DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
2. Applicant’s Amendment filed November 20, 2025 (hereinafter “11/20/25 Amendment") has been entered, and fully considered. In the 11/20/25 Amendment, claims 1-9 were amended, and claims 10 & 11 were newly added. No claims were cancelled. Accordingly, claims 1-11 are now pending in the application.
3. The 11/20/25 Amendment has overcome the claim objections and the claim rejections under §§ 112(b) previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 10/20/25 (“10/20/25 Action”), with the exception of those that have been reiterated herein.
4. New drawing objections, new claim objections, and new rejections under § 112(b) are set forth herein, necessitated by Applicant’s Amendment.
5. Additionally, new drawing objections are set forth herein that were not previously set forth in the 10/20/25 Action. As such, this action constitutes a second Non-Final Action.
Drawings
6. 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:
Reference character (“44”), used to describe the “conductive surfaces 44” (see as-filed Specification, e.g., ¶[0018], does not appear in the drawing figures; and
Reference character (“48”), used to describe a “side edge” (see as-filed Specification, e.g., ¶[0017]; as well as claims 1, 4, 10, 11), does not appear in the drawing figures.
7. The “Replacement Sheet” including amended FIG. 6, filed 11/20/25, is objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “41d” has been used to designate both the proximal and distal portions of the thermally conductive first broad side (41). As noted in the annotated 11/20/25 version of FIG. 6 (below), the indicated “(41d”) should instead be labelled with reference character (“41p”).
PNG
media_image1.png
246
462
media_image1.png
Greyscale
8. 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
9. Claims 5, 7, & 10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
a. In claim 5, lines 20-21, the recitation of “a posterior nasal nerve” should instead recite --the posterior nasal nerve--.
b. In claim 7, lines 10-12, the recitation of “to cryoablate the posterior nerve proximate a fourth treatment zone on an anterior facing surface of the nub” should instead recite -- to cryoablate the posterior nasal nerve proximate the fourth treatment zone on the anteriorly facing surface of the nub--.
c. In claim 10, line 21, a comma (“,”) should be added after the recitation of “said proximal portion (41p).”
d. In claim 10, line 22, a comma (“,”) should be added after the recitation of “said distal portion (41d).”
e. In claim 10, line 23, the recitation of “said the first notch (45)” should instead recite --said notch (45)--.
f. In claim 10, line 26, a comma (“,”) should be added after the recitation of “nasal cavity.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
10. 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.
11. Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
12. Claim 1 recites the limitation “the attachment” in lines 24-25. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this recitation in the claim.
13. Claim 1 recites the limitation “the middle turbinate” in lines 28-29. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this recitation in the claim.
14. Claim 1 recites the limitation “a posterior attachment of the middle turbinate” in lines 33-34. This recitation renders the claim indefinite, as it is not clear whether the recited “a posterior attachment” is intended to be the “a posterior end of the attachment” previously recited in lines 24-25, or different anatomical structure. Clarification concerning the relationship(s) between and among the recitations of the middle turbinate, middle turbinate attachment, posterior end, and posterior attachment is required.
15. Claim 2-8 are rejected as ultimately depending from a claim (claim 1) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
16. Claim 5 recites the limitation “the ganglion (13)” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this recitation in the claim.
17. Claim 6-8 are rejected as ultimately depending from a claim (claim 5) rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
18. Claim 9 recites the limitation “the middle turbinate” in lines 23-24. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this recitation in the claim.
19. Claim 10 recites the limitation “the attachment” in lines 31-32. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this recitation in the claim.
20. Claim 10 recites the limitation “the middle turbinate” in lines 35-36. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this recitation in the claim.
21. Claim 10 recites the limitation “the posterior end” in line 36. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this recitation in the claim.
22. Claim 10 recites the limitation “a posterior attachment of the middle turbinate” in lines 40-41. This recitation renders the claim indefinite, as it is not clear whether the recited “a posterior attachment” is intended to be the “a posterior end of the attachment” previously recited in lines 31-32, or different anatomical structure. Clarification concerning the relationship(s) between and among the recitations of the middle turbinate, middle turbinate attachment, posterior end, and posterior attachment is required.
23. Claim 11 recites the limitation “a posterior end of the attachment” in line 27. This recitation renders the claim indefinite, as it is not clear whether the recitation of “the attachment” is referring to the “posterior attachment of a middle turbinate” previously recited in line 22, or the “middle turbinate attachment (14)” previously recited in lines 25-26. Clarification is required.
24. Claim 11 recites the limitation “the posterior end of the middle turbinate” in lines 32-33. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this recitation in the claim.
25. NOTE: While claims 1-11 are not currently subject to a rejection under either 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 or 103, the claim objections and the rejections under § 112(b) above have precluded a determination of allowability at this time. Upon correction of the issues underlying the § 112(b) rejections, the allowability of claims 1-11 will be reconsidered by the Examiner.
Response to Arguments
26. As noted above, the 11/20/25 Amendment has overcome the claim objections and the claim rejections under §§ 112(b) previously set forth in the 10/20/25 Action, with the exception of those that have been reiterated herein.
27. New drawing objections, new claim objections, and new rejections under § 112(b) are set forth herein, necessitated by Applicant’s Amendment.
28. Further, as noted above, this action constitutes a second Non-Final Action since new drawing objections are set forth herein that were not previously set forth in the 10/20/25 Action.
Conclusion
29. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bradford C. Blaise whose telephone number is (571)272-5617. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8 AM-5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Linda Dvorak can be reached on 571-272-4764. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Bradford C. Blaise/Examiner, Art Unit 3794