Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/578,815

METHOD AND DEVICE FOR QUANTITATIVE IMAGING IN MEDICAL ULTRASOUND

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jan 12, 2024
Examiner
DAVIS, AMELIE R
Art Unit
3798
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Korea Advanced Institute Of Science And Technology
OA Round
2 (Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
289 granted / 452 resolved
-6.1% vs TC avg
Strong +35% interview lift
Without
With
+35.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
484
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.6%
-31.4% vs TC avg
§103
33.7%
-6.3% vs TC avg
§102
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
§112
35.7%
-4.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 452 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 . 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. Claim 19 is 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. Claim 19 is indefinite because the claim recites dependency upon claim 18, which is cancelled. It is unclear what the claim’s dependency is. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see page 9, filed 3/10/2026 with respect to the art rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The art rejections have been withdrawn. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1 - 4, 6 - 10, 12 - 17, and 20 - 22 are allowed. Claim 19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: as noted above, applicant’s arguments, see page 9, filed 3/10/2026 with respect to the art rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The prior art of record, either singly or in combination, fails to teach or reasonably suggest the combination of features required by claim 1, particularly with respect to the limitations requiring “in response to a selection of an objective variable, extracting a style feature of the objective variable from the pulse-echo data; generating style-transferred content features by applying the style feature on content features of the B-mode image and reconstructing a quantitative image of the objective variable using the style- transferred content features, wherein the style feature varies according to the selected objective variable.” Similar logic applies to claims 10 and 16. Dependent claims are allowable at least by virtue of dependency. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 AMELIE R DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)270-7240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30 - 6:00 PST. 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, Pascal Bui-Pho can be reached at (571)272-2714. 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. /AMELIE R DAVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 12, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 10, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 04, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582331
SYSTEMS, DEVICES AND METHODS FOR ENHANCING OPERATIVE ACCURACY USING INERTIAL MEASUREMENT UNITS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575737
ULTRASONIC TRANSMISSION INSTRUMENT AND ULTRASONIC IMAGING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564453
Optical-Fiber Connector Modules Including Shape-Sensing Systems and Methods Thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558049
METHOD FOR GENERATING A CONTRAST-ENHANCED MAMMOGRAM RECORDING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12551196
MEASURING PULSE WAVE VELOCITY USING ULTRASOUND
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+35.4%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 452 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