Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/725,815

CAPSULE ENDOSCOPE AND ADJUSTING METHOD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 01, 2024
Examiner
SHARPLESS, CHRISTEN ALICIA
Art Unit
3795
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Anx Ip Holding Pte. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
76%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allow Rate
49 granted / 103 resolved
-22.4% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+28.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
142
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
61.9%
+21.9% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
13.5%
-26.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 103 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 . Status of Claims Claims 1-13 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. Foreign Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copies have been received. 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, 2, 3, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2010/0076258 to Segawa. Regarding claim 1, Segawa discloses a capsule endoscope, comprising: an enclosure (2, Fig. 1, [0046]) the enclosure comprising an enclosure main body portion (2a, Fig. 1, [0047]) and enclosure end portions (2b, 2c, Fig. 1, [0047]); an image acquisition component (5, 8, Fig. 1, [0046]), a circuit processing component (10, Fig. 1, [0046]), an information transmission component (9, Fig. 1, [0046], [0054]), and a battery arranged within a space defined by the enclosure (12a, 12b, Fig. 1, [0046]) wherein the image acquisition component, the circuit processing component and the information transmission component are electrically connected to the battery (Fig. 1), and the circuit processing component and the battery are disposed in the space corresponding to the enclosure main body portion (12a, 12b, Fig. 1, [0046]); and a heating component ([0134])-[0135], the heating component is wound around the outer peripheral surface of the battery (Fig. 28, [0134]- [0135]). Segawa fails to expressly teach the image acquisition component and the information transmission component are disposed in the spaces corresponding to the enclosure end portions. However, it would've been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to place the image acquisition component and the information transmission component of Segawa in the spaces corresponding to the enclosure end portions because Applicant has not disclosed that such placement provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a problem. Regarding claim 2, Segawa discloses a capsule endoscope, comprising: an enclosure (2, Fig. 1, [0046]), the enclosure comprising an enclosure main body portion (2a, Fig. 1, [0047]) and enclosure end portions (2b, 2c, Fig. 1, [0047]); an image acquisition component (5, 8, Fig. 1, [0046]), a circuit processing component (10, Fig. 1, [0046]), an information transmission component (9, Fig. 1, [0046], [0054]), and a battery arranged within a space defined by the enclosure (12a, 12b, Fig. 1, [0046]), wherein the image acquisition component, the circuit processing component and the information transmission component are electrically connected to the battery (Fig. 1), and the circuit processing component and the battery are disposed in the space corresponding to the enclosure main body portion (Fig. 1); at least one accommodating space is formed between the enclosure main body portion and the enclosure end portions, and the accommodating space is filled with a heat storage material (Fig. 28, [0134]- [0135]). Segawa fails to expressly teach the image acquisition component and the information transmission component are disposed in the spaces corresponding to the enclosure end portions. Regarding claim 3, Segawa teaches the capsule endoscope of claim 2, wherein the capsule endoscope comprises sealing partitions (25a, 25b, Fig. 10, [0082]), the sealing partitions are arranged between the enclosure main body portion and the enclosure end portions (Fig. 10), the partitions divide the internal space of the capsule endoscope into a first accommodating space, a second accommodating space, and a third accommodating space (Fig. 10), wherein the second accommodating space is located between the first accommodating space and the third accommodating space (Fig. 10), and the heat storage material filled in the first accommodating space and the third accommodating space has a specific heat capacity greater than that of the heat storage material filled in the second accommodating space, or has a phase change latent heat greater than that of the heat storage material filled in the second accommodating space ([0082]). Regarding claim 6, Segawa teaches the capsule endoscope of claim 2, wherein the heat storage material has a specific heat capacity greater than 0.7kJ/(kg- C) or a phase change latent heat in 90kJ/kg-500kJ/kg, and a phase change temperature in 15°C-75°C ([0134]-[0135]). Claim(s) 4, 5, 7, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2010/0076258 to Segawa and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2018/0064366 to Sweeney et al. (hereinafter “Sweeney”). Regarding claim 4, Segawa discloses the capsule endoscope of claim 3. Segawa, fails to expressly teach wherein the capsule endoscope comprises a thermal insulation layer, the thermal insulation layer is arranged in the first accommodating space and the third accommodating space near the inner wall of the capsule endoscope. However, Sweeney teaches of a capsule endoscope (Sweeney: Fig. 2A) wherein the capsule endoscope comprises a thermal insulation layer, the thermal insulation layer is arranged in the first accommodating space and the third accommodating space near the inner wall of the capsule endoscope (Sweeney: 250, Fig. 8, [0082]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Segawa, to utilize a thermal insulation layer in the manner as taught by Sweeney. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of providing insulation ([0082] of Sweeney). Regarding claim 5, Segawa discloses the capsule endoscope of claim 4, wherein the capsule endoscope further comprises a thermally conductive plate, the heat storage materials in the first accommodating space, the second accommodating space and the third accommodating space are connected via the thermally conductive plate (Fig. 10, [0135]). Regarding claim 7, Segawa teaches the capsule endoscope of claim 1. Segawa fails to expressly teach wherein the enclosure main body portion of the capsule endoscope is provided with a thermal insulation layer, the thermal insulation layer is attached to the inner wall of the enclosure, protruding towards the circuit processing component, or embedded in the enclosure main body portion and flush with the inner wall surface of the enclosure main body portion. However, Sweeney further teaches wherein the enclosure main body portion of the capsule endoscope is provided with a thermal insulation layer, the thermal insulation layer is attached to the inner wall of the enclosure, protruding towards the circuit processing component, or embedded in the enclosure main body portion and flush with the inner wall surface of the enclosure main body portion (250, Fig. 8, [0082]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Segawa to utilize a thermal insulation layer in the manner as taught by Sweeney. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of providing insulation ([0082] of Sweeney). Claim(s) 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2010/0076258 to Segawa and further in view of JP 2013215481 A to Minae. Regarding claim 8, Segawa teaches an adjusting method for the capsule endoscope of any of claim 1. Segawa fails to expressly teach an adjusting method comprising: Step Sl, monitoring output power of the battery of the capsule endoscope; Step S2, heating the battery by the heating component when the output power is less than a threshold; Step S3, stopping heating by the heating component when the output power is greater than the threshold. However, Minae teaches of an analogous method comprising: Step Sl, monitoring output power of the battery of the capsule endoscope (Minae: pages 1-5); Step S2, heating the battery by the heating component when the output power is less than a threshold (Minae: pages 1-5); Step S3, stopping heating by the heating component when the output power is greater than the threshold (Minae: pages 1-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Segawa, to utilize the adjusting method as taught by Minae. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose preventing wasteful power consumption (page 1 of Minae). Regarding claim 9, Segawa, and Minae, teaches the adjusting method of claim 8, and Segawa further teaches wherein before use of the capsule endoscope, the heat storage material in the capsule endoscope absorbs and stores heat (Fig. 28, [0134]- [0135]). Regarding claim 10, Segawa an adjusting method for the capsule endoscope of claim 2. Segawa fails to expressly teach an adjusting method, comprising: Step Sl, monitoring output power of the battery of the capsule endoscope; Step S2, heating the battery by the heating component when the output power is less than a threshold; wherein, if the output power remains less than the threshold after 5s-30s of heating, the heating component stops heating; Step S3, stopping heating by the heating component when the output power is greater than the threshold. However, Minae teaches of an analogous adjusting method comprising: Step Sl, monitoring output power of the battery of the capsule endoscope (Minae: pages 1-5); Step S2, heating the battery by the heating component when the output power is less than a threshold; wherein, if the output power remains less than the threshold after 5s-30s of heating, the heating component stops heating(Minae: pages 1-5).; Step S3, stopping heating by the heating component when the output power is greater than the threshold(Minae: pages 1-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Segawa to utilize the adjusting method as taught by Minae. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose preventing wasteful power consumption (page 1 of Minae). Regarding claim 11, Segawa teaches the capsule endoscope of claim 2, Segawa fails to expressly teach wherein the enclosure main body portion of the capsule endoscope is provided with a thermal insulation layer, the thermal insulation layer is attached to the inner wall of the enclosure, protruding towards the circuit processing component, or embedded in the enclosure main body portion and flush with the inner wall surface of the enclosure main body portion. However, Sweeney teaches of a capsule endoscope (Fig. 2A) wherein the enclosure main body portion of the capsule endoscope is provided with a thermal insulation layer, the thermal insulation layer is attached to the inner wall of the enclosure, protruding towards the circuit processing component, or embedded in the enclosure main body portion and flush with the inner wall surface of the enclosure main body portion (250, Fig. 8, [0082]). Regarding claim 12, Segawa teaches an adjusting method for the capsule endoscope of claim 2. Segawa fails to expressly teach comprising: Step S1, monitoring output power of the battery of the capsule endoscope; Step S2, heating the battery by the heating component when the output power is less than a threshold; Step S3, stopping heating by the heating component when the output power is greater than the threshold. However, Minae teaches of an analogous method including a method comprising: Step S1, monitoring output power of the battery of the capsule endoscope; Step S2, heating the battery by the heating component when the output power is less than a threshold; Step S3, stopping heating by the heating component when the output power is greater than the threshold (Minae: pages 1-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Segawa, to utilize the adjusting method as taught by Minae. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose preventing wasteful power consumption (page 1 of Minae). Regarding claim 13, Segawa teaches of an adjusting method for the capsule endoscope of claim 2, but Segawa fails to expressly teach comprising: Step S1, monitoring output power of the battery of the capsule endoscope;Step S2, heating the battery by the heating component when the output power is less than a threshold; wherein, if the output power remains less than the threshold after 5s-30s of heating, the heating component stops heating;Step S3, stopping heating by the heating component when the output power is greater than the threshold. However, Minae teaches of an analogous adjusting method comprising: Step S1, monitoring output power of the battery of the capsule endoscope (Minae: pages 1-5); Step S2, heating the battery by the heating component when the output power is less than a threshold; wherein, if the output power remains less than the threshold after 5s-30s of heating, the heating component stops heating (Minae: pages 1-5); Step S3, stopping heating by the heating component when the output power is greater than the threshold (Minae: pages 1-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Segawa to utilize the adjusting method as taught by Minae. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose preventing wasteful power consumption (page 1 of Minae). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTEN A. SHARPLESS whose telephone number is (571)272-2387. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday 6:00 AM - 2:00 PM, and Friday 6:00 AM - 10:00 AM. 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, Mike Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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. /C.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3795 /MICHAEL J CAREY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 01, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599287
SELF-LOCKING DEVICE OF ENDOSCOPE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588800
ENDOSCOPE TREATMENT TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12575722
METHOD OF VISIBLE LIGHT AND FLUORESCENCE IMAGING WITH REDUCED CHROMATIC ABERRATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564316
Endoscope with Bendable Camera Shaft
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12564308
IMAGE PICKUP UNIT, ENDOSCOPE, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING IMAGE PICKUP UNIT
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
48%
Grant Probability
76%
With Interview (+28.9%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 103 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