Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/712,551

VAGUS NERVE STIMULATION DEVICE FOR ANIMALS

Non-Final OA §102§Other
Filed
May 22, 2024
Examiner
SCHMITT, BENJAMIN ALLYN
Art Unit
3796
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Neurive Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
6%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 2m
To Grant
56%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 6% of cases
6%
Career Allow Rate
1 granted / 16 resolved
-63.7% vs TC avg
Strong +50% interview lift
Without
With
+50.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 2m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
65
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.9%
-30.1% vs TC avg
§103
43.8%
+3.8% vs TC avg
§102
18.0%
-22.0% vs TC avg
§112
26.8%
-13.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 16 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §Other
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/22/2024 is being considered by the examiner. Status of Claims Claims 1-6 are currently pending and under examination. Priority The instant application (filed on 05/22/2024) is a national stage of PCT/KR2022/018655 (filed on 11/23/2022) filed under 35 USC 371. Acknowledgment is made of Applicant's claim for foreign priority based on application KR10-2021-0165571 filed on 11/26/2021. It is noted, however, that Applicant has not filed an English translation of the certified foreign application. While not required, an English translation of the foreign application will be necessary when “the application is involved in an interference … or derivation … proceeding; When necessary to overcome the date of a reference relied upon by the examiner; or When specifically required by the examiner” (MPEP 213.04). Claim Objections The following claims are objected to because of the following informalities: • Claim 5: The limitation “controller having a control part that controls the electrical stimuli transmitted to the electrode” would be more consistent with other claim structures (such as claim 4) by changing to “controller having a control part configured to control the electrical stimuli transmitted to the electrode” Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1-6 are rejected under U.S.C 102(a)(1) and U.S.C 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Simon (US PG Pub 2019/0366076 A1, see “Notice of References Cited”). Regarding Claim 1, Simon discloses a vagus nerve stimulation device for animals ([0011] – vagus nerve stimulator), the device comprising: an electrode configured to contact a skin of an animal to transmit electrical stimuli to the vagus nerve ([0013] – an electrode contact surface of the device applied to the skin surface of the neck to stimulate the vagus nerve); and a power source for generating electrical stimuli transmitted to the electrode ([0020-0021] – an electrical power source used to apply a stimulation signal to the electrodes in contact with the skin). Therefore, Claim 1 is anticipated by Simon. Regarding Claim 2, the vagus nerve stimulation device for animals according to Claim 1 is anticipated by Simon, as indicated hereinabove. Simon further discloses wherein the electrode is formed on one of a collar worn around a neck of an animal, a harness worn on a horse, an ear tag attached to an ear of an animal, and an earmuff of a horse ([0159] – “Heads of the stimulator (731) are applied to a surface of the patient's body, during which time the stimulator may be held in place by straps or frames or collars, or the stimulator may be held against the patient's body by hand”). Note only one of the four options is interpreted as required (e.g. a collar worn around a neck of an animal). Therefore, Claim 2 is anticipated by Simon. Regarding Claim 3, the vagus nerve stimulation device for animals according to Claim 2 is anticipated by Simon, as indicated hereinabove. Simon further discloses wherein an electrode part on which the electrode is formed is attachable and detachable to one of the collar, the harness, the ear tag, and the earmuff (Figure 6B, [0188] - the electrode part of stimulator 50 is inserted through a collar to be held in place, where the arrangement is interpreted as the electrode part being removable). Note only one of the four options is interpreted as required (e.g. the collar). Therefore, Claim 3 is anticipated by Simon. Regarding Claim 4, the vagus nerve stimulation device for animals according to Claim 1 is anticipated by Simon, as indicated hereinabove. Simon further discloses a control part configured to control the electrical stimuli transmitted to the electrode ([0102] – “The control unit 330 controls the impulse generator 310 to generate a signal for each of the device's coils or electrodes. The signals are selected to be suitable for amelioration of a particular medical condition, when the signals are applied non-invasively to a target nerve or tissue via the coil 341 or electrodes 340”). Therefore, Claim 4 is anticipated by Simon. Regarding Claim 5, the vagus nerve stimulation device for animals according to Claim 2 is anticipated by Simon, as indicated hereinabove. Simon further discloses a controller having a control part that controls the electrical stimuli transmitted to the electrode ([0102] – control unit used to transmit a stimulation signal to the electrodes), wherein the controller is connected to the electrode by wire or wirelessly ([0099] – wires between controller and electrodes; [0188] – wireless: “In other models, the stimulator may be turned on and off remotely, using a wireless controller that may be used to adjust all of the stimulation parameters of the controller (on/off, stimulation amplitude, frequency, etc.)”). Therefore, Claim 5 is anticipated by Simon. Regarding Claim 6, the vagus nerve stimulation device for animals according to Claim 1 is anticipated by Simon, as indicated hereinabove. Simon further discloses a detection part configured to detect physical changes in response to electrical stimuli ([0215] – describes feedback system where sensor data is used to detect physiologic changes in response to electrical stimuli; [0216-0218] – describes different examples of sensors used for feedback). Therefore, Claim 6 is anticipated by Simon. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Benjamin Schmitt, whose telephone number is 703-756-1345. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30 am to 5:00 pm. 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, Jennifer McDonald can be reached on 571-270-3061. 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. /Benjamin A. Schmitt/ Examiner Art Unit 3796 /REX R HOLMES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 22, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §Other (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12558555
MIXED-SEGMENT ELECTROCARDIOGRAM ANALYSIS IN COORDINATION WITH CARDIOPULMONARY RESUSCITATION FOR EFFICIENT DEFIBRILLATION ELECTROTHERAPY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 1 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
6%
Grant Probability
56%
With Interview (+50.0%)
4y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 16 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