Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/699,690

TRACKING MARKER SUPPORT STRUCTURE AND SURFACE REGISTRATION METHODS EMPLOYING THE SAME FOR PERFORMING NAVIGATED SURGICAL PROCEDURES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 21, 2022
Examiner
BOLES, SAMEH RAAFAT
Art Unit
3775
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
7D Surgical Ulc
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
671 granted / 961 resolved
At TC average
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1002
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.3%
-37.7% vs TC avg
§103
41.8%
+1.8% vs TC avg
§102
37.3%
-2.7% vs TC avg
§112
13.1%
-26.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 961 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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 the 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/16/26 has been entered. Accordingly, Claim 1 is amended, claims 8-15, 17-20 are withdrawn, claims 21-22 are added. 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) 1-3, 5-6, 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hauri (US 20080027471 A1) in view of Lo Iacono (US 20160038242 A1). Hauri discloses a handheld surgical tool fig. 5 comprising: a proximal portion 12 capable to be supported by a hand; a clamping mechanism fig. 3 capable to be removably attachable to a skeletal region of a subject during a surgical procedure; a plurality of tracking markers (see modified fig. 5 below) secured to at least a portion of said clamping mechanism, said plurality of tracking markers being configured to be detectable by an optical tracking system; and a geometrical marker 14 secured relative to said plurality of tracking markers such that said geometrical marker 14 remains fixed in position and orientation relative to said plurality of tracking markers when said distal clamping mechanism is attached to the skeletal anatomy fig. 5, said geometrical marker being capable to be detectable by a surface detection system during intraoperative use of the handheld surgical tool; said geometrical marker comprising a plurality of planar surfaces (see modified fig. 5 below) , wherein at least two of the planar surfaces are oriented at oblique angles relative to one another (see modified fig. 5 below), thereby facilitating detection of said geometrical marker by the surface detection system over a range of relative orientations between said handheld surgical tool and the surface detection system, wherein said geometrical marker is a first geometrical marker, said handheld surgical tool further comprising a second geometrical marker (see modified fig. 5 below), wherein said first geometrical marker and said second geometrical marker have different shapes fig. 5, wherein said geometrical marker resides closer to said distal clamping mechanism than said plurality of tracking markers fig. 5, wherein said geometrical marker has a truncated pyramidal shape (see modified fig. 5 below). PNG media_image1.png 516 737 media_image1.png Greyscale Hauri fails to teach that the geometrical marker comprising a plurality of distinct faceted planar surfaces, wherein at least two of the distinct faceted planar surfaces are oriented at oblique angles relative to one another. Lo Iacono teaches geometrical markers 29a, 29b, 29c, 29d, fig. 10b, each comprising a plurality of distinct faceted planar surfaces (pyramid shape), wherein at least two of the distinct faceted planar surfaces are oriented at oblique angles relative to one another fig. 10b. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to modify the geometrical marker of Hauri to include a plurality of distinct faceted planar surfaces (pyramid shape), wherein at least two of the distinct faceted planar surfaces are oriented at oblique angles relative to one another in view of Lo Iacono in order to allow the remote detection of the exact position of said handheld surgical tool, and hence of the surgery, through the analysis of a light radiation reflected by said distinct faceted planar surfaces. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 4 is 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. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3, 5-6 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Lo Iacono. Conclusion 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 21, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 22, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 20, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 20, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Aug 28, 2024
Response Filed
Sep 20, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 20, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 26, 2024
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 26, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 19, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 21, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 27, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 27, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 30, 2025
Response Filed
Jun 30, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 16, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 16, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 18, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 04, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 04, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599483
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR JOINING BONEY STRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594169
EXPANDABLE INTERBODY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588932
MULTI-PLANAR FIXATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588915
Bone Resection Method by Plunge Milling and Rasping During Total Ankle Arthroplasty
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589005
INTERBODY SPINAL CAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+25.3%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 961 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