Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/072,767

EMBOLIC COIL IMPLANT SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Dec 01, 2022
Examiner
PASQUALINI, HANNA LOUISE
Art Unit
3774
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Deepin Technologies LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
72%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
7 granted / 15 resolved
-23.3% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
66
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§103
47.8%
+7.8% vs TC avg
§102
18.0%
-22.0% vs TC avg
§112
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 15 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of invention I in the reply filed on 09/18/2025 is acknowledged. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the primary configuration, the concentric sets of loops, and the greater diameter of the second set of loops, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 5-6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 5 recites “2-14 sets,” but it is unclear what makes up a set, it is unclear if the 2-14 sets is claiming 2-14 set of loops, which contradicts the 1 or more sets limitations, or is the claim is referring to a set being made up of 2-14 loops. Dependent claims are likewise rejected. 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. Claim(s) 1-10 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki (US 10709453 B2). Regarding claim 1, Suzuki teaches an embolic device (col 1, lines 13-36) comprising a microcoil having a primary configuration (col 1, lines 13-36),wherein: the microcoil comprises a first portion having a secondary configuration (col 1, lines 13-36),the first portion in the secondary configuration comprises one or more sets of loops (see annotated fib 7b-c), loops of each of the one or more sets intersect one with another in succession in a cycle (see annotated fib 7b-c), collectively forming a three-dimensional shape (fig 7d). PNG media_image1.png 793 952 media_image1.png Greyscale Annotated figure 7b-c Regarding claim 2, Suzuki further teaches wherein the loops of each of the one or more sets intersect at middle sections of the loops of each of the one or more sets along the cycle (see annotated fib 7b-c). Regarding claim 3, Suzuki further teaches wherein the one or more sets of loops comprise a first set of loops and a second set of loops (see annotated fib 7b-c) overlaying the first set of loops (fig 7d), wherein the loops of the first set and the loops of the second set are generally concentric (col 3-4, lines 65-2). Regarding claim 4, Suzuki further teaches wherein the loops of the second set have a diameter greater than a diameter of the loops of the first set (see annotated fib 7b-c). Regarding claim 5, Suzuki further teaches wherein the one or more sets of loops comprise two to fourteen (2-14) sets (see annotated fib 7b-c), wherein the loops of the two to fourteen sets are generally concentric (col 3-4, lines 65-2). Regarding claim 6, Suzuki further teaches wherein the two to fourteen sets of loops extend a length of the microcoil ranging from 20 to 400 mm (col 9, 8-10). Regarding claim 7, Suzuki further teaches wherein at least one of the one or more sets of loops comprises a first loop, a second loop, and one or more intermediate loops between the first loop and the second loop (see annotated fib 7b-c), wherein the first loop, the second loop, and the one or more intermediate loops intersect one with another in succession in the cycle (see annotated fib 7b-c), collectively forming a generally spherical or ellipsoidal shape (see cyclic intersection in annotated fib 7b-c). Regarding claim 8, Suzuki further teaches wherein the first loop, the second loop, and the one or more intermediate loops (see annotated fib 7b-c) comprise at least a complete loop and at least a loop consisting of two partial loops (see annotated fib 7b-c and fig 10). PNG media_image2.png 609 1137 media_image2.png Greyscale Annotated figure 10 Regarding claim 9, Suzuki further teaches wherein the first loop, the second loop, and the one or more intermediate loops comprise two complete loops (see annotated fib 7b-c) and one or more loops consisting of two partial loops (see annotated fib 7b-c and fig 10). Regarding claim 10, Suzuki further teaches wherein the microcoil further comprises a second portion distal to the first portion, wherein the second portion of the microcoil has a secondary configuration comprising a loop in a generally circular shape having a diameter smaller than a diameter of the at least complete loop or of the loop consisting of two partial loops (see annotated fib 10). Regarding claim 12, Suzuki further teaches wherein the loop of the second portion of the microcoil is adjacent to the first loop of the first portion of the microcoil, wherein the first loop is a loop consisting of two partial loops (see annotated fib 10). 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(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (US 10709453 B2) in further view of Qin (US 20190298387 A1). Regarding claim 11, Suzuki further teaches wherein the loop of the second portion of the microcoil is adjacent to the first loop of the first portion of the microcoil (see annotated fib 10). Suzuki does not exactly teach wherein the first loop is a complete loop. Qin teaches an aneurysm treatment coil (abstract) wherein a first loop is a loop consisting a complete loop with a distal second portion (see annotated fig 9b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Qin to modify the device taught by Suzuki by substituting the two partial loops for a complete loop, in order to complete a simple substitution of one known element, of a partial loop, for another, a complete loop, to obtain predictable results of creating a functional treatment coil capable of reducing flow in a vascular space (Qin: abstract) (MPEP 2143). PNG media_image3.png 494 642 media_image3.png Greyscale Annotated figure 9b Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANNA LOUISE PASQUALINI whose telephone number is (703)756-1984. The examiner can normally be reached Telework 7:30PM-5:00PM EST M-F (occasionally off Fridays). 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, Jerrah Edwards can be reached at (408) 918-7557. 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. /H.L.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3774 /JERRAH EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3774
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 01, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12575969
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR TREATMENT OF RETINAL DETACHMENT AND OTHER MALADIES OF THE EYE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12396854
SYSTEMS, DEVICES AND METHODS FOR RESHAPING A BODILY LUMEN
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 26, 2025
Patent 12376955
ENDOPROSTHESIS WITH STRESS REDUCING FEATURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 05, 2025
Patent 12364592
INTRAOCULAR LENS HAVING A SPECIFIC, THREE-DIMENSIONALLY CURVED HAPTIC ELEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 22, 2025
Patent 12343271
LOADING TOOLS FOR PROSTHETIC VALVE DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 01, 2025
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
47%
Grant Probability
72%
With Interview (+25.0%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 15 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