Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/952,910

Ultrasound-Guided Procedures

Non-Final OA §101§DP
Filed
Nov 19, 2024
Examiner
ALDARRAJI, ZAINAB MOHAMMED
Art Unit
3797
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Agitated Solutions Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
81 granted / 121 resolved
-3.1% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
150
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
§103
50.2%
+10.2% vs TC avg
§102
20.4%
-19.6% vs TC avg
§112
21.6%
-18.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 121 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §DP
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 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 11 recites the limitation “a portion of the quantity or additional quantity through the medical device” should read “a portion of the quantity or additional quantity of biocompatible fluid through the medical device”. Appropriate correction is required. Double Patenting A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-10 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12,144,563. This is a statutory double patenting rejection. Co-pending application U.S. Patent No. 12,144,563 Claim 1: A method of performing an ultrasound-guided procedure, the method comprising: providing a medical device, the medical device comprising (i) a therapeutic distal tip configured to percutaneously alter internal tissue or bone at a treatment site of a patient; (ii) a source of biocompatible fluid; and (iii) a delivery system configured to selectively deliver a quantity of the biocompatible fluid, with echogenic microbubbles therein, to an area external and adjacent to the therapeutic distal tip; subcutaneously advancing the therapeutic distal tip toward the treatment site; delivering a quantity of biocompatible fluid with echogenic microbubbles to the area; observing, via ultrasound, an anatomic structure proximate the treatment site and dispersion of the echogenic microbubbles at the area; and based on a nature and location of the dispersion, steering the therapeutic distal tip relative to the anatomic structure, and continuing to advance the therapeutic distal tip toward the treatment site. Claim 1: A method of performing an ultrasound-guided procedure, the method comprising: providing a medical device, the medical device comprising (i) a therapeutic distal tip configured to percutaneously alter internal tissue or bone at a treatment site of a patient; (ii) a source of biocompatible fluid; and (iii) a delivery system configured to selectively deliver a quantity of the biocompatible fluid, with echogenic microbubbles therein, to an area external and adjacent to the therapeutic distal tip; subcutaneously advancing the therapeutic distal tip toward the treatment site; delivering a quantity of biocompatible fluid with echogenic microbubbles to the area; observing, via ultrasound, an anatomic structure proximate the treatment site and dispersion of the echogenic microbubbles at the area; and based on a nature and location of the dispersion, steering the therapeutic distal tip relative to the anatomic structure, and continuing to advance the therapeutic distal tip toward the treatment site. Claim 2: The method of claim 1, wherein the therapeutic distal tip comprises one of a blade, a trochar, a grinding tip, a source of ultrasonic energy, a source of radio frequency energy, and a source of pressurized fluid. Claim 2: The method of claim 1, wherein the therapeutic distal tip comprises one of a blade, a trochar, a grinding tip, a source of ultrasonic energy, a source of radio frequency energy, and a source of pressurized fluid. Claim 3: The method of claim 1, wherein the treatment site comprises a finger, a wrist, an elbow, a shoulder, a back, a hip, a knee, an ankle, a foot, a toe, or a joint. Claim 3: The method of claim 1, wherein the treatment site comprises a finger, a wrist, an elbow, a shoulder, a back, a hip, a knee, an ankle, a foot, a toe, or a joint. Claim 4: The method of claim 1, wherein the anatomic structure comprises a ligament, a tendon, a bone, a band of muscle, a portion of fat, a nerve, a vessel, a duct, a lymph node or a gland. Claim 4: The method of claim 1, wherein the anatomic structure comprises a ligament, a tendon, a bone, a band of muscle, a portion of fat, a nerve, a vessel, a duct, a lymph node or a gland. Claim 5: The method of claim 1, wherein steering the therapeutic distal tip relative to the anatomic structure comprises steering the therapeutic distal tip away from a blood vessel or a nerve. Claim 5: The method of claim 1, wherein steering the therapeutic distal tip relative to the anatomic structure comprises steering the therapeutic distal tip away from a blood vessel or a nerve. Claim 6: The method of claim 1, wherein observing the dispersion of the echogenic microbubbles comprises observing a lateral dispersion of the echogenic microbubbles parallel to a plane of tissue. Claim 6: The method of claim 1, wherein observing the dispersion of the echogenic microbubbles comprises observing a lateral dispersion of the echogenic microbubbles parallel to a plane of tissue. Claim 7: The method of claim 6, wherein steering the therapeutic distal tip comprises steering the therapeutic distal tip along the plane of tissue. Claim 7: The method of claim 6, wherein steering the therapeutic distal tip comprises steering the therapeutic distal tip along the plane of tissue. Claim 8: The method of claim 6, wherein steering the therapeutic distal tip comprises steering the therapeutic distal tip through the plane of tissue. Claim 8: The method of claim 6, wherein steering the therapeutic distal tip comprises steering the therapeutic distal tip through the plane of tissue. Claim 9: The method of claim 6, further comprising delivering an additional quantity of biocompatible fluid to hydrodissect the plane of tissue from other tissue adjacent the plane. Claim 9: The method of claim 6, further comprising delivering an additional quantity of biocompatible fluid to hydrodissect the plane of tissue from other tissue adjacent the plane. Claim 10: The method of claim 1, wherein observing the dispersion of the echogenic microbubbles comprises observing a diffuse dispersion of echogenic microbubbles. Claim 10: The method of claim 1, wherein observing the dispersion of the echogenic microbubbles comprises observing a diffuse dispersion of echogenic microbubbles. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claim 11 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,144,563. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are obvious variation of each other. Co-pending application U.S. Patent No. 12,144,563 Claim 11: The method of claim 1, further comprising evacuating a portion of the quantity or additional quantity through the medical device. Claim 11: The method of claim 9, further comprising evacuating a portion of the quantity or additional quantity of biocompatible fluid through the medical device. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAINAB M ALDARRAJI whose telephone number is (571)272-8726. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday7AM-5PM 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, Carey Michael can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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. /ZAINAB MOHAMMED ALDARRAJI/ Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 19, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599331
Hyperspectral Image-Guided Ocular Imager for Alzheimer's Disease Pathologies
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594038
ESTIMATION OF CONTACT FORCE OF CATHETER EXPANDABLE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588887
MEDICAL DEVICE POSITION SENSING COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582479
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATIC PLANNING OF A MINIMALLY INVASIVE THERMAL ABLATION AND METHOD FOR TRAINING A NEURAL NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569189
DEVICE, METHOD AND COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR DETERMINING SLEEP EVENT USING RADAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
67%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+16.1%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 121 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