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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of group I in the reply filed on 03 August 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McKinnon et al (U.S. 2020/0275976). McKinnon discloses (par. 0257) a processor; and a memory storing data for processing by the processor, the data, when processed, causes the processor to (par. 0232-0233): receive a set of inputs for a surgical procedure for a patient; determine one or more potential plans for the surgical procedure based at least in part on the set of inputs and a machine learning model; receive a selection of a plan from the one or more potential plans; determine a plurality of surgical instruments corresponding to the plan from the selection; and provide an output that indicates the plurality of surgical instruments to load in a surgical tray (par. 0279).
Regarding claim 2, McKinnon discloses (par. 0279) the data stored in the memory that, when processed causes the processor to provide the output that indicates the plurality of surgical instruments to load in the surgical tray further causes the system to: display, via a user interface, a suggestion of the plurality of surgical instruments to load in the surgical tray.
Regarding claim 3, McKinnon discloses (par. 0279) the data stored in the memory that, when processed causes the processor to provide the output that indicates the plurality of surgical instruments to load in the surgical tray further causes the system to: load the plurality of surgical instruments into the surgical tray.
Regarding claim 4, McKinnon discloses (par. 0228) the data stored in the memory that, when processed causes the processor to determine the one or more potential plans for the surgical procedure further causes the system to: compare the set of inputs for the surgical procedure with historical data of previously performed surgical procedures to determine the one or more potential plans based at least in part on a similarity index.
Regarding claim 5, McKinnon discloses (par. 0228) the memory stores further data for processing by the processor that, when processed, causes the processor to: display, via a user interface, one or more similarity index values for each of the one or more potential plans.
Regarding claim 6, McKinnon discloses (par. 0231) the historical data of previously performed surgical procedures comprises at least procedure and instrument flow and abnormalities for the previously performed surgical procedures.
Regarding claim 7, McKinnon discloses (par. 0265) the similarity index comprises at least a three-dimensional model.
Regarding claim 8, McKinnon discloses (par. 0207) the memory stores further data for processing by the processor that, when processed, causes the processor to: provide a position suggestion for the surgical procedure for the patient corresponding to the plan from the selection.
Regarding claim 9, McKinnon discloses (par. 0279) the memory stores further data for processing by the processor that, when processed, causes the processor to: receive one or more changes to the plan from the selection, wherein the plurality of surgical instruments to load in the surgical tray are determined based at least in part on the one or more changes.
Regarding claim 10, McKinnon discloses (par. 0176) the memory stores further data for processing by the processor that, when processed, causes the processor to: provide a cut sectional view for the surgical procedure for the patient based at least in part on the set of inputs; and provide one or more cut sectional views for the one or more potential plans based at least in part on historical surgical data corresponding to the one or more potential plans, wherein the selection of the plan from the one or more potential plans is received based at least in part on a comparison of the cut sectional view for the surgical procedure and the one or more cut sectional views for the one or more potential plans.
Regarding claim 11, McKinnon discloses (par. 0199) the memory stores further data for processing by the processor that, when processed, causes the processor to: receive feedback after the surgical procedure for the patient is performed based at least in part on the output that indicates the plurality of surgical instruments to load in the surgical tray.
Regarding claim 12, McKinnon discloses (par. 0199) the feedback is used, in part, to train the machine learning model.
Regarding claim 13, McKinnon discloses (par. 0233) the one or more potential plans are determined based at least in part on a disease state corresponding to the surgical procedure for a patient.
Regarding claim 14, McKinnon discloses (par. 0229) the set of inputs for the surgical procedure comprises at least patient demographic data.
Regarding claim 15, McKinnon discloses (par. 0279) the output that indicates the plurality of surgical instruments to load in the surgical tray comprises an order for loading the plurality of surgical instruments in the surgical tray.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEBORAH L MALAMUD whose telephone number is (571)272-2106. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 1:00-9:30 Eastern.
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, Unsu Jung can be reached at (571) 272-8506. 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.
/DEBORAH L MALAMUD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights