Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/371,914

SURGICAL CLEANING TOOL, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS

Final Rejection §103§DP
Filed
Sep 22, 2023
Examiner
JENNINGS, MICHAEL DEANGILO
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Mazor Robotics LTD.
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
840 granted / 1081 resolved
+7.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1117
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
40.4%
+0.4% vs TC avg
§102
28.6%
-11.4% vs TC avg
§112
18.8%
-21.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1081 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §DP
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 . Double Patenting 1. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. (11,793,599) to Levy et al. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because independent claims 21, 32 and 37 encompass independent claims 1, 12 and 16. In particular, independent claims 21, 32 and 37 discloses at least one brush, a motor, a fluid source, processor, and memory are encompassed in independent claims 1, 12 and 16. Response to Arguments 2. Applicant's arguments filed on February 5, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant’s amendment has overcome the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103; however, Applicant’s failed to file a terminal disclaimer; therefore, the double patenting rejection is maintained. Conclusion 3. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL D. JENNINGS whose telephone number is (571)270-1536. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30pm. 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, Monica S. Carter can be reached at (571) 272-4475. 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 DEANGILO. JENNINGS Examiner Art Unit 3723 /MICHAEL D JENNINGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 22, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 20, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §DP
Feb 05, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 24, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §DP
Mar 31, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601106
WIPING SHEET AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING WIPING SHEET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588751
VEHICLE WASHING SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12590468
POOL RELATED PLATFORM AND ADDED-ON ACCESSORIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582275
CLEANER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569103
WET ROBOT CLEANER AND CONTAMINATION PREVENTION MODULE USED THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+8.2%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1081 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