Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/567,450

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ILLUMINATING TISSUE

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Dec 06, 2023
Examiner
FRITH, SEAN A
Art Unit
3798
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Koninklijke Philips N.V.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
167 granted / 276 resolved
-9.5% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
312
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.9%
-31.1% vs TC avg
§103
49.5%
+9.5% vs TC avg
§102
15.4%
-24.6% vs TC avg
§112
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 276 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 12/06/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “radiation delivery unit” in claims 1, and 8-9. This limitation has been interpreted to correspond to the optical elements of figure 7 and pages 9-10 of the applicant’s specification. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Objections Claims 1, 6, 11, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claims 1, 6, 11, and 13, the amended claims of 12/06/2023 recite mathematical relationships of wavelength ranges that are not clearly visible within the uploaded document. Please file a clear set of claims with the wavelength ranges clearly visible. For present purposes of examination, the claims have been examined for prior art using the ranges that are visible in the other sets of claims also filed 12/06/2023, which do not appear to be changed in the amended claim set. 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 1-15 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 claims 1, 6, 11, and 13, the amended claims of 12/06/2023 recite mathematical relationships of wavelength ranges that are not clearly visible within the uploaded document. Please file a clear set of claims with the wavelength ranges clearly visible. For present purposes of examination, the claims have been examined for prior art using the ranges that are visible in the other sets of claims also filed 12/06/2023, which do not appear to be changed in the amended claim set. This renders the scope of the claims unclear and rejected for indefiniteness. Regarding claims 8-9, the claims recite the limitation “an optical filter system according to claim 6”, and with the optical filter system being previous set forth it is unclear as to whether it includes the previously set forth system. The limitation should be replaced with “the optical filter system according to claim 6”. Claims dependent upon rejected claims are also rejected for indefiniteness. Therefore, dependent claims 2-5, 7, 10, 12, and 14-15 are also rejected. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Darty et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20150271380) teaches to a compact light sensor device for concurrent imaging at multiple wavelengths. The device includes a bandpass filter for allowing spectral bands to pass through the filter and directs light to a photosensor for analysis. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN A FRITH whose telephone number is (571)272-1292. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:00-5:30 Second Fri 8:00-4:30. 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, Keith Raymond can be reached at 571-270-1790. 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. /SEAN A FRITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 06, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Apr 02, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594042
DEVICE FOR MOVING A MEDICAL OBJECT AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING A CORRECTION PRESET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594128
LOCKING AND DRIVE MECHANISMS FOR POSITIONING AND STABILIZATION OF CATHETERS AND ENDOSCOPIC TOOLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594119
SHOCK WAVE BALLOON CATHETER WITH MULTIPLE SHOCK WAVE SOURCES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588964
MEDICAL INSTRUMENT GUIDANCE WITH ROBOTIC SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12569224
Intravascular Imaging Devices
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
60%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+19.4%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 276 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