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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-10 and 12-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gustine et al. (US 8992579 B1) (hereon referred to as Gustine).
Regarding claim 1 (first interpretation), Gustine teaches a connector (702) for slidably connecting an anchoring device (708) to a rod (704) in a spinal correction system (see Figs. 72-81), comprising:
a body (706), wherein the body (706) has a first tubular opening (725),
a coupling mechanism (710) for coupling the body (706) to the anchoring device (708),
a guiding mechanism (766) provided in said first tubular opening (725) and arranged to guide the rod (704) in a sliding movement along a longitudinal direction of the rod (see Col. 23, ll. 46-67),
wherein said guiding mechanism (766) has at least two guiding portions (each bearing 766) provided at a mutual distance in said first tubular opening directly contacting the rod (see Col. 24, ll. 51-67) and acting as a constraining conduit for the rod (see Col. 24, ll. 1-40) and is further arranged to prevent any movement, with respect to the rod (704), other than a translation along the longitudinal direction of the rod and a rotation around said longitudinal direction of the rod (see Col. 24, ll. 40-67).
Regarding claim 2, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 1, wherein the guiding mechanism (766) is arranged to prevent any rotation of the body with respect to the rod in any plane containing the longitudinal direction or axis of the rod (see Col. 24, ll. 40-67, noting that the locked position will prevent unwanted movement of the rod).
Regarding claim 3, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 1, wherein the at least two guiding portions (766) are provided at opposite ends of the first tubular opening (see Fig. 81).
Regarding claim 4, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 1, wherein the first tubular opening (725) has a first internal diameter (formed at 726, 727), the guiding portions (766) have a second internal diameter, and the first internal diameter is larger than the second internal diameter (note that 766 is configured to sit inside 726, 727, inherently requiring the guiding portion 766 to have a smaller diameter than the corresponding internal diameter of the tubular opening. Also see Col. 24, ll. 51-67 and Fig. 81).
Regarding claim 6, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 1, wherein the guiding portions are spherical bearings (note that the guiding portions 766 are generally spherical in shape and function as a bearing).
Regarding claim 7, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 1, wherein the guiding portions (766) are slid inside the body (706) through slot openings (726, 727) in the body (see Col. 23, ll. 46-67).
Regarding claim 8, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 1, wherein the guiding portions (766) are slid inside the body (706) via one end of the first tubular opening (see Col. 24, ll. 40-67).
Regarding claim 9, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 8, wherein the guiding portions (766) are fixed using a thread mechanism (738).
Regarding claim 12, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 1, wherein the body (706) has a locking mechanism (738) for locking the rod (704) in a fixed position with respect to the body (see Col. 24, ll. 40-67).
Regarding claim 13, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 1, wherein the coupling mechanism (710) has a second tubular opening (734) for receiving a stationary rod (728), said second tubular opening (734) having a direction substantially parallel to the direction of the first tubular opening (see Fig. 72).
Regarding claim 14, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 13, wherein the coupling mechanism (710) has a locking mechanism (738) for locking the stationary rod (728) with respect to the coupling mechanism (see Col. 24, ll. 4-19).
Regarding claim 15, Gustine teaches a connector assembly (700, see Fig. 72) for spinal correction comprising:
the connector according to the connector according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above); and
an anchoring device (708) for anchoring to the spine (see Col. 24, ll. 31-50), said anchoring device being coupled to the connector (702) via the coupling mechanism (710) of the connector (see Col. 24, ll. 31-50).
Regarding claim 16, Gustine teaches the connector assembly according to claim 15, wherein the anchoring device (708) has a stationary rod (728).
Regarding claim 17, Gustine teaches the connector assembly according to claim 15, wherein the anchoring device (708) has one or more anchoring elements (754) for anchoring in one or more vertebrae (see Col. 24, ll. 31-50).
Regarding claim 18, Gustine teaches the connector assembly according to claim 16, wherein the stationary rod (704) is fixed by two anchoring elements in two neighboring vertebrae (see Col. 23, ll. 14-32).
Regarding claim 19, Gustine teaches a spinal correction system comprising the rod (704) for spinal correction and at least one said connector according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 20, Gustine teaches the spinal correction system according to claim 19, further comprising an anchoring device (708) to form a connector assembly with the at least one connector (702), said anchoring device (708) being coupled to the connector (702) via the coupling mechanism (710) of the connector (see Col. 24, ll. 31-50).
Regarding claim 21, Gustine teaches the spinal correction system according to claim 20, further comprising one or more anchors for anchoring the rod in the spine (see Col. 23, ll. 14-32).
Regarding claim 22, Gustine teaches a kit of parts comprising at least two of a connector according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), an anchoring device (708), and a rod (704; see Col. 23, ll. 14-32).
Regarding claim 23, Gustine teaches a method for providing a spinal correction to a patient (see claim 9), comprising the steps of:
providing a rod for attachment to the spine of the patient (see Col. 33, ll. 6-11);
providing an anchoring device for attachment to the spine of the patient (see Col. 32, ll. 31-34);
providing the connector according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above) for connection to the rod and the anchoring device (see Col. 33, ll. 6-11); and
coupling the connector to the rod (see Col. 33, ll. 12-15).
Regarding claim 24, Gustine teaches the method according to claim 23, further comprising coupling the connector to the anchoring device (see Col. 32, ll. 35-51).
Regarding claim 1 (second interpretation), Gustine teaches a connector (702) for slidably connecting an anchoring device (708) to a rod (704) in a spinal correction system (see Figs. 72-81), comprising:
a body (706), wherein the body (706) has a first tubular opening (725),
a coupling mechanism (710) for coupling the body (706) to the anchoring device (708),
a guiding mechanism (766) provided in said first tubular opening (725) and arranged to guide the rod (704) in a sliding movement along a longitudinal direction of the rod (see Col. 23, ll. 46-67),
wherein said guiding mechanism (consisting of 732 and 766) has at least two guiding portions (each bearing 766 and portion 732) provided at a mutual distance in said first tubular opening directly contacting the rod (see Col. 24, ll. 51-67) and acting as a constraining conduit for the rod (see Col. 24, ll. 1-40) and is further arranged to prevent any movement, with respect to the rod (704), other than a translation along the longitudinal direction of the rod and a rotation around said longitudinal direction of the rod (see Col. 24, ll. 40-67).
Regarding claim 5, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 1, wherein each guiding portion (766) has a bearing and a bearing holder (732).
Regarding claim 10, Gustine teaches the connector according to claim 5, wherein the bearing holders (732) are fixed using a thread mechanism (738).
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McClintock et al. (US 20090204156 A1) (hereon referred to as McClintock).
Regarding claim 1, McClintock teaches a connector (100B) for slidably connecting an anchoring device (S2 connected to R2, see Para. [0011]) to a rod (R1) in a spinal correction system (see Figs. 5A-5B), comprising:
a body (10B), wherein the body (10B) has a first tubular opening (2),
a coupling mechanism (R2) for coupling the body (10B) to the anchoring device (S2),
a guiding mechanism (10, 11) provided in said first tubular opening (2) and arranged to guide the rod (R2) in a sliding movement along a longitudinal direction of the rod (see Para. [0054]),
wherein said guiding mechanism (10) has at least two guiding portions (each bearing 10) provided at a mutual distance in said first tubular opening (see Fig. 5B) directly contacting the rod (see Para. [0054]) and acting as a constraining conduit for the rod (see Para. [0054]) and is further arranged to prevent any movement, with respect to the rod (R2), other than a translation along the longitudinal direction of the rod and a rotation around said longitudinal direction of the rod (see Para. [0054]).
Regarding claim 11, McClintock teaches the connector according to claim 1, further comprising a spring (11) for constraining the translation of the rod along its longitudinal direction (see Para. [0054]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-24 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 HOLLY J LANE whose telephone number is (703)756-4702. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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.
/H.J.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3773
/JULIANNA N HARVEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3773
Prosecution Insights