Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/376,256

Injection Devices

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Oct 03, 2023
Examiner
OLYNICK, DAVID
Art Unit
3741
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
177 granted / 226 resolved
+8.3% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
246
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
50.2%
+10.2% vs TC avg
§102
21.3%
-18.7% vs TC avg
§112
24.0%
-16.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 226 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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Page 24 last paragraph. “Slideable collar(23) compression portion (23)” should be “slideable collar compression portion (23).” Appropriate correction is required. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “49” has been used to designate both “a retainer” and “a needle containing piece.” The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 16, 38. 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: 15, 31. The drawings are objected to because the symbol “1” in Fig. 1 appears to be pointing to two different elements. 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. 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 Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 in line 5 includes “the length.” It is believed to be in error for - - a length. - - Claim 1 in lines 6-7 includes “(under direct or indirect force from a slideable collar).” It is believed to be in error for - - under direct or indirect force from a slideable collar. - - (remove the parentheses) Claim 1 in line 12 includes “the inside of.” It is believed to be in error for - - an inside of. - - Claim 1 in line 17 includes “the formulation.” It is believed to be in error for - - a formulation. - - Claim 1 in line 17 includes “a slideable collar.” It is believed to be in error for - - the slideable collar. - - Claim 1 in line 22 includes “a needle containing piece.” It is believed to be in error for - - the needle containing piece. - - Claim 1 in line 23 includes “of any contents.” It is believed to be in error for - - of the any contents. - - Claim 2 in lines 2-3 includes “the proximal end.” It is believed to be in error for - - a proximal end. - - Claim 7 in line 2 includes “the longitudinal direction.” It is believed to be in error for - - a longitudinal direction. - - Claim 15 in line 2 includes “by groove.” It is believed to be in error for - - by a groove. - - Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-20 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. Regarding claim 1, it is not clear what the limitation “said longitudinal flanges” is referring to. The claim previously recites “at least one flange extending along at least a majority of the length of said hollow tubular section.” One flange is singular. Further, it is not clear what direction longitudinal refers to. It seems their may be a longitudinal axis that extends from the distal end to the proximal end. But, this is not clear in the claim. Claims 2-20 depend from claim 1. Regarding claim 4, the limitation “a direction other than the length of said extension piece” is recited. A direction and a length are two different things. Thus, the claim is unclear. A second direction other than a first direction along a length of said extension piece or something similar is clearer. Regarding claim 5, the limitation “said slide” is recited. It is not clear what is said slide. Regarding claim 15, it recites “A syringe as defined in claim 1 which is one-piece.” It is not clear what one-piece means or refers to. The syringe has many pieces such as a hollow tubular section, a slideable collar and a needle containing piece. It is not clear how the syringe could be formed as one-piece. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. PNG media_image1.png 680 704 media_image1.png Greyscale Closest prior is Figs. 9A-9C of Genosar (US 2014/066846). In Genosar, the a roller flatten a compressible chamber as it slides along a track. The design of Genosar lacks one piece body having a flange with a slideable collar configured to move along the flange. Farris (US 6296150) has a compressible chamber that is pulled through rollers, but, also doesn’t have one piece body having a flange with a slideable collar configured to move along the flange. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID OLYNICK whose telephone number is (571)272-2355. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30 am-5 pm (ET). 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, Phuttiwat Wongwian can be reached at (571) 270-5426. 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. /DAVID P. OLYNICK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 03, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590561
COMBUSTOR WITH LEAN OPENINGS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12571326
MOBILE ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560324
COMBUSTION SECTION WITH A PRIMARY COMBUSTOR AND A SET OF SECONDARY COMBUSTORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12553609
INTERCOOLED COMBUSTOR NOZZLE GUIDE VANE AND SECONDARY AIR CONFIGURATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12523200
MICRO SCALABLE THRUSTERS FOR ADAPTIVE MISSION PROFILES IN SPACE - USTAMPS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 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
99%
With Interview (+25.2%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 226 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