Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/523,398

ADJUSTABLE ACTUATION MECHANISMS FOR ENDOSCOPES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 29, 2023
Priority
Dec 02, 2022 — provisional 63/385,841
Examiner
BARKER, DAYTON HYUN JIN
Art Unit
3795
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Gyrus ACMI, Inc. D/B/A Olympus Surgical Technologies America
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allowance Rate
5 granted / 7 resolved
+1.4% vs TC avg
Strong +40% interview lift
Without
With
+40.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
33
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
49.3%
+9.3% vs TC avg
§102
28.0%
-12.0% vs TC avg
§112
22.7%
-17.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 7 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Amendment The amendment filed September 8th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3, 4, and 6-22 remain pending in the application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chikama (U.S. Patent 5167221) in view of Yeh et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0309791 hereinafter “Yeh”). Regarding claim 21, Chikama teaches a controller for an endoscope (figure 1 element 1), the controller comprising: a handle (figure 1 element 2) including a first section (figure 1 element 2 pointed at with the downwards arrow below) and a second section (figure 1 element 10 pointed to with the upward arrow below) being moveable with respect to each other (process described in column 5 lines 37-65) PNG media_image1.png 262 442 media_image1.png Greyscale a control actuator (figure 1 element 22) on one or more of the first section or the second section a pull wire (figure 2 element 30) extending between the first section and the second section within the handle Chikama fails to teach a working channel opening on one or more of the first section or the second section as well as an elongate tube disposed within the handle and through which the pull wire extends, the elongate tube being flexible to permit the elongate tube to bend within the handle when the first section and the second section are moved with respect to each other, wherein the elongate tube is separate from an insertion shaft extending from the handle. Yeh teaches a working channel opening (figure 2 element 208 “working channel port”) on one or more of the first section (figure 2 control element 114) or the second section (figure 2 element 106) and an elongate tube (figure 2 element 234) disposed within the handle and through which the pull wire extends (paragraph 43 details that flexible tube 234 surrounds pull wire 232), the elongate tube being flexible (paragraph 43 details this tube being flexible) to permit the elongate tube to bend within the handle when the first section (figure 2 control element 114) and the second section (figure 2 element 106) are moved with respect to each other (the control actuator 114 is moved with respect to element 106, causing the flexible tube to bend in response to the contraction of pull wire 232), wherein the elongate tube is separate from an insertion shaft extending from the handle (figure 2 see that tube 234 is separate from insertion shaft 130). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the controller of Chikama with the addition of a working channel opening in order to allow for the introduction of a treatment tool to the target region within the patient, widening the therapeutic capabilities of the device, reducing the need for multiple endoscopic operations with differently-abled endoscopes, and to add the flexible tube within the handle body in order to allow for a flexible force transmission mechanism within the handle, allowing for a greater insertion tip bending range of motion (improving surgical capability) as more slack can exist within the tensioning system to be manipulated by the actuator. Regarding claim 22, Chikama teaches a method for controlling an endoscope (figure 1 element 1), the method comprising: actuating a controller (column 5 lines 16-18 “in the endoscope 1 of the above construction, when the manipulation knob 22 is rotated in a clockwise direction”) comprising: a handle (figure 1 element 2) including a first section (figure 1 element 2 pointed at with the downwards arrow below) and a second section (figure 1 element 10 pointed to with the upward arrow below) being moveable with respect to each other (process described in column 5 lines 37-65) PNG media_image1.png 262 442 media_image1.png Greyscale a control actuator (figure 1 element 22) on one or more of the first section or the second section a pull wire (figure 2 element 30) extending between the first section and the second section within the handle Chikama fails to teach a working channel opening on one or more of the first section or the second section as well as an elongate tube disposed within the handle and through which the pull wire extends, the elongate tube being flexible to permit the elongate tube to bend within the handle when the first section and the second section are moved with respect to each other, wherein the elongate tube is separate from an insertion shaft extending from the handle. Yeh teaches a working channel opening (figure 2 element 208 “working channel port”) on one or more of the first section (figure 2 control element 114) or the second section (figure 2 element 106) and an elongate tube (figure 2 element 234) disposed within the handle and through which the pull wire extends (paragraph 43 details that flexible tube 234 surrounds pull wire 232), the elongate tube being flexible (paragraph 43 details this tube being flexible) to permit the elongate tube to bend within the handle when the first section (figure 2 control element 114) and the second section (figure 2 element 106) are moved with respect to each other (the control actuator 114 is moved with respect to element 106, causing the flexible tube to bend in response to the contraction of pull wire 232), wherein the elongate tube is separate from an insertion shaft extending from the handle (figure 2 see that tube 234 is separate from insertion shaft 130). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the controller of Chikama with the addition of a working channel opening in order to allow for the introduction of a treatment tool to the target region within the patient, widening the therapeutic capabilities of the device, reducing the need for multiple endoscopic operations with differently-abled endoscopes, and to add the flexible tube within the handle body in order to allow for a flexible force transmission mechanism within the handle, allowing for a greater insertion tip bending range of motion (improving surgical capability) as more slack can exist within the tensioning system to be manipulated by the actuator. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 1 is allowed. The following limitations “A controller for an endoscope, the controller comprising: a handle wherein the handle is configured to adjust a distance between the first location and the second location; wherein the first pull wire tensioner comprises: a first anchor fixed to the handle proximate the working channel opening and a second anchor fixed to the handle proximate the control actuator, wherein the first anchor is configured to move with the first location and the second anchor is configured to move with the second location” are deemed allowable. The closest prior art of reference is found in Chikama. Chikama teaches a controller for an endoscope, with the controller comprising a handle wherein the handle is configured to adjust a distance between the first location and the second location, but fails to teach a pull wire tensioner comprising a first anchor fixed to the handle proximate the working channel opening and a second anchor fixed to the handle proximate the control actuator, wherein the first anchor is configured to move with the first location and the second anchor is configured to move with the second location. As claim 1 is allowed, its dependents 3, 4, and 6-20 are also deemed allowable due to their dependency on an allowable independent claim. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAYTON BARKER whose telephone number is (571)272-0912. The examiner can normally be reached between 9:00 and 5:00 PM Monday – Friday. 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, Michael Carey can be reached at 5712707235. 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. /DAYTON HYUN JIN BARKER/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795 /MICHAEL J CAREY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 29, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Mar 09, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 05, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Sep 08, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 14, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12758089
THREE-DIMENSIONAL LIGHT-FIELD MICROENDOSCOPY WITH A GRIN LENS ARRAY
2y 4m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12751693
MEDICAL APPLIANCE
2y 4m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12733789
ENDOSCOPE HANDLE WITH CATHETER LOOP
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12721505
BENDABLE PART OF ENDOSCOPE, ENDOSCOPE, AND MOVABLE MEMBER
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 4 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+40.0%)
2y 0m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 7 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