the first and second tapered portions” constitutes functional claim language, indicating that the claimed device need only be capable of being used in such a manner. Furthermore, the claim is an apparatus claim, and is to be limited by structural limitations. The Office submits that the device of Campbell meets the structural limitations of the claim, and the spiral wrapping 42 is capable of covering at least one of the first and second tapered portions. Regarding claim 2 Campbell further discloses (fig. 2) the tube comprises an extruded or blow-molded material. Regarding claim 10 Campbell further discloses (fig. 2) one or more fiber layers between the base balloon layer and the hybrid layer. Regarding claim 11 Campbell discloses (fig. 2) a composite medical balloon, comprising: a balloon 38 including first and second tapered portions and a barrel portion (center tubular portion of 38) therebetween (see fig. 38 and [0022]); and a hybrid layer (40+42+44) adhesively attached to the balloon 38 (see fig. 2 and [0022]), the hybrid layer comprising a tube 40 made of a first material for covering the barrel portion (see fig. 2 and [0022]), a first spirally wrapped ribbon 42 made of a second material (see [0022]) for covering the first tapered portion (see fig. 2), and a second spirally wrapped ribbon 44 made of the second material (see [0022]) for covering the second tapered portion (see fig. 2); wherein the first material is different from the second material (see [0022]). The language “spiral wrapping for covering the tapered portion” constitutes functional claim language, indicating that the claimed device need only be capable of being used in such a manner. Furthermore, the claim is an apparatus claim, and is to be limited by structural limitations. The Office submits that the device of Campbell meets the structural limitations of the claim, and the spiral wrappings 42 and 44 are capable of covering the first and second tapered portions. Regarding claim 17 Campbell further discloses (fig. 2) a fiber layer 39 between the balloon 38 and the hybrid layer (see fig. 2 and [0022]). Regarding claim 24 Campbell further discloses (fig. 2) the first material imparts a first property (elastic) to the tube (see [0022]); wherein the second material imparts a second property (adhesion) to the first tapered portion and the second tapered portion (see [0022]); and wherein the first property is different from the second property (see [0022]). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell in view of Pepper et al. (US 20100243135 A1). Regarding claims 7 and 15, Campbell discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claims 1 and 11. Campbell is silent regarding the spiral wrapping comprises a polyether block amide. However Pepper, in the same filed of endeavor, teaches (fig. 5C) a similar spiral wrapping tape 522, wherein the spiral wrapping comprises a polyether block amide (see [0078]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Campbell to have the spiral wrapping comprises a polyether block amide as taught by Pepper, for the purpose of having a thermally weldable material to be able to heat set the device (see Pepper [0078]). Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell in view of Sridharan (US 20070138694 A1). Regarding claim 12, Campbell discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 11. Campbell further discloses one wind of the spiral wrapping overlapping an edge of the tube (see fig. 2). Campbell is silent regarding the first spirally wrapped ribbon of material includes a plurality of overlapping winds. Sridharan, in the same filed of endeavor, teaches (fig. 1B-7) a hybrid layer 33 comprising a first spirally wrapped ribbon of material (section 45 of another of the layers of 40) for covering the first tapered portion (see fig. 5 and [0028]-[0029]), and a second spirally wrapped ribbon of material (section 46 of a third of the layers of 40) for covering the second tapered portion (see fig. 5 and [0028]-[0029]); the first spirally wrapped ribbon of material includes a plurality of overlapping winds, (see fig. 5 and [0031]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Campbell to have the first spirally wrapped ribbon of material includes a plurality of overlapping winds as taught by Sridharan, for the purpose of covering the whole section to increase adhesion. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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 KATHERINE H SCHWIKER whose telephone number is (571)272-9503. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am-4:00 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, the examiner’s supervisor, Darwin Erezo can be reached at (571) 272-4695. 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. /KATHERINE H SCHWIKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 24, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 01, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 01, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 16, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 13, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594070
SUTURING DEVICE WITH IMPROVED NEEDLE TRANSFERRING MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588921
TREATMENT TOOL, TREATMENT TOOL ASSEMBLING METHOD, AND TREATMENT TOOL DISASSEMBLING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12569252
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TREATING ANEURYSMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564392
CONTAINMENT BAG
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558090
MULTI-FIRE FASTENER DELIVERY SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
66%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+35.5%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 408 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