Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/693,145

CLIP APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Mar 18, 2024
Examiner
SEVERSON, RYAN J
Art Unit
3771
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Hangzhou Ags Medtech Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
891 granted / 1075 resolved
+12.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
11 currently pending
Career history
1086
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
40.3%
+0.3% vs TC avg
§102
23.8%
-16.2% vs TC avg
§112
17.0%
-23.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1075 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 § 102 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 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. Claims 1 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kissel et al. (8,523,880). Regarding claim 1, Kissel et al. disclose a clip apparatus (see at least the embodiments of figures 4a and 4b), comprising: a conveying device, wherein the conveying device includes a sheath pipe (12 in both figures) provided with a passage and a core shaft (10 in figure 4a and 11 in figure 4b) extending axially within the passage of the sheath pipe; and at least two clip devices (14 in both figures), wherein the at least two clip devices include a first clip device and a second clip device (any of the clips 14 in either figure can be considered first and second clip devices), the first clip device and the second clip device respectively include at least one clipping portion (3; see at least figures 3a and 3b), the clipping portions include a first clipping portion provided in the first clip device and a second clipping portion provided in the second clip device, and the clipping portions are provided outside the passage of the sheath pipe (see figures 4a and 4b where all of the clips 14 are outside of the sheath pipe 12). Regarding claim 21, the clipping portions are provided with a first snap portion (3 as in figures 3a and 3b), an extension portion (5) is provided with a second snap portion (3 as in figures 3a and 3b), and the first snap portion and the second snap portion are releasably connected. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-11, 15, 18, 22-25, 27, and 28 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 2, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest the at least two clip devices are releasably connected to one another in sequence and proximal ends of the clip devices are also releasably connected to the sheath pipe. Claim 3 is also objected to by virtue of its dependency from claim 2. Regarding claim 4, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest the at least two clip devices further include an extension portion connected to the core shaft, where a distal end of the extension portion is switchably connected to one of the clipping portions. Claims 5 and 18 are also objected to by virtue of their dependency from claim 4. Regarding claim 6, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest a connecting member where at least one of the clipping portions is releasably connected to the rest of the clipping portions through the connecting member and/or at least one of the clipping portions is releasably connected to the sheath pipe through the connecting member. Claims 7-11 and 15 are also objected to by virtue of their dependency from claim 6. Regarding claim 22, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest the clipping portions include first and second clipping arms and a locking portion, where the locking portion includes first and second locking portions on the first and second clipping arms, respectively, and the first locking portion includes a convexity and the second locking portion includes a concavity that mate to locking the first and second clipping arms together. Regarding claim 23, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest the first and second clip devices include first and second storage pipes, respectively, where a portion of the second clipping portion mates with the first storage pipe when the first and second clip devices are connected to one another. Claims 24, 25, 27, and 28 are also objected to by virtue of their dependency from claim 23. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the attached PTO-892 for a general showing of the state of the art of clip apparatus structures similar to that which is claimed in the instant application. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN J SEVERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3142. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:00-2:00 central. 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, Jackie Ho can be reached at (571) 272-4696. 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. /Ryan J. Severson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 18, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 25, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599387
Emergency Protocol Receptacle for Puncture Wounds
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12575971
OPHTHALMIC SURGERY INSTRUMENT, INTRAOCULAR EXCISION MEMBER, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564411
FRICTION COMPENSATING, EVEN PRESSURE CLIP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12564485
TISSUE GRAFTS WITH PRE-MADE ATTACHMENT POINTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12564394
Occluder and Occluding System
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+12.8%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1075 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month