Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/102,148

ENDOSCOPE

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Jan 27, 2023
Examiner
BOLER, RYNAE E
Art Unit
3795
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Olympus Medical Systems Corp.
OA Round
2 (Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 0m
To Grant
69%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
300 granted / 485 resolved
-8.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 0m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
519
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
53.0%
+13.0% vs TC avg
§102
22.8%
-17.2% vs TC avg
§112
21.6%
-18.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 485 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION Response to Amendment This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 11/26/2025. As indicated by the amendment: claims 1, 4-8, 10 and 13-17 have been amended, claims 18-20 have been cancelled, and new claims 21-24 have been added. In response to the remarks and amendment of claim 10, its rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, has been withdrawn. Claims 1-17 and 21-24 are presently pending in the application, with claims 8 and 11-17 withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-7, 9-10 and 21-24 are examined below. 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 22 is 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 22 recites the limitation "the baseline surface" in the sixth line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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) 1-4, 9, 21 and 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Finkman et al. (US 2011/0144429 A1). Regarding claim 1, Finkman discloses an endoscope (22; par. [0024]Fig. 1), comprising: an insertion section (23; par. [0024]) including a conduit (38/40; par. [0027] and [0029]; Fig. 1) having [[an]] a continuous inner surface (interior of 38/40; Figs. 1 and 2), an inner diameter, and a longitudinal center axis (Figs. 1 and 2), and, wherein the inner surface at a distal end of the insertion section comprises: a first projection (a first projection of 60 located at the proximal end of 60 on the top side; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) provided at a first position (on one side of 38/40; see Fig. 2), [[and]] a second projection (a second projection of 60 located distally of the first projection on the bottom side; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) provided at a second position (on the other side of 38/40; see Fig. 2), and a first recess provided at a third position (a first recess of 60 opposite the first projection; par. [0038]; Fig. 2), wherein, in a longitudinal direction of the insertion section, the first position (of the first projection of 60 on one side of 38/40; Fig. 2) is different from the second position (of the second projection of 60 on the other side of 38/40; Fig. 2), wherein, in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal center axis: a distance from the radially innermost surface of the first projection (a first projection of 60 located at the proximal end of 60 on the top side; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) to a radially outermost surface of the first recess (a first recess of 60 opposite the first projection; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) is a first distance, and wherein the first distance is the same as the inner diameter of the conduit (of that distal end portion of the conduit; Fig. 2). Regarding claim 2, Finkman discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein, in a circumferential direction of the insertion section, the first position (proximal projection of 60) is different from the second position (distally located projection of 60; see Fig. 2). Regarding claim 3, Finkman discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the first projection (a first projection of 60 located at the proximal end of 60 on the top side; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) is provided on a first inner surface portion (inner surface of 30/40) and the second projection (a second projection of 60 located distally of the first projection on the bottom side; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) is provided on a second inner surface portion (inner surface of 30/40 opposite the first inner surface portion; see Fig. 2), and wherein, in a side cross-sectional view (Fig. 2), the first inner surface portion is on a first side (top side; Fig. 2) of [[a]] the longitudinal center axis of the insertion section and the second inner surface portion is on a second side (bottom side; Fig. 2) of the longitudinal center axis of the insertion section. Regarding claim 4, Finkman discloses the endoscope according to claim 3, center axis of the insertion section and facing the first projection (a first projection of 60 located at the proximal end of 60 on the top side; par. [0038]; Fig. 2). Regarding claim 9, Finkman discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the first projection (a first projection of 60 located at the proximal end of 60 on the top side; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) has a first height in a radial direction of the conduit (Fig. 2), wherein the second projection (a second projection of 60 located distally of the first projection on the bottom side; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) has a second height in the radial direction of the conduit (Fig. 2), and wherein the first height and the second height are less than a radius of the conduit (Fig. 2). Regarding claim 21, Finkman discloses the endoscope accordingly to claim 1, wherein the distal section of the inner surface further comprises: a second recess (a second recess of 60 opposite the second projection; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) provided at a fourth position, wherein, in the longitudinal direction of the insertion section, the fourth position (of the second recess of 60 opposite the second projection; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) is the same as the second position (of the second projection of 60 Fig. 2), wherein, in a side cross-sectional view, the first recess faces the first projection (Fig. 2) and the second recess faces the second projection (Fig. 2). Regarding claim 23, Finkman discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the first position (of the first projection of 60; Fig. 2) is the same as the third position (of the first recess of 60 opposite the first projection; Fig. 2), wherein, in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal center axis: a distance from the longitudinal center axis to a radially innermost surface of the first projection is a second distance (Fig. 2), and a distance from the longitudinal center axis to a radially innermost surface of the second projection is a third distance (Fig. 2), and wherein the second distance is the same as the third distance (Fig. 2). Regarding claim 24, Finkman discloses the endoscope according to claim 23, wherein the inner surface at the distal end of the insertion section further comprises: a second recess (a second recess of 60 opposite the second projection; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) provided at a fourth position, wherein, in the longitudinal direction of the insertion section, the fourth position (of the second recess of 60 opposite the second projection; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) is the same as the second position (of the second projection of 60 Fig. 2), wherein, in the direction perpendicular to the longitudinal center axis, a distance from the radially innermost surface of the second projection (a second projection of 60 located distally of the first projection on the bottom side; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) to a radially outermost surface of the second recess (a second recess of 60 opposite the second projection; par. [0038]; Fig. 2) is a fourth distance, and wherein the first distance is the same as the fourth distance (Fig. 2). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-7 and 10 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Regarding claim 5, the prior art of record does not disclose, or otherwise render obvious, the endoscope wherein the first projection includes a first projecting side wall surface, wherein the first recess includes a first recessed side wall surface and a bottom surface, wherein the first projecting side wall surface intersects a baseline surface of the conduit at a first obtuse angle, and wherein the first recessed side wall surface intersects the bottom surface at a second obtuse angle, in combination with the other elements of the claim. Regarding claim 6, and claim 7 dependent therefrom, the prior art of record does not disclose, or otherwise render obvious, the endoscope wherein, in a side cross-sectional view and relative to a baseline surface of the conduit: the first projection and the second projection are each protruded from the baseline surface, and the first recess and the second recess are each recessed from the baseline surface, in combination with the other elements of the claim. Regarding claim 10, the prior art of record does not disclose, or otherwise render obvious, the endoscope wherein a shortest distance between the first projection and the second projection defines a projection separation distance, and wherein the projection separation distance is larger than the inner diameter of the conduit, in combination with the other elements of the claim. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see claim amendments and remarks, filed 11/26/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Finkman, as discussed above. 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 RYNAE E BOLER whose telephone number is (571)270-3620. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00-5:00. 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, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-4963. 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. /RYNAE E BOLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3795 /ANH TUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795 3/11/26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 27, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Nov 26, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112
Apr 02, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 09, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 09, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599292
AN ARTICULATED BENDING SECTION BODY FOR AN INSERTION ENDOSCOPE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593965
ENDOSCOPE WITH A THREE-WIRE STEERING MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588802
CONNECTION JOINT, ENDOSCOPE, AND METHOD OF CONNECTING TUBE AND CONNECTION JOINT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582295
ENDOSCOPE TUBULAR CONNECTOR AND ENDOSCOPE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582489
MOUNTING AN ENDOSCOPE TO A SURGICAL ROBOT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
62%
Grant Probability
69%
With Interview (+7.3%)
4y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 485 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