Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/986,664

DILATION INSTRUMENT WITH LATERALLY OFFSET GUIDE FEATURE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Dec 18, 2024
Examiner
LANE, HOLLY JOANNA
Art Unit
3773
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Acclarent Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
83 granted / 104 resolved
+9.8% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
131
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
35.3%
-4.7% vs TC avg
§102
38.9%
-1.1% vs TC avg
§112
23.1%
-16.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 104 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claims 1-11, 14-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Makower et al. (US 20230248234 A1) (hereon referred to as Makower). Regarding claim 1, Makower teaches a medical instrument, comprising a body (6056) and a shaft (6054) assembly extending distally relative to the body, the shaft assembly comprising: an outer sheath (6058); a dilation catheter (6062) assembly comprising a dilator (6048, see Para. [0165], noting that a variety of therapeutic tools may be inserted therein) positioned along a first longitudinal axis (see labelled diagram of Fig. 6Q below); and a first guide feature (6064) extending distally relative to the outer sheath (6058) and defining a second longitudinal axis (see labelled diagram of Fig. 6Q below) that is laterally offset relative to the first longitudinal axis (see Fig. 6Q), the dilation catheter (6062) assembly being translatable along the first guide feature (see Para. [0165]). PNG media_image1.png 422 676 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 2, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 1, further comprising an actuator (6066) that is movable relative to the body (6056) to drive translation of the dilation catheter assembly along the first guide feature (6060, see Para. [0165]). Regarding claim 3, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 1, wherein the dilation catheter assembly (6062) comprises a distal shaft portion (6046), the dilator being positioned on the distal shaft portion (see Fig. 6N), and a proximal shaft portion (6068, see Fig. 6Q), at least part of which is positioned within the outer sheath (see Fig. 6Q). Regarding claim 4, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 3, wherein the proximal shaft portion comprises a first outer diameter, and the distal shaft portion (6046) comprises a second outer diameter that is smaller than the second outer diameter (see Fig. 6N). Regarding claim 5, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 3, wherein the proximal shaft portion (6068) defines a first lumen, and the first guide feature is slidably disposed in the first lumen (see Para. [0165]). Regarding claim 6, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 3, wherein the proximal shaft portion (6068) defines a third longitudinal axis that is laterally offset relative to the second longitudinal axis (see labelled diagram of Fig. 6Q above). Regarding claim 7, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 6, wherein the first longitudinal axis is offset relative to the third longitudinal axis (see labelled diagram of Fig. 6Q above). Regarding claim 8, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 6, wherein the distal shaft portion (6046) defines a fourth longitudinal axis that is laterally offset relative to the third longitudinal axis or coaxial with the third longitudinal axis (see labelled diagram of Fig. 6Q above, noting that distal shaft 6046 is configured to be placed in shaft portion 6062). Regarding claim 9, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 3, wherein the dilation catheter assembly further comprises a hub (6050), the proximal shaft portion (6068) extends proximally relative to the hub (6050), the distal shaft portion (6046) extends distally relative to the hub, and the hub defines a fifth longitudinal axis that is coaxial with the first longitudinal axis (see labelled diagram of Fig. 6Q above, noting that hub 6050 is configured to be placed in shaft portion 6062). Regarding claim 10, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 9, wherein the proximal shaft portion (6046) comprises an outer diameter, and the hub (6050) comprises an outer diameter that is larger than the outer diameter of the proximal shaft portion (note that when expanded, hub member 6050 is larger than its respective sheath, see Fig. 6O). Regarding claim 11, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 9, the distal shaft portion (6046) having an outer diameter, and the hub (6050) comprises an outer diameter that is larger than the outer diameter of the distal shaft portion (see Fig. 6N). Regarding claim 14, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 9, wherein the second longitudinal axis is laterally offset relative to the fifth longitudinal axis (see labelled diagram of Fig. 6Q above). Regarding claim 15, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 1, wherein the shaft assembly further comprises a second guide feature (6060) having a distal end and an indicator element at or near the distal end, the indicator element comprising one or more of a position sensor or an illumination source (see Para. [0165]). Regarding claim 16, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 15, wherein the second guide feature (6060) is disposed in and translatable relative to the dilation catheter assembly (see Para. [0165]). Regarding claim 17, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 16, wherein the second guide feature (6060) defines a sixth longitudinal axis (aligned with the third) that is laterally offset relative to the first longitudinal axis (see labelled diagram of Fig. 6Q above). Regarding claim 19, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 1, wherein the dilator comprises a balloon (6050) configured to: transition between a non-inflated state and an inflated state (see Para. [0163]); be spaced away from the first guide feature when the balloon is in the non-inflated state (see Para. [0163]); engage the first guide feature when the balloon is in the inflated state (see Para. [0163]); and deform around the guide feature when the balloon is in the inflated state (see Para. [0163]). Regarding claim 20, Makower teaches the medical instrument of Claim 1, wherein the first guide feature (6064) is fixedly secured relative to the outer sheath (6058; see Para. [0165]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 12, 13, and 18 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 claims in the instant application have not been rejected using prior art because no references, or reasonable combination thereof, could be found which disclose, or suggest, the claimed combination of limitations recited in dependent claims 12, 13, 18. In particular, none of the cited references teach or suggest the proximal shaft portion (6046) and the distal shaft portion (6068) define a single, continuous tubular structure that passes through the hub, the first guide feature is slidably disposed in the hub, and wherein the first guide feature comprises a guide rail, at least a distal portion of which comprises a malleable region, as required by claims 12, 13, and 18. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOLLY J LANE whose telephone number is (703)756-4702. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm. 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, Eduardo Robert can be reached at 571-272-4719. 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. /H.J.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3773 /EDUARDO C ROBERT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3773
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 18, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582305
LIGHTED DISPOSABLE SPECULUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575723
LIGHTED BOUGIE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575866
INTRAMEDULLARY IMPLANT FOR TRANSVERSE OSTEOTOMY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569236
DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR INSERTING AND REMOVING SURGICAL WIRES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564429
ADJUSTABLE IMPLANT, SYSTEM AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
80%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+16.9%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 104 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