Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/673,448

SURGICAL DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR DETERMINING WEAR

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 24, 2024
Priority
May 30, 2023 — provisional 63/469,643
Examiner
SHIRSAT, MARCELA
Art Unit
3775
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Medtronic Ps Medical Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allowance Rate
498 granted / 677 resolved
+3.6% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
700
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.8%
-35.2% vs TC avg
§103
45.8%
+5.8% vs TC avg
§102
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
§112
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 677 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election of Invention I and Species A (Claims 1-6) in the reply filed on 7/9/26 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 7-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/9/26. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Culp et al (US Patent Pub. 20020087179A1) in view of Woloszko et al (US Patent Pub. 20040186469A1). Culp recites a surgical device. Specifically in regards to claim 1-2, Culp recites a tool (34); a motor (shown in Fig. 3) configured to drive movement of the tool (34), the tool (34) supported on a shaft assembly, the shaft assembly and the motor including a plurality of components that cooperate to at least one of support or drive the tool (34); and at least one indicator (96) disposed proximate at least one of the plurality of components and configured to provide feedback indicative of at least one property of at least one component of the plurality of components either prior to, during or after use of the surgical device (30), wherein the plurality of components includes at least one gear, shaft or bearing (64) (Fig. 2-3; and Para. [0053],[0057]-[0065]). However, the reference is silent as to the at least one indicator is selected from the group consisting of thermochromic indicators, thermally-activated elements, thermal fuses, thermocouples, and thermistors. Woloszko recites a surgical device. Specifically in regards to claim 1, Woloszko recites a tool (501); a motor configured to drive movement of the tool, and at least one indicator (550) configured to provide feedback indicative of at least one property of at least one component of the plurality of components either prior to, during or after use of the surgical device (501), to the at least one indicator (550) is a thermochromic indicators (Fig. 5a-5d; and Para. [0089]). In regards to claim 2, Woloszko recites wherein the at least one indicator (550) is a thermochromic indicator visibly disposed on an outer surface of the surgical device (501) proximate one or more bearings configured to support the tool, the organic thermochromic indicator (550) having a temperature gradient range to visibly indicate varying states of condition of the one or more bearings of the surgical device (501) (The reference recites that the temperature-indicating element is located at a working end of the shaft and/or may be located along any portion or portions of the device where information regarding surrounding temperature is desired.) (Para. [0011],[0089]-[0090]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the temperature sensor of Culp to be a thermochromic element as taught in Woloszko in order to for the medical practitioner to be able to identify the temperature in regions adjacent to, in contact with, and/or surrounding a working end of a surgical device without solely having to remove his or her attention from the operative field (Para. [0007]). In regards to claim 3, Culp in view of Woloszko recite a surgical device having a thermochromic temperature indicator as recited above. Culp further recites wherein the at least one indicator (96) is a thermally-activated element operably associated with one or more bearings (64) configured to support the tool, the thermally-activated element (96) adapted to couple to an integrated power console (36) to visibly indicate the condition of the one or more bearings of the surgical device (Fig. 3, Para. [0053],[0139],[302],[0309]). In regards to claim 4, Culp further recites wherein the at least one indicator (96) is operably associated with one or more bearings (64) configured to support the tool, and is adapted to couple to an integrated power console to visibly indicate varying states of condition of the one or more bearings of the surgical device (Fig. 3, Para. [0053],[0139],[302],[0309]). However, the reference is silent as to a thermocouple. Woloszko further recites wherein the at least one indicator is a thermocouple (Para. [0006]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the temperature sensor of Culp to be a thermocouple as taught in Woloszko in order to for the medical practitioner to be able to identify the temperature in regions adjacent to, in contact with, and/or surrounding a working end of a surgical device without solely having to remove his or her attention from the operative field (Para. [0007]). In regards to claim 5, Culp further recites wherein the surgical device is adapted to couple to a power console (36) the power console configured to monitor feedback from the at least one indicator (96) during use over time to visibly indicate the condition of the surgical device (Fig. 3, Para. [0053],[0124],[0131],[0172],[0218],[0299]-[0300],[0139],[302],[0309] and claim 61). In regards to claim 6, Culp further recites wherein the feedback from the at least one indicator (96) is selected from the group consisting of current, voltage, vibration, and noise (Para. [0131],[0155],[0172],[0173],[0299]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCELA I SHIRSAT whose telephone number is (571)270-5269. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:30pm MST. 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, Kevin Truong can be reached at 571-272-4705. 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. MARCELA . SHIRSAT Primary Examiner Art Unit 3775
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 24, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12733926
FIBULAR FRACTURE STAPLE AND METHODS FOR USING THE SAME
2y 3m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12734043
EXPANSIBLE INTERVERTEBRAL IMPLANT
1y 9m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12733962
TELESCOPIC NAIL AND ASSOCIATED PERFORATING TOOL
1y 7m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12727895
CONTOUR GUIDE FOR SMALL BONE SURFACE MODIFICATION
2y 7m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12727916
FAILURE DETECTION AND SENSOR BASED CONTROL IN A MOTORIZED BONE FIXATION DEVICE
2y 2m to grant Granted Sep 08, 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
74%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+19.0%)
2y 11m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 677 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