Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/256,711

EXTRACELLULAR VESICLE CHARACTERIZATION SYSTEMS

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jun 09, 2023
Examiner
HAWTHORNE, OPHELIA ALTHEA
Art Unit
3786
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Mursla Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
913 granted / 1273 resolved
+1.7% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
1322
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.2%
-34.8% vs TC avg
§103
38.9%
-1.1% vs TC avg
§102
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
§112
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1273 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Objections Claims 2-6, 8, 10-12 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: “A method as claimed in claim 1” should read, The method as claimed in claim 1”. Appropriate correction is required. See MPEP 608.01(n) as rationale for using “a” rather than “the” in the dependent claims. Examiner points out that none of the claims are multiple dependent claims and further points to MPEP 608.01(n) IV which gives the example for a singular dependent claim as “2. The product of claim 1 in which …” 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 8 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 8 recites the limitation "the vicinity" in line 4 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) 17 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Victor et al. (GB 2583550A). With respect to claim 17, Victor et al. discloses a method of detecting binding sites or quantifying binding sites on an extracellular vesicle (abstract), comprising: obtaining a liquid sample containing extracellular vesicles ([Page 11], 2nd paragraph]); attaching reporters to binding sites on the extracellular vesicles ([Page 9], 7th paragraph]); and interrogating the reporters to characterize a number of bindings of the reporters to the extracellular vesicles ([Page 9], 8th paragraph]) and ([Page 21], 7th paragraph]). With respect to claim 23, Victor et al. discloses the method is a method of detecting binding sites, and wherein interrogating the reporters to characterize a number of bindings of the reporters to the extracellular vesicles comprises optically interrogating the reporters ([Page 21], 7th paragraph, via Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS)]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-6, 10-12 and 14-16 are allowed. Claims 24-28 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. Reasons for Allowance The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art of record drawn to Victor et al. fails to show or make obvious the claimed combinations of elements particularly the limitations as set forth in independent claims 1 and 15 and dependent claims 2-6, 10-12, 14 and 16 which recite features not taught or suggested by the prior art drawn to Victor et al. Victor et al. fails to disclose or fairly suggests, determining a number of extracellular vesicles in the liquid sample by sensing an electrical response of the liquid sample using a pair of electrodes separated by less than an average maximum dimension of the electrically conducting nanoparticles; and combining the determined total number of bindings and the determined number of extracellular vesicles in the liquid sample to determine a number of binding sites per extracellular vesicle, in combination with the other elements (or steps) of the apparatus and method recited in the claims. Accordingly, a prima facie case of obviousness or an anticipation rejection cannot be established with respect to the claimed subject matter as set forth in claims 1and 15. Furthermore, the prior art of record drawn to Victor et al. fails to disclose or fairly suggests, the limitations as set forth in dependent claims 24-28, in combination with the other elements (or steps) of the apparatus and method recited in the claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OPHELIA ALTHEA HAWTHORNE whose telephone number is (571)270-3860. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 PM, EST. 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, Alireza Nia can be reached at 5712703076. 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. /OPHELIA A HAWTHORNE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3786
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 09, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Mar 31, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594385
Medical Vaporizer with Precision Controlled Vapor Composition
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594184
PACKAGED LUBRICATED CONDOM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589182
OCCLUSIVE IMPLANT COMPOSITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589180
MEDICAL DEVICE HAVING A POLYMERIC NANOCOMPOSITE ACTIVELY CONTROLLED FOR RAPID HEALING OF FRACTURES AND SOFT TISSUE INJURY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582541
Cryotherapy and Compression Sleeve and Methods of Use
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
72%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+19.7%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1273 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month