Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/252,810

CATHETER

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Dec 11, 2023
Examiner
PEFFLEY, MICHAEL F
Art Unit
3794
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Japan Lifeline Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
1037 granted / 1334 resolved
+7.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
54 currently pending
Career history
1388
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
36.8%
-3.2% vs TC avg
§102
28.3%
-11.7% vs TC avg
§112
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1334 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 . 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 4 and 7 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 4 lacks sufficient structure to support the function of ejecting a liquid. That is, there is no claimed liquid source to provide for the function. Claim 7 lacks clear antecedent basis for “the electrode”. It is noted that claim 1 recites “a plurality of electrodes”, so it is not clear if the singular electrode recited in claim 7 is different from the plurality, or one of the plurality. 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 1-3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Danek et al (7,198,635). Danek et al provide a catheter device comprising a catheter shaft (102) including a near-distal end structure (104) comprising a plurality of electrodes (106). A handle is mounted on a proximal end of the catheter and the handle includes a handle body (124) and a slide mechanism (128) configured to be slidable along the axial direction of the handle body (Figures 5D and 5E, for example) during a deformation operation in which a shape of the near-distal end structure is deployed between first and second shapes (Figures 5F and 5G, for example) along an axial direction. Regarding claim 2, the near-distal end structure is settable to any intermediate shape according to a slide position. That is, the slider (128) may be deployed any desired amount to affect the desired amount of deployment. Regarding claim 3, a distal end of a fixation wire (122) is fixed to the near-distal end structure to effect deployment, and a proximal end side of the fixation wire is fixed by the slide mechanism by insertion into a rigid tube (102) in the handle body. Regarding claim 7, the near-distal end structure includes a branch point of the catheter shaft (Figures 5F and 5G, for example), and a joining point (118) near the most distal end of the catheter shaft. A plurality of branch structures (106) including electrodes are connected to the branch point and the joining point in a curved shape forming a petal shape in the non-deployed shape (Figure 5f) and a deployed shape in which the petal shaped is deployed along the axial direction (Figure 5G). Claims 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Deford et al (2009/0240248). Deford et al provide a catheter comprising a catheter shaft (12) having a near-distal end structure (28) comprising a plurality of electrodes (50). The device includes a handle including a handle body (14) and a slide mechanism (252) configured to be slid along an axial direction in the handle body (Figure 25, for example) to change the near-distal end structure between first (non-deployed) and second (deployed) shapes. See Figures 4 and 5, for example. Regarding claim 2, the near-distal end structure is settable to any intermediate shape according to a slide position. That is, the slider (252) may be deployed any desired amount to affect the desired amount of deployment. Regarding claim 3, the distal end side of a deformation wire (162a and 162b) is fixed to the near-distal end structure, and a proximal end side of the deformation wire is fixed by the slide mechanism in a state of being inserted into a rigid tube (shown but not labeled in Figure 25 – the tubes through which the wires extend through the handle to the catheter). Regarding claim 5, Deford et al also provide a rotation operation portion to deflect a portion of the catheter near the distal end, the rotation operation portion including a rotating plate (122 – Figure 25) configured to be rotatable about a rotation axis perpendicular to the axial direction with respect to the handle body and a path defining member (206) formed from a member different from a member of the rotating plate and defining a non-rotational (i.e. linear) path through which the deformation wire (162c and 162d) passes. 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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danek et al (‘635) in view of the teaching of Fung et al (6,120,476). Danek et al fail to disclose a slide mechanism that includes an interface on both a front surface side and a back surface side of the handle body. Fung et al disclose another catheter device having a slider mechanism to actuate a near-distal end structure similar to Danek et al. In particular, Fung et al specifically teach that the sliding mechanism (126) may be circumferentially disposed about the housing to enable movement of the slider from any rotational position. Such a circumferential slide mechanism/knob inherently covers all sides of the handle, including a front and back surface. To have provided the Danek et al device with a slide mechanism including a knob that extends around the circumference of the handle to enable actuation of the slide mechanism from any angular orientation would have been an obvious design consideration for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention since Fung et al fairly teach that such a slide mechanism is generally known in the art. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deford et al (‘248) in view of the teaching of Shockey et al (5,275,151). Deford et al disclose the catheter device having a near-distal end structure and a slide mechanism to deform the near-distal end structure as addressed with respect to claim 1 above. Deford et al also disclose a means to provide an irrigation fluid to be ejected outside the near-distal end structure. However, Deford et al fail to show the specific tube structure and liquid stop member as required by claim 4. Shockey et al disclose another catheter device including a slide mechanism to cause a deformation of a near-distal end structure of the catheter. The slide mechanism of Shockey et al includes a deformation wire (20) secured to the slide mechanism (174) to control deformation of the near-distal end structure. In particular, a distal end-side region of the rigid tube (12) is configured to be insertable into a protective tube (66) such that fluid from the fluid source (via Y-tube (92)) flows into a gap between the protective tube and the rigid tube toward the near-distal end structure, and a liquid stop member (106) is configured to suppress leakage of the fluid into the handle member. See, for example, Figure 5. To have provided the Deford et al device with the fluid distribution arrangement taught by Shockey et al to provide a fluid to the near-distal end structure and prevent leakage of the fluid into the handle would have been an obvious design alternative for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention since Shockey et al disclose the use of such a fluid providing structure in a similar catheter device having a deployable near-distal end structure and a slide mechanism. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bowden et al (5,611,777), Kohler et al (2003/0114832), Fuimaono et al (6,741,878), Highsmith (9,522,035) and Olson et al (12,465,721) disclose other devices having a deformable distal structure and a slide mechanism to deform the distal structure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL PEFFLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4770. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 am-5 pm. 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, Linda Dvorak can be reached at (571) 272-4764. 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. /MICHAEL F PEFFLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794 /M.F.P/ December 11, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 11, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599429
METHODS FOR CONTROLLING TREATMENT VOLUMES, THERMAL GRADIENTS, MUSCLE STIMULATION, AND IMMUNE RESPONSES IN PULSED ELECTRIC FIELD TREATMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599426
ELECTROSURGICAL GENERATOR HAVING AN EXTENDED MEASUREMENT RANGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599406
METHODS AND DEVICES FOR PUNCTURING TISSUE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594115
LACERATION SYSTEM AND DEVICE, AND METHODS FOR LACERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588941
ELECTROSURGICAL INSTRUMENT
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+12.6%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1334 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