Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/920,939

Janjua Toroidal (JAN-T) Intrasaccular Aneurysm Occlusion Device

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 20, 2024
Examiner
LAUER, CHRISTINA C
Art Unit
3771
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Species O, Figure 31 in the reply filed on 2/12/26 is acknowledged. Claims 1-9, 15 and 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/12/26. 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) 10, 11, 13, 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cox et al. US 2012/0283768. Regarding claim 10, Cox et al. discloses wherein an intrasaccular aneurysm occlusion device comprising: a torus-section-shaped neck bridge (see annotated figure 4 or 39 below, or other similar additional embodiments such as figure 40B), lower half a torus shape is formed within portion adjacent the aneurysm neck; Examiner notes any section of the torus shape may be used) which is configured to be inserted into an aneurysm sac and then expanded to cover the neck of the aneurysm (figures 25, 26, 29), wherein the shape of the neck bridge can be modeled by revolving a section of a convex shape in three-dimensional space around an axis of revolution which is coplanar with the convex shape (section of convex shape forming a semi circle, for example, see annotated figure 4 or 39 below), wherein a convex shape diameter is the widest diameter of the convex shape which is perpendicular to the axis of revolution, wherein a revolution diameter is the widest diameter of the circle formed by the path of the center of the convex shape as the convex shape is revolved in three-dimensional space, and wherein the revolution diameter is greater than the convex shape diameter (semi-circle shape may be revolved PNG media_image1.png 406 636 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 577 704 media_image2.png Greyscale around the center of the neck bridge, as it is symmetrical and shown in figures 4 or 39 below). Regarding claim 11, Cox discloses wherein the device further comprises one or more embolic members or embolic material which is inserted into the aneurysm sac through a central opening in the neck bridge (figure 53, embolic material comprising shells 436; Examiner notes a central opening does not require to be within the center of the device, but “central” may be considered “situated at, in, or near the center” as defined by Merriam Webster Online Dictionary; additionally the shells may be tilted within the aneurysm, for example, figure 27, thereby having a central opening being central to the aneurysm neck and therefore the neck bridge for insertion of a catheter and additional embolic members or shells, paragraph 0253). Regarding claim 13, 14, and 16, Marchand et al. discloses wherein the section of a convex shape is a semi-circle, wherein the section of a convex shape is the perimeter of a circle with a gap within a portion between 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock coordinates, wherein the section of a convex shape is a section of an ellipse with a longitudinal axis which is perpendicular to the axis of revolution (see annotated figures 4, 39 below, dotted line showing where there may be a “gap” between coordinates, longitudinal axis of a circle or ellipse, semi circle or section of ellipse annotated within device with a longitudinal axis, axis extending between 6 o’clock and 12 o’ clock). PNG media_image5.png 464 621 media_image5.png Greyscale Claim(s) 10, 11, 13, 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Divino et al. US 10,327,781. Regarding claim 10, Divino et al. discloses wherein an intrasaccular aneurysm occlusion device comprising: a torus-section-shaped neck bridge (column 33, lines 21-25, placed across aneurysm neck, lower half a torus shape is formed within portion adjacent the aneurysm neck; Examiner notes any section of the torus shape may be used) which is configured to be inserted into an aneurysm sac and then expanded to cover the neck of the aneurysm (column 33, lines 21-25), wherein the shape of the neck bridge can be modeled by revolving a section of a convex shape in three-dimensional space around an axis of revolution which is coplanar with the convex shape (see annotated figure 14 below), wherein a convex shape diameter is the widest diameter of the convex shape which is perpendicular to the axis of revolution (see annotated figure 14 below), wherein a revolution diameter is the widest diameter of the circle formed by the path of the center of the convex shape as the convex shape is revolved in three-dimensional space, and wherein the revolution diameter is greater than the convex shape diameter (figure 14, revolution diameter may be larger as the section of the convex shape is within one half of the torus section, and does not extend to the center opening 156b). PNG media_image6.png 230 352 media_image6.png Greyscale Regarding claim 11, Divino et al. discloses wherein the device further comprises one or more embolic members or embolic material which is inserted into the aneurysm sac through a central opening in the neck bridge (aperture 156b, figure 14; column 9-15). Regarding claims 13, 14 and 16, Divino et al. discloses wherein the section of a convex shape is a semi-circle, wherein the section of a convex shape is the perimeter of a circle with a gap within a portion between 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock coordinates, and wherein the section of a convex shape is a section of an ellipse with a longitudinal axis which is perpendicular to the axis of revolution (see annotated figure 14 below, semi circle or section of ellipse annotated within device with a longitudinal axis, axis extending between 6 o’clock and 12 o’ clock, being perpendicular to the revolution around the device as revolves around a circle). PNG media_image7.png 252 397 media_image7.png Greyscale 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) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cox et al. US 2012/0283768. Regarding claim 12, Cox et al. discloses a variety of shapes (for example, figures 4, 39, 40A) wherein the revolution diameter greater than the convex shape diameter, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the revolution diameter is 5% to 30% greater than the convex shape diameter. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide a convex shape having a revolution diameter, the revolution diameter is 5% to 30% greater than the convex shape diameter since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the form or shape of a component. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976). Examiner further notes that the convex shape may be any section of a convex shape may be used, resulting in the claimed dimensions. Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Divino et al. US 10327781. Regarding claim 12, Divino et al. discloses wherein the revolution diameter greater than the convex shape diameter, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the revolution diameter is 5% to 30% greater than the convex shape diameter. Divino et al. discloses neck bridge may be formed from a variety of different shapes (column 32, lines 18-29, column 33, lines 39-41), but fails to explicitly disclose the revolution diameter is 5% to 30% greater than the convex shape diameter. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide a convex shape having a revolution diameter, the revolution diameter is 5% to 30% greater than the convex shape diameter since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the form or shape of a component. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976). Examiner further notes that the convex shape may be any section of a convex shape may be used, resulting in the claimed dimensions. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Gorochow et al. US 10,653,425 discloses a similar aneurysm neck bridge have a torus section shaped neck bridge that may be modeled by a convex shape (for example, figure 1A). 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

Oct 20, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 07, 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 for Full Analysis

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month