Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/178,981

Novel Pain Management System, Method & Device Using Analytics Driven Random Electrical Stimuli

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Mar 06, 2023
Examiner
DIETRICH, JOSEPH M
Art Unit
3796
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Calmare Therapeutics Incorporated
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
743 granted / 918 resolved
+10.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
959
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
45.9%
+5.9% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
12.3%
-27.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 918 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 31 December 2025 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed 31 December 2025, with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 102/103 have been fully considered and are persuasive, in light of the amendments. The rejection of 1, 2, 6, 7, 12 – 16, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102/103 has been withdrawn. Please see reasons for indicating allowable subject matter. It is noted that Applicant has asked for the Double Patenting rejections to be held in abeyance. The Double Patenting rejections are maintained below. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1 – 21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 – 28 of U.S. Patent No. 10,384,062. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the present application and the ‘062 patent claim a system and method of generating random electrical stimulation signals in a frequency range of about 5Hz to 2 KHz. The claims of the present application are more broad than the claims of the ‘062 patent. Therefore, the claims of the ‘062 patent anticipate the claims of the present application. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1 – 7, 9 – 13, and 15 – 20 would be allowable upon receipt of a timely filed Terminal Disclaimer to overcome the Double Patenting rejections set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach a configurable lower RMS voltage and a configurable upper RMS voltage, along with the other limitations of the independent claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH M DIETRICH whose telephone number is (571)270-1895. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00. 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, Jennifer McDonald can be reached on 571-270-3061. 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. /JOSEPH M DIETRICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 06, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Mar 31, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 28, 2025
Final Rejection — §DP
Dec 31, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 06, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599766
Systems and Methods For Treating Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599773
POWER MANAGEMENT FOR IMPLANTABLE MEDICAL DEVICE SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588822
Remote Physiological Monitor
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589254
WEARABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATOR WITH AI-BASED FEATURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589245
SYSTEMS AND METHODS RELATED TO THE TREATMENT OF BACK PAIN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
81%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+8.1%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 918 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