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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 9/25/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 8, 9, 11, 13, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carter et al. (US Pub 2010/0191261) in view of Teirstein et al. (US Patent 8,523,824).
With respect to claim 8, Carter discloses a suture retention device (see figs 15 and 16 below), comprising: a body (fig 15, 230) having a top portion (fig 15, 272), a bottom portion (see fig 15 below), a width dimension (seem fig 16 below), and a transverse channel (see fig 16 below along the dotted line) formed in the top portion, the transverse channel extending the entire width dimension of the body; a suture retainer (fig 16, 238)connected to the body and positioned within the transverse channel crosses the channel in the bottom right corner), and an opening (see fig 15 below) formed in the body, the opening extending from the top portion to the bottom portion, with the opening laterally aligned with and oriented substantially perpendicularly to the traverse channel (fig 15), the suture retainer being positioned on a first side (bottom right corner) of the opening such that the opening is configured to permit a suture to pass through the opening and engage the suture retainer (fig 16 shows sutures engaged through the channels and into the retainer), wherein the opening is substantially aligned with the center axis of the body (fig 16) ,wherein the transverse channel on a second side of the opening opposite the suture retainer includes an outwardly flared segment with the opening positioned between the outwardly flared segment (the outer portion of the channels is shown wider than the inner portion of the channels) and the suture retainer to aid in guiding suture into the transverse channel and the suture retainer (fig 16 shows sutures guided into the channel and into the retainer). With respect to claim 9, Carter discloses wherein the suture retainer comprises a coil, a comb, a viscous gel, or a gum (coil 238). With respect to claim 13, Carter discloses wherein the body is cylindrical (shown as a cylinder) or polygonal. With respect to claim 19, Carter discloses wherein the suture retainer is configured to partially overlap the opening so that when the suture is passed through the opening, the suture engages the retainer (fig 16 238 overlaps with the opening in part 236). With respect to claim 20, Carter discloses wherein the suture retainer comprises a coiled wire (fig 15, 238).
PNG
media_image1.png
682
522
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 8, Carter discloses the claimed invention except for an adhesive member connected to the body bottom portion.
Teirstein discloses an adhesive member (col. 2, ll. 53) connected to the body bottom portion of a retainer (fig 5, 30) to keep the retainer in position in the surgical field (col. 2, ll. 54-55). With respect to claim 11, Teirstein discloses further comprising a protective cover (col. 2, ll. 58-59) removably connected to the adhesive member.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Carter to include an adhesive member connected to the body bottom portion in view of Teirstein in order to keep the retainer in position in the surgical field.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carter et al. in view of Teirstein as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Snyder (US Pub 2003/0187466).
With respect to claim 14, Carter in view of Teirstein discloses the claimed invention except for the device is in sterile form sealed in a sterile package.
Snyder discloses a suture retention device in sterile form sealed in a sterile package (paragraph 19) to facilitate handling and storage (paragraph 19).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Carter in view of Teirstein to include for the device is in sterile form sealed in a sterile package in view of Snyder in order to facilitate handling and storage.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 9/25/2025, with respect to the U.S.C. 112 rejection of claims 8-14 and 19-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The U.S.C. 112 rejection of claims 8-14 and 19-20 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 19 and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN J COTRONEO whose telephone number is (571)270-7388. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm EST.
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, Eduardo Robert can be reached at (571) 272-4719. 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.
/S.J.C/Examiner, Art Unit 3773 /EDUARDO C ROBERT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3773