Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/713,982

Medical Electrode Device Comprising at Least One Contact Element

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 28, 2024
Examiner
DINH, ANH-KHOA N
Art Unit
3796
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
BIOTRONIK SE & Co. KG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
219 granted / 251 resolved
+17.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
291
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.7%
-32.3% vs TC avg
§103
44.6%
+4.6% vs TC avg
§102
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
§112
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 251 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement(s) filed 05/28/2024 has/have been considered by the Examiner. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. EP21212321.0, filed on 12/03/2021. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites, “…a carrier element (14) …” which includes the label parenthesis (14); however, the parenthesis labels are canceled in the other claims. It is not clear if this is deliberate, or if this was mistakenly left in the preliminary amendment. 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. Claim(s) 1-2, 6-9 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cross (US 20130060313 A1 – hereinafter Cross). Re. claim 1 and 15, Cross teaches a medical electrode device/method of forming a medica electrode device for implantation into a patient (abstract – “The present invention provides for an improved apparatus and method for electrical stimulation. A paddle having a thickness up to 0.030 inches is implanted adjacent the spinal cord dura mater…”), comprising: a carrier element (figure 2, first and second paddle portions 22 and 24, respectively) being formed from an electrically insulating material (paragraph 0033 – “…the polyurethane material of first paddle portion 22 and second paddle portion 24”), at least one contact element arranged on the carrier element (figure 2, electrodes 20) and comprising a contact portion for coupling to tissue in an implanted state of the medical electrode device (paragraph 0036 – “Top surface 104 provides electrical contact with the tissue to be stimulated and preferably extends slightly beyond second paddle portion 24 as discussed above”), PNG media_image1.png 400 544 media_image1.png Greyscale and at least one electrical supply line connected to the at least one contact element (figure 3, conductor 18 connected to electrode 20), PNG media_image2.png 384 540 media_image2.png Greyscale wherein the at least one contact element comprises a first fastening section and a second fastening section (figure 4, base 108 comprises arches 110 and 112), the first fastening section and the second fastening section being arranged at a distance with respect to each other along a length direction (figure 4 shows the arches 110 and 112 are longitudinally spaced from one another) and the at least one electrical supply line being connected to the at least one contact element at the first fastening section and the second fastening section (figure 4 shows the conductor 18 connected to the arches 110 and 112 and electrode 20) such that the at least one electrical supply line is arranged at a distance with respect to the contact portion along a height direction oriented perpendicularly to the length direction (figure 4 shows the perpendicular separation of the conductor 18 and the contact portion of the electrode 20), PNG media_image3.png 360 504 media_image3.png Greyscale wherein a portion of the carrier element (figure 4, crimp sleeve 98) extends through a space in between the contact portion and the at least one electrical supply line (figure 4 shows the crimp sleeve 98 has a top portion which extend through the space between the electrode 20 and the conductor 18). PNG media_image4.png 238 508 media_image4.png Greyscale Re. claim 2, Cross further teaches wherein the contact portion faces outside in a first direction along the height direction (figure 3, electrode 120 faces outward), wherein the at least one contact element comprises an edge contour facing in a second direction opposite the first direction (figure 4, 108 includes widened edges), PNG media_image5.png 360 504 media_image5.png Greyscale the first fastening section and the second fastening section being formed on the edge contour (figure 4, arches 112 and 110 are formed on the edges of the base 108). Re. claim 6, Cross further teaches wherein at least one of the first fastening section and the second fastening section comprises a fastening opening in which the at least one electrical supply line is arranged (figure 4 shows the arches 110, 112 through which the conductor 18 goes through). PNG media_image3.png 360 504 media_image3.png Greyscale Re. claim 7, Cross further teaches wherein the fastening opening is circumferentially closed OR is circumferentially opened (figure 4, arches 110, 112 are shown to be circumferentially opened). Re. claim 8, Cross further teaches wherein a connection element (figure 4, crimp sleeve 98) configured to connect the at least one electrical supply line to the first fastening section and the second fastening section, the connection element being fastened on the first fastening section and the second fastening section (figure 4 shows the crimp sleeve 98 fastened on the arches 110, 112). PNG media_image6.png 360 504 media_image6.png Greyscale Re. claim 9, Cross further teaches wherein the connection element comprises a conduit in which the at least one electrical supply line is received (figure, crimp sleeve 98). PNG media_image7.png 238 307 media_image7.png Greyscale Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cross (US 20130060313 A1 – hereinafter Cross). Re. claim 3, Cross teaches the first and second fastening sections as stated above in claim 1 (figure 4, arches 112 and 110), but does not explicitly teach wherein at least one of the first fastening section and the second fastening section protrudes from the edge contour along the second direction. However, it is held by the courts that the configuration of the fastening sections (arches 112 and 110) is considered a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant. In the instant case, the arches 110 and 112 are shown to connect to the electric supply line (figure 4, conductor 18), and therefore modifying the shape to protrude outwards from the base 108 would not change operation of the device in securing the electric supply line, as well as delivering stimulation as a whole. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try modifying shape of the arches 110, 112 of Cross, to a protruded configuration since such modification would still predictably result in in securing the electric supply line, as well as delivering stimulation as a whole. Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cross (US 20130060313 A1 – hereinafter Cross) in view of Skubitz (US 9561363 B2 – hereinafter Skubitz). Re. claim 4, Cross teaches the contact element (figure 4, electrodes 20) and the edge contour (figure 4, 108 includes widened edges) as stated above in claim 2, but does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one contact element comprises at least one engagement element protruding from the edge contour and engaging with the electrically insulating material of the carrier element. Skubitz teaches a similar electrode assembly (abstract – “An insulative body of a medical electrical lead electrode assembly…”) which includes an insulative carrier (figure 3A, insulative carrier 200) comprising an outward contact surface 43 (figure 3A) comprising at least one engagement element protruding from the edge contour and engaging with the electrically insulating material of the carrier element (figure 3A shows the projections 420, 440 which extend beyond the edge of the carrier 200 and engages with the insulative carrier 200). PNG media_image8.png 190 350 media_image8.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Cross, specifically the contact element of Cross, to incorporate the protruding engagement element, or projections 420, 440 as taught by Skubitz, since such modification would predictably result in securing the contact element in place. Re. claim 5, the combined invention of Cross and Skubitz (hereinafter the combined invention) further teaches wherein the first fastening section and the second fastening section are formed on a first portion and a second portion of the edge contour arranged at a distance with respect to each other along the length direction (figure 4 shows arches 110 and 112 are arranged on a first and second portion of the base 108 and along the length direction). PNG media_image9.png 360 504 media_image9.png Greyscale The combined invention further teaches the engagement element as stated above in claim 4 (figure 3A shows the projections 420, 440 which extend beyond the edge of the carrier 200 and engages with the insulative carrier 200), but does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one engagement element is arranged on a third portion of the edge contour extending in between the first portion and the second portion along the length direction. The differences in the layout and arrangement of the essential working elements are not considered to comprise a critical advantage to the layout of elements disclosed by the combined invention, and thus is not considered to constitute a patentable difference. Since the combined invention demonstrates the capability of housing each of the working elements (i.e. projections 420, 440 of Skubitz) to fit within the base 108 of Cross, then the architecture in which the elements are arranged is not deemed critical. This difference, wherein the only difference being the arrangement and location of essential working elements, has been held by the reviewing courts as being obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art since it is motivated by choice in design and routine skill (In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70). The location of each element is motivated by choice in design dictated by the limited available space. PNG media_image10.png 376 936 media_image10.png Greyscale Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cross (US 20130060313 A1 – hereinafter Cross) in view of Avery (US 3724467 A – hereinafter Avery). Re. claim 10, Cross teaches the connection element as stated above in claim 8 (figure 4, crimp sleeve 98), but does not explicitly teach wherein the connection element comprises a plate body configured to fasten the at least one electrical supply line. Avery teaches a similar medical electrode device (abstract – “An improved implantable device for electrically stimulating a selected portion of the spinal cord is provided”), PNG media_image11.png 258 296 media_image11.png Greyscale and includes an electrode pad (figure 1, neuro-stimulating implant 10) comprising electrodes 14 and a lead 16 (figure 2), and a connection element comprising a plate (figure 2, layers 18 and 20) which fastens the electrical supply line (lead 16) to the electrodes 14, shown in figure 2. PNG media_image12.png 138 238 media_image12.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connection element of Cross, to incorporate the connection element layer plate as taught by Avery as stated above, since such modification would predictably result in fixing the electrical supply line to the contact portion of the electrode. Re. claim 11, the combined invention of Cross and Avery further teaches wherein the at least one electrical supply line is arranged on a side of the plate body facing away from the contact portion (Avery figure 2 shows the lead 16 on the layer 20 facing away from the electrode 14). PNG media_image13.png 138 238 media_image13.png Greyscale Re. claim 12, the combined invention of Cross and Avery teaches the plate body, electrical supply line and the contact portion as stated above in claim 10, but does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one electrical supply line is arranged on a side of the plate body facing towards the contact portion. The differences in the layout and arrangement of the essential working elements are not considered to comprise a critical advantage to the layout of elements disclosed by the combined invention, and thus is not considered to constitute a patentable difference. Since the combined invention demonstrates the capability of housing each of the working elements (i.e. electrical supply line) to fit within the plate body, then the architecture in which the elements are arranged is not deemed critical. This difference, wherein the only difference being the arrangement and location of essential working elements, has been held by the reviewing courts as being obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art since it is motivated by choice in design and routine skill (In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70). The location of each element is motivated by choice in design dictated by the limited available space. Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cross (US 20130060313 A1 – hereinafter Cross) in view of McLaughlin (US 11116964 B2 – hereinafter McLaughlin). Re. claim 13, Cross teaches the carrier element as stated above in claim 1 (paragraph 0033 – “…the polyurethane material of first paddle portion 22 and second paddle portion 24”), but does not explicitly teach wherein said portion of the carrier element is a reinforcement layer embedded in the electrically insulating material of the carrier element. McLaughlin teaches a similar medical electrode device (abstract – “An electrode array system includes a unitary body forming a plurality of apertures…”) comprising a carrier element (figure 3, electrode substrate 26), and a portion of the electrode substrate includes a reinforcement layer (figure 3, reinforcing material 36) embedded in the electrically insulating material of the carrier element (column 6, lines 47-55: “In accordance with illustrative embodiments and as noted below, a reinforcing material 36 (FIGS. 6A and 6B, discussed below) embedded within a base and/or cover elastomer layer mechanically strengthens the electrode array substrate assembly 26 without increasing rigidity or appreciable thickness. Among other things, this reinforcing material 36includes open areas, pores, strips, or apertures to allow elastomers to continuously encapsulate (e.g., micro-fiber, woven mesh, honeycomb, carbon fiber)”). PNG media_image14.png 570 398 media_image14.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify carrier element of Cross, to incorporate the reinforcing layer as taught by McLaughlin, since such modification would predictably result in mechanically strengthening the carrier element (column 6, lines 47-55). Re. claim 14, the combined invention of Cross and McLaughlin further teaches wherein said reinforcement layer comprises a woven fabric (McLaughlin (column 6, lines 47-55: “In accordance with illustrative embodiments and as noted below, a reinforcing material 36 (FIGS. 6A and 6B, discussed below) embedded within a base and/or cover elastomer layer mechanically strengthens the electrode array substrate assembly 26 without increasing rigidity or appreciable thickness. Among other things, this reinforcing material 36includes open areas, pores, strips, or apertures to allow elastomers to continuously encapsulate (e.g., micro-fiber, woven mesh, honeycomb, carbon fiber)”). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anh-Khoa N. Dinh whose telephone number is (571)272-7041. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00am-4:00pm 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, CARL LAYNO can be reached at 571-272-4949. 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. /ANH-KHOA N DINH/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 28, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594025
APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR SCREENING, DIAGNOSIS AND MONITORING OF RESPIRATORY DISORDERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12576269
ELECTRONIC DEVICE USING LOW FREQUENCY AND METHOD OF OPERATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569177
SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING AN EMOTION OF A USER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569676
IMPLANTABLE MEDICAL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564713
ASSEMBLY OF AN IMPLANTING ACCESSORY AND A FLEXIBLE IMPLANTABLE STIMULATION LEAD
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
87%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+13.5%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 251 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