Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/302,522

METHOD AND DEVICE FOR MINIMALLY INVASIVE IN VIVO TRANSFECTION OF ADIPOSE TISSUE USING ELECTROPORATION

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 18, 2023
Examiner
KIM, SUN U
Art Unit
1777
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
747 granted / 954 resolved
+13.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
985
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
47.2%
+7.2% vs TC avg
§102
21.6%
-18.4% vs TC avg
§112
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 954 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 § 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-2 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2003/0149451 A1 to Chomenky et al. (hereinafter “Chomenky”). As per claim 1, Chomenky describes a method of electroporating adipocytes in the adipose layer of tissue (FIG. 1; para [0044]), the method comprising: providing a first electrode (14) having a first contact surface, and wherein the first contact surface has a first perimeter (para [0044]); providing a second electrode (16) having a second contact surface, and wherein the second contact surface has a second perimeter (para [0044]); obtaining a fold (18) of tissue (para [0044]); positioning the fold of tissue between the first electrode and the second electrode such that the first contact surface of the first electrode is facing toward the second contact surface of the second electrode (para [0044]), producing a treatment zone therebetween (FIG. 1; para [0044]), and wherein the tissue positioned within the treatment zone includes an adipose layer or fat deposit (22) of tissue (para [0044]); and applying an electrical signal to the first electrode and second electrode (para[0044]: high voltage electroporation pulses). As per claim 2, Chomenky teaches that the tissue positioned within the treatment zone does not include skeletal muscle (FIG. 1, para [0044], [0032]: showing substantially all fat within the fold). As per claim 5, Chomenky teaches that applying an electrical signal to the first electrode and the second electrode further includes applying electrical pulses (para [0044]). As per claim 6, Chomenky teaches that applying electrical pulses includes applying an electrical pulse of between 5 volts and 1000 volts (para [0046]). As per claim 7, Chomenky teaches that applying electrical pulses includes applying an electrical pulse between approximately 100 microseconds and 100 milliseconds (para [0046]). As per claim 8, Chomenky teaches that applying electrical pulses includes applying between approximately 1 pulse and approximately 10 pulses (para [0046]; para [0063]-[0064] showing a single pulse). As per claim 9, Chomenky teaches that at least one of the first contact surface and the second contact includes a plurality of protrusions extending therefrom (FIC. 1, para [0044]). Claims 1 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2014/0277219 A1 (Nanda). As per claim 1, Nanda describes a method of electroporating adipocytes in the adipose layer of tissue (Abstract; Fig. 6), the method comprising: providing a first electrode (614a) having a first contact surface, and wherein the first contact surface has a first perimeter (para [0109]-[0110]); providing a second electrode (614b) having a second contact surface, and wherein the second contact surface has a second perimeter (para [0109]-[0110]); obtaining a fold of tissue (tissue within vacuum cup in Fig. 5; para [0109]-[0110], [0105]); positioning the fold of tissue between the first electrode and the second electrode such that the first contact surface of the first electrode is facing toward the second contact surface of the second electrode (para [0109]-[0110], [0105]), producing a treatment zone therebetween, and wherein the tissue positioned within the treatment zone includes an adipose layer of tissue (para [0109], [0045]); and applying an electrical signal to the first electrode and second electrode (para [0110], [0105]-[0107]). As per claim 9, Nanda teaches that at least one of the first contact surface and the second contact surface includes a plurality of protrusions extending therefrom (FIG. 6, para [0110]: see electrodes 616). 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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chomenky. As per claim 3, Chomenky describes the method of claim 1, but fails to describe wherein obtaining the fold of tissue further comprises obtaining a fold of tissue including a skin layer, an adipose layer, and a smooth muscle layer. Chomenky discloses targeting fat cells specifically (para [0019]-[0022]), and discloses a method including skin and fat (FIG. 1; para [0044]), but is silent on smooth muscle. However, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to also utilize the device for any area of external fat treatment (such as those that might contains superficial arteries/veins) so as to treat fat all areas of the body. Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanda. As per claim 3, Nanda describes the method of claim 1, but fails to describe wherein obtaining the fold of tissue further comprises obtaining a fold of tissue including a skin layer, an adipose layer, and a smooth muscle layer. Nanda describes drawing tissue into a vacuum cup (FIG. 1, 6; para [0109]-[0110],[0105]-[0106]), but is silent on smooth muscle. However, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to also utilize the device for any area of external fat treatment (such as those that might contains superficial arteries/veins) so as to treat fat all areas of the body. As per claim 4, Nanda describes the method of claim 3, further comprising injecting a predetermined amount of an agent into the adipose layer of the fold of tissue before applying the electrical signal to the first electrode and the second electrode (para [0110]). Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanda as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of US 2011/0190659 A1 to Long et al. (hereinafter “Long”). As per claim 10, Nanda describes the method of claim 9, but fails to describe specifically wherein each protrusion is substantially pyramidal in shape. However, Nanda depicts such shape with the same cross section, but is silent on shape (FIG. 6: note protrusion could be conical or pyramidal). Long also describes electroporation electrodes (para [0028]) that operate on tissue folds (Fig. 8; para [0074]) and discloses wherein electrode protrusions is substantially pyramidal in shape (FIG. 7; para [0069]: pyramidal). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to shape the electrodes in any common manner, such as pyramidal. as alternate design choices to balance pain and effectiveness. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-1142. The examiner can normally be reached Maxi Flex. 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, VICKIE KIM can be reached at 571-272-0579. 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. /John Kim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777 JK 11/13/25
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 18, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601733
DEVICES FOR PERITONEAL DIALYSATE ANALYSIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594368
PERITONEAL DIALYSIS SYSTEM USING DISINFECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594367
A SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING FLUID FOR PERITONEAL DIALYSIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594369
WEIGHT-BASED PERITONEAL DIALYSIS SYSTEM INCLUDING A DRAIN TROLLEY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589192
PORTABLE DIALYSIS SYSTEM
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 (+11.2%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 954 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