Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/372,388

ELECTRODE FOR HIGH-FREQUENCY MEDICAL DEVICE AND MEDICAL DEVICE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Sep 25, 2023
Examiner
DEMIE, TIGIST S
Art Unit
3794
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Olympus Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
322 granted / 428 resolved
+5.2% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
462
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
46.7%
+6.7% vs TC avg
§102
25.8%
-14.2% vs TC avg
§112
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 428 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 . 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 1, 3-7 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation "wherein one or more of: particles of the filler are fusion-bonded to each other to form a conductive path, and a particle of the filler and an electrode substrate disposed on a surface of the treatment section are fusion-bonded to form a conductive path; wherein the particles have a shape with corners and the corners are bonded together by the fusion-bounding" in line 8-14. It is unclear to the examiner if the claim requires one or more of each 1) particles of the filler are fusion-bonded to each other to form a conductive path and 2) a particle of the filler and an electrode substrate disposed on a surface of the treatment section are fusion-bonded to form a conductive path or it only requires either 1) particles of the filler are fusion-bonded to each other to form a conductive path or 2) a particle of the filler and an electrode substrate disposed on a surface of the treatment section are fusion-bonded to form a conductive path. Furthermore, it is unclear to the examiner what “the particles” in line 13 is referring to. It is unclear if it is referring to the particles of the filler that are fusion bonded to each other to work conductive path or the one or more of particle of the filler and an electrode substrate disposed on a surface of the treatment section are fusion bonded to form a conductive path. Claim 3-6 depend on claim 1 and therefore are rejected. Claim 7 recites the limitation "a proportion of filler with smaller particle sizes" in in line 17. It is unclear to the examiner if the filler is a new filler or the conductive filler that was mentioned above. The claim also recites conductive filler and filler interchangeable. The examiner suggested to use consistent terms for clarity. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 TIGIST S DEMIE whose telephone number is (571)270-5345. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5Pm. 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, Joseph Stoklosa can be reached at 571-2721213. 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. /TIGIST S DEMIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 25, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Dec 03, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594089
MEDICAL TOOLS FOR AND METHODS OF GAINING ACCESS TO EXTRAVASCULAR SPACES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594185
TREATMENT SYSTEM HAVING GENERATOR AND FLUID TRANSFER CARTRIDGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582465
TISSUE RESURFACING DEVICES AND METHODS THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582466
Ablation Assembly to Treat Target Regions of Tissue in Organs
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575851
VIBRATION TRANSMISSION MEMBER, ULTRASONIC TREATMENT INSTRUMENT, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING VIBRATION TRANSMISSION MEMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+21.6%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 428 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