Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/570,154

CASSETTE AND TISSUE EMBEDDING METHOD USING SAME

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Dec 14, 2023
Priority
Jun 18, 2021 — nonprovisional of PCTCN2021100984
Examiner
GORDON, BRIAN R
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Leica Biosystems
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allowance Rate
624 granted / 960 resolved
+5.0% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
1009
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
54.6%
+14.6% vs TC avg
§102
19.0%
-21.0% vs TC avg
§112
14.0%
-26.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 960 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to because it is unclear what structures in the drawings correspond to the faces of claim 1, the through holes of claims 7 and 11, the teeth and side face of claim 10 because such are not represented by any reference numbers nor labeled in the drawings. 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 Interpretation Content of Specification (k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS: See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP § 608.01(m). The claim or claims must commence on a separate sheet or electronic page (37 CFR 1.52(b)(3)). Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate subcombinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP 608.01(i)-(p). The claimed invention is defined by the positively claimed elements, the structural elements listed on separate indented lines listed in the body of the claim after the transitional phrase, “comprising”. A claim is only limited by positively claimed elements. Thus, "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims”. MPEP 2115 Material or Article Worked Upon by Apparatus. Claim 1 mentions a tissue sample. However, such sample is not positively claimed as a structural element of the apparatus. The tissue sample is a material that can be, intended to be used with and worked upon by the apparatus. It is noted that the respective “portions” recited throughout the claims are defined within the claims as being and specific structures. 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 1-14 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. As to claim 1, it is unclear what the term “therebetween” references. It is presumed to refer to between the base and the cover. If so, the claim should clearly recite such. Claims 2-14 are rejected via dependency upon a rejected claim. The term “extreme position” in claim 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “extreme position” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Although a position is not defined in the claim as being any structure, it is unclear what is structurally required of a position to be considered as extreme. A position that may be considered as “extreme” to one person may not be considered as such to another and vice versa. As to claim 5, it is unclear if the rib is actually intended to be coupling the guide portion to the limit portion because the “for” clause is directed to intended use and does not require an actual coupling. It appears as if the claim should read as “a rib coupling the guide portion to the limit portion.” As to claim 6, the structurally undefine “operation portion” is claimed as an element of the base. Therefore, it is unclear how the base can be slidable through itself (the base). The term “tooth-shape” in claim 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “tooth-shape” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. This is not a known, geometrical shape. All teeth do not have same shape. What may be considered as “tooth-shape” to one person may not be considered as such to another and vice versa. Furthermore the phrase “of cover” appears to be a grammatical error. It is appears as if the phrase should read as “of the cover”. The term “slightly cooling” in claim 14 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “slightly cooling” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The claim does not provide for what amount of cooling is required to be considered as “slightly cooling”. What may be considered as slightly cooling to one person may not be considered as such to another and vice versa. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1),(a)(2) as being anticipated by Webber; Paul et al., US 2015/0087018. Webber discloses in paragraphs [0068]-[0076], claim 1 and in figures 1-10: A cassette (1), comprising: a frame (fig.10, structure limiting the compartment (4)) having a first face and a second face arranged oppositely in a first direction and defining an accommodating cavity (4+5) through the first face and the second face; a cover (12) detachably mounted to the frame and received in the accommodating cavity; and a base detachably (21) mounted to the frame and received in the accommodating cavity (4+5) (figs.8 and 10), the base (21) and the cover (12) being configured to hold and orient a tissue sample therebetween (see claim 1 ), wherein the base (21) is slidable relative to the frame in a second direction different from the first direction to open and close the accommodating cavity (4+5) ([0074] and fig.8). As to claim 2: (see fig.8) wherein the direction in which the base (12) slides is perpendicular to the first direction. As to claims 3-4 and 6, (see, [0074] and figs .6, 8 and 10) as shown in the figures the cartridge frame includes a guiding/limit groove that allows for the sliding insertion of the base 21; the positioning of the base is limited by the groove, and there is an operation portion (opening) through which the base slides through. As to claim 5, the base includes a number of ribs. (Figures 8 and 10). As to claim 7, (see [0075] and fig. 8), wherein there are though holes in base (21). As to claim 8, the cover can displaced moved in a first direction. ([0073]­[0074] and fig.8). As to claims 9-10, wherein the inter-engaging means (13-17) are the "lug" that are fitted to an engaging means of the frame. As to claim 11, the cover 12 comprises a plurality o through holes. ([0015] and figs. 3-8 and 10). As to claim 12, see first stage (6) in figures 2 and 6. As to claims 13-14, Processing in which the sample is contacted with a processing solution and contacted with paraffin wax typically involves cooling [0002]; inserting the standard size cassette into a histology processing cassette according to the first aspect of the invention and locating the biological sample in the histology processing cassette optionally; [0048] iv) treating the biological sample by contacting the biological sample with an organic material including molten wax; [0049] v) removing the biological sample from the histology processing cassette and placing the sample in a mould adapted to engage with the histology processing, preferably the bottom face of the histology processing cassette, and engaging the cassette with the mould to form a mould assembly; [0050] vi) adding molten wax to the mould assembly to fill the mould and at least partially, and preferably completely, filling the compartment of the histology processing cassette with molten wax; [0051] vii) solidifying the molten wax or allowing the molten wax to solidify so as to provide a wax block containing the biological sample. (see also [0052, 56, 75-76]). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Agah; Masoud et al.; Bergstedt; Steven W. et al.; Wu; Rongrong et al.; Blain Christen; Jennifer et al.; LANSING; Manfred et al.; FANG; Wei et al.; Minato; Hiroyuki et al.; Williamson, IV; Warren P.; Apostolou; Athanasia et al.; HANSON J C et al.; Carrano; John et al.; Webber; Paul et al.; Levner; Daniel et al.; Knorr; Stella et al.; Webber; Paul et al.; TITCOMBE R et al.; Bui; Xuan S. et al.; Cheng; Kasing et al.; Williamson, IV; Warren P. et al.; McCormick; James B.; Fredrick; Joseph P.; Angros; Lee; Ho; Stephen; Degel; Christian et al.; Aghassi; Nora B. et al.; RENSHAW, A.; Intengan; Franklin S.; and KINNEY T D et al. disclose cartridges and/or cassettes. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN R GORDON whose telephone number is (571)272-1258. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-5:30pm; off every other 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, Charles Capozzi can be reached at 571-270-3638. 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. /BRIAN R GORDON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 14, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12678783
DROPLET GENERATION METHOD, SYSTEM AND APPLICATION
3y 6m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12674798
PATHOGEN DETECTION METHOD AND APPARATUS
4y 9m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12673322
DEVICE AND DRIVING METHOD FOR DRIVING MICROFLUIDIC CHIP
4y 8m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12669520
System and Method for Disposing of a Reaction Vessel of a Mass Spectrometry System
3y 5m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12661652
IMPROVED INK FORMULATIONS FOR PRINTING AND MANUFACTURE OF REACTIVE CHEMICAL SENSORS
4y 2m to grant Granted Jun 23, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+18.7%)
3y 2m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 960 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