Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/164,171

MEDICAL DEVICE PACKAGING AND RELATED METHODS

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Feb 03, 2023
Examiner
REYNOLDS, STEVEN ALAN
Art Unit
3735
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
66%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 66% — above average
66%
Career Allow Rate
1113 granted / 1697 resolved
-4.4% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+23.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
1747
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
44.5%
+4.5% vs TC avg
§102
27.5%
-12.5% vs TC avg
§112
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1697 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 Group 1 (claims 1-14 and 24-32) in the reply filed on 2/2/2026 is acknowledged. 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. Claims 1-10, 24 and 26-32 are 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 1 is rendered indefinite by the terms “a first cavity portion”, “a second cavity portion” and “a third cavity portion”, in lines 6-7, since it is unclear if the first, second and third cavity portions are referring to the at least three cavity portions previously defined in line 2 or different cavity portions. For examination purposes, Examiner interprets the first, second and third cavity portions as referring to the at least three cavity portions defined in line 2 of claim 1. Claim 3 is rendered indefinite by the limitation “less than about 2.0 mm than the” since it is unclear what is being claimed. For examination purposes, Examiner interprets the claim limitation as “a distance between the first geometric feature and the second geometric feature is about 2.0 mm less than the width of the portion of the syringe contained within the narrowed portions”. 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 1-5, 7-14, 24-25 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mismar et al. (US 2021/0077645). Regarding claim 1, Mismar discloses a packaging (packaging 200 – shown in Figs. 3A-3C) comprising: a tray having an opening (see Fig. 3A labeled below), a cavity (cavity within the opening) including at least three cavity portions (see three cavity portions labeled in Fig. 3A below), a plurality of sidewalls (see Fig. 3A labeled below), and a base (bottom surface at 214 in Fig. 3A); and a syringe (at 10 in Fig. 3C) contained within the cavity, wherein the sterile syringe is pre-filled with a medicament or other fluid (see [0037]); wherein a first cavity portion (see Fig. 3A labeled below) comprises a plunger rod of the syringe (left-most portion of syringe 10 in as shown in Fig. 3C), a second cavity portion (see Fig. 3A labeled below) comprises a barrel of the syringe (middle portion of syringe 10 as shown in Fig. 3C), and a third cavity portion (see Fig. 3A labeled below) comprises a needle attachment portion of the syringe (right-most portion of syringe 10 as shown in Fig. 3C), wherein the three cavity portions are connected to one another by intermediate narrowed portions (see Fig. 3A labeled below), and wherein each of the narrowed portions includes a first sidewall (see Fig. 3A labeled below), a second sidewall (see Fig. 3A labeled below), a base (portion of the narrowed portion in which element 220 is disposed), and a plurality of geometric features (at 210/220 in Fig. 3A) projecting into the narrowed portions to position the syringe away from the plurality of sidewalls. PNG media_image1.png 816 1076 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, Mismar discloses the first sidewall of the narrowed portion includes a first geometric feature (top-most element 210 in Fig. 3A) and the second sidewall of the narrowed portion includes a second geometric feature (bottom-most element 210 in Fig. 3A). Regarding claim 3, Mismar discloses a distance between the first geometric feature and the second geometric feature is about 2.0 mm less than the width of the portion of the syringe contained within the narrowed portions (based on the barrel diameters described in [0098]). Regarding claim 4, Mismar discloses a distance between the first geometric feature and the second geometric feature ranges from about 5.5 mm to about 6.5 mm (based on the barrel diameters described in [0098]). Regarding claim 5, Mismar discloses the base of the narrowed portion includes a third geometric feature (at 220 in Fig. 3A). Regarding claim 7, Mismar discloses the first cavity includes a flange portion (portion to the left of left-most 210 in Fig. 3C that accommodates the wide flange portion of the syringe 10) configured for holding a flange of the syringe. Regarding claim 8, Mismar discloses a recessed portion is located between the flange portion and the first cavity (as shown in Fig. 3C). Regarding claim 9, Mismar discloses each of the at least three cavity portions has a rectangular shape (as shown in Fig. 3B). Regarding claim 10, Mismar discloses each of the at least three cavity portions has a rectangular shape with a radius around each corner (as shown in Fig. 3B). Regarding claims 11 and 14, Mismar discloses a packaging (packaging 200 – shown in Figs. 3A-3C) capable of holding a syringe, the packaging comprising: a tray having an opening, a cavity including a plurality of cavity portions, a plurality of sidewalls, and a base (See Fig. 3A labeled above); wherein the plurality of cavity portions are connected to one another by intermediate narrowed portions (See Fig. 3A labeled above), each narrowed portion including a first sidewall (see Fig. 3A labeled above), a second sidewall (see Fig. 3A labeled above), a base (portion of the narrowed portion in which element 220 is disposed), wherein each of the first sidewall, the second sidewall, and the base, includes a geometric feature (at 210/220) extending away from the corresponding sidewall or base and projecting into the narrowed portion to position the syringe away from the plurality of sidewall; a lip (see Fig. 3A labeled above) surrounding the opening, wherein the lip extends radially outward from the cavity and defines a periphery of the tray; and a removable cover having a periphery that is adhered to the lip (described in [0041]), wherein the removable cover is permeable to a gaseous sterilant ([0041] describes the cover as being formed from Tyvek, which is well known in the art as being permeable to a gaseous sterilant, specifically ethylene oxide). Regarding claim 12, Mismar discloses the geometric feature on the first sidewall is a first geometric feature (top-most element 210 in Fig. 3A) and the geometric feature on the second sidewall is a second geometric feature (bottom-most element 210 in Fig. 3A), and a distance between the first geometric feature and the second geometric feature ranges from about 5.5 mm to about 6.5 mm (based on the barrel diameters described in [0098]). Regarding claim 13, Mismar discloses the plurality of cavity portions includes at least three cavity portions, and wherein a first cavity portion (see Fig. 3A labeled above) comprises a plunger rod of the syringe (left-most portion of syringe 10 in as shown in Fig. 3C), a second cavity portion (see Fig. 3A labeled above) comprises a barrel of the syringe (middle portion of syringe 10 as shown in Fig. 3C), and a third cavity portion (see Fig. 3A labeled above) comprises a needle attachment portion of the syringe (right-most portion of syringe 10 as shown in Fig. 3C) Regarding claim 24, Mismar discloses the syringe is pre-filled with aflibercept (See [0102]). Regarding claim 25, the packaging of Mismar is capable of holding a syringe pre-filled with aflibercept. Regarding claim 32, Mismar discloses the syringe is a sterile syringe. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 6 and 26-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mismar et al. (US 2021/0077645) as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Lau (US 9,617,055). Regarding claim 6, as described above, Mismar discloses the claimed invention except for the projection. However, Lau teaches a packaging (at 2 in Figs. 14A-14B) comprising a tray having a cavity (cavity between 126 and 68 in Fig. 14A) for holding an item (at 25) therein, wherein the bottom wall of the cavity includes a projection (at 130) in line with a portion of the item, for the purpose of assisting in ejecting the item from the tray (column 22, line 36 – column 23, line 13). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided one of the cavity portions of the tray of Mismar with a projection as taught by Lau in order to assist in removing the syringe from the tray. Regarding claim 26, Lau teaches the projection includes a dome shape (See Figs. 14A-14B and column 22, line 36 – column 23, line 13). Regarding claim 27, Lau teaches a diameter of the projection defines a widest portion of the dome shape where the projection meets the base of the tray. Regarding claim 28, Mismar-Lau discloses the projection is configurable to move relative to the syringe in response to receiving a pressure at a portion of the projection when pushing the projection. Regarding claim 29, Lau teaches the projection includes a dome having a widest diameter at the base of the tray, wherein the projection extends directly outwards from the base such that the widest diameter of the dome is connected at the base. Regarding claim 30, Mismar-Lau discloses the projection includes a dome and when the syringe is disposed within the cavity a height of the projection from an apex of the dome to a base of the dome is greater than a distance between the base of the dome and the portion of the syringe contained within the cavity and in line with the projection. Regarding claim 31, Lau teaches the projection includes a dome shape that is hollow and open towards the cavity of the tray. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN A REYNOLDS whose telephone number is (571)272-9959. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm. 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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (571) 272-4561. 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. /STEVEN A. REYNOLDS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 03, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Apr 14, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 14, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600549
Header Bag for Packaging at Least One Medical Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595092
IMPROVED STATIONERY PAPER PACKAGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595955
MODULAR BOX ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583661
CHIP STORING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569406
AM/PM MULTI-DAY PILL CONTAINER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
66%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+23.6%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1697 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