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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 November 28, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on November 28, 2025. As directed by the amendment: claim(s) 1-2, 7 and 15 have been amended, no claim(s) have been cancelled, and no claim(s) have been added. Thus, claims 1-20 are currently pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 15-16 have been considered but the arguments do not apply to the combination of the references being used in the new grounds of rejection set forth above. The applicant asserts that the prior art rejections do not teach or suggest the features as now amended into the amended claims; therefore, the examiner has applied a new combination of prior art to reject the claims and address the arguments necessitated by such amendment.
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) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellman (US 5,196,007) in view of Miller (US 2008/0215056 A1) and Overmyer (US 2015/0272557 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Ellman discloses a surgical tool and control device comprising: a surgical power tool having a handpiece elongate along a length (e.g. Fig 3); a control device removably coupled to the surgical power tool (e.g. Fig 5:52 col 4 lines 28-30), the control device including: a housing including an arm that extends from a bottom surface of the housing (e.g. col 5 lines 30-35 Fig 5:54), the arm configured to receive at least a portion of an outer perimeter of the handpiece of the power tool along a direction perpendicular to the length so as to couple to the power tool (e.g. col 5 lines 30-35 Fig 5:54), thereby coupling the control device to the power tool (e.g. col 4 lines 30-31 and lines 58-64 and col 5 lines 21-24 Figs. 4a and 5); wherein, when the housing is coupled to the handpiece, the control device is movable along the length of the handpiece to adjust a location of the control device with respect to a distal end of the surgical power tool (e.g. col 4 lines 30-31 and lines 58-64).
Ellman is silent regarding the housing including arms that extends from a bottom surface of the housing so as to couple the arms to the power tool via a press-fit or snap-fit connection, and a control unit supported by the housing and configured to wirelessly transmit user input information received at a pressure responsive touch pad to the power tool for directing a speed of the power tool; the pressure responsive touch pad located on a top surface of the control device for receiving a user input.
However, Miller discloses a cradle housing for supporting a powered driver wherein the housing including arms that extends from a bottom surface of the housing so as to couple the arms to the power tool via a snap-fit connection (e.g. [0083] Fig 3A:284)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the system of Ellman to incorporate the teachings of Miller to substitute the singular arm of Ellman for the dual arms of Miller that extend from a bottom surface of the housing so as to couple the arms to the power tool via a snap-fit connection for the purpose of utilizing another known attachment means as suggested by Ellman (e.g. col 5 lines 12-24).
Additionally, Overmyer discloses a modular surgical instrument with an input surface including a control unit supported by the housing and configured to wirelessly transmit user input information received at a pressure responsive touch pad to the power tool for directing a speed of the power (e.g. [0109] and [0127]-[0129] a capacitive touch screen [0160] [0259] for wirelessly transmitting the signals); the pressure responsive touch pad located on a top surface of the control device for receiving a user input tool (e.g. [0127]-[0129] a capacitive touch screen Fig 15 ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Ellman to incorporate the teachings of Overmyer to have a surface including a control unit supported by the housing and configured to wirelessly transmit user input information received at a pressure responsive touch pad to the power tool for directing a speed of the power; the pressure responsive touch pad located on a top surface of the control device for receiving a user input tool for the purpose of swapping one known control mechanism i.e. buttons for a touchpad mechanism.
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellman in view of Miller and Overmyer as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Belagali (US 2015/0182230 A1).
Regarding claim 16, modified Ellman discloses wherein the user input information is received by a control unit of the power tool and the speed of the power tool varies in response to a pressure of the user input received at the touch pad (e.g. Overmyer [0109] For instance, an initial pressure or force applied to the firing actuator can be detected by the processor 3008 and, in response thereto, the processor 3008 can operate the motor 2216 at a first speed, wherein additional pressure or force applied to the firing actuator can be detected by the processor 3008 and, in response thereto, the processor 3008 can operate the motor 2216 at a second speed, such as a faster speed,), wherein the user input information is transmitted to the control unit of the power tool independent of the location of the control device on the handpiece of the power tool (e.g. Ellman col 4 lines 31-34 and lines 58-64).
Modified Ellman is silent regarding wherein the control unit includes a battery.
However, Belagali discloses a control module for a powered surgical tool wherein the control unit includes a battery (e.g. [0011]-[0012]; [0108]; [0117]; Fig 3:38 ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the modified system of Ellman to incorporate the teachings of Belagali wherein the control unit includes a battery for the purpose of utilizing a known power source.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 and 17-20 are allowed.
The prior art neither teaches nor suggest a control device for a surgical power tool comprising a housing configured to removably coupled to the surgical power tool having a top housing and a bottom housing, wherein the top housing defines an opening for an input surface to receive a user input that wirelessly transmits the user input information to a corresponding control unit of the surgical power tool, including a cover slidably coupled to the housing such that the cover is movable between a first position over the opening and at least a portion of the input surface and second position away from the input surface and including a downwardly extending arm that extends over at least one of an external side surface and an external bottom surface of the bottom housing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSANDRA F HOUGH whose telephone number is (571)270-7902. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7 am - 4 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, David Hamaoui can be reached at (571)270-5625. 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.
Jessandra Hough January 24, 2026
/J.F.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3796
/William J Levicky/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796