Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/718,874

DISSIMILAR STAPLE CARTRIDGES WITH DIFFERENT BIOABSORBABLE COMPONENTS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 12, 2022
Examiner
KU, SI MING
Art Unit
3775
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Cilag GmbH International
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
543 granted / 752 resolved
+2.2% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+33.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
804
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
39.2%
-0.8% vs TC avg
§102
26.3%
-13.7% vs TC avg
§112
24.7%
-15.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 752 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of the election/restriction in the reply filed on December 3, 2025 is acknowledged. Applicant has elected Group I: Claims 1-19, drawn to a surgical staple cartridge assembly and Species I: Figure 5. Claims 20-24 have been cancelled. Claims 1-19 are presently pending in this application. Examiner’s Note In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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) 1-6, 9, and 11-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prommersberger (US 2008/0308608) in view of Hodgkinson et al. (US 2021/0259684), herein referred to as Hodgkinson. Regarding claim 1, Prommersberger discloses a surgical staple cartridge assembly (30) (figure 11), comprising a cartridge body (22), comprising a tissue-supporting deck (110), and staple cavities (elements 112) defined in the tissue-supporting deck (110) (figure 11), staples (178) removably stored in the staple cavities (elements 112) (¶76), wherein the staples (178) are deployable into tissue of a patient (element “T”, see figures 24-26), and an implantable layer (26) (¶47) configured to (i.e. capable of) be installed in the patient upon deployment of the staples (178) into tissue of the patient (element “T”, see figures 24-26), wherein the implantable layer (26) is comprised of a bioabsorbable polymer (¶47, ¶48) and is configured to (i.e. capable of) degrade at a layer degradation rate over an expected layer life in the patient. Yet, Prommersberger lacks a detailed description on wherein the staples are comprised of a bioabsorbable metal alloy and are configured to degrade at a staple degradation rate over an expected staple life in the patient. However, Hodgkinson teaches staples (44) (title and figure 2) are comprised of a bioabsorbable metal alloy (title and ¶25) and are configured to (i.e. capable of) degrade at a staple degradation rate over an expected staple life in the patient. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Prommersberger’s staples with wherein the staples are comprised of a bioabsorbable metal alloy as taught by Hodgkinson, since such materials increase the healing performance of tissue (¶25). Thus, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the staple degradation rate and the layer degradation rate are different (due to their materialistic properties). Regarding claim 2, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the implantable layer (26 of Prommersberger) is configured to (i.e. capable of) mechanically support a portion of the staple (the modified Prommersberger’s staple) during deployment of the staples into tissue of the patient. Regarding claim 3, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the implantable layer (26 of Prommersberger) is configured to (i.e. capable of) mechanically support a portion of the staple during the expected staple life in the patient. Regarding claim 4, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the implantable layer (26 of Prommersberger) is configured to (i.e. capable of) distribute a tissue load within the staples during the expected staple life in the patient. Regarding claim 5, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein each staple (the modified Prommersberger’s staple) comprises a crown (182 of Prommersberger) (figure 23 of Prommersberger), a first leg (184 of Prommersberger) extending from the crown (182 of Prommersberger) at a first transition (figure 23 of Prommersberger), and a second leg (186 of Prommersberger) extending from the crown (182 of Prommersberger) at a second transition (figure 23 of Prommersberger), wherein the implantable layer (26 of Prommersberger) is configured to (i.e. capable of) mechanically support the staple at the first transition and the second transition. Regarding claim 6, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the first leg (184 of Prommersberger) and the second leg (186 of Prommersberger) are deformed from an initial configuration (figures 23 and 24 of Prommersberger) to a formed configuration (figures 23 and 24 of Prommersberger) during deployment (figures 23 and 24 of Prommersberger), and wherein the implantable layer (26 of Prommersberger) is configured to (i.e. capable of) resist deformation of the first leg (184 of Prommersberger) and the second leg (186 of Prommersberger) away from the formed configuration by tissue compressed within the staple (figure 24 of Prommersberger). Regarding claim 9, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the implantable layer (26 of Prommersberger) is releasably secured to the tissue-supporting deck (¶69 and figures 11 and 12 of Prommersberger). Regarding claim 11, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein at least one of the staple degradation rate and the layer (26 of Prommersberger) degradation rate comprises a variable rate (due to their materialistic properties). Regarding claim 12, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the expected staple life and the expected layer life are different (due to their materialistic properties). Regarding claim 13, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the staple degradation rate (¶25 of Hodgkinson) is faster than the layer degradation rate (¶47, ¶48 of Prommersberger) (due to the size and their materialistic properties). Regarding claim 14, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the bioabsorbable metal alloy is selected from a group consisting of a magnesium-based alloy (¶25 of Hodgkinson), a zinc-based alloy, and an iron-based alloy. Regarding claim 15, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the bioabsorbable metal alloy further comprises lithium, zinc (¶25 of Hodgkinson), calcium, and manganese. Regarding claim 16, Prommersberger discloses a surgical staple cartridge assembly (30) (figure 11), comprising a cartridge body (22), comprising a deck (110), and staple cavities (elements 112) defined in the deck (110) (figure 11), staples (178) removably stored in the staple cavities (elements 112) (¶76), wherein the staples (178) are deployable into tissue of a patient (element “T”, see figures 24-26), and a buttress (26) configured to (i.e. capable of) be installed in the patient along with the staples (178) (figures 23-26), wherein the buttress (26) is comprised of a bioabsorbable polymer (¶47, ¶48) and is configured to (i.e. capable of) degrade at a buttress degradation rate over an expected layer life in the patient, and wherein the buttress (26) is configured to (i.e. capable of) mechanically support a portion of the staple (178) at a predefined time (figure 26). Yet, Prommersberger lacks a detailed description on wherein the staples are comprised of a bioabsorbable metal alloy and are configured to degrade at a staple degradation rate over an expected staple life in the patient. However, Hodgkinson teaches staples (44) (title and figure 2) are comprised of a bioabsorbable metal alloy (title and ¶25) and are configured to (i.e. capable of) degrade at a staple degradation rate over an expected staple life in the patient. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Prommersberger’s staples with wherein the staples are comprised of a bioabsorbable metal alloy as taught by Hodgkinson, since such materials increase the healing performance of tissue (¶25). Regarding claim 17, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the predefined time comprises a portion of the expected staple life in the patient (figure 26 of Prommersberger). Regarding claim 18, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein each staple (the modified Prommersberger’s staple) comprises a crown (182 of Prommersberger) and legs (184+186 of Prommersberger) extending from the crown (182 of Prommersberger) at a transitional curve (figure 23 of Prommersberger), and wherein the portion of the staple comprises the transitional curve (figure 23 of Prommersberger). Regarding claim 19, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly has wherein the buttress degradation rate is slower than the staple degradation rate (due to the size and their materialistic properties). Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prommersberger and Hodgkinson as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mandakolathur Vasudevan et al. (US 2016/0199063), herein referred to as Mandakolathur Vasudevan. Regarding claim 7, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly discloses all the features/elements as claimed including wherein the staples comprises legs (figure 23 of Prommersberger) but lacks wherein channels are defined in the implantable layer, and wherein the channels are aligned with the legs and structured to guide the legs during deployment of the staples into tissue of the patient. However, Mandakolathur Vasudevan teaches channels (considered wherein elements 32 are situated in, see figure 1A) are defined in an implantable layer (38) (¶620), and wherein the channels (considered wherein elements 32 are situated in, see figure 1A) are aligned with the legs (figure 1A) and structured to guide the legs during deployment of the staples (32) into tissue of the patient. Therefore, 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 modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly with wherein channels are defined in the implantable layer, and wherein the channels are aligned with the legs and structured to guide the legs during deployment of the staples into tissue of the patient as taught by Mandakolathur Vasudevan, since such a modification would provide an alternative implantable layer. Regarding claim 8, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly discloses all the features/elements as claimed but lacks wherein channels are defined in the implantable layer, and wherein the channels are positioned and structured to support the staples during the expected staple life in the patient. However, Mandakolathur Vasudevan teaches channels (considered wherein elements 32 are situated in, see figure 1A) are defined in an implantable layer (38) (¶620), and wherein the channels (considered wherein elements 32 are situated in, see figure 1A) are positioned and structured to support the staples (32) during the expected staple life in the patient. Therefore, 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 modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly with wherein channels are defined in the implantable layer, and wherein the channels are positioned and structured to support the staples during the expected staple life in the patient as taught by Mandakolathur Vasudevan, since such a modification would provide an alternative implantable layer. Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prommersberger and Hodgkinson as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Harris et al. (US 2015/0297235), herein referred to as Harris. Regarding claim 10, the modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly discloses all the features/elements as claimed but lacks wherein the tissue-supporting deck comprises pocket extenders extending into the implantable layer, and wherein the pocket extenders at least partially surround a perimeter of the staple cavities. However, Harris teaches wherein a tissue-supporting deck (5311) (figure 92) comprises pocket extenders (¶109 and figure 90) extending into an implantable layer (¶356), and wherein the pocket extenders (5351) at least partially surround a perimeter of the staple cavities (5350) (figure 92). Therefore, 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 modified Prommersberger’s surgical staple cartridge assembly with wherein the tissue-supporting deck comprises pocket extenders extending into the implantable layer, and wherein the pocket extenders at least partially surround a perimeter of the staple cavities as taught by Harris, since such a modification would guide and maintain the staples position. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SI MING KU whose telephone number is (571)270-5450. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30am-6pm. 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. /SI MING KU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 12, 2022
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599442
ASSISTIVE SURGICAL ROBOT FOR DISTAL HOLE LOCALIZATION IN INTRAMEDULLARY NAIL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594104
SCREW IMPLANTS FOR BONE FUSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582453
ANTEROLATERAL CLAVICLE FRACTURE FIXATION PLATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575869
COMPLIANT ORTHOPEDIC DRIVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569237
FORCE-INDICATING RETRACTOR DEVICE AND METHODS OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.8%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 752 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