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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 30, 33-43, and 46-60 are pending and examined below
Response to Arguments
The remarks of 09/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art of record doesn't explicitly teach or disclose all of the elements of amended claims 30 and 41, in particular the following claim language:
“a central portion, wherein the male interface of the first coupling portion includes a shaft extending arcuately around the central portion in a first angular range, and wherein the second coupling portion extends around the central portion in a second angular range and the female interface of the second coupling portion includes a receptacle”
However, upon reconsideration of Figs. 1 and 2, link 10 discloses a central region 12 as well as shafts extending arcuately around at least the first, second, and third coupling regions as indicated in the rejections of claims 30 and 41.
Therefore, claims 30 and 41 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2016/0101371 A1 (Gruenwald)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 30, 37, 41-43, 46, 47, 53 and 59 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2016/0101371 A1 (Gruenewald)
Regarding claim 30, Gruenewald discloses a link for a prosthesis system (Fig. 2, wherein element 10 is configured for this intended use), the link comprising:
a first coupling portion (see annotated Fig. 2 below) including a male interface (Fig. 2, 161) for engaging a female interface (Fig. 2, 160) of another link (see Fig. 4, wherein 161 of one link engages with 160 of another link)
a second coupling portion (9, Fig. 6) including a female interface for engaging a male interface of another link (see Fig. 4, wherein 160 of one link engages with 161 of another link); and
a central portion (see annotated Fig. 2), wherein the male interface of the first coupling portion includes a shaft extending arcuately around the central portion in a first angular range (see annotated Fig. 2, wherein shaft extends arcuately around the central portion), and wherein the second coupling portion extends around the central portion in a second angular range (see annotated Fig. 2, wherein second coupling portion extends around central portion) and the female interface of the second coupling portion includes a receptacle (see annotated Fig. 2, “receptacle”)
PNG
media_image1.png
742
894
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 37, Gruenewald further a beam (Fig. 2, 13) extending radially outwardly from the central portion (Fig. 1, wherein 13 extends radially outwardly from 12).
Regarding claim 41, Gruenwald discloses a link (Fig. 2) for an assistive system, the link comprising:
a first portion (see annotated Fig. 2) including a first male coupling feature (see annotated Fig. 2), the first male coupling feature comprising a shaft extending arcuately in a first angular range (see annotated Fig. 2, wherein shaft extends arcuately);
a second portion (see annotated Fig. 2) including a first female coupling feature (see annotated Fig. 2), the first female coupling feature comprising a receptacle extending in a second angular range (see annotated Fig. 2, wherein receptacle extends around central portion around at an angle); and
a third portion including one of a second male coupling feature or a second female coupling feature (see annotated Fig. 2, wherein third portion contains both a second male coupling feature and a second female coupling feature), wherein the second male coupling feature or the second female coupling feature extends in a third angular range (see annotated Fig. 2, wherein second male coupling feature and second extend around the center of 10)
PNG
media_image2.png
637
752
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 42, Gruenwald further discloses wherein the second male coupling feature includes a shaft extending arcuately in the third angular range (see annotated Fig. 2, wherein “shaft extends arcuately around 12) or the second female coupling feature includes a receptacle extending in the third angular range (see annotated Fig. 2)
PNG
media_image3.png
877
1036
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 43, Gruenewald further comprising a central portion (Fig. 2) positioned between the first portion, the second portion and the third portion (see Fig. 2), wherein the first portion extends along a first peripheral portion (see annotated Fig. 2 below, wherein first portion is located away from the center corresponding to “peripheral”), and wherein the second portion extends along a second peripheral portion (see annotated Fig. 2 below, wherein first portion is located away from the center corresponding to “peripheral”)), and the third portion extends along a third peripheral portion (see annotated Fig. 2 below, wherein first portion is located away from the center corresponding to “peripheral”)
PNG
media_image4.png
877
1036
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 46, Gruenewald further discloses wherein the third portion includes a second male coupling feature (see rejection of claim 41, wherein annotated third portion includes a second male coupling feature)
Regarding claim 47, Gruenewald further discloses wherein the third portion includes a second female coupling feature (see rejection of claim 41, wherein annotated third portion includes a second female coupling feature)
Regarding claim 53, Gruenewald further discloses a central portion (Fig. 2, 12) and a beam (Fig 2, 13) extending radially outwardly from a central portion (Fig. 2, wherein 13 extends radially outward from 12), the beam separating the first portion from one of the second portion and the third portion (see annotated Fig. 2 below, wherein 13 separates the first portion from the second portion)
PNG
media_image4.png
877
1036
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 59, Gruenwald further discloses wherein the shaft extends arcuately between a first end of the second coupling portion and a second end of the second coupling portion (see annotated Fig. 2 below, wherein the shaft extends between the two ends)
PNG
media_image5.png
877
1036
media_image5.png
Greyscale
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) 33, 34, 57, 58 and 60 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0101371 A1 (Gruenewald)
Regarding claim 33, Gruenewald discloses a first angular portion and a second angular portion (see rejection of claim 30) but doesn’t explicitly teach or disclose wherein the first angular portion extends along one-third of a peripheral edge of a link or the second angular portion extends along two-third of a peripheral edge of a link.
However, Paragraphs 0094-0095 of Gruenewald provide a suggestion that the linkage can have a different shape (such as a triangle shown in Fig. 9) or a slightly arched profile with the convexity facing outwards.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second angular portion of Gruenewald to extend along one-third and two-third of a peripheral edge respectively, in order to facilitate coupling with homologous sectors (¶0095)
Regarding claim 34, Gruenewald discloses a first angular portion and a second angular portion (see rejection of claim 30) but doesn’t explicitly teach or disclose wherein the first angular portion extends along two-thirds of a peripheral edge of a link or the second angular portion extends along one-third of a peripheral edge of a link.
However, Paragraphs 0094-0095 of Gruenewald provide a suggestion that the linkage can have a different shape (such as a triangle shown in Fig. 9) or a slightly arched profile with the convexity facing outwards.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second angular portion of Gruenewald to extend along two-thirds and one-third of a peripheral edge, in order to facilitate coupling with homologous sectors (¶0095)
Regarding claim 57, Gruenwald discloses a first angular range and a second angular range (see rejection of claim 30) but doesn't explicitly teach or disclose wherein the first angular range is approximately 120 degrees and the second angular range is approximately 240 degrees.
However, Paragraphs 0094-0095 of Gruenewald provide a suggestion that the linkage can have a different shape (such as a triangle shown in Fig. 9) or a slightly arched profile with the convexity facing outwards.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first angular range and the second angular range to be 120 degrees and 240 degrees respectively, in order to facilitate coupling with homologous sectors (¶0095)
Regarding claim 58, Gruenwald discloses a first angular range and a second angular range (see rejection of claim 30) but doesn't explicitly teach or disclose wherein the first angular range is approximately 240 degrees and the second angular range is approximately 120 degrees.
However, Paragraphs 0094-0095 of Gruenewald provide a suggestion that the linkage can have a different shape (such as a triangle shown in Fig. 9) or a slightly arched profile with the convexity facing outwards.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first angular range and the second angular range to be 240 degrees and 120 degrees respectively, in order to facilitate coupling with homologous sectors (¶0095)
Regarding claim 60, Gruenwald discloses a first angular range and a second angular range (see rejection of claim 41) but doesn't explicitly teach or disclose wherein the first angular range is approximately 240 degrees and the second angular range is approximately 120 degrees.
However, Paragraphs 0094-0095 of Gruenewald provide a suggestion that the linkage can have a different shape (such as a triangle shown in Fig. 9) or a slightly arched profile with the convexity facing outwards.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first angular range, the second angular range, and the third angular range to each be 120 degrees, in order to facilitate coupling with homologous sectors (¶0095)
Claim(s) 35 and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0101371 A1 (Gruenewald) in view of US 3,177,611 (Beck)
Regarding claim 35, Gruenewald discloses a first coupling portion which includes two male interfaces (see annotated Fig. 2 under rejection of claim 30, wherein first coupling portion has 4 male interfaces). Gruenewald doesn’t explicitly teach or disclose that the male interfaces are configured to engage female interfaces of two separate links.
Beck discloses a link (Fig. 1, 10) comprising a male interface (Fig. 1, 12) configured to engage female interfaces of two separate links (See Fig. 2, wherein a single male interface 12 is interfacing with two female interfaces 13)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the male interface of Gruenwald with to engage with the female interfaces of two separate links, as taught by Beck, in order to provide a higher degree of modularity and/or customization.
Regarding claim 36, Gruenewald discloses a first coupling portion which includes two female interfaces (see rejection of claim 30, wherein the annotated first coupling portion includes three female interface). Gruenewald doesn’t explicitly teach or disclose that the female interfaces are configured to engage male interfaces of two separate links.
Beck discloses a link (Fig. 1, 10) comprising a female interface (Fig. 1, 13) configured to engage male interfaces of two separate links (See Fig. 2, wherein a single female interface 13 is engage with male interfaces of two separate links)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the male interface of Gruenwald with to engage with the female interfaces of two separate links, as taught by Beck, in order to provide a higher degree of modularity and/or customization.
Claim(s) 38-40 and 53-56 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0101371 A1 (Gruenewald) in view of WO 2020078864 A1 (Rajewski)
Regarding claim 38, Gruenwald discloses a central portion (see rejection of claim 30) but doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a tensioning anchor passing through the central portion, the shaft tensioning anchor engaging a tensioning element for exerting a force on the link
Rajewski discloses a tensioning anchor (Fig. 2, 12, see also Page 8, Lines 13-18 wherein “screw mechanism” corresponds to a tensioning anchor) for engaging a tensioning element (Fig. 2,2b) for exerting a force on the link (Page 8, Lines 13-18, wherein 2b is configured for this intended use because it generates a perpendicular force on the residual limb)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the central portion of Gruenwald with a tensioning anchor for engaging a tensioning element, as taught by Rajewski, in order to selectively increase or decrease the perpendicular pressure of the residual limb of the user.
Regarding claim 39, Gruenewald discloses a central portion (see rejection of claim 3) but doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a tensioning anchor rotatable relative to the central portion
Rajewski further discloses wherein the tensioning anchor is rotatable relative to the central portion (Page 8, Lines 12-18, wherein 12 rotates to draw in links and is therefore rotatable)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the central portion of Gruenwald with a rotatable tensioning anchor, as taught by Rajewski, in order to selectively increase or decrease the perpendicular pressure of the residual limb of the user.
Regarding claim 40, Gruenewald discloses a link comprising a central portion (see rejection of claim 30) but doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a friction element positioned adjacent one side of the central portion and configured to be positioned between the link and a limb, the friction element configured to inhibit relative movement between the link and the limb.
Rajewski disclose a link further comprising a friction element a friction element (Fig. 3, 13) positioned adjacent one side of the central portion (See Fig. 3, wherein 13 is adjacent to center of each link) and configured to be positioned between the link and a limb (See Fig. 2, wherein 13 is positioning between link and limb), the friction element configured to inhibit relative movement between the link and the limb (See Page 8, Line 32 – Page 9, Line 1, wherein the perpendicular pressure on the residual limb from 13 corresponds to inhibiting relative movement between the link and the limb).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the link of Gruenwald with a friction element, as taught by Rajewski, in order to reduce skin issues by reduce friction between the links and the residual limb
Regarding claim 54, Gruenwald discloses a central portion (see rejection of claim 30) but doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a tensioning anchor passing through the central portion, the shaft tensioning anchor engaging a tensioning element for exerting a force on the link
Rajewski discloses a tensioning anchor (Fig. 2, 12, see also Page 8, Lines 13-18 wherein “screw mechanism” corresponds to a tensioning anchor) for engaging a tensioning element (Fig. 2,2b) for exerting a force on the link (Page 8, Lines 13-18, wherein 2b is configured for this intended use because it generates a perpendicular force on the residual limb)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the central portion of Gruenwald with a tensioning anchor for engaging a tensioning element, as taught by Rajewski, in order to selectively increase or decrease the perpendicular pressure of the residual limb of the user.
Regarding claim 55, Gruenewald discloses a link comprising a central portion (Fig. 2, 120) but doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a friction element positioned adjacent one side of the central portion and configured to be positioned between the link and a limb, the friction element configured to inhibit relative movement between the link and the limb.
Rajewski disclose a link further comprising a friction element a friction element (Fig. 3, 13) positioned adjacent one side of the central portion (See Fig. 3, wherein 13 is adjacent to 120) and configured to be positioned between the link and a limb (See Fig. 2, wherein 13 is positioning between link and limb), the friction element configured to inhibit relative movement between the link and the limb (See Page 8, Line 32 – Page 9, Line 1, wherein the perpendicular pressure on the residual limb from 13 corresponds to inhibiting relative movement between the link and the limb).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the link of Gruenwald with a friction element, as taught by Rajewski, in order to reduce skin issues by reduce friction between the links and the residual limb
Regarding claim 56, Gruenewald doesn’t explicitly teach or disclose a friction element positioned between the link and a limb which is configured to inhibit relative movement between the link and the limb.
Rajewski disclose a link further comprising a friction element a friction element (Fig. 3, 13) positioned adjacent one side of the central portion (See Fig. 3, wherein 13 is adjacent to 120) and configured to be positioned between the link and a limb (See Fig. 2, wherein 13 is positioning between link and limb), the friction element configured to inhibit relative movement between the link and the limb (See Page 8, Line 32 – Page 9, Line 1, wherein the perpendicular pressure on the residual limb from 13 corresponds to inhibiting relative movement between the link and the limb).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the link of Gruenwald with a friction element, as taught by Rajewski, in order to reduce skin issues by reduce friction between the links and the residual limb
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAXIMILIAN TOBIAS SPENCER whose telephone number is (571)272-8382. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Jerrah Edwards can be reached on 408.918.7557. 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.
/MAXIMILIAN TOBIAS SPENCER/Examiner, Art Unit 3774
/JERRAH EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3774