Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/087,715

MEDICAL CUTTING DEVICES WITH A STATIC CASING AND A BLADE WORKING BODY OF GREATER WIDTH AND RELATED METHODS

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Dec 22, 2022
Examiner
IGBOKO, CHIMA U
Art Unit
3771
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Innovations 4 Surgery LLC
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
319 granted / 408 resolved
+8.2% vs TC avg
Strong +41% interview lift
Without
With
+40.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
452
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
42.6%
+2.6% vs TC avg
§102
29.5%
-10.5% vs TC avg
§112
21.8%
-18.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 408 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Drawings The drawings were received on 12/01/25. These drawings are acceptable. Claim Objections Claim 13 objected to because of the following informalities: In line 1, “claim 13” should read “claim 1”. Appropriate correction is required. Response to Amendment The Amendment filed 12/01/25 has been entered. Claims 1, 6, 11, 13-17, and 19 have been amended, and claim 12 has been cancelled. Claims 9-11 and 15-19 are withdrawn. Note amended claim 14, formally claim 15, is directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally elected, because it is drawn to the non-elected species of static casing and blade working body detailed in the office action mailed 08/29/25. Also, note amended claim 15, formally claim 16, is directed to the invention originally elected, because it is drawn to Group I and Species 18-25 detailed in the office action mailed 08/29/25. Claims 1-8 and 13 are addressed in the following office action. 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 1-8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carusillo et al. (US 2006/0009796), cited in previous office action. Regarding claim 1, an invention relating to surgical cutting devices, Carusillo discloses (Figs. 1-9) a cutting device (20 & 22) comprising: a static casing (116, 118, 120, 130) including a body (120) that extends substantially within a first plane and substantially along a first direction [i.e. the plane along the longitudinal axis and in a direction towards element 112], wherein the static casing defines a first protrusion and a second protrusion (130) that extend into a second plane and substantially along the first direction [i.e. the plane along the longitudinal axis of element 130], wherein the first and second protrusions define a planar space therebetween within the second plane [i.e. space occupied by element 112] (Par. 0080, 0088); and a blade working body (112) including a first end (156) and a second end (168), the first end being configured to operatively connect to a source of movement (Par. 0097), the second end including a cutting component (166) positioned in the second plane and outside of the planar space between the first and second protrusions (Fig. 7A & Par. 0080 & 0088), wherein a portion (162) of the blade working body extends between the first and second protrusions, and wherein the portion of the blade working body is moveable between the first protrusion and the second protrusion by the source of movement (Par. 0071 & 0088). Regarding claim 2, Carusillo discloses the cutting device of claim 1. Carusillo further discloses wherein the cutting component comprises a curved cutting portion (Par. 0084). Regarding claim 3, Carusillo discloses the cutting device of claim 1. Carusillo further discloses (Fig. 9) wherein the cutting component comprises a serrated portion (168; Par. 0084-0085). Regarding claim 4, Carusillo discloses the cutting device of claim 1. Carusillo further discloses wherein the second end of the blade working body extends beyond the static casing (Figs. 7 & 7A). Regarding claim 5, Carusillo discloses the cutting device of claim 1. Carusillo further discloses wherein the static casing includes a first end and a second end (see annotated figure below), wherein the first end of the static casing is attached to the source of movement and substantially stationary with respect to the source of movement (Par. 0077). PNG media_image1.png 602 222 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 6, Carusillo discloses the cutting device of claim 5. Carusillo further discloses wherein the second end of the static casing opposes the first end of the static casing (see annotated figure above). Regarding claim 7, Carusillo discloses the cutting device of claim 6. Carusillo further discloses wherein the second end of the static casing defines a curved shape (Par. 0072). Regarding claim 8, Carusillo discloses the cutting device of claim 1. Carusillo further discloses wherein the blade working body is substantially flat with a first surface and a second surface (Par. 0081). Regarding claim 13, Carusillo discloses the cutting device of claim 1, Carusillo further discloses wherein the first protrusion and the second protrusion are positioned on opposing sides of the body of the static casing (Par. 0075-0076 & 0080). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see page 6, filed 12/01/25, with respect to Drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the Drawings has been withdrawn. Applicant's remaining arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues previously cited prior art reference Carusillo does not teach each and every feature of amended Claim 1. Particularly, Carusillo does not teach the amended Claim 1 features for the static casing being in a different plane that the first and second protrusions, and the first and second protrusions defining a planar space therebetween where a portion of the working blade body is positioned. Also, Carusillo does not teach the amended Claim 1 feature of the portion of the blade working body being moveable between the first protrusion and the second protrusion by the source of movement. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Carusillo discloses (Figs. 1-9) a cutting device (20 & 22) comprising: a static casing (116, 118, 120, 130) including a body (120) that extends substantially within a first plane and substantially along a first direction [i.e. the plane along the longitudinal axis and in a direction towards element 112], wherein the static casing defines a first protrusion and a second protrusion (130) that extend into a second plane and substantially along the first direction [i.e. the plane along the longitudinal axis of element 130], wherein the first and second protrusions define a planar space therebetween within the second plane [i.e. space occupied by element 112] (Par. 0080, 0088); and a blade working body (112) including a first end (156) and a second end (168), the first end being configured to operatively connect to a source of movement (Par. 0097), the second end including a cutting component (166) positioned in the second plane and outside of the planar space between the first and second protrusions (Fig. 7A & Par. 0080 & 0088), wherein a portion (162) of the blade working body extends between the first and second protrusions, and wherein the portion of the blade working body is moveable between the first protrusion and the second protrusion by the source of movement (Par. 0071 & 0088). 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 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 January 26, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 22, 2022
Application Filed
Jul 07, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Dec 01, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 20, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599499
DEVICES AND METHODS FOR CREATING A CAPSULORHEXIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12569362
DELIVERY DEVICE AND METHOD OF DELIVERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569332
IOL INJECTOR WITH AUTOMATIC DRIVER OR ASSISTED MANUAL DRIVE FORCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569327
INTRAVASCULAR CATHETER HAVING AN EXPANDABLE INCISING PORTION AND EMBOLIC PROTECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12558096
FULL EVERSION ANASTOMOSIS JUNCTURE FORMATION AND SUTURING
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
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+40.8%)
3y 6m
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