Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/264,392

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING CLINICAL VALUES THROUGH MEDICAL IMAGING

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Jul 09, 2025
Priority
Jun 19, 2020 — provisional 63/041,360 +6 more
Examiner
BRUTUS, JOEL F
Art Unit
3797
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Ultrasound AI, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allowance Rate
941 granted / 1295 resolved
+2.7% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
1344
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
82.3%
+42.3% vs TC avg
§102
4.9%
-35.1% vs TC avg
§112
9.0%
-31.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1295 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to method for estimating a quantitative laboratory value of a patient without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s): “obtaining one or more non-invasive medical images of at least a portion of the patient, each image acquired without penetrating the patient's skin; processing the one or more images with a trained neural network to generate an estimated laboratory value corresponding to a biological condition of the patient; causing presentation of the estimated laboratory value on a display or to another downstream computer process” The processor is recited at a high level of generality, i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of processing data. This generic processor limitation is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. This determining step, as drafted, is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components (one or more processors and computer storage memory) That is, other than reciting "by a processor", nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the human mind. Additionally, the mere nominal recitation of a generic processor does not take the claim limitation out of the mental processes grouping. Thus, the claim recites a mental process. The additional element in the claim amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component which cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. The claim does not provide an inventive concept (significantly more than the abstract idea). The claim is ineligible. Prior arts: Beck et al (Pub. No.: US 10, 650, 929). a prognostic model is trained using any number of machine learning algorithms (e.g., regularized Cox regression, regularized logistic regression and overall survival time is used for the survival data. A classifier, such as for example, an L1-regularized logistic regression, is trained to predict the binary outcome of (1) alive at 5 years or (2) dead at 5 years [see column 22 lines 30-37] and disclosing performance of the model to be able to accurately predict survival data for patients in the other treatment group is analyzed to determine its effectiveness in correctly identifying a subset of patients that may benefit from the experimental treatment studied in the clinical trial. Ln some embodiments, the trained model is used to predict an expected benefit of an experimental treatment for candidate patients in a new clinical trial [see column 2 lines 50-64]. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOEL F BRUTUS whose telephone number is (571)270-3847. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Sat, 11:00 AM to 7:00 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, Anne Kozak can be reached at 571-270-0552. 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. /JOEL F BRUTUS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 09, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12678126
SAFETY ALERT BASED ON 4D INTRACARDIAC ECHO (ICE) CATHETER TRACKING
1y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12661499
SENSORS FOR CATHETER PUMPS
1y 11m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12653480
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PERFORMING SINGLE GATING IN POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPY SYTEMS
3y 0m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12653496
INTRAVASCULAR IMAGING CATHETER
1y 6m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12648745
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LOCAL THREE DIMENSIONAL VOLUME RECONSTRUCTION USING A STANDARD FLUOROSCOPE
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 09, 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
73%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+17.7%)
3y 5m (~2y 5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1295 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