Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 05, 2026
Application No. 18/914,810

TABLET ULTRASOUND SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Oct 14, 2024
Priority
Mar 26, 2012 — provisional 61/615,627 +3 more
Examiner
CATTUNGAL, SANJAY
Art Unit
3798
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Teratech Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 4m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allowance Rate
863 granted / 1036 resolved
+13.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
1058
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
49.1%
+9.1% vs TC avg
§102
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
§112
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1036 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1-29 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-27 of U.S. Patent No. 12,115,023 although the claims are not identical, both patent and application claim a tablet ultrasound system with gesture inputs. Claims 1-29 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-46 of U.S. Patent No. 10,667,790 although the claims are not identical, both patent and application claim a tablet ultrasound system with gesture inputs. Claims 1-29 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-44 of U.S. Patent No. 9,877,699 although the claims are not identical, both patent and application claim a tablet ultrasound system with gesture inputs. Claims 1-29 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 11,179,138 although the claims are not identical, both patent and application claim a tablet ultrasound system with gesture inputs. 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 on 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 3793
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 14, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12653504
TABLET ULTRASOUND SYSTEM
4y 0m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12653452
SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND BONE MAPPER DEVICES FOR REAL-TIME MAPPING AND ANALYSIS OF BONE TISSUE
3y 8m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12659197
ULTRASOUND BEAM QUALITY TEST APPARATUS AND METHODS
2y 7m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12642506
PRESET OPTIMIZATION QUICK GUIDE FOR IMPROVED IMAGE QUALITY
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12642484
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING A SUBJECT'S MUSCLE FUEL LEVEL, MUSCLE FUEL RATING, AND MUSCLE ENERGY STATUS
1y 4m to grant Granted Jun 02, 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
83%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+11.3%)
3y 1m (~1y 4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1036 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