Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/473,958

MICROPUMP

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 25, 2023
Priority
Sep 04, 2019 — provisional 62/895,575 +1 more
Examiner
SCHMIDT, EMILY LOUISE
Art Unit
3783
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Lynntech Inc.
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
59%
Grant Probability
Moderate
4-5
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 59% of resolved cases
59%
Career Allowance Rate
585 granted / 997 resolved
-11.3% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+36.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
53 currently pending
Career history
1075
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
74.4%
+34.4% vs TC avg
§102
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
§112
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 997 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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(s) 34 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grigorov (US 2011/0218516 A1) in view of Carlisle et al. (US 2014/0350511 A1) and Flaherty (US 2002/0169439 A1). With regard to claim 34, Grigorov teaches a pump comprising: a disposable component (Fig. 3 exemplary member 20) comprising: a disposable component inlet port (Fig. 12 port of 32 connected to 33) coupled to a first disposable conduit (Fig. 12 member 33) in fluid communication with a fluid medium source (Fig. 12 member 32), wherein the first disposable conduit comprises a disposable piston pump assembly (Fig. 12 components including at least 78 and 76), and the first disposable conduit is in fluid communication with a disposable component outlet port (Fig. 3 port of 12 connected to 40), wherein the disposable piston pump assembly is operable to pump the fluid medium from the disposable component inlet port, through the first disposable conduit, to the disposable component outlet port (Figs. 12 and 13, [0291]-[0293]); and a reusable component (Fig. 3 exemplary member 21) comprising: a reusable movable stage operable to compress the disposable piston pump assembly (Fig. 12 shows member 78 also listed as 15a, the actuator is not shown in this Fig., members 15a connect to a stage 128/15b as shown in Fig. 23); and a reusable mechanical actuator operable to drive the movable stage (Fig. 23 actuator includes 123, 120, 122). Grigorov does not disclose first and second one-way valves or a bubble eliminator. However, Carlisle et al. teach one-way valves on either side assembly to prevent over infusion to a patient (Fig. 1 135 and 145, [0052], [0088], [0089]) and placing a gas permeable porous membrane in a fluid chamber between the valves to remove air bubbles (Figs. 4A and 4B, [0066], [0068]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use first and second one-way valves and a bubble eliminator in Grigov et al. as Carlisle et al. teach this is beneficial for preventing overflow and bubbles. As combined the valves would be placed on either side of 8 and the membrane in 8a. Grigorov does not disclose a reusable bubble detector. However, Flaherty discloses a reusable bubble detector to verify adequate flow ([0068], [0121]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a reusable bubble detector in Grigorov as in Flaherty as this is beneficial for verifying adequate flow and detecting bubbles. With regard to claim 35, Grigorov teaches a kit comprising: a disposable component (Fig. 3 exemplary member 20) comprising: a disposable component inlet port (Fig. 12 port of 32 connected to 33) coupled to a first disposable conduit (Fig. 12 member 33) in fluid communication with a fluid medium source (Fig. 12 member 32), wherein the first disposable conduit comprises a disposable piston pump assembly (Fig. 12 components including at least 78 and 76), and the first disposable conduit is in fluid communication with a disposable component outlet port (Fig. 3 port of 12 connected to 40), wherein the disposable piston pump assembly is operable to pump the fluid medium from the disposable component inlet port, through the first disposable conduit, to the disposable component outlet port (Figs. 12 and 13, [0291]-[0293]); and a reusable component (Fig. 3 exemplary member 21) comprising: a reusable movable stage operable to compress the disposable piston pump assembly (Fig. 12 shows member 78 also listed as 15a, the actuator is not shown in this Fig., members 15a connect to a stage 128/15b as shown in Fig. 23); and a reusable mechanical actuator operable to drive the movable stage (Fig. 23 actuator includes 123, 120, 122). Grigorov does not disclose first and second one-way valves or a bubble eliminator. However, Carlisle et al. teach one-way valves on either side assembly to prevent over infusion to a patient (Fig. 1 135 and 145, [0052], [0088], [0089]) and placing a gas permeable porous membrane in a fluid chamber between the valves to remove air bubbles (Figs. 4A and 4B, [0066], [0068]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use first and second one-way valves and a bubble eliminator in Grigov et al. as Carlisle et al. teach this is beneficial for preventing overflow and bubbles. As combined the valves would be placed on either side of 8 and the membrane in 8a. Grigorov does not disclose a reusable bubble detector. However, Flaherty discloses a reusable bubble detector to verify adequate flow ([0068], [0121]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a reusable bubble detector in Grigorov as in Flaherty as this is beneficial for verifying adequate flow and detecting bubbles. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed November 25, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued that as combined with Carlisle one of the valves would be placed in the Grigorov reservoir. It is not clear why Applicant contends this. Looking at Fig. 12, as combined, valves are placed on outside of and on either side of 8, generally where connections to 5 and 33 are shown, this does not place a valve within the reservoir itself. The amendments are sufficient to overcome the previous claim objection. Conclusion 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 EMILY L SCHMIDT whose telephone number is (571)270-3648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 7:00 AM to 4:30 PM. 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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached at 571-272-4965. 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. /EMILY L SCHMIDT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 4 earlier events
May 27, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Nov 25, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 08, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Mar 09, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12623029
Safety Device for Preventing Needle Stick Injury with a Needle of a Medical Injection Device
4y 4m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12611511
MULTI-ROWS PRONGS GRABBER
5y 4m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12599750
VASCULAR ACCESS CONNECTOR SUPPORT DEVICE, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS
3y 6m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576214
BUTTON AND BUTTON ASSEMBLY FOR A DRUG DELIVERY DEVICE
2y 1m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569625
RIGID NEEDLE SHIELD REMOVER WITH DROP TEST FEATURE FOR AUTOINJECTOR
4y 7m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
59%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+36.4%)
3y 4m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 997 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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