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 .
According to the Amendment filed on 3/23/26, Claims 21, 28, 29 are amended, claims 30-32e withdrawn, claims 38-41 are canceled.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 28-29 are allowed.
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)(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) 21-26, 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Calandruccio (US 5743918 A).
Calandruccio discloses a method for delivering an implant 87, fig. 11-12, the method comprising:(a) inserting cylindrical portion (see modified figs. 22-23 below) of a head of a trial sizer 69, fig. 9-10 into a given space between bones of a patient; (b) determining whether the trial sizer fits into the space in an acceptable way (col. 10, lines 33- col. 12, line 31) , and: (i) if the trial sizer fits into the space in an acceptable way, delivering the implant to the space (col. 10, lines 33- col. 12, line 31); or (ii) if the trial sizer does not fit into the space in an acceptable way, sequentially repeating steps (a) and (b) with a trial sizer of a different size until a trial sizer fits into the space in an acceptable way (col. 10, lines 33- col. 12, line 31), further comprising excising a bone in a patient figs. 3-8 prior to inserting the trial sizer, wherein the bone is a trapezium bone fig. 1, wherein the space between bones is the space occupied by the trapezium bone in the carpometacarpal joint figs 2-12, wherein a peripheral surface of a head of the trial sizer faces bone fig. 9-10, wherein a first side and a second side of the head of the trial sizer faces bone fig. 9-10, wherein the trial sizer is selected from a kit having more than one trial sizers (col. 10, lines 33- col. 12, line 31).
PNG
media_image1.png
356
587
media_image1.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) 27, 34-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calandruccio in view of Gannoe (US 20090254190 A1).
Calandruccio fails to teach inserting a suture anchor into a first bone, wherein the first bone is a second metacarpal, wherein the suture anchor is inserted into a distal aspect of the first bone, fastening a soft-tissue allograft to the suture anchor, wherein delivering the implant to the space comprises using a suture delivery guide.
Gannoe teaches inserting a suture anchor 700, fig. 20 into a first bone, wherein the first bone is a second metacarpal (para. 68), wherein the suture anchor is inserted into a distal aspect of the first bone fig. 20, fastening a soft-tissue allograft (adjacent tendons) to the suture anchor to increase the stability of trapezial implant device (para. 69), wherein delivering the implant to the space comprises using a suture delivery guide 300, para. 68).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to modify the method of Calandruccio with fastening a soft-tissue allograft to a suture anchor delivered by using a suture delivery guide in view of Gannoe for effectively increase the stability of trapezial implant device .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Calandruccio fails to teach inserting cylindrical portion of a head of a trial sizer into a given space between bones of a patient.
Examiner respectfully disagrees since , the head 77 of the trial sizer 69 of Calandruccio may be considered cylindrical (see modified figs. 22-23 above)
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMEH RAAFAT BOLES whose telephone number is (571)270-5537. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 pm.
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, Kevin Truong can be reached at 571-272-4705. 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.
/SAMEH R BOLES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Prosecution Insights