Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/295,499

ENDOSCOPE SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 04, 2023
Examiner
FAIRCHILD, AARON BENJAMIN
Art Unit
3795
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Olympus Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
495 granted / 627 resolved
+8.9% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
647
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
§103
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
§102
23.1%
-16.9% vs TC avg
§112
34.8%
-5.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 627 resolved cases

Office Action

§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. Election /Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (claims 1-10) and Species A, readable on claims 1-2 and 4-10, in the response of 9 September, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 3 and 11-15 are therefore withdrawn, and claims 1-2 and 4-10 are examined. Claim Interpretation In claims 1 and 4, the claims read “submillimeter waves”. While a quick reading of this term may lead to including any waves with a wavelength of less than one millimeter, it is clear this is a term of the art synonymous with “ tetrahertz radiation”, which is electromagnetic radiation in the range of 10 µm to 1 mm, or 3 0 µm to 3 mm in older sources . It is further clear that “millimeter waves” used in these claims are a term of the art meaning the “EHF” electromagnetic band, 1-10 mm in wavelength . In claim 4, the claim reads “determine a bending state of the bendable portion based on information representing distance measured by the distance sensor and on information representing the bending state of the bendable portion” [lines 18-21]. As nothing is done with this determination in this claim, this is an arbitrary flag, and is the same as claiming the controller receives both the distance measured and the bending state information. 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 -10 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. In regards to claim 4, the claim reads “a signal indicating a bending state of the bendable portion” [lines 16-17] and “information representing the bending state of the bendable portion” [lines 20-21]. It is unclear if these are supposed to be the same item. Therefore, the claim is unclear. For the purposes of prosecution, it will be assumed that these are the same. In regards to claim 7 , the claim read s “ a notification of information representing the bending state of the bendable portion ” [ lines 2-3 ] , wherein claim 4 from which it depends reads “information representing the bending state of the bendable portion” [lines 20-21] . It is unclear if this “information” is meant to be the same as that recited in claim 4 . Therefore, the claim is unclear. For the purposes of prosecution, it will be assumed that this is the same information. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 1 is allowed. Claim s 4-10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112, 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art fails to teach, among other features, an endoscope system comprising: an endoscope having an insertion portion, a distance sensor configured transmit and receive millimeter or submillimeter electromagnetic waves to measure a distance between the insertion portion and an object, a flexible waveguide with one end connected to the distance sensor, and another end exposed on an outside from a distal end of the insertion portion, the waveguide configured to propagate the above described waves transmitted and received by the distance sensor. Kawashima (US 4,292,961) discloses an endoscope that utilizes visible light propagated over a waveguide to and from a distal end of an endoscope insertion portion to find a distance between the insertion portion and an object. Matsumoto (JPH 10-272088) discloses an endoscope that uses a millimeter wavelength laser to find the range from an endoscope insertion portion to an object. Ri et al. (JP 2008122278) discloses an endoscope that uses submillimeter radiation emitted and received at a distal portion of an endoscope insertion portion to find a distance between the insertion portion and an object, wherein a flexible optical wavelength waveguide is configured to transmit light to/from a sensor outside the endoscope, through the endoscope to where the submillimeter radiation is emitted and received, to control a submillimeter radiation emitter and a submillimeter radiation receiver at the insertion portion distal end and receive and process the information therefrom. Wantanabe et al. (US 2018/0136456) discloses an endoscope that uses a flexible waveguide to transmit, using millimeter and/or submillimeter wavelength radiation, image information from an imager at a distal end of an endoscope insertion portion. There is no reason or suggestion provided in the prior art to modify the above prior art to teach the limitations as claimed above, and the only reason to modify the references would be based on Applicant's disclosure, which is impermissible hindsight reasoning . Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Kawashima (US 4,292,961) Ri et al. (JP 2008122278) Wantanabe et al. (US 2018/0136456) Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT AARON B FAIRCHILD whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-5276 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 8:30am-5pm Monday-Friday . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Michael Carey can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-7235 . 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. /AARON B FAIRCHILD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 04, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 09, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593961
ENDOSCOPE SYSTEM AND SUCTION UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12575719
STERILE MEDICAL DEVICE PACKAGE, MEDICAL DEVICE SYSTEM, STERILIZATION METHOD FOR MEDICAL DEVICE, AND OPENING METHOD FOR STERILE MEDICAL DEVICE PACKAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564309
ACTUATORS FOR MEDICAL DEVICES AND RELATED SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12564462
ROBOTIC SURGICAL SYSTEM AND OPERATOR-SIDE APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12551094
ENDOSCOPIC IMAGE CAPTURING ASSEMBLY AND ENDOSCOPIC DEVICE THEREWITH
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
79%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+20.1%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 627 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