Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/120,953

APPARATUS AND ULTRASOUND IMAGING SYSTEM FOR HOLDING AND CHARGING WIRELESS ULTRASOUND PROBES

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 13, 2023
Examiner
TURCHEN, ROCHELLE DEANNA
Art Unit
3797
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
GE Precision Healthcare LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
56%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 2m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 56% of resolved cases
56%
Career Allow Rate
357 granted / 642 resolved
-14.4% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+30.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 2m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
673
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
§103
48.2%
+8.2% vs TC avg
§102
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
§112
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 642 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Claim Objections Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the probe holder the probe charger” in line 2 should state “the probe holder and the probe charger”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “one or more securing elements configured to secure” in claims 1, 3, 13 and 30, “one or more second securing element configured to secure” in claim 7. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 7-15 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rahardja et al (2023/0225706). Regarding claim 1, Rahardja et al disclose an apparatus for holding and charging a wireless ultrasound probe used in an ultrasound imaging system, the apparatus comprising: a probe holder configured to securely engage, at least, a probe charger that is configured to engage the wireless ultrasound probe (charging and cooling unit 130 – [0062]; fig.1); wherein the probe holder comprises one or more securing elements configured to secure in place at least the probe charger once engaged with the probe holder (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]); wherein the probe holder is configured to engage a corresponding part of the ultrasound imaging system (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]. The probe holder is secured in place once engaged, i.e., “attached to” via an attachment means to the ultrasound imaging system.); and wherein the probe holder is configured for being secured in place, once engaged with the ultrasound imaging system, based on a securing mechanism (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]. The probe holder is secured in place once engaged, i.e., “attached to” via an attachment means to the ultrasound imaging system.). Regarding claim 3, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the one or more securing elements comprise at least one securing element configured to secure in place, at least in part, both the probe charger and the wireless ultrasound probe (at least one attachment means…the attachment means is formed with mating components on a housing of the dural function charging and cooling unit and on a surface of the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]). Regarding claim 4, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the one or more securing elements comprise at least one element that comprises a hook-like structure extending from an edge of the probe holder and configured to engaging a side part of one or both of the probe charger and the wireless ultrasound probe (a plurality of nubs or protrusions 401 – [0073]; fig.4). Regarding claim 7, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the probe holder comprise one or more second securing elements configured to secure in place the probe holder, once engaged with the ultrasound imaging system, based on the securing mechanism (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]. Examiner interprets the first attachment means as the “one or more securing elements” and the second attachment means as the “one or more second securing elements.). Regarding claim 8, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the securing mechanism comprises a magnetic force based mechanism, and wherein the one or more second securing elements comprise at least one structure configured to house a magnet (the dual function charging and cooling unit is coupled to the ultrasound imaging apparatus using magnetic force. Said housing includes at least one magnet for performing detachable coupling…a body of the ultrasound imaging apparatus includes a magnetic material for mating with said at least one magnet – [0039]). Regarding claim 9, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the at least one structure is on a bottom-side of the probe holder (magnet 602 – fig.6). Regarding claim 10, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the at least one structure is at a location that is opposite a location of at least one corresponding structure on the corresponding part of the ultrasound system, and wherein the corresponding structure is configured to house a magnet, or to house a steel or iron-based bracket when the at least one structure houses a magnet ([0080]; fig.6). Regarding claim 11, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the corresponding part of the ultrasound imaging system comprises one or more recesses configured to receive the probe holder, and wherein the probe holder is configured to reside or fit with each of the one or more recesses (a plurality of nubs or protrusions which each nest or snap with respective apertures 510 – [0073]; fig.5). Regarding claim 12, Rahardja et al disclose wherein one or both of the probe holder and the corresponding part of the ultrasound imaging system are configured to enable placement of the probe holder at a right-side position or a left-side position with respect to a user of the ultrasound imaging system (portable – [0095]. Examiner notes the system is portable and can therefore be placed in any configuration desirable with respect to the user including a right-side or left-side position). Regarding claim 13, Rahardja et al disclose an apparatus for holding and charging a wireless ultrasound probe used in an ultrasound imaging system, the apparatus comprising: a probe charger configured to engage the wireless ultrasound probe (power source 138 – fig.1); and a probe holder configured to engage at least the probe charger (charging and cooling unit 130 – [0062]; fig.1); wherein the probe charger is configured to charge the wireless ultrasound probe when engaged therewith (external power source 138 – [0066]); wherein the probe holder comprises one or more securing elements, and wherein at least one securing element is configured to secure in place at least the probe charger once engaged with the probe holder (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]); and wherein the probe holder is configured for being secured in place once engaged with the ultrasound imaging system (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]. The probe holder is secured in place once engaged, i.e., “attached to” via an attachment means to the ultrasound imaging system.). Regarding claim 14, Rahardja et al disclose wherein one or both of the probe holder and the probe charger are configured such that when engaged to one another there is space between the probe holder and the probe charger to allow for air flow (air egress is via purpose-created gaps in the coupling of the dual function charging and cooling unit to the ultrasound imaging apparatus to allow air to flow past – [0073]). Regarding claim 15, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the one or more securing elements comprise at least one element that comprises a hook-like structure extending from an edge of the probe holder and configured to engaging a side part of one or both of the probe charger and the wireless ultrasound probe (a plurality of nubs or protrusions 401 – [0073]; fig.4). Regarding claim 17, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the probe charger comprises one or more structures configured for securing in place, at least in part, the wireless probe once engaged therewith (connector 134 – fig.1). Regarding claim 18, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the probe charger comprises a port configured to receive a connector for providing power from the ultrasound imaging system via a charging cable (power port for mating with a detachable power cord – [0033]). Regarding claim 19, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the probe holder comprises one or more structures configured to secure in place the charging cable once plugged into the port (power port for mating with a detachable power cord – [0033]. power source 138 mated to housing via connector 134 and fastened to the ultrasound probe 136 – fig.1). Regarding claim 20, Rahardja et al disclose an ultrasound imaging system comprising: a wireless ultrasound probe (an ultrasound imaging apparatus 110 – [0061]; fig.1); a probe charger configured to engage the wireless ultrasound probe (power source 138 – fig.1); a probe holder configured to engage at least the probe charger (charging and cooling unit 130 – [0062]; fig.1); wherein the probe charger is configured to charge the wireless ultrasound probe when engaged therewith (external power source 138 – [0066]); wherein the probe holder comprises one or more securing elements, and wherein at least one securing element is configured to secure in place at least the probe charger once engaged with the probe holder (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]); and wherein the probe holder is configured for being secured in place once engaged with the ultrasound imaging system (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]. The probe holder is secured in place once engaged, i.e., “attached to” via an attachment means to the ultrasound imaging system.). 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rahardja et al (2023/0225706) in view of Aspa et al (20230226238). Regarding claim 2, Rahardja et al disclose the invention substantially as claimed, but fail to explicitly disclose wherein the probe holder comprises or is made from a transparent material. However, Aspa et al teach in the same medical field of endeavor, wherein a probe holder comprises or is made from a transparent material (the at least one support member is formed from quartz glass and/or transparent/translucent plastics – [0018]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the probe holder of Rahardja et al with being transparent as it would provide increased visibility through the probe holder. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5, 6 and 16 are 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROCHELLE DEANNA TURCHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7104. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 6:30-2:30. 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, Christopher Koharski can be reached at (571)272-7230. 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. /ROCHELLE D TURCHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 13, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599367
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR GENERATING 3D PLEURAL SURFACES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588891
ACOUSTIC WAVE DIAGNOSTIC APPARATUS AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING ACOUSTIC WAVE DIAGNOSTIC APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588899
ULTRASONIC DIAGNOSTIC APPARATUS, LEARNING APPARATUS, AND IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582487
System and Method for Registration Between Coordinate Systems and Navigation
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584807
Bragg Grated Fiber Optic Fluctuation Sensing and Monitoring System
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
56%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+30.7%)
4y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 642 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