Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 18/781,109

ARTICULABLE OTOLOGIC SUCTION TUBE AND SUCTION TUBE SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 23, 2024
Priority
Aug 03, 2023 — provisional 63/517,387
Examiner
HALL, DEANNA K
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Alcon Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 1m
Est. Remaining
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allowance Rate
878 granted / 1161 resolved
+15.6% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
1210
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
49.6%
+9.6% vs TC avg
§102
32.1%
-7.9% vs TC avg
§112
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1161 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/7/24;9/17/24 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97(b). Accordingly, the IDSs are 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 (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. Claims 1-3, 5-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Palushi et al. (US 2021/0386274) (“Palushi”). Palushi discloses: an instrument 400 (Fig. 1A) comprising: a handle 402 configured to be held by a hand of a surgeon; a cannula 422 extending outwardly from the handle and mounted to the handle; an articulated tube 424 at least partially positioned within the cannula and at least partially extending outwardly from a distal end of the cannula; and an actuator 432 configured to articulate the articulated tube relative to the cannula to position a distal end of the articulated tube at a plurality of positions within a three-dimensional volume. at least one of the articulated tube or the cannula is rotatably mounted to the cannula. [0032,0040] a control structure mounted to the handle and configured to rotate the at least one of the articulated tube or the cannula in response to interaction with the control structure. [0032-0034] the articulated tube has a curved shape when undeformed; and the actuator is configured to control an amount of the articulated tube extending outwardly from the distal end of the cannula. Fig. 2 the actuator is a slider 406 mounted to the handle. the actuator is configured to move the cannula relative to the articulated tube. [0026-0027,0040] actuator is configured to move the articulated tube relative to the cannula. [0026-0027,0040] the actuator is at least one of a push rod and a cable extending within the articulated tube and coupled to a control structure. [0032-0033,0038] the articulated tube has one or more regions having mechanical properties (Figs. 3A,B) [0036] causing the articulated tube to have a primary bending plane such that a first force required to bend the articulated tube in a primary direction in the primary bending plane is less than 50 percent of a second force required to bend the articulated tube in a plane perpendicular to the primary bending plane and intersecting a center line of the articulated tube. the one or more regions include one or more slots distributed along the articulated tube. Figs. 3A,B further comprising a vacuum source 418 coupled to the articulated tube. further comprising one or more medical instruments 412 configured to insert through the articulated tube, the one or more medical instruments selected from the group consisting of: a tube for supplying vacuum pressure; a tube for providing infusion fluid; a tube for infusing at least one of medication, gel, foam, or viscoelastic material; a tube for conducting pressurized gas; one or more optical fibers; a cable coupled to an ultrasonic imaging transducer; and a waveguide for conducting electromagnetic waves for performing diathermy. [0028,0044-0046] the one or more medical instruments comprise a plurality of medical instruments, the otologic instrument further comprising an instrument housing comprising a plurality of receptacles each configured to receive one or more of the plurality of medical instruments, the instrument housing configured to selectively guide instruments of the plurality of medical instruments into the articulated tube. Fig. 5 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palushi in view of Weitzman et al. (US 2019/0374236) (“Weitzman”). Palushi discloses the invention as substantially claimed but does not directly disclose the cannula is mounted to a first portion of the handle, the handle including a second portion that is at least one of offset and angled with respect to the first portion. Weitzman, in the analogous art, teaches this offset handle, see Fig. 2A,B. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handle of Palushi with the handle as taught by Weitzman for better visualization of the work area (Weitzman [0010]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEANNA K HALL whose telephone number is (571)272-2819. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am- 4:30pm EST. 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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached at 571-272-4965. 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. /DEANNA K HALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 23, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12702764
DRUG DELIVERY DEVICE ASSEMBLY AND ACCESSORY FOR DRUG DELIVERY DEVICE
3y 3m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12691227
DEVICES AND METHODS FOR PRECISION DOSE DELIVERY
4y 7m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12685843
AMPLATZ SHEATH AND DILATION SYSTEM
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12685830
MEDICAL GAS DUCTS FOR MEDICAL GAS EVACUATION DEVICES AND RELATED SYSTEMS AND METHODS
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12685819
INFUSION DEVICES AND RELATED MEAL BOLUS ADJUSTMENT METHODS
3y 1m to grant Granted Jul 21, 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
76%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+15.7%)
3y 2m (~1y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1161 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