Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/568,434

SIMULATED HUMAN BODY MODEL FOR INJECTION TRAINING

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Dec 08, 2023
Examiner
MUSSELMAN, TIMOTHY A
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Ebm Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allow Rate
542 granted / 936 resolved
-12.1% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+26.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
965
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.1%
-29.9% vs TC avg
§103
55.3%
+15.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.2%
-19.8% vs TC avg
§112
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 936 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for failure to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter applicant regards as the invention. Regarding claim 14, there is a reference to the plate section. Neither this claim nor any parent claim makes any reference to the plate section (it first appears in claim 9). Thus there is no antecedent basis for the plate section. Correction or clarification is required. 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. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toly (US 6,780,016) in view of Jarc et al. (US 2014/0051049). Regarding claims 1 and 6, Toly discloses a simulation system for medical training, including injections. See col. 2: 24-41. Toly discloses wherein the system comprises a skin layer and a second layer of subcutaneous tissue. See col. 5: 17-20 and col. 5: 61-62. Toly does not disclose a layer that blocks the needle except in correct locations with a through hole (claim 6). However, Toly discloses multiple layers with various properties, and this through-hole concept this is established, as is disclosed by the medical training system of Jarc in paragraph 0061. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider the through-hole concept with the layers of the Toly system, in order to provide various injection training scenarios. Regarding claims 2-4, Toly discloses a muscle layer under the subcutaneous fat layer. See col. 6: 42-43. The layers may be ‘stacked’ as desired for a particular anatomical simulation. See col. 4:62 – col. 5:16. Using a layer to block or allow injections would be obvious as described above with regard to claim 1. Regarding claim 5, Toly does not disclose a structure for reference for a puncture location. However, this concept is disclosed by Jarc in fig.4. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to incorporate this concept into the Toly invention, to provide various training scenarios. Regarding claims 7-8, Jarc discloses making through holes as required for an application. See paragraph 0061. This would encompass the shapes and dimensions claimed by applicant. The use of such a scheme would be obvious as described above with regard to claim 1. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 9-13 are objected to as depending from a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to include the base claim and any intermediate claims. The prior art does not teach or suggest the structure of claim 9, including the bowed plate section. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:00AM - 4:00PM. 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, PETER S VASAT can be reached at 571-570-7625. 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. TIMOTHY A. MUSSELMAN Primary Examiner Art Unit 3715 /TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 08, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599535
EXTERNAL COUNTERPULSATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576005
Cameras for Emergency Rescue
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573315
TRAINING LESSON AUTHORING AND EXECUTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12548463
ELECTRONIC COUPLING OF CONTROLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12530981
MONITORING COMMUNICATIONS IN AN OBSERVATION PLATFORM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 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
58%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+26.3%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 936 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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