Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/761,879

Lightweight Curved Support and Guide Rail with High Load Capacity for C-Arm Imaging Systems

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 02, 2024
Examiner
ARTMAN, THOMAS R
Art Unit
2884
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
GE Precision Healthcare LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
735 granted / 874 resolved
+16.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
903
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§103
38.9%
-1.1% vs TC avg
§102
34.6%
-5.4% vs TC avg
§112
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 874 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/26/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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 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 1-3, 5, 7-10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schaefer (US 5,425,068). Regarding claim 1, Schaefer discloses a C-shaped arm (Fig.1), including: a) a C-shaped portion 5; b) a radiation source 3 carried by the C-shaped portion 5; c) a radiation detector 4 carried by the C-shaped portion 5; and d) a pair of guide rails 23, 24 secured to opposite sides of the C-shaped portion 5 (Fig.5), where each of the pair of guide rails 23, 24 include: e) a body 23, 24 formed of a lightweight material and including a pair of rod channels formed therein; and f) a pair of rods 25, 26 engaged within the pair of rod channels. With respect to claim 2, Schaefer further discloses that the body 23, 24 is formed as a unitary structure. With respect to claim 3, Schaefer further discloses that each of the pair of rods 25, 26 is formed as a unitary structure (cables or wires). With respect to claim 5, Schaefer further discloses that a diameter of each of the pair of rods 25, 26 is greater than a depth of each of the rod channels (Fig.5, for the rollers to effectively engage with the rods). With respect to claim 7, Schaefer further discloses that each of the pair of rod channels includes a compression section along one side of each of the pair of rod channels (inherent insofar as there will be more force on one roller than on the opposed roller on the same side of the C-arm due to C-arm orientation). Regarding claim 8, Schaefer discloses a medical imaging system (Fig.1), including: a) a C-arm 5; b) a radiation source 3 and a radiation detector 4 carried by the C-arm 5; c) a base 7; and d) a carriage 6 coupled to the C-arm 5 and the base 7, the carriage 6 including a pair of trolleys 27, each of the pair of trolleys rotatably supporting a number of rollers 28 thereon (Fig.5); where the C-arm includes (Fig.5): e) a C-shaped portion 5; and f) a pair of guide rails 23 and 24 secured to opposed sides of the C-shaped portion 5 and engaged with the number of rollers 28 on the pair of trolleys 27; where each of the pair of guide rails 23, 24 include (Fig.5): g) a body 23, 24 formed of a lightweight material and including a pair of rod channels formed therein; and h) a pair of rods 25, 26 engaged within the pair of rod channels. With respect to claim 9, Schaefer further discloses that the body 23, 24 is formed as a unitary structure. With respect to claim 10, Schaefer further discloses that each of the pair of rods 25, 26 is formed as a unitary structure (cables or wires). With respect to claim 12, Schaefer further discloses that a diameter of each of the pair of rods 25, 26 is greater than a depth of each of the rod channels (Fig.5, for the rollers to effectively engage with the rods). Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baumann (US 2017/0202529 A1). Regarding claim 1, Baumann discloses a C-shaped arm (Fig.4), including: a) a C-shaped portion 1; b) a radiation source 13 carried by the C-shaped portion 1; c) a radiation detector 14 carried by the C-shaped portion 1; and d) a pair of guide rails 12 secured to opposed sides of the C-shaped portion 1 (Figs.2 and 3), where each of the pair of guide rails 12 includes: e) a body 12 formed of a lightweight material and including a pair of rod channels 9 formed therein; and f) a pair of rods 8 engaged within the pair of rod channels 9. With respect to claim 2, Baumann further discloses that the body 12 is formed of a unitary structure (par.0026). With respect to claim 3, Baumann further discloses that each of the pair of rods 8 is formed as a unitary structure (wires, par.0026). With respect to claim 4, Baumann further discloses that the body 12 is formed of aluminum, and each of the pair of rods 8 are formed of hardened steel (par.0026). With respect to claim 5, Baumann further discloses that a diameter of each of the pair of rods 8 is greater than a depth of each of the rod channels 9 (Figs.2 and 3). With respect to claim 6, Baumann further discloses that each of the pair of rod channels 9 defines three areas of contact between the rod channel 9 and the rod 8 engaged therein (Fig.3 shows rectangular channels, which results in 3 points of contact with the rods). With respect to claim 7, Baumann further discloses that each of the pair of rod channels 9 includes a compression section along one side of each of the pair of rod channels (inherent insofar as there will be more force on one roller than on the opposed roller on the same side of the C-arm due to C-arm orientation). Regarding claim 8, Baumann discloses a medical imaging system (Fig.4), including: a) a C-arm 1; b) a radiation source 13 and a radiation detector 14 carried by the C-arm 1; c) a base (not labeled, Fig.4); and d) a carriage coupled to the C-arm 1 and the base (Fig.4), the carriage including a pair of trolleys, each of the pairs of trolleys rotatably supporting a number of rollers 7 thereon (Figs.2-3), where the C-arm 1 includes: e) a C-shaped portion 2; and f) a pair of guide rails 12 secured to opposing sides of the C-shaped portion 2 and engaged with the number of rollers 7 secured to opposed sides of the C-shaped portion 2, where each of the pair of guide rails 12 includes: g) a body 12 formed of a lightweight material and including a pair of rod channels 9 formed therein; and h) a pair of rods 8 engaged within the pair of rod channels 9 (Figs.2-3). With respect to claim 9, Baumann further discloses that the body 12 is formed of a unitary structure (par.0026). With respect to claim 10, Baumann further discloses that each of the pair of rods 8 is formed as a unitary structure (wires, par.0026). With respect to claim 11, Baumann further discloses that the body 12 is formed of aluminum, and each of the pair of rods 8 are formed of hardened steel (par.0026). With respect to claim 12, Baumann further discloses that a diameter of each of the pair of rods 8 is greater than a depth of each of the rod channels 9 (Figs.2 and 3). With respect to claim 13, Baumann further discloses that each of the pair of rod channels 9 defines three areas of contact between the rod channel 9 and the rod 8 engaged therein (Fig.3 shows rectangular channels, which results in 3 points of contact with the rods). Regarding claim 14, Baumann discloses a method of forming a C-arm 1 for a medical imaging system (Figs.2-4), including: a) providing a C-shaped section 2 adapted to support a radiation source 13 and a radiation detector 14 at opposed ends of the C-shaped section 2; b) forming a material into a body for a guide rail 12, the body including a pair of rod channels 9 disposed on opposed sides of the body (Figs.2-3); c) engaging a pair of rods 8 at least partially within the pair of rod channels 9 to form the guide rail 12 (Figs.2-3); and d) securing the guide rail 12 to a side of the C-shaped section 2 to form the C-arm 1; where e) the material forming the body is selected from aluminum or steel (par.0026); and where f) a diameter of each of the pair of rods 8 is greater than a depth of each of the rod channels (best seen in Fig.2). With respect to claim 15, Baumann further discloses that the step of forming the body includes extruding the material to form the body as a unitary structure (pars.0005, 0011, 0014 and 0016). With respect to claim 16, it is inherent in Baumann that, after extrusion (pars.0005, 0011, 0014 and 0016), the body must be bent into the C-shape, as understood in the art. 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 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. Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baumann, as applied to claim 14 above, in view of Nakahara (JP 2006-167300 A, pagination according to provided translation). With respect to claim 17, Baumann does not specifically disclose that the body is bent after engaging the pair of rods 8 within the pair of rod channels 9. Nakahara teaches the practice of engaging steel components 9 into corresponding grooves 15 of an extruded aluminum C-arm at the time of extrusion and prior to bending to provide faster manufacturing at lower cost by avoiding the use of screws and the corresponding machining (bottom of p.3, also see bottom of p.5 to top of p.6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for Baumann to bend the body after engaging the pair of rods within the pair of rod channels in order to streamline manufacturing, as taught by Nakahara. With respect to claims 18-20, Baumann does not specifically disclose that the step of engaging the pair of rods at least partially within the pair of rod channels includes forming an interference fit between the pair of rods and the pair of rod channels. Nakahara teaches the practice of providing an interference fit (no need for screws, bottom of p.3 and bottom of p.5), where the opening width of the groove 15 is smaller than the diameter of the rod 9. Due to the steel rod 9 being harder than, and having a lower coefficient of thermal expansion than, the extruded aluminum alloy of the groove walls 15, the skilled artisan appreciates that press fitting or shrink fitting would be readily applicable as routine and effective interference fits. Further, the skilled artisan recognizes that the outer portions of the groove 15, being closer together than the width of the steel rod 9, may be crimped over the steel rod 9 to provide a compression fit, since the extruded aluminum is understood as being more ductile than the steel rod. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention for Baumann to use the notoriously well-known practices of a press-fit, or shrink-fit, or crimp fit, as recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art, in order to streamline manufacturing due to the lack of screw fasteners, as taught by Nakahara, with a reasonable expectation of success and without undue experimentation. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US patent documents to Noda teach the practice of attaching higher-strength reinforcement members to extruded aluminum C-arms by press-fitting as an alternative to screw-fitting (par.0040 of the pre-grant publication); and the remaining prior art teaches various aspects of roller/steel rod bearing surfaces with aluminum or fiber-composite C-arms. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS R ARTMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2485. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10am-6:30pm. 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 on 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. THOMAS R. ARTMAN Primary Examiner Art Unit 2884 /THOMAS R ARTMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 02, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601590
Method to Control Gap for Sheet Manufacturing Measurement Processes
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596083
AUTOMATED ANALYZER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596062
METHOD FOR CLASSIFYING UNKNOWN PARTICLES ON A SURFACE OF A SEMI-CONDUCTOR WAFER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590907
X-RAY INSPECTION APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588878
X-RAY DETECTOR AND RADIOGRAPHIC X-RAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
84%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+12.8%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 874 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