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Claims 1-15 are pending, of which claims 1-7 and 13-15 have been withdrawn. Therefore, claims 8-12 are examined below.
Response to Arguments
The remarks of 4/16/2026 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 claim 8. In particular, applicant argues the following claim language:
“the medical device further comprises a medical textile comprising a felt material and connected to the medical implant
“…wherein the separated fibers of the first connection section and/or the second connection section of the medical implant extend into or though
Regarding the first bullet point – this argument is moot in light of the new 103 rejection below.
Regarding the second bullet point – this argument is moot in light of the new 103 rejection below.
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) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,214,047 (Melvin) in view of US 2007/0248640 (Karabey) in view of US 2014/0222038 (Seedhom)
Regarding claim 8, Melvin discloses a medical implant (Fig. 2) extending between a first end and a second end, wherein the medical implant comprises or consists of a plurality of fibers (Fig. 2, fibers 14 and 24), characterized in that the medical implant comprises:
a main section (Fig. 2, 20) and a first connecting section (Fig. 2, 30) configured to be connected to soft biological tissue (Col. 6, Lines 8-10, wherein “muscle” corresponds to soft biological tissue) or to a medical textile, particularly comprising or consisting of a felt material (note: the limitations requiring a medical textile comprising or consisting of a felt material are currently claimed as an optional feature)
wherein the first connecting section extends towards the first end (see annotated Fig. 2 below), and wherein the fibers are connected, particularly braided, twisted, knitted or felted, in the main section (Col. 5, Lines 31-45, wherein outer fibers 24 are braided around fiber 14) and separated from each other in the first connecting section (Col. 6, Lines 8-14, wherein “generally unbraided, unspun, untwisted, and unplaited”
PNG
media_image1.png
457
1025
media_image1.png
Greyscale
corresponds to fibers separated from each other”)
Melvin doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a felted medical textile.
Karabey discloses a medical textile (Fig. 2, 12), particularly comprising or consisting of a felt material (¶0175, “felting”)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the fibers of the first connecting section of Melvin to the felted medical textile, as taught by Karabey, in order to securely fasten the medical implant and the medical textile during implantation.
Melvin discloses a medical implant with a separated fibers in a first connection section but doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a medical textile comprising a felt material and connected to the medical implant or an entangled connection with the fibers of a medical textile. Karabey discloses a medical textile (see above) but doesn't explicitly teach or disclose an entangled connection with the fibers of a medical textile.
Seedhom discloses a medical textile (Fig. 1, 10) comprising a felt material (¶0061, wherein “non-woven filamentous material” corresponds to a felt) and connected to the medical implant (Fig. 1, elongate cord 13) wherein separated fibers of the medical implant are entangled with fibers of the medical textile (¶0032, wherein “hydroentanglement” corresponds to separated fibers of the medical implant entangled with the medical textile)
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 medical textile of Melvin in view of Karabey to be both connected and entangled together, as taught by Seedhom, in order to conveniently and securely anchor to connective biological tissue (¶0007)
Regarding claim 9, Melvin discloses a medical implant (see rejection of claim 8) but doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a medical textile extending along a plane, wherein the medical textile comprises a flat shape.
Karabey discloses a medical textile which extends along a plane (Fig. 2c, wherein 12 extends along a plane) wherein particularly the medical textile comprises a flat shape (Fig. 2C, wherein 12 is flat)
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 medical device of Melvin to include a medical textile extending along a plane which comprises a flat shape, as taught by Karabey, in order to decrease friction against the surface during implantation
Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,214,047 (Melvin) in view of US 2007/0248640 (Karabey) in view of US US 2014/0222038 (Seedhom), as applied to claims above, and further in view of US 2018/0228596 (Wyland)
Regarding claim 10, Melvin disclose a first medical implant (Fig. 2) according to any one of the claim 9, wherein the first connecting section (110) and/or the second connecting section (120) of the first medical implant (130) forms a fan-like structure extending in a plane parallel to an extension direction of the first medical implant (see annotated Fig. 2, wherein 30 forms a fan-like structure), and wherein the first medical implant (130) is connected to the medical textile (300), such that the first medical implant (130) extends from the medical textile (300) parallel to the plane of the medical textile (300),
Melvin doesn’t explicitly teach or discloses a medical textile.
Karabey discloses a medical textile (Fig. 2C, 12)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the medical implant of Melvin in parallel with the medical textile, as taught by Karabey, in order to ensure that the implant and textile are securely fastened.
Melvin doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a second medical implant with a tubular structure with a cross-sectional width that increase monotonously towards a first end. Karabey doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a second medical implant with a tubular structure with a cross-sectional width that increase monotonously towards a first end. Seedhom doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a second medical implant with a tubular structure with a cross-sectional width that increase monotonously towards a first end.
Wyland discloses a second medical implant wherein the first connecting section or the second connecting section of the second medical implant forms a tubular structure (Fig. 1, wherein 20 forms a tubular structure), particularly comprising a circular or oval-shaped cross-sectional contour perpendicular to an extension direction of the second medical implant (see Fig. 1, wherein 20 has an oval-shaped cross-section contour perpendicular to an extension direction), wherein particularly a width of the cross-sectional contour increases, particularly monotonously, towards the first end of the second medical implant (see annotated Fig. 1 below)
PNG
media_image2.png
396
784
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the medical textile of Melvin in view of Karabey in view of Seedhom perpendicular with the second medical implant, as taught by Wyland, in order to properly secure the medical textile and the medical implant once implanted in the body.
Regarding claim 11, Melvin doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a medical textile comprising a tubular shape and an opening for insertion of a soft biological material. Karabey doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a medical textile comprising a tubular shape and an opening for insertion of a soft biological material. Seedhom doesn't explicitly teach or disclose a medical textile comprising a tubular shape and an opening for insertion of a soft biological material.
Wyland discloses a medical textile (Fig. 1, 20) which comprises a tubular shape (Fig. 2, wherein 20 is tubular in shape), wherein the medical textile comprises an opening configured for insertion of a soft biological tissue (Fig. 2, 22, ¶0050, “connective tissue”) into the medical textile (Fig. 2, wherein 22 is inserted into 20), wherein particularly the first connecting section or the second connecting section of the medical implant forms a tubular structure (Fig. 2, wherein 30 forms a tubular structure),
wherein the tubular structure is arranged in the medical textile contacting the inner circumference of the medical textile (note: this claim language is optional as currently written) or
wherein the tubular structure is arranged at least partially around the outer circumference of the medical textile (Fig. 1, wherein the tubular structure of 30 is at least partially around the outer circumference), wherein the separated fibers of the tubular structure extend into or through the medical textile (Fig. 1, wherein separated fibers 40 extends into 30)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the medical implant of Melvin in view of Karabey in view of Seedhom with a medical textile, as taught by Wyland, in order to properly secure the medical textile and the medical implant once implanted in the body.
Regarding claim 12, Melvin doesn't explicitly teach or disclose at least one anchoring element. Karabey doesn't explicitly teach or disclose doesn't explicitly teach or disclose at least one anchoring element. Seedhom doesn't explicitly teach or disclose at least one anchoring element.
Wyland discloses at least one anchoring element (Fig. 5, screw 48) configured to be inserted into a bone (Fig. 5, wherein screw 48 is inserted into bone 46), wherien the anchoring element in connected to a medical implant (Fig. 5, ¶0056, wherein 48 is connected to 20)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the medical implant of Melvin in view of Karabey in view of Seedhom with an anchoring element, as taught by Wyland, in order to securely fasten the medical implant into bone.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, 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
Prosecution Insights