Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/093,896

ENDOSCOPE AND ENDOSCOPE PRODUCING METHOD

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 06, 2023
Examiner
SURGAN, ALEXANDRA L
Art Unit
3799
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Olympus Medical Systems Corp.
OA Round
2 (Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 2m
To Grant
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
229 granted / 490 resolved
-23.3% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+27.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 2m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
533
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
56.2%
+16.2% vs TC avg
§102
20.7%
-19.3% vs TC avg
§112
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 490 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Status of Claims Claims 1-12 and 14-21 are pending, claims 12, 16, and 18-20 have been withdrawn from consideration, and claims 1-11, 14-15, 17,and 21 are currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. Response to arguments found below. Foreign Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). The certified copies have been received. 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) 1-11, 14, 15, 17 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa (U.S. 2015/0265142) in view of Imai (U.S. 2016/0363757). With respect to claim 1, Ogawa teaches an insertion portion of an endoscope comprising: a distal end portion extending in a longitudinal axis direction and configured to be inserted into a subject in the longituidnal axis direction, the distal end portion (FIG. 2) comprising: an exterior surface (FIG. 8), a first channel (45) including a first opening on the exterior surface, the first channel extending in a first direction that intersects the longitudinal axis direction (FIG. 2). an elongated object (9) inserted into the first channel; a rigid portion (46) provided at a distal end of the first elongated object, the rigid portion including: an outer peripheral surface (FIG. 8), and a first surface (49) recessed from the outer peripheral surface of the rigid portion (FIG. 8) However, Ogawa does not teach a second channel or second and third openings. With respect to claim 1, Imai teaches an insertion portion of an endoscope comprising: a distal end portion (21) comprising: an exterior surface (FIG. 6), a first channel (22) including a first opening on the exterior surface (22a), and a second channel (23) including a second opening (24a) on the exterior surface and a third opening on the first channel (FIG. 6), an elongated object (30) inserted into the first channel; a rigid portion (33) provided at a distal end of the first elongated object, the rigid portion including: an outer peripheral surface (33d), and a first surface (39a) recessed from the outer peripheral surface of the rigid portion, wherein both of the outer peripheral surface and the first surface are exposed within the third opening (FIG. 10, 21 for example). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the means of attaching holding frame 46 of Ogawa to the distal end portion of Ogawa, to instead utilize the pin configuration as taught by Imai so that the holding frame can be reversably fixed to the endoscope for easier repairs (para [0011] of Imai). Such a modification would necessarily result in the second channel intersecting the first direction and the second channel being inclined and non-perpendicular relative to the longitudinal axis direction because Imai teaches the second channel is perpendicular to the distal end of the first channel and Ogawa teaches the first channel is angled with respect to the longitudinal axis of the endoscope. With respect to claim 2, Imai teaches the rigid portion comprising a second surface recessed from the outer peripheral surface (39a, FIG. 20). With respect to claim 3, Imai teaches the first surface and the second surface are separated from each other in a circumferential direction (FIG. 20). With respect to claim 4, Imai does not explicitly teach a relationship of W>d+r. However, it is obvious that the Imai device satisfies this condition at least based on 24a in FIG. 6 and 39a,33d as compared to pin 50 in FIG. 21. With respect to claim 5, Imai does not explicitly teach the first surface includes a side surface and a bottom surface, the side surface and the bottom surface form an angle of 90 to 135 degrees relative to each other. However, it is obvious based on FIG. 21 that the shape of the recess-shaped groove portions meets this limitation. With respect to claim 6, Imai teaches a fixing portion (50) inserted into the second channel (FIG. 6, 10), the fixing portion contacting the outer peripheral surface so as to hold the rigid portion (FIG. 21). With respect to claim 7, Imai teaches the fixing portion is configured to press the outer peripheral surface of the rigid portion (para [0111]). With respect to claim 8, Imai teaches the fixing portion includes a distal end having a size greater than a size of an opening of the recessed surface on the outer peripheral surface (FIG. 21). With respect to claim 9, Ogawa teaches the first elongated object includes a distal portion at a distal-end side that is bent relative to a proximal portion of the first elongated object and the rigid portion is provided on the distal portion (FIG. 6,7). With respect to claim 10, Ogawa teaches the first elongated object is an illumination unit configured to emit light for illuminating a subject (para [0043] for example). With respect to claim 11, Ogawa teaches the illumination unit is a light guide (22) that is pre-formed to maintain a predetermined shape in which a middle portion is bent (FIG. 7). With respect to claim 14, Imai teaches the second channel extends linearly (FIG. 6). With respect to claim 15, Imai teaches the lens frame 31 including body portion 33 is made of stainless steel (para [0052]). Further, FIG. 2 of Imai shows image pickup cable 37 is part of the elongated object. It is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the stainless steel rigid portion has higher rigidity than the image pickup cable. With respect to claim 17, Imai teaches an endoscope comprising the insertion portion according to claim 1 (FIG. 1). With respect to claim 21, Ogawa teaches the elongated object having a columnar shape; and the rigid portion further having an inner peripheral shape for accommodating the elongated object therein (FIG. 7). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 09/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Specifically, Applicant has presented no specific arguments with respect to the obviousness rejection of claim 1. 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 Alexandra Newton Surgan whose telephone number is (571)270-1618. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4pm EST. 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, Michael Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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. /ALEXANDRA L NEWTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 06, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 17, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 24, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593958
ENDOSCOPE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12564310
ENDOSCOPE AND ENDOSCOPE APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12544160
CONTINUUM INSTRUMENT AND SURGICAL ROBOT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12539022
ARTICULATION CONTROL DEVICE AND METHODS OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12533263
Ear Cleaning Arrangement
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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
47%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+27.5%)
4y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 490 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