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 .
According to the Amendment filed on 9/29/25, Claims 1, 16, 104 and 153-155 are amended.
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) 1,16,104,126-132,140 and 153-156 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davison et al. (US 10420596 B2) in view of Langdale (US 20170056081 A1 ).
Davison discloses a device figs. 1D, E capable of being used for treating a fracture in a bone of a subject between a proximal section of a bone and a distal section of the bone, the proximal section of the bone can have a prosthesis implanted therein, the device comprising: a first section having a first longitudinal axis (see modified fig. 1E below) ;a second section having a second longitudinal axis (see modified fig. 1E below); the first section being connected to the second section thereby defining a first junction between the first section and the second section (see modified fig. 1E below); the first longitudinal axis and the second longitudinal axis forming an oblique angle at the first junction (see modified fig. 1E below); and wherein the second section has a terminal end section having a width greater than the first section fig. 1E, the terminal end section having a sloped portion (see modified fig. 1E below) extending from a first curved section at a first end of the width of the terminal end section to a second curved section at an opposite second end of the width of the terminal end section, the sloped portion lacking concavity (see modified fig. 1E below); wherein the first section and the second section are capable to provide fixation to a region of the bone and providing a plurality of screw holes 120a, and wherein the bone can be a humerus that includes a greater tuberosity, and the sloped portion is capable to conform in a lateral view of the humerus to the greater tuberosity of the humerus, wherein the device has a bone interface surface that faces the bone when the device is placed on the bone, wherein an edge formed by the bone interface surface and the sloped portion is smooth (see modified fig. 1E below), and wherein the edge extends from the first curved section at the first end of the width of the terminal end section to the second curved section at the opposite second end of the width of the terminal end section fig. 1e, wherein the second section includes a first row of screw holes 120a adjacent the flat sloped portion of the terminal end section of the second section and a second row of screw holes 120a adjacent the first row of screw holes, and wherein the first junction is located adjacent the second row of screw holes (see modified fig. 1E below), and wherein the first longitudinal axis extends through a distal edge of the device (see modified fig. 1E below); and the first junction forming a transition portion dimensioned to provide a curvature connecting the first section to the second section fig. 1E, and wherein the location of the first junction can be determined by a location of greatest deviation from a straight centerline of the bone, wherein the bone interface surface, in a coronal viewing plane, transitions from convex at a proximal portion to be concave at an intermediate portion to be convex at a distal portion fig. 26, wherein the bone can be the humerus and the second end section is capable to conform to an outer surface of a proximal end section of the humerus, wherein a perimeter of the terminal end of the second section is capable to conform to a greater tuberosity of the proximal end section of the humerus, wherein the oblique angle formed at the junction is capable to match an angle of a greater tuberosity from a centerline of the humerus, wherein a length of the device can be determined by a length of the humerus, wherein a width of the first section is capable to provide fixation for a fracture in the bone, further comprising a plurality of screw holes 120a and wherein a number of the screw holes is correlated to the width of the terminal end of the second section fig. 1e, wherein the device is capable to be specific for a left and a right side of the subject, further comprising: a plurality of screw holes 120a adjacent the sloped portion, wherein the plurality of screw holes are arranged in a configuration that bows outward toward the sloped portion figs. 1D, E.
PNG
media_image1.png
736
783
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Davison teaches that the first and second rows of screw holes extending from the first end of the width of the terminal end section to the second end of the width of the terminal end section (see modified fig. 1E above).
However, Davison fails to teach a third row of screw holes adjacent the second row of screw holes, and wherein the first row of screw holes are arranged in a configuration that bows outward toward the sloped portion.
Langdale teaches a third row of screw holes adjacent the second row of screw holes extending from the first end of the width of the terminal end section to the second end of the width of the terminal end section fig. 1E, and wherein the first row of screw holes are arranged in a configuration that bows outward toward the sloped portion fig. 1E.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the second section of the plate of Davison to have a third row of screw holes and to arrange the first row of screw holes in a configuration that bows outward toward the sloped portion in view of Langdale in order to receive fasteners extending toward different locations on the bone to further enhancing fixing and securing the plate onto the bone surface.
Davison teaches that the oblique angle at the junction is in a range of 153.309 ± 7.816 degrees, since angle X, fig, 1C can be about 30-40 degrees (col. 5, lines 62-64) , that means the oblique angle can be about 150 degrees (180-30=150 degrees) which falls within the claimed range. (see modified fig. IC below).
PNG
media_image2.png
287
472
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1,16,104,126-132,140 and 153-155 under Davison alone is moot since the 103 rejection under Davison alone is withdrawn.
Applicant argues that “The Final Office Action is proposing replacing the "window 126 [of Davison that] provide[s] visualization of the plate 110 with respect to the radius 102 in the operating environment and on imaging (e.g., fluoroscopy)" with a third row of screw holes adjacent the second row of screw holes ….. This proposed modification of Davison would create solid material between the screw holes that would block "visualization of the plate 110 with respect to the radius 102 in the operating environment and on imaging (e.g., fluoroscopy)" as desired in Davison. As noted above, proposed modifications that render the prior art "inoperable for its intended purpose," In re Gordon, 733 F.2d 900, 902 (Fed.Cir.1984), or that change the "basic principles under which the [prior art] was designed to operate," In re Ratti, 46 CCPA 976, 270 F.2d 810, 813 (1959), fail to support a conclusion of obviousness. Therefore, such attempted modifications of Davison (see Item 1 of the Final Office Action) or Davison with Langdale (see Item 3 of the Final Office Action) would fail to support a conclusion of obviousness. See M.P.E.P. § 2143.01 V and M.P.E.P. § 2143.01 VI.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees, since examiner in the rejection proposed modifying the second section of the plate to include a third row of holes NOT to replace the window with a third row of holes.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 156 under Davison is moot, Since Davison teaches that the oblique angle at the junction is in a range of 153.309 ± 7.816 degrees, since angle X, fig, 1C can be about 30-40 degrees (col. 5, lines 62-64) , that means the oblique angle can be about 150 degrees (180-30=150 degrees) which falls within the claimed range. (see modified fig. IC above).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMEH RAAFAT BOLES whose telephone number is (571)270-5537. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 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, Kevin Truong can be reached at 571-272-4705. 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.
/SAMEH R BOLES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Prosecution Insights