Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 18/759,994

System And Method For Imaging

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jun 30, 2024
Priority
Sep 14, 2020 — provisional 63/078,065 +3 more
Examiner
THOMAS, COURTNEY D
Art Unit
2884
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Medtronic Navigation Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allowance Rate
821 granted / 921 resolved
+21.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
935
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.4%
-33.6% vs TC avg
§103
27.3%
-12.7% vs TC avg
§102
26.3%
-13.7% vs TC avg
§112
11.9%
-28.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 921 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-5 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,813,094. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 11813094 claims an imaging system comprising: a gantry; a source assembly configured to move within the gantry; a plurality of source positions configured to selectively emit X-rays; detector configured to detect the x-rays; a controller configured to acquire image data; and wherein the source assembly is positioned anti-symmetrical relative to the detector. Claims 2-5 are not patentably distinct from the claims of U.S. Patent No. 11813094 because the additional limitations merely constitute obvious operational and structural variations of the patented imaging system and do not render the claimed subject matter patentably distinct. Claims 6-14 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,813,094. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 11813094 claims an imaging system further comprising: a plurality of source portions; a first and second sub-plurality of source portions configured to acquire respective image data; a source assembly positioned anti-symmetrical relative to the detector (claim 1) such that a first number of the plurality of source portions are positioned on a first side of a line extending from the detector and a second number of the plurality of source portions are positioned on a second side of the line extending from the detector such that the second number is greater than the first number (claim 2). Claims 7, 8 and 11 are not patentably distinct from claims 3, 5 and 9 respectively of U.S. Patent No. 11,813,094 because the additional limitations correspond to subject matter recited in those claims. Claims 9, 10 and 12-14 are not patentably distinct from the claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,813,094 because the additional limitations constitute obvious operational and structural variations of the patented imaging system. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY D THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-2496. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9 AM - 5 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, David Makiya can be reached at 571-272-2273. 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. /COURTNEY D THOMAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 30, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12699202
INSPECTION SYSTEM AND INSPECTION METHOD
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12697086
MEDICAL IMAGE CAPTURING SYSTEM
1y 10m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12694592
MEDICAL IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS, MEDICAL IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD, AND X-RAY CT APPARATUS
1y 12m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12674897
ESTIMATING A RADIATION LOAD QUANTITY FOR AN IMAGING SYSTEM HAVING A RADIATION SOURCE
1y 10m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12669447
ARTICLE INSPECTION APPARATUS
1y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 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
89%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+9.2%)
2y 0m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 921 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