Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 06, 2026
Application No. 18/726,970

DEGRADABLE BILE AND PANCREATIC DUCT STENT

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jul 05, 2024
Priority
Jan 07, 2022 — CN 202210011816.9 +1 more
Examiner
BLASS, PARIS MARIE
Art Unit
3774
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Beijing Advanced Medical Technologies Ltd. Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 6m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allowance Rate
17 granted / 31 resolved
-15.2% vs TC avg
Strong +54% interview lift
Without
With
+53.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
75
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
51.2%
+11.2% vs TC avg
§102
31.2%
-8.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.3%
-23.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 31 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 . 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. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in CN on 01/07/2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed an English translation certified copy of the CN 202210011816.9 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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. Claims 1-5 and 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20140277561 A1 (hereafter --Jordan--). Regarding Claim 1, Jordan discloses a degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent (100) for dilating the narrowed lumen of a lesion, the duct stent comprising: - a guiding part configured to have a guide passage through which a guide wire passes and a fluid flows (see annotated guiding part and guide passage in Figure 4A below); and - a stent main body spirally distributed around the guiding part along the longitudinal direction of the guiding part (see annotated stent main body and guiding part in Figure 4A below); - wherein the stent main body is configured to form a spiral fluid channel relative to the lumen (see annotated stent main body and spiral fluid channel in Figure 4A below), and the guide passage of the guiding part is in communication with the spiral fluid channel (see annotated guiding part and spiral fluid channel in Figure 4A below, the two being “in communication” through the openings in the “guiding part” body). PNG media_image1.png 514 976 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 2, Jordan discloses the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent (100) according to claim 1, wherein the guiding part comprises at least one first spiral element, the first spiral element being is spring-shaped and defines the guide passage, wherein a plurality of the first spiral elements define the guide passage in parallel with each other (see annotated plurality of first spiral elements in Figure 4A above, the spiral elements being individual filaments of the braided struts that spread spirally from one longitudinal end to the other longitudinal end). Regarding Claim 3, Jordan discloses the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent (100) according to claim 1, wherein the stent main body comprises at least one group of spiral structures, wherein a plurality of groups of the spiral structures are distributed parallel with each other around the guiding part (see annotated group of spiral structures in Figure 4A below, in which they are parallel with one another along the longitudinal direction of the stent). PNG media_image2.png 514 890 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 4, Jordan discloses the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent (100) according to claim 1, wherein the guiding part comprises: a first portion, the first portion comprising at least two groups of straight elements arranged parallel with each other (see annotated straight elements in Figure 4A below, the “straight elements” being the straight sides from the side lateral angle to the stent); a second portion, the second portion being configured in a ring shape and arranged at an end of the first portion to define the guide passage together with the first portion (see annotated guide passage in Figure 4A above, see also second portion being round (ring shape) in Figure 4A below, see also end of first portion in Figure 4A below); and the stent main body comprises at least one group of spiral structures (see annotated spiral structures in Figure 4A above), wherein a plurality of groups of the spiral structures are distributed parallel with each other around the guiding part (see annotated spiral structures in Figure 4A below) along the first portion (see annotated first portion in Figure 4A below) to confine the guide wire within the guide passage (see paragraph [0030]). PNG media_image3.png 508 874 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 5, Jordan discloses the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent (100) according to claim 1, wherein the guiding part is constructed as a porous structural element with said guide passage (see annotated guiding part in Figure 4A above, the braided structure of Jordan being a porous tube defining a guidewire passage). Regarding Claim 6, Jordan discloses the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent (100) according to claim 1, wherein the stent main body comprises two groups of spiral structures spirally extending around the guiding part, and each group of the spiral structures comprises at least one second spiral element (see annotated second spiral elements (one being the “fourth element”, the second being the “second element”) in Figure 4A below). PNG media_image4.png 514 890 media_image4.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 7, Jordan discloses the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent (100) according to claim 6, wherein the spiral structure comprises two second spiral elements arranged in parallel (see annotated second spiral elements (one being the “fourth element”, the other being the “second spiral element”) in Figure 4A above). Regarding Claim 8, Jordan discloses the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent (100) according to claim 6, wherein the spiral structure comprises three spirally arranged second spiral elements (see annotated spiral structures in Figure 4A above, the second, third, and fourth elements being the “three spirally arranged second spiral elements”). Regarding Claim 9, Jordan discloses the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent (100) according to claim 1, wherein the stent main body and the guiding part are made of different materials (see paragraph [0031] denoting that the stent main body (component 204) is made of polyethylene material, and see also paragraph [0035] denoting that component 202, being the guiding part, can be made of nitinol) [and/or the stent main body and the guiding part have different material degradation rates.] Regarding Claim 10, Jordan discloses the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent (100) according to claim 9. The claimed phrase ““wherein the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent is made by 3D printing technology” is being treated as a product by process limitation; that is the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent is made by 3D printing technology. As set forth in MPEP 2113, product-by-process claims are NOT limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only to the structure implied by the steps. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Thus, even though Jordan is silent as to the process used to make the stent, it appears that the stent would be the same as that claimed. Regarding Claim 11, Jordan discloses the degradable bile and pancreatic duct stent (100) according to claim 2, wherein the stent main body comprises at least one group of spiral structures, wherein a plurality of groups of the spiral structures are distributed parallel with each other around the guiding part (see annotated spiral structures and groups of spiral structures in Figure 4A above). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20190053921 A1: This reference discloses a stent with a spiral structure. US 20080195189 A1: This reference discloses a stent for implantation into the body of a patient, having a guiding part being the body of the stent (see Abstract). Asgari teaches herein the guiding part is constructed as a porous structural element with said guide passage (see paragraph [0063]). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PARIS MARIE BLASS whose telephone number is (703)756-5375. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9 a.m. - 7 p.m. ET. 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, Melanie Tyson can be reached at 571-272-9062. 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. /PARIS MARIE BLASS/Examiner, Art Unit 3774 /SARAH W ALEMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3774
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 05, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12690959
ARTIFICIAL BLADDER SYSTEM
3y 9m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12653672
PERICARDIAL ANCHORING SYSTEM
4y 1m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12653671
DELIVERY SYSTEM HAVING A SPLIT DISTAL TIP FOR IMPROVED POSITIONING OF A TRANSCATHETER HEART VALVE
3y 7m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12642645
SURGICALLY IMPLANTED THERAPEUTIC/DIAGNOSTIC OCULAR OPTICAL ARRAY
3y 5m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12636150
DELIVERY DEVICE HAVING A CONTROL RELEASE SHAFT FOR IMPROVED POSITIONING OF A TRANSCATHETER HEART VALVE
3y 6m to grant Granted May 26, 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
55%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+53.8%)
3y 7m (~1y 6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 31 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