Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/236,730

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SECURELY ATTACHING AN ANCHOR TO AN IMPLANT BODY

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Aug 22, 2023
Examiner
COLEY, ZADE JAMES
Art Unit
3775
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Nexus Spine, LLC
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
555 granted / 773 resolved
+1.8% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
805
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.6%
-38.4% vs TC avg
§103
41.3%
+1.3% vs TC avg
§102
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
§112
18.0%
-22.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 773 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 29 requires the anchor head to be a “frustospherical” shape. The written specification does not mention this shape and while it looks like the drawings may show a frustospherical shape it is not guaranteed that is what is being shown. 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)(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. Claim(s) 1-2, 9, and 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ensign et al. (US 2008/0140075; “Ensign”). Claim 1, Ensign discloses an implant (Fig. 5) comprising: an anchor (102) comprising an anchor head (110) that comprises a socket (124); an implant body (104, 106) comprising: a rod (104); and a coupler (106) comprising: a top (where 400 points) defining a first opening (where 400 points); a bottom (Fig. 7B; where 200 points) opposite the top (fig. 7B) and defining a second opening (200); a receptacle (Fig. 7B; where 755 generally points) configured to receive the anchor head through the second opening (Figs. 6-7B; paragraph [0042]); and a groove (the groove that 755 points towards which includes the upper shoulder to create a “groove”) formed around an inner perimeter of the receptacle (Fig. 7B; paragraph [0042]), wherein a portion of the anchor head is configured to be received within the groove when the anchor head is disposed within the receptacle (Figs. 6-7B; paragraph [0042]). Claim 2, Ensign discloses the implant of claim 1, wherein the groove is spaced apart from the first opening and the second opening (Fig. 7B; paragraph [0042]). Claim 9, Ensign discloses the implant of claim 1, wherein the groove is formed around an entirety of the inner perimeter of the receptacle (Fig. 7B; paragraph [0042]). Claim 28, Ensign discloses an implant (Fig. 5) comprising: an anchor (102) comprising an anchor head (110) having a socket (124) and substantially spherical shape (Fig. 5); a coupler (106) having: a top (where 400 points) defining a first opening (where 400 points); a bottom (Fig. 7B; where 200 points) opposite the top and defining a second opening (Fig. 7B); a receptacle (where 755 generally points) configured to receive the anchor head through the second opening (Fig. 6); and a groove (the groove that 755 points towards which includes the upper shoulder to create a “groove”) formed around an inner perimeter of the receptacle (Fig. 7B; paragraph [0042]), wherein a portion of the anchor head is configured to be retained by interference within the groove when the anchor head is disposed within the receptacle (Fig.7B; paragraph [0042]). Claim 29, Ensign discloses the implant of claim 28, wherein the anchor head comprises a frustospherical shape (Fig. 5; inasmuch as the applicant’s head is this shape). Claim(s) 20 and 22-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Brace et al. (US 6575975; “Brace”). Claim 20, Brace discloses an implant (Fig. 6) comprising: an implant body (body of the plate) coupled to a coupler (Fig. 5; 14) comprising a receptacle (26), the receptacle defining an opening (Fig. 4; upper opening that 26 points near) and a groove (Fig. 4; 40) that is disposed away from the opening (Fig. 4); an anchor (Fig. 6; 32) configured to be secured to a body of a patient (Fig. 6; abstract), the anchor comprising an anchor head (38) configured to be inserted through the opening (Fig. 6) and to be retained within the receptacle (Fig. 6; col. 4), wherein at least a portion of the anchor head is configured to extend into the groove (Fig. 6), and wherein the anchor head defines a socket (where 46 points); and a rivet (Fig. 6; 34) comprising a projection (58) configured to fit into and be retained within the socket (Fig. 6), wherein when the projection is disposed within the socket, the anchor head is more tightly retained within the groove, and consequently more tightly retained within the receptacle (Fig. 6; col. 4). Claim 22, Brace discloses an implant (Fig. 6) comprising: an anchor (32) comprising an anchor head (38) that defines a socket (46) that defines an opening (46); an implant body (body of the plate) comprising a coupler (Fig. 4; 14) that is configured to couple to the implant body (Fig. 6) and that defines a receptacle (Fig. 5; 26) that is configured to receive the anchor (Fig. 6); a rivet (Fig. 6; 34) comprising a projection (58) that is configured to be received within the socket (Fig. 6), wherein the projection is configured to have an expanded configuration (configuration when the rivet is in the socket) and an unexpanded configuration (not fully seated or out of the socket), and wherein a portion of the projection is larger than the opening of the socket when the projection is in the expanded configuration (Fig. 6; on the right side note how the head 58 is larger than the lower region of the opening); a passage (Fig. 8; 34) formed in the projection; and a plug (plug can be the other screw or the screwdriver used to insert 34) configured to be slidably inserted into the passage to place the projection in the expanded configuration (Fig. 6; screw and/or a screwdriver can place the rivet 34 into the socket). Claim 23, Brace discloses the implant of claim 22, further defining a groove (Figs. 4-5; 40) formed in an inner perimeter of the receptacle (Fig. 5), the groove being disposed away from an opening (opening is at the top or bottom of 14 and the groove 40 is in the middle region) of the receptacle. Claim 24, Brace discloses the implant of claim 23, wherein a rounded portion (Fig. 7; head is a round circle shape) of the anchor head is configured to be received within the groove when the anchor head is disposed within the receptacle (Fig. 6). Claim 25, Brace discloses the implant of claim 23, wherein the groove is formed around an entirety of the inner perimeter of the receptacle (Figs. 4-5). Claim 26, Brace discloses the implant of claim 22 wherein the plug further comprises a plug head (Fig. 6; for the screw it is screw head, if screwdriver it would be the handle) and a plug body (Fig. 6; if it’s the opposite screw, it is the threaded shaft, if it is the screwdriver it would be the shaft of the screwdriver), and wherein the plug head has a greater diameter than the plug body (Fig. 6, screw head larger than screw shaft and driver handle is larger than driver shaft on a typical screwdriver), such that the plug head is configured to hold the projection in the expanded configuration (the user can push on the screw head to help hold the plug in place or could use the screwdriver handle to push and hold the plug into place). Claim 27, Brace discloses the implant of claim 22, wherein the implant body further comprises a rod (Fig. 1; the cross bars between the screw holes). 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) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brace et al. (US 6575975; “Brace”), in view of Winslow et al. (US 8430916; ‘Winslow”). Claim 21, Brace discloses the implant of claim 20, wherein the projection defines a passage (Fig. 8; 34) configured to receive a plug that is configured to prevent removal of the projection from the socket when the plug is disposed within the passage (Figs. 6-8; a t-shaped plug could be placed in the channel 34 that will prevent the user from unscrewing the rivet 34). However, Brace does not disclose a passage extending through the rivet from the first end to the second end. Winslow teaches an implant (Fig. 4D) wherein all the parts are cannulated (Fig. 4D), which results in a passage that runs through all the parts from first ends to second ends (Fig. 4D). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to cannulate the implant of Brace as taught by Winslow, in order to allow for the user to either inject medicine or guide the device over a guidewire to the surgical site (col. 13, line 34 – col. 14, line 8). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-8 and 10-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 3 requires the limitations of claim 1 along with a rivet with special features listed in claim 3. Ensign does not disclose a rivet as required by claim 3. Other cited art fails to teach all the limitations. Brace was used in some claims since it has many parts including one that can be considered a rivet (see action above). However, Brace does not disclose the limitation in claim 1 wherein the anchor head is inserted through the bottom opening of the implant. Response to Arguments In response to Applicant’s amendments and/or arguments. Either the claim has been rejected by new art or the rejection points out how limitations are met. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Zade Coley whose telephone number is (571)270-1931. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (9-5) PT. 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. /Zade Coley/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 22, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 24, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Oct 02, 2025
Interview Requested
Oct 09, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 09, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 13, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 04, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jan 28, 2026
Interview Requested
Feb 06, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 27, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599441
TORQUE SENSOR WITH DECISION SUPPORT AND RELATED SYSTEMS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599403
METHODS, SYSTEMS, AND DEVICES FOR SURGICAL ACCESS AND INSERTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12575871
KIT OF ORTHOPEDIC TOOLS AND BITS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12551256
INSTRUMENTS AND RELATED METHODS FOR BREAKING REDUCTION TABS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12551311
ADJUSTABLE CLAVICLE HOOK PLATE MEASUREMENT GAUGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+25.4%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 773 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month