Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/777,746

SURGICAL CANNULA MOUNTS AND RELATED SYSTEMS AND METHODS

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Jul 19, 2024
Priority
Mar 17, 2014 — provisional 61/954,222 +5 more
Examiner
MCDUFFIE, MICHAEL D
Art Unit
3632
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
57%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allowance Rate
571 granted / 846 resolved
+15.5% vs TC avg
Minimal -11% lift
Without
With
+-10.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
862
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
80.8%
+40.8% vs TC avg
§102
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
§112
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 846 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . The following correspondence is a non-final Office Action for application # 18777746, entitled: SURGICAL CANNULA MOUNTS AND RELATED SYSTEMS AND METHODS, filed on 07/19/2024. Claims 1-20 are pending. 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 (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 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. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Anderson et al. (U.S. 8182469). Regarding claim 1, Anderson discloses a surgical cannula, comprising: a bowl portion 300 defining a proximal end opening (as seen in Fig. 11B below); a tube (as shown in Fig. 11B below) extending from a distal end of the bowl portion 300; and an attachment portion (as seen in Fig. 11B below) extending from the bowl portion 300, the attachment portion configured to removably mount the cannula to a cannula mount assembly 246 of a surgical system (as seen in Fig. 9C); where a longitudinal axis extends through the bowl portion 300 and the tube (see Fig. 11B below), where the attachment portion extends from the bowl portion 300 along a radial direction with respect to the longitudinal axis, and where the attachment portion tapers in a direction away from the bowl portion 300 and is configured to be received in a complementary shaped recess of the cannula mount assembly 246 (as seen in Figs. 11B and 18A). Regarding claim 2, Anderson discloses the cannula, where the attachment portion includes two pairs of generally oppositely disposed tapering surfaces (as seen in Fig. 18C), the surfaces of each pair facing away from each other. Regarding claim 3, Anderson discloses the cannula, where the attachment portion comprises surface features configured to mate with complementary surface features of at least one of the cannula mount assembly 246 (as seen in Fig. 18C). Regarding claim 4, Anderson discloses the cannula, where the surface features comprise depressions (as seen in Fig. 11B below). Regarding claim 5, Anderson discloses the cannula, where the depressions are configured to receive clamping arms 404 of the cannula mount assembly 246 (as seen in Figs. 17C-17E). Regarding claim 6, Anderson discloses the cannula, where the attachment portion is configured to move the clamping arms 404 from a biased position (via spring 416) during mounting of the cannula to the cannula mount assembly 246 (see discussion in col. 13, lines 23-27). Regarding claim 7, Anderson discloses the cannula, where in a mounted state of the cannula with the cannula mount assembly 246, the attachment portion is received in an aperture of the cannula mount assembly 246 (see opening formed by surfaces 404 in Fig. 17A). Regarding claim 8, Anderson discloses the cannula, where the attachment portion is configured to move clamping arms 404 of the cannula mount assembly 246 away from each other during insertion of the attachment portion in the aperture of the cannula mount assembly 246 (as implied in col. 13, lines 27-29). Regarding claim 9, Anderson discloses the cannula, where a mounted state of the cannula with the cannula mount assembly 246, the proximal end opening of the bowl portion 300 is accessible to receive a medical instrument 256 for insertion through the cannula (as seen in Fig. 9C). Regarding claim 10, Anderson discloses the cannula, where the attachment portion of the cannula comprises a square frustum shape. The Examiner notes that Anderson fails to explicitly disclose a square frustum shape, but he implies that other shapes can be used in col. 16, lines 46-50. Regarding claim 11, Anderson discloses the cannula, where the attachment portion is configured to removably mount the cannula to a cannula mount assembly 246 at a manipulator arm 242 of the surgical system (as seen in Fig. 9B). Regarding claim 12, Anderson discloses the cannula, where the attachment portion is shaped to be received in a predefined orientation by the cannula mount assembly 246 (as seen in Figs. 17C-17E). Regarding claim 13, Anderson discloses the cannula, where the attachment portion is shaped to be received in an aperture of the cannula mount assembly 246 with a sterile adapter 270a of the cannula mount assembly 246 located surrounding the attachment portion. Regarding claim 14, Anderson discloses an assembly 246 for mounting a cannula to a surgical system (as seen in Fig. 9C), the assembly comprising: a mounting structure at a distal end portion of a manipulator arm 242 of the surgical system (see Fig. 11B); a sterile interface structure 270a configured to matingly engage with the mounting structure (as seen in Figs. 17C-17E), the sterile interface structure 270a defining a recess configured to receive an attachment portion of a cannula in a matingly engaged state of the sterile interface structure 270a with the mounting structure (as seen in Fig. 17B); and a pair of biased clamping arms 404 configured to exert a clamping force on the attachment portion of the cannula in a received state of the attachment portion in the recess (as shown in Fig. 17E). Regarding claim 15, Anderson discloses the assembly, where the recess is oriented to receive the attachment portion of the cannula along a first insertion direction transverse to a second insertion direction of a medical instrument 256 through the cannula (as seen in Figs. 9C and 17E). Regarding claim 16, Anderson discloses the assembly, where end portions of the clamping arms 404 are configured to be received in respective depressions (as shown in Fig. 11B below) in the attachment portion in the received state of the attachment portion in the recess. Regarding claim 17, Anderson discloses the assembly, where the recess is tapered in a direction toward the manipulator arm 242 (as seen in Figs. 17A-17B). Regarding claim 18, Anderson discloses the assembly, where the clamping arms 404 extend at least partially into the recess (see Fig. 17B). Regarding claim 19, Anderson discloses the assembly, where the clamping arms 404 comprise clamping surfaces moveable toward each other to a clamping position and away from each other to a release position (see discussion in col. 13, lines 23-27). Regarding claim 20, Anderson discloses the assembly, where the recess is defined by two pairs of opposing sidewalls (as seen in Fig. 17B). PNG media_image1.png 345 611 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 303 426 media_image2.png Greyscale Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In addition to the reference to Anderson et al. above, the Examiner submits the Notice of References Cited (PTO-892). The cited prior art discloses mounting systems for medical devices. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL D MCDUFFIE whose telephone number is (571)272-3832. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8AM-4:30PM. 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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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. /Michael McDuffie/Examiner, Art Unit 3632 12-Dec-25 /TERRELL L MCKINNON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 19, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 07, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Mar 11, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 31, 2026
Response Filed
May 27, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594892
TWEETER FLUSH, SURFACE, AND STARFISH MOUNT INSTALLATION
1y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12440073
Tube Holder With Retractable Barrier(s)
3y 8m to grant Granted Oct 14, 2025
Patent 12318022
FLAT-PACK LIQUID DISPENSING STATION
3y 10m to grant Granted Jun 03, 2025
Patent 12323088
SOLAR PANEL SUPPORT
1y 10m to grant Granted Jun 03, 2025
Patent 12320083
Cable Barrier With Dual-Column Posts
1y 5m to grant Granted Jun 03, 2025
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
57%
With Interview (-10.6%)
2y 6m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 846 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