Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 14, 2026
Application No. 18/294,960

SAFETY DEVICE FOR A NEEDLE AND SAFETY NEEDLE SYSTEM COMPRISING A SAFETY DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Feb 02, 2024
Priority
Aug 05, 2021 — EU 21189836.6 +1 more
Examiner
SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE
Art Unit
3783
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Aesculap AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allowance Rate
591 granted / 1010 resolved
-11.5% vs TC avg
Strong +37% interview lift
Without
With
+36.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
53 currently pending
Career history
1082
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
49.8%
+9.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.7%
-18.3% vs TC avg
§112
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1010 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
ssaDETAILED 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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 11-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on June 15, 2026. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on June 15, 2026 is acknowledged. Drawings The drawings are objected to because in Fig. 4 12 is used to indicate two different parts, one of number 12 is believed to be 22. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 16. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 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: a securing element in claim 1. 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 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) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Isaacson et al. (US 2018/0289932 A1). With regard to claim 1, Isaacson et al. teach a safety device for protecting against injuries on a needle tip, the safety device comprising: a housing having a channel with a proximal opening and a distal opening for a stem of a needle to pass therethrough, wherein the housing is configured to slide over the stem of the needle such that the needle is moveable relative to the housing between a first needle position, in which the needle tip protrudes from the distal opening of the housing and a second needle position, in which the needle tip is situated inside the channel (housing 50, see first position in Fig. 2A, second position in Fig. 2C, the housing is shown more clearly in Fig. 4A); and a closing device which is configured to close the distal opening of the housing when the needle tip is in the second needle position, wherein the closing device comprises a protection flap, wherein the protection flap closes the distal opening when the protection flap is in a first protection flap position (Fig. 2C protection flap 40a and 48a closes the opening), the closing device comprises comprising a securing element configured to block a movement or deformation of the protection flap out of the first protection flap position towards the an inside of the channel (Fig. 2C securing element 40b and 48b, [0044]). With regard to claim 2, see [0041], second position of the protection flap shown in Fig. 2B and 4A. With regard to claims 3 and 4, see transition from Fig. 2A-2C, first securing flap position in Fig. 2C second position in Fig. 2B. With regard to claim 5, the use of the device is considered in totality, to initially place the device in the position in Fig. 2A in which the securing flap is in the second securing flap position it must move against its restoration force, as it is once piece with the protection flap this occurs with action from the protection flap on the securing flap, this is all part of the movement process to place the protection flap in the first position. With regard to claim 6, member 70 retain members 40 and 48b in the first position (exemplary Fig. 3B, [0050]), the Examiner notes assembly is not defined by the claim. With regard to claim 7, the abutment portion is taken as member 56 of 48b which would be at the distal end of the housing (Fig. 3B). With regard to claim 8, see [0040] it is made from a resilient metal, the limitation to formation from a sheet metal piece is a product by process limitation. The applicant is advised that patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process MPEP 2113. With regard to claim 9, Issacson et al. teach a safety needle device comprising: the safety device according to claim 1 (see above); and the needle (Fig. 2A needle 22). With regard to claim 10, see Fig. 3B member 54 ([0045]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILY L SCHMIDT whose telephone number is (571)270-3648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 7:00 AM to 4:30 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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached at 571-272-4965. 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. /EMILY L SCHMIDT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 02, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12691205
A PUMP ARRANGEMENT, CONFIGURED TO BE USED WITH A DOUBLE BREAST PUMP DEVICE
5y 7m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12691263
MEDICAL BALLOON CATHETER AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF MEDICAL BALLOON CATHETER
3y 11m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12678603
Drug Delivery Systems and Methods for Treating the Nasal Cavity
5y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12678569
Autoinjector
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12667696
GUIDE EXTENSION CATHETER
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+36.7%)
3y 4m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1010 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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