Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/636,183

ADJUSTABLE MOUNT SYSTEMS AND METHODS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Apr 15, 2024
Examiner
ROBINSON, NICHOLAS A
Art Unit
3798
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Stryker Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
49%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 49% of resolved cases
49%
Career Allow Rate
64 granted / 131 resolved
-21.1% vs TC avg
Strong +55% interview lift
Without
With
+54.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
182
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
11.9%
-28.1% vs TC avg
§103
41.7%
+1.7% vs TC avg
§102
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
§112
30.6%
-9.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 131 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION This Office action is responsive to communications filed on 02/05/2026. Claims 1 is canceled. Claims 2, 10-12, & 15 have been amended. Presently, Claims 2-18 remain pending and are hereinafter examined on the merits. 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/05/2026 has been entered. Response to Arguments Previous claim objections are withdrawn in view of the amendments filed on 02/05/2026. Rejections under 35 USC § 103 are withdrawn in view of the amendments filed on 02/05/2026. Examiner’s Notes Claims 2-18, though rejected under 35 U.S.C § 112(a) are not rejected under the prior arts. Note; a change in scope in view of the requested corrections will require further search and consideration. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 2-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1: recites: “wherein the convex surface of the sensor assembly and the plurality of sensors rotate about an axis of rotation that passes through one of the one or more prisms and that does not pass through the convex surface, such that the one of the one or more prisms is translationally fixed during rotation while the plurality of sensors rotate about the one or more prisms by adjusting an orientation of the sensor assembly relative to the platform.“ – lines 8-13. The above rejection to claim 1 applies to claim 15 for substantially identical claim limitations recited in the claim. The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for lack of written description. First, the instant specification and drawings teaches the configuration but does not proper written description for state the negative condition regarding the axis of rotation not passing through the convex surface. Second, the instant specification and drawings does not further provide proper written description regarding the plurality of sensors rotate about the one or more prisms. Indeed the original claims filed describe, the convex surface of the sensor assembly and the plurality of sensors rotate about a center of the plurality of sensors and the one or more prisms. By rotating about the center of the plurality of sensors and the one or more priss, the prisms located at the center would remain translationally fixed (i.e., its center does not translate) while the sensor assembly changes orientation. Note; as the sensors are indeed part of the sensor assembly and the rotation is centered on the sensors/prisms, the sensors effectively rotate around that center point. Regarding the convex surface, the sensor assembly has a convex surface that corresponds to a concave surface of the platform as seen in FIG. 8, and thus the rotation is achieved by adjusting the orientation of the sensor assembly relative to the platform. However, the Applicant’s specification does not have proper written description for that axis of rotation “does not pass through the convex surface”. The geometrical relationship is centered on the prisms/sensors, and the physical interface involving the convex surface, but it does not describe this spatial relationship between the axis of rotation and the material of the convex surface such that this axis of rotation does not pass through the convex surface. Regarding the claim language of “the plurality of sensors rotate about the one or more prisms” lacks written description under 35 USC § 112(a). The specification describes the sensors as being ¶0116: “bonded and sealed directly to their perspective prism face”, thus forming a single ridged assembly, and provides no disclosure in the specification or drawings of the sensors rotating about the one or more prisms. Because the specification only supports a fixed, unitary structure in which the sensors are secured to and move with the prism, there is no adequate written description of sensors that rotate about the prism. Consequently, one of ordinary skill in the art would not deem the instant specification having sufficient detail so that they could understand how the inventor intended to achieve said aforementioned claimed feature. Since the instant specification fails to provide written description for the phrase above in claim 1, the aforementioned claims 1 and 15 fail to meet the written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). The dependent claims of the above rejected claims are rejected due to their dependency. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kwon (US 2015/0323755 A1) discloses, a camera module and a tilt frame with respect to the housing may be adjustable by tilting adjusting units such as screws and ball bearings. Ozaki (US 2011/0034768 A1) discloses an endoscope having sensor assembly comprising a plurality of sensors and one or more prisms. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicholas Robinson whose telephone number is (571)272-9019. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM EST. 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. /N.A.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3798 /PASCAL M BUI PHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 15, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Oct 14, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 29, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Feb 05, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 10, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594024
METHOD FOR PREDICTING SURVIVAL OF NON SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER PATIENTS WITH BRAIN METASTASIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12569219
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR VALVE REGURGITATION ASSESSMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569142
Method And System For Context-Aware Photoacoustic Imaging
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569154
PATHLENGTH RESOLVED CW-LIGHT SOURCE BASED DIFFUSE CORRELATION SPECTROSCOPY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564381
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONTRAST ENHANCED IMAGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
49%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+54.9%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 131 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