Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/200,626

METHODS FOR REMOVING CLOT MATERIAL FROM A PATIENT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 06, 2025
Examiner
LOUIS, RICHARD G
Art Unit
3771
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Inquis Medical Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
699 granted / 939 resolved
+4.4% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
988
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
49.7%
+9.7% vs TC avg
§102
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
§112
15.6%
-24.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 939 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Detailed Action This is in response to the non-provisional application filed 05/06/2025. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/10/2026 has been entered. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 11, 13-16, 18, 19, 24, 29-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication Number 2021/0316127 (Beck et al.) in view, U.S. Patent Publication Number 2024/0245414 (Calderon et al.) Regarding claims 1, 11, 13-15 Beck discloses as shown in Figures 6, 7A, 7B, a method of clot removal, the method comprising: positioning an aspiration catheter (aspiration catheter 12, see paragraph [0100]) adjacent to a first clot material within a patient; actuating a pressure source one or more times by trigger a control (flow control 76, see paragraph [0100]), wherein each actuation of the pressure source: aspirates the first clot material and blood, filters the first clot material from the blood, and drives the filtered blood into a collection chamber (chamber within pump, syringe or reservoir, see paragraphs [0097], [0098]) wherein actuating the pressure source comprises (a) aspirating blooding and clot from the aspiration catheter and (b) collecting filtered blood in a reservoir in one step and driving filtered blood from the reservoir to the collection chamber in another step, wherein each actuation comprises a first stroke and a second stroke, wherein the first stroke comprises a first movement of a piston of the pressure source and wherein the second stroke comprises a return movement of the piston of the pressure source, wherein the first stroke comprises a negative pressure stroke and the second stroke comprises a positive pressure stroke, wherein the first stroke results in a first flow rate by which clot material is aspirated with blood and wherein the second stroke results in a second flow rate by which filtered blood is driven into the collection chamber. Beck et al. fails to disclose wherein the first flow rate is greater than the second flow rate, wherein aspirating and filtering the blood are performed at a first flow rate and driving the filtered blood to the collection chamber is performed at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate. Calderon et al., from a related filed of endeavor teaches a similar method as shown in Figure 1, a first stroke that aspirates a predetermined volume of the first clot material and blood at a first flow rate, and a second stroke that drives the clot material and blood towards a filter that filters the first clot material from the blood, and drives the filtered blood into towards a collection chamber a second flow rate is slower than the first flow rate, where actuation the pressure source is automatically actuated by a controller (controller 108, see paragraph [0152]) for the purpose of creating momentum during aspiration and ensuring the blood is properly during the second stroke, wherein the controller is further programmed to aspirate and filter the blood at a first flow rate and drive the filtered blood to the collection chamber at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate. See paragraph [0272]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Beck et al. by modifying the first flow rate is greater than the second flow rate, wherein aspirating and filtering the blood are performed at a first flow rate and driving the filtered blood to the collection chamber is performed at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate in order to create momentum during aspiration and ensuring the blood is properly during the second stroke. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Beck et al. to include the controller taught by Calderon et al. such that wherein the controller is further programmed to aspirate and filter the blood at a first flow rate and drive the filtered blood to the collection chamber at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate in order to control the first and second stroke automatically and remotely. So modified, the Office interprets Beck et al. in view of Skujins and Calderon as disclosing wherein the first stroke results in a first flow rate by which clot material is aspirated with blood and wherein the second stroke results in a second flow rate by which filtered blood is driven into the collection chamber. So modified, the Office interprets Beck et al. in view of Skujins and Calderon as disclosing wherein the first flow rate is greater than the second flow rate, wherein aspirating and filtering the blood are performed at a first flow rate and driving the filtered blood to the collection chamber is performed at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate. Regarding claims 16, 18, 19 Beck discloses as shown in Figures 6, 7A, 7B, a method of clot removal, the method comprising: positioning an aspiration catheter (aspiration catheter 12, see paragraph [0100]) adjacent to a first clot material within a patient; actuating a control to trigger a pressure source, wherein each actuation causes the pressure source to: aspirate the first clot material, filter the first clot material from blood, and drive filtered blood to the a collection chamber (chamber within pump, syringe or reservoir), wherein the first stroke comprises a negative pressure stroke and the second stroke comprises a positive pressure stroke, wherein the first stroke results in a first flow rate by which clot material is aspirated with blood and wherein the second stroke results in a second flow rate by which filtered blood is driven to the collection chamber. see paragraphs [0097], [0098]). Calderon et al., from a related filed of endeavor teaches a similar method as shown in Figure 1, a first stroke that aspirates a predetermined volume of the first clot material and blood at a first flow rate, and a second stroke that drives the clot material and blood towards a filter that filters the first clot material from the blood, and drives the filtered blood into towards a collection chamber a second flow rate is slower than the first flow rate, where actuation the pressure source is automatically actuated by a controller (controller 108, see paragraph [0152]) for the purpose of creating momentum during aspiration and ensuring the blood is properly during the second stroke, wherein the controller is further programmed to aspirate and filter the blood at a first flow rate and drive the filtered blood to the collection chamber at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate. See paragraph [0272]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Beck et al. by modifying the first flow rate is greater than the second flow rate, wherein aspirating and filtering the blood are performed at a first flow rate and driving the filtered blood to the collection chamber is performed at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate in order to create momentum during aspiration and ensuring the blood is properly during the second stroke. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Beck et al. to include the controller taught by Calderon et al. such that wherein the controller is further programmed to aspirate and filter the blood at a first flow rate and drive the filtered blood to the collection chamber at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate in order to control the first and second stroke automatically and remotely. So modified, the Office interprets Beck et al. in view of Skujins and Calderon as disclosing wherein the first stroke results in a first flow rate by which clot material is aspirated with blood and wherein the second stroke results in a second flow rate by which filtered blood is driven into the collection chamber. So modified, the Office interprets Beck et al. in view of Skujins and Calderon as disclosing wherein the first flow rate is greater than the second flow rate, wherein aspirating and filtering the blood are performed at a first flow rate and driving the filtered blood to the collection chamber is performed at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate. Regarding claim 24, Beck et al. discloses as shown in Figures 6, 7A, 7B a method of clot removal, the method comprising: positioning an aspiration catheter adjacent to a first clot material within a patient; actuating a control to trigger a pressure source, wherein each actuation causes the pressure source to generate a negative pressure stroke that aspirates the first clot material and a positive pressure stroke that drives filtered blood to a collection chamber (chamber within pump, syringe or reservoir, see paragraphs [0097], [0098]), wherein the blood is filtered during the negative pressure stroke and/or the positive pressure stroke. Beck et al. fails to disclose repositioning the aspiration catheter to be adjacent to a second clot material within the patient; and actuating the control to trigger the pressure source, wherein each actuation causes the pressure source to generate the negative pressure stroke that aspirates the second clot material and the positive pressure stroke that drives filtered blood to the collection chamber, wherein the blood is filtered during the negative pressure stroke and/or the positive pressure stroke. Calderon et al., from a related filed of endeavor teaches a similar method as shown in Figure 1, a first stroke that aspirates a predetermined volume of the first clot material and blood at a first flow rate, and a second stroke that drives the clot material and blood towards a filter that filters the first clot material from the blood, and drives the filtered blood into towards a collection chamber a second flow rate is slower than the first flow rate, where actuation the pressure source is automatically actuated by a controller (controller 108, see paragraph [0152]) for the purpose of creating momentum during aspiration and ensuring the blood is properly during the second stroke, wherein the controller is further programmed to aspirate and filter the blood at a first flow rate and drive the filtered blood to the collection chamber at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate. See paragraph [0272]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Beck et al. by modifying the first flow rate is greater than the second flow rate, wherein aspirating and filtering the blood are performed at a first flow rate and driving the filtered blood to the collection chamber is performed at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate in order to create momentum during aspiration and ensuring the blood is properly during the second stroke. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Beck et al. to include the controller taught by Calderon et al. such that wherein the controller is further programmed to aspirate and filter the blood at a first flow rate and drive the filtered blood to the collection chamber at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate in order to control the first and second stroke automatically and remotely. So modified, the Office interprets Beck et al. in view of Skujins and Calderon as disclosing wherein the first stroke results in a first flow rate by which clot material is aspirated with blood and wherein the second stroke results in a second flow rate by which filtered blood is driven into the collection chamber. So modified, the Office interprets Beck et al. in view of Skujins and Calderon as disclosing wherein the first flow rate is greater than the second flow rate, wherein aspirating and filtering the blood are performed at a first flow rate and driving the filtered blood to the collection chamber is performed at a second flow rate slower than the first flow rate. Claim(s) 7, 8, 21, 22, 27, 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication Number 2021/0316127 (Beck et al.) in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2024/0245414 (Calderon et al.), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0409857 (Saadat et al.) Regarding claims 7, 8, 21, 22, 27, 28 Nyguyen et al. fails to disclose sensing that the aspiration catheter is adjacent to the first clot material using one or more clot sensors, wherein sensing comprises sensing an electrical signal, wherein sensing comprises sensing an electrical impedance. Saadat et al., from the same field of endeavor teaches a similar method that includes sensing that the aspiration catheter is adjacent to the first clot material using one or more clot sensors, wherein sensing comprises sensing an electrical signal, wherein sensing comprises sensing an electrical impedance, for the purpose of tracking a clot. See paragraph [0044]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Nyguyen to include sensing that the aspiration catheter is adjacent to the first clot material using one or more clot sensors, wherein sensing comprises sensing an electrical signal, for the purpose of tracking a clot. Claim(s) 9, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication Number 2021/0316127 (Beck et al.) in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2024/0245414 (Calderon et al.), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2010/0185048 (Lonky et al.) Regrading claims 9, 10 Beck et al. is silent about wherein each actuation of the pressure source comprises operating a control in communication with the pressure source, wherein operating the control comprises pushing a button. Lonky et al., from the same field of endeavor teaches a similar method wherein actuation of the pressure source comprises operating a control in communication with the pressure source, wherein operating the control comprises pushing a button. See paragraph [0070]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Beck et al. to include the push-button switch taught by Lonky, in order to remotely actuate the pressure source. Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication Number 2021/0316127 (Beck et al.) in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2024/0245414 (Calderon et al.) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2010/0185048 (Lonky et al.) Regrading claim 23 Beck et al. is silent about wherein operating the control comprises pushing a button. Lonky et al., from the same field of endeavor teaches a similar method wherein actuation of the pressure source comprises operating a control in communication with the pressure source, wherein operating the control comprises pushing a button. See paragraph [0070]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Beck et al. by substituting the control contemplated by Beck et al. for the push-button disclosed by Lonky because it would only require the simple substitution of one known alternative for another it produce nothing but predictable results. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82, USPQ2d 1385 (2007). Claim(s) 29, 30, and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication Number 2021/0316127 (Beck et al.) in view U.S. Patent Publication Number 2024/0245414 (Calderon et al.) as applied to claims 1, 16, and 24 respectively above, and further in view of of U.S. Patent Publication Number 2020/0323546 (Skujins et al.), Regarding claims 29-31, Beck et al. fails to disclose repositioning the aspiration catheter adjacent to a second clot material within the patient; and actuating the pressure source one or more times, wherein each actuation of the pressure source: aspirates the second clot material and blood, filters the clot material from blood, and drives filtered blood to the collection chamber. Skujins et al., from the same field of endeavor teaches a similar method as shown in Figure 1, where the method includes the step of repositioning the aspiration catheter adjacent to a second clot material within the patient; and actuating the pressure source one or more times, for the purpose of ensuring the catheter is in contact and will remove the clot material. See paragraph [0041]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed Beck et al. to include the steps of repositioning the aspiration catheter adjacent to a second clot material within the patient; and actuating the pressure source one or more times, wherein each actuation of the pressure source: aspirates the second clot material and blood in order to ensure the catheter is in contact and will remove the clot material. So modified, the Office interprets Beck et al. in view of Skujins et al as disclosing repositioning the aspiration catheter adjacent to a second clot material within the patient; and actuating the pressure source one or more times, wherein each actuation of the pressure source: aspirates the second clot material and blood, filters the clot material from blood, and drives filtered blood to the collection chamber (chamber within pump, syringe or reservoir, see paragraphs [0097], [0098]). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 02/10/2026, see pages 7-13 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD G LOUIS whose telephone number is 571-270-1965. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday, 9:30 – 6:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Jackie Ho at 571-272-4696. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. If there are any inquiries that are not being addressed by first contacting the Examiner or the Supervisor, you may send an email inquiry to TC3700_Workgroup_D_Inquiries@uspto.gov. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /RICHARD G LOUIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 06, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 03, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 08, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 10, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 10, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 03, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594077
An endoscopic magnetic anastomosis system, and methods and devices for forming an anastomosis
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588928
MEDICAL DEVICE INSERTERS AND PROCESSES OF INSERTING AND USING MEDICAL DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588904
IMPLANT DEVICES AND FABRICATION METHODS FOR IMPLANT DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589198
CYCLIC ASPIRATION SYSTEM PRODUCING CYCLIC ASPIRATION PRESSURE WAVEFORM USING VACUUM PUMP AND POSITIVE PRESSURE PULSE GENERATOR MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582424
ASPIRATION CATHETER SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+17.3%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 939 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