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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7/22/2026 has been entered with a corresponding information disclosure statement.
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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson (6,419,705) in view of Engstrom (2018/0318101).
Erickson teaches an expandable implant 10 configured to be inserted in an intervertebral space defined between a first vertebral body and a second vertebral body comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
251
564
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a first endplate 8 defining an upper bone contacting surface;
a first pair of first and second side walls (6, 7) that extend from the first endplate in a first direction along a transverse direction;
a second endplate 5 defining a lower bone contacting surface opposite the upper bone contacting surface along the transverse direction;
a second pair of first and second side walls (3, 4) that extend from the second endplate in a second direction along the transverse direction;
an insertion end (select one end, generally half of the longitudinal length) and a trailing end (the other end, generally half of the longitudinal length) opposite the insertion end along a longitudinal direction that is perpendicular to the transverse direction, wherein the first and second side walls of the first and second pairs extend from the insertion end to the trailing end, wherein the insertion end and the trailing end define respective terminal ends of the implant along the longitudinal direction (as shown),
an expansion member (see 5:38-40 teaching, for example, reverse plyers, spearder, retractor, etc),
wherein the expandable implant defines a first height from the first bone contacting surface to the second bone contacting surface in the collapsed configuration, the expandable implant defines a second height from the first bone contacting surface to the second bone contacting surface in the expanded configuration, and the second height is greater than the first height (compare the two figures above),
PNG
media_image2.png
190
413
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein when the expandable implant is in the collapsed configuration, respective entireties of the first and second side walls of the second pair fit inside the first and second side walls (see figure above), respectively, of the first pair, and a straight line oriented in a lateral direction intersects the first and second side walls of the first pair and the first and second side walls of the second pair, the lateral direction being oriented perpendicular to each of the transverse direction and the expansion direction (depicted above).
However, Erickson fails to teach said expansion member that defines a ramped engagement surface configured to bear against an engagement surface one of one of the first and second endplates as the expansion member moves in an expansion direction with respect to the first and second endplates, thereby moving the expandable implant from a collapsed configuration to an expanded configuration, and wherein the expansion member mates with the first and second endplates so as to guide movement of the first and second endplates away from each other as the expansion member moves in the expansion direction.
PNG
media_image3.png
637
485
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Engstrom teaches a very similar expandable implant as applicant comprising first and second endplates, expansion member(s) (51, 52, 53, 54) that defines a ramped engagement surface (guide protrusion 144) configured to bear against an engagement surface (56, 58) of one of the first and second endplates as the expansion member moves in an expansion direction with respect to the first and second endplate,
PNG
media_image4.png
225
431
media_image4.png
Greyscale
thereby moving the expandable implant from a collapsed configuration (H1 in figure 30) to an expanded configuration (H2 in figure 30), and wherein the expansion member mates with the first and second endplates so as to guide movement of the first and second endplates away from each other as the expansion member moves in the expansion direction.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have substituted the expansion member of Engstrom for the expansion member of Erickson to expand the first endplate away from the second endplate to obtain predictable results fulfilling all limitation of claim 1.
Claims 2-3, the first endplate has a first guide member (56, 58, 70), the second endplate has a second guide member (56, 58, 70) and the expansion member defines a first guide member 146 and a second guide member 146 configured to slidably engage the first guide member of the first endplate and the second guide member of the second endplate, respectively, so as to guide movement of the first and second endplates away from each other as the expansion member moves in the expansion direction.
Claims 4-5, wherein the second endplate is a lower endplate, the first endplate is an upper endplate (fully capable of/interchangeable), the second guide member of the expansion member comprises outer projections (outer male dovetail portion) that are received in the channels of the second guide member of the upper endplate,
and the second guide member of the expansion member comprises inner projections (inner male dovetail portion) that are received in the channels of the lower endplate (same depiction but on the lower endplate).
PNG
media_image5.png
551
527
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim 6, referring to at least figures 29, 32 and 33, the limitations are self-evident.
Claim 7, the combination uses the expansion member shown in figure 29 above which rides in dovetail channels which allows for them to movable collapse the implant.
Claim 8, figure 5 first and second expansion members that move towards each other.
Claim 9, Engstrom uses contact between elements 51 and 110 to limit expansion.
Claim 10, Engstrom teaches deployment tool 300.
Claim 11, referring to figure 29 above, the expansion member is interpreted as the collective of elements shown which bear against respective engagement surfaces (plural) of both the first and second endplates.
Claim 12, see at least figure 10A showing an expansion member at trailing ends and at the insertion end.
Claim 13, referring to at least figure 9 and column 7-8, lines 65-17, Erickson teaches grooves and guiding pins fulfilling an alignment rib that extends from one of the first and second side walls of the first pair that slide along an alignment slot defined by one of the first and second side walls of the second pair as the expandable implant from the collapsed configuration to the expanded configuration.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUCE EDWARD SNOW whose telephone number is (571)272-4759. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 5:00 pm Monday through Thursday.
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, Melanie Tyson can be reached on 5712729062. 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.
/BRUCE E SNOW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3774
Prosecution Insights