Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/895,935

ULTRASONIC DIAGNOSTIC DEVICE AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 25, 2024
Examiner
CATTUNGAL, SANJAY
Art Unit
3798
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Samsung Medison Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
850 granted / 1024 resolved
+13.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
1052
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
§103
36.0%
-4.0% vs TC avg
§102
38.8%
-1.2% vs TC avg
§112
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1024 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 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) 1, 10, 11, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U. S. Publication No. 2022/0344034 to Roundhill et al. in view of U. S. Publication No. 2017/0120080 to Phillips et al. Regarding Claims 1 and 11, Roundhill teaches a control method and system of an ultrasonic diagnostic device, which comprises a display configured to display an ultrasonic image corresponding to a scan area scanned by a probe, including: identifying an object included in the scan area; determining a diagnostic subject based on at least one of the object or a user input received from an input interface (para 038-042 teaches identifying an object in a scan area); determining a scannable time for each object or diagnostic subject (para 046-050 teaches a scannable time for each diagnostic object). Does not expressly teach and displaying an indicator for displaying the scannable time on the display. Phillips teaches displaying an indicator for displaying the scannable time on the display (figs. 4 and 6 elements 430 and 634 teaches an indicator showing how much time is left). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify with an indicator for displaying the scannable time on the display as taught by Phillips, since such a setup would result in an easy determination by the operator for determining how much time is left. Regarding Claims 10 and 20, Roundhill teaches identifying of the object included in the scan area includes being performed by a machine learning model stored in a memory (para 041 and 042 teaches a machine learning model for identifying an object included in a scan area). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-9 and 12-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art of record are U. S. Publication No. 2022/0344034 to Roundhill et al.; U. S. Publication No. 2017/0120080 to Philips et al.; U. S. Publication No. 2017/0086783 to Stefan et al.; and U. S. Publication No. 2022/0087644 to Patil et al. none of the prior art alone or in combination teaches “displaying a first sub-indicator displaying information about the object or the diagnostic subject; displaying a second sub-indicator displaying information about a time at which a scan for the object or the diagnostic subject has been performed; and displaying a third sub-indicator displaying information about a remaining scannable time for the object or the diagnostic subject, and wherein the combination of the second sub-indicator and the third sub-indicator displays the maximum scannable time for each object or diagnostic subject”. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANJAY CATTUNGAL whose telephone number is (571)272-1306. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 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, Keith Raymond can be reached at 571-270-1790. 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. /SANJAY CATTUNGAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 25, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 27, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588893
TABLET ULTRASOUND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582363
Mobile X-Ray Imaging System
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582482
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PREDICTING CORONARY PLAQUE VULNERABILITY FROM PATIENT-SPECIFIC ANATOMIC IMAGE DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582356
INTRAVASCULAR DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575806
POWER REDUCTION OF FETAL ULTRASOUND TRANSDUCERS FOR EXTENDED BATTERY LIFE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
83%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+8.6%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1024 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month