Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/028,305

GALLBLADDER CRYOABLATION DEVICE AND METHOD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 24, 2023
Examiner
FLANAGAN, BEVERLY MEINDL
Art Unit
3794
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Arizona Board of Regents
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
136 granted / 191 resolved
+1.2% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+23.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
61 currently pending
Career history
252
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
§103
39.7%
-0.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.7%
-19.3% vs TC avg
§112
23.6%
-16.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 191 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 2, 2026 has been entered. Previously Set Forth Rejections All of the rejections as set forth in the final rejection (mailed October 1, 2025) are hereby withdrawn. The following new grounds of rejection are set forth: 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. Claim(s) 1-20, 22 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nojoomi et al. (PCT Publication No. WO 2022/036250) in view of Ryba et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0038212). In regard to claims 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18-20, 22 and 23, Nojoomi et al. teach an ablation system 100 used to treat a gallbladder having a control unit 110, an ablation catheter 150 and an ablation medium supply 120 (see para. 0061 and Fig. 1). The ablation medium can be a cryogenic liquid or gas that ranges from about -120 degree Celsius to about 0 degrees Celsius (see para. 0062). The control unit 110 can be coupled to a vacuum source 140 to apply a vacuum to a channel or lumen 262 of the ablation catheter 150 (see paras. 0063 and 0070). The ablation catheter 150 can be percutaneously inserted into a body lumen without the need for surgical removal of the anatomy (see para. 0067). An embodiment of ablation catheter 250 includes an outer shaft 260 that has a tapered portion at the distal end to aid in insertion into the body lumen BL (see para. 0073). The outer shaft 260 also includes an expandable structure 266 that can be transitioned from an undeployed state to a deployed state (see Figs. 6A-6B and para. 0074). The expandable structure 266 can be bounded within a region along the length of outer shaft 260 between two boundary rings and the expandable structure 266 can deploy upon bringing the two boundary rings closer together (see paras. 0075 and 0114). The expandable structure 266 can include elongate members (bands, fibers, wires, splines) arranged in a woven or braided pattern and can be composed of nitinol, stainless steel, a polymer or any suitable material that can be selected based on the material’s ability to withstand cryogenic temperatures without significantly affecting the cooling performance of the ablation catheter 250 (see paras. 0076 and 0083). Figure 9 shows that, as broadly as claimed, the expandable structure 266, 876 comprises a plurality of pre-programmed loops that are configured to contact a sufficient portion of an inner wall of the gallbladder to freeze the gallbladder (see para. 0112) and would be in thermal contact with the cryogenic fluid. Nojoomi et al. do not specifically teach that the expandable structure performs the function of freezing the gallbladder. However, Ryba et al. teach a similar a cryocatheter 102 with a cryo-balloon 124 at the distal end (see paras. 0121-0122). Ryba et al. further teach that strips and patterns of metal, such as silver, may be deposited on the surface of the balloon for various applications (see paras. 0248-0249) and these thermally conductive features can include bands 3341, patches 3343 or metal mesh or braid 3350 that can have a variety of different configurations (see para. 0250). Nojoomi et al. also teach that the expandable structure 266 can include an inflatable balloon (see para. 0074) and it follows that the balloon would be in fluid communication with the vacuum lumen so as to provide the necessary suction. Ryba et al. thus demonstrate that the use of an expandable balloon with a thermally conductive feature on its exterior is well known in the art for better thermal conduction. Accordingly, it would have been obvious, in view of the combined teachings of Nojoomi et al. and Ryba et al., to provide the device of Nojoomi et al. with an expandable balloon as the expandable structure 266 with the elongate members (bands, fibers, wires, splines) positioned on the exterior of the balloon as the thermally conductive features in order to create better thermal conduction. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention that when the expandable structure 266 is inflated or expanded, it would contact a sufficient portion of the inner wall of the gallbladder such that the thermally conductive features freeze the gallbladder. In regard to claims 2-5, the expandable structure 266 can be bounded within a region along the length of outer shaft 260 between two boundary rings and the expandable structure 266 can deploy upon bringing the two boundary rings closer together (see paras. 0075 and 0114). The expandable structure 266 can include elongate members (bands, fibers, wires, splines) arranged in a woven or braided pattern and can be composed of nitinol, stainless steel, a polymer or any suitable material that can be selected based on the material’s ability to withstand cryogenic temperatures without significantly affecting the cooling performance of the ablation catheter 250 (see paras. 0076 and 0083). In regard to claim 8, Figure 33B shows an embodiment of a conductive mesh or braid 3350 carried by a balloon 3341 where the mesh 3350 extends proportionally to match inflation of the balloon 3341 (see also para. 0250). In regard to claims 11 and 17, Ryba et al. teach that the thermally conductive feature may be a component of a composite elastomeric material such that the metal layer (thermally conductive layer) would be coupled to the elastomeric material (mandrel) (see para. 0248 of Ryba et al.). As noted above, Nojoomi et al. teach nitinol as a material for the expandable member. In regard to claim 14, as broadly as claimed, Figure 9 of Nojoomi et al. shows that at least two of the arms of the expandable member have different diameters. With further respect to claims 15 and 16, see paras. 0099-0104 of Noojomi et al. Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nojoomi et al. (PCT Publication No. WO 2022/036250) in view of Ryba et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0038212) and further in view of Littrup et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0119836). In regard to claim 21, Nojoomi et al. is silent as to the cross-sectional diameter of the expandable member 266. However, Littrup et al. teach a cryogenic probe with an outer diameter as small as 1.2 mm (see para. 0055). Furthermore, it is well settled that a change in size of a prior art device is a design consideration within the scope of one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCAP 1955). Accordingly, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the expandable member 266 of Nojoomi et al. with a cross-sectional diameter of 1.2 mm. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-23 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. Specifically, the new grounds of rejection is based upon Nojoomi et al. in view of Ryba et al. while applicant’s arguments address the application of Nojoomi et al. alone and Arless et al. (see pages 6-9 of the response filed 1/2/26). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BEVERLY MEINDL FLANAGAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4766. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30AM to 5:00PM. 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. /BEVERLY M FLANAGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 24, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 22, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 29, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 02, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582467
SURGICAL INSTRUMENT WITH HOVER SENSOR AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582468
APPLICATION OF NON-THERAPEUTIC WAVEFORMS WITH GRADIENT SENSING TO PREDICT PULSED FIELD ABLATION (PFA) FIELDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582469
GROUPED PIN RECEPTACLE CONNECTOR FOR ABLATION CATHETER HANDLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575881
CALIPER TOOL WITH TOGGLING BETWEEN MULTIPLE ABLATION MODES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569139
MICROSURGICAL SYSTEMS FOR PERFORMING SURGICAL PROCEEDURES
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
71%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+23.6%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 191 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