Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/805,990

FILAMENTARY DEVICES FOR TREATMENT OF VASCULAR DEFECTS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 15, 2024
Examiner
LAUER, CHRISTINA C
Art Unit
3771
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Microvention Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 11m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
451 granted / 659 resolved
-1.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
55 currently pending
Career history
714
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
50.4%
+10.4% vs TC avg
§102
23.3%
-16.7% vs TC avg
§112
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 659 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 . Claim Objections Claim 26 is objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein the each of the plurality of stiffening elements” should be changed to “wherein each of the plurality of stiffening elements”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim(s) 21-24, 26-29, 31-35 and 37-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hewitt et al. US 2016/0249934. Regarding claim 21, Hewitt et al. discloses a device for treatment of a patient's cerebral aneurysm, comprising: a resilient self-expanding permeable shell (1200 or 1300, figures 55, 56) including a radially constrained elongated state configured for delivery within a catheter lumen (paragraph 0292, the mesh device 1200, 1300 may be radially constrained into a smaller diameter, and fit through a smaller microcatheter lumen), an expanded state with a longitudinally shortened configuration relative to the radially constrained state (once expanded from catheter to form shell, expands outward, an expanded state with a globular and longitudinally shortened configuration relative to the radially constrained state, figures 55, 56, paragraph 0247), and a plurality of elongate filaments that are woven together to form a mesh and define a cavity of the permeable shell (figures 55, 56, filaments 1005, paragraph 0294, 0297), wherein the permeable shell comprises a proximal (adjacent the aneurysm neck, 1208 or 1308, figures 55, 56), and a distal portion (1210 or 1310, figures 55, 56), and a plurality of stiffening elements associated with the proximal portion of the permeable shell (paragraph 0294, figures 57, 58, smaller and medium wires may be included to provide a higher density portion adjacent the neck of the aneurysm, or the proximal portion of the shell, the medium wires may supply strength, stiffness and radiopacity; Examiner notes the wires are wound throughout the shell, therefore, would also be considered to be associated with at least the proximal portion), wherein the plurality of stiffening elements comprise a plurality of DFT wires (paragraph 0294, filaments may be made from platinum or platinum alloy, or may be drawn filled tubes (DFT)). Regarding claim 22, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the plurality of elongate filaments has a first thickness and the plurality of stiffening elements has a second thickness (paragraph 0294, elongate filaments may include larger diameter wires or smaller diameter wires, and the DFT filaments or stiffening elements may comprise a medium diameter). Regarding claim 23, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the second thickness is greater than the first thickness (paragraph 0294, elongate filaments may include smaller diameter wires around 0.0005 inches to 0.001 inches for the first thickness, and the DFT filaments or stiffening elements may comprise a medium diameter around 0.00075 inches and 0.00125 inches for the second thickness, the second thickness being greater). Regarding claim 24, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the second thickness is less than the first thickness (paragraph 0294, elongate filaments may include larger diameter wires around 0.001 inches to 0.002 inches for the first thickness, and the DFT filaments or stiffening elements may comprise a medium diameter around 0.00075 inches and 0.00125 inches for the second thickness, the second thickness being less). Regarding claim 26, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the each of the plurality of stiffening elements is interwound in the mesh in the proximal portion the resilient permeable shell (figures 5, 7; paragraph 0294, filaments including DFT filaments are interwound within the mesh therefore, in at least the proximal portion). Regarding claim 27, Hewitt et al. discloses the device essentially as claimed, wherein the plurality of stiffening elements are incorporated into at least about 40% to about 100% of the proximal portion of the permeable shell (paragraph 0010, 0238; shell includes at least 40% composite filaments relative to a total number of filaments, the composite filaments being the stiffening elements, such as the DFT wires). Examiner notes the stiffening elements are incorporated throughout the shell, therefore, would also be considered to be associated with at least the proximal portion. Regarding claim 28, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the proximal portion is about 1/3 to about 1/4 of a length of an expanded state of the permeable shell (Examiner notes that the proximal portion may be considered 1/3 to about 1/4 of a length of the expanded state of the permeable shell, as the proximal portion may be considered any proximal segment of the whole shell). Regarding claim 29, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the proximal portion extends from a proximal end of the permeable shell to about 40% or less of a total length of an expanded state of the permeable shell (Examiner notes that the proximal portion may be considered extends from a proximal end of the permeable shell to about 40% or less of a total length of an expanded state of the permeable shell, as the proximal portion may be considered any proximal segment of the whole shell). Regarding claim 31, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein each of the plurality of stiffening elements are coated with a hydrogel (paragraph 0221, coating embodiments may be disposed on the filaments, active materials such as a hydrogel may be attached or otherwise incorporated into the shell). Regarding claim 32, Hewitt et al. discloses a method of treating method for treating an aneurysm having an interior cavity and a neck (for example, aneurysm 160 shown in figure 18), comprising the steps of: advancing an implant (for example, 1200 or 1300, figures 55, 56) in a microcatheter to a region of interest in an artery (paragraph 0013, implant is constrained within a microcatheter to a region of interest within a cerebral artery), wherein the implant comprises a resilient self-expanding permeable shell including a radially constrained elongated state configured for delivery within a catheter lumen (paragraph 0010 and 0247), an expanded state with a longitudinally shortened configuration relative to the radially constrained state, and a plurality of elongate filaments that are woven together to form a mesh and define a cavity of the permeable shell (once expanded from catheter to form shell, expands outward, an expanded state with a globular and longitudinally shortened configuration relative to the radially constrained state, figures 55, 56, paragraph 0247), wherein the permeable shell comprises a proximal portion (adjacent the aneurysm neck, 1208 or 1308, figures 55, 56), and a distal portion (1210 or 1310, figures 55, 56), and a plurality of stiffening elements associated with the proximal portion of the permeable shell (paragraph 0294, figures 57, 58, smaller and medium wires may be included to provide a higher density portion adjacent the neck of the aneurysm, or the proximal portion of the shell, the medium wires may supply strength, stiffness and radiopacity; Examiner notes the wires are wound throughout the shell, therefore, would also be considered to be associated with at least the proximal portion), wherein the plurality of stiffening elements comprise a plurality of DFT wires (paragraph 0294, filaments may be made from platinum or platinum alloy, or may be drawn filled tubes (DFT)), deploying the implant within the aneurysm (figures 24-26, implant shown after deployed into an aneurysm), wherein the permeable shell expands to the expanded state in the interior cavity of the aneurysm (figures 24-26); and withdrawing the microcatheter from the region of interest after deploying the implant (paragraph 0013, microcatheter is withdrawn from the region of interest after deploying the implant). Regarding claim 33, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the plurality of elongate filaments has a first thickness and the plurality of stiffening elements has a second thickness (paragraph 0294, elongate filaments may include larger diameter wires or smaller diameter wires, and the DFT filaments or stiffening elements may comprise a medium diameter). Regarding claim 34, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the second thickness is greater than the first thickness (paragraph 0294, elongate filaments may include smaller diameter wires around 0.0005 inches to 0.001 inches for the first thickness, and the DFT filaments or stiffening elements may comprise a medium diameter around 0.00075 inches and 0.00125 inches for the second thickness, the second thickness being greater). Regarding claim 35, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the second thickness is less than the first thickness (paragraph 0294, elongate filaments may include larger diameter wires around 0.001 inches to 0.002 inches for the first thickness, and the DFT filaments or stiffening elements may comprise a medium diameter around 0.00075 inches and 0.00125 inches for the second thickness, the second thickness being less). Regarding claim 37, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the each of the plurality of stiffening elements is interwound in the mesh in the proximal portion the resilient permeable shell (figures 5, 7; paragraph 0294, filaments including DFT filaments are interwound within the mesh therefore, in at least the proximal portion). Regarding claim 38, Hewitt et al. discloses the device essentially as claimed, wherein the plurality of stiffening elements are incorporated into at least about 40% to about 100% of the proximal portion of the permeable shell (paragraph 0010, 0238; shell includes at least 40% composite filaments relative to a total number of filaments, the composite filaments being the stiffening elements, such as the DFT wires). Examiner notes the stiffening elements are incorporated throughout the shell, therefore, would also be considered to be associated with at least the proximal portion. Regarding claim 39, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the proximal portion extends from a proximal end of the permeable shell to about 40% or less of a total length of an expanded state of the permeable shell (Examiner notes that the proximal portion may be considered extends from a proximal end of the permeable shell to about 40% or less of a total length of an expanded state of the permeable shell, as the proximal portion may be considered any proximal segment of the whole shell). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim(s) 25, 30, 36, and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hewitt et al. US 2016/0249934. Regarding claims 25 and 36, Hewitt et al. discloses wherein the plurality of elongate filaments has a first thickness and the stiffening elements have a second thickness (paragraph 0018), and the elongate filaments may have a mixture of nitinol wires and drawn filled tubes (paragraph 0018), the dimension of the elongate filaments may have a dimension about .0005 inches to .002 inches or alternatively between about .00075 to .00125 inches, but fails to explicitly disclose the second thickness is equal to the first thickness. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a second thickness is equal to a first thickness, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Examiner notes the dimension of both types of filaments may be within the ranges of about .0005 inches to .002 inches or alternatively between about .00075 to .00125 inches, and may be equal or different dimensions as required for the desired characteristics of the shell. Regarding claims 30, and 40, Hewitt et al. discloses the device essentially as claimed, but fails to disclose wherein the plurality of stiffening elements comprise a number of stiffening elements selected from the group consisting of between about 2 and about 10, about 3 and about 12, about 4 and about 8, about 5 and about 10, about 5 and about 15, about 2 and about 30, and about 2 and about 25. However, Hewitt et al. discloses the stiffening element filaments may be included in variable percentages (in relation to the total number of filaments) to in order to achieve a specific stiffness characteristic. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Hewitt et al. with a plurality of stiffening elements comprise a number of stiffening elements selected from the group consisting of between about 2 and about 10, about 3 and about 12, about 4 and about 8, about 5 and about 10, about 5 and about 15, about 2 and about 30, and about 2 and about 25, as taught by Hewitt et al. and known in the art to vary the number of stiffening elements within the shell to achieve a specific stiffness characteristic as desired. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA C LAUER whose telephone number is (571)270-5418. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00 AM-4:00 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, Darwin Erezo can be reached at (571) 272-4695. 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. /CHRISTINA C LAUER/Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 15, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589488
SURGICAL ROBOT ARM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582400
SYSTEMS, DEVICES, AND METHODS FOR ENDOSCOPE OR LAPAROSCOPE MAGNETIC NAVIGATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12533134
ANASTOMOSIS DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12508031
Neurovascular Flow Diverter and Delivery Systems
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12502177
Systems and Methods for Customizable Flow Diverter Implants
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
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
68%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+14.4%)
3y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 659 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