DETAILEC 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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5, 23-27, 30-31, 33-35 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1, 2, 4, 23, 24, 26 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson (US 2007/0055244 A1) in view of Colleran et al. (US 2005/0216000 A1) and in view of Peterson (US 2008/0294202 A1) and in view of Jackson (US 2006/0058794 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jackson (244) discloses a method for securing an elongate rod to a bone of a patient with a pivotal bone anchor assembly (Abstract, paragraph [0014]), the method comprising:
providing a receiver (ref. 20, Fig. 8) having a longitudinal axis (see remarked Fig. 8 below), a base portion (see remarked Fig. 6 below) having a bottom surface (see remarked Fig. 6), and an upper portion having a pair of opposed upright arms (see remarked Fig. 6 below) extending upwardly from the base portion to define an open channel (ref. 156) therebetween configured to receive the elongate rod (Fig. 6), the open channel extending between a front facing portion and a back facing portion of the receiver (Fig. 5 shows a front surface located at ref. 150, the opposite back surface is hidden) and opening onto top surfaces of the upright arms to define a top of the receiver (ref. 154), the upright arms having interior surfaces with a discontinuous helically wound thread form formed therein (ref. 162) and outer side surfaces opposite the interior surfaces (Fig. 7 shows an outer surface opposite the inner surface), the outer side surfaces having first and second horizontal elongated instrument engaging grooves (HEIEG) formed therein (ref. 164) and being proximate the top surface of the receiver (Fig. 7), and extending to the front facing portion and back facing portion on each upright arm (Fig. 5), each of the first and second HEIEG including a downward- facing groove surface, an opposed upwardly-facing groove surface (paragraph [0079] and Figs. 7 – 9, see remarked Fig. 9 below);
providing an elongate rod-engaging insert configured to be positioned within the receiver (paragraph [0062], ref. 24, Fig. 5);
providing a shank having a distal end (Fig. 5, ref. 124), a head integral with the distal end having a partially spherically shaped with an outer continuous surface extending above and below a hemisphere thereof and entirely surrounded by an annular planar surface (paragraphs [0082-83], Fig. 5, refs. 22, 18 shows a partially spherical head, Fig. 5 shows a planar surface of head at ref. 192), the head including a central internal drive socket formed in an upper portion thereof (Fig. 5, ref. 144), the head of the shank configured to be positioned within the receiver and spaced apart from the elongate rod positioned within the open channel by the insert (Fig. 9);
providing a closure (ref. 30) configured to be positioned within the open channel to secure the elongate rod to the receiver in a locked configuration (Fig. 9), the closure comprising a cylindrical body (Fig. 5) having a central axis and an outer surface with a mating helically wound thread form formed thereon (Figs. 5, 9), the thread form of the closure being configured to limit splaying between the pair of upright arms upon rotatably advancing the closure within the open channel of the receiver (paragraph [0078] discloses that splaying is resisted, not prevented entirely), the thread form of the closure having a thread pitch (paragraph [0105]), an axially extending cylindrical root surface, an outer crest surface, an upper portion with a linear radially extending thrust surface (see remarked Figure 9 below, “upper thrust surface”) and a lower portion with a linear radially extending clearance surface (see remarked Fig. 9 below, “lower clearance surface), the linear radially extending clearance surface and the linear radially extending thrust surface sloping upwardly and outwardly with respect to the central axis of the cylindrical body of the closure (Fig. 9),
wherein when the pivotal bone anchor assembly is in the locked configuration, the closure does not extend over any part of the top surface of the upright arms (Fig. 9);
and with the distal end of the shank in the bone of the patient and the head positioned within the receiver, and with the elongate rod-engaging insert positioned in the receiver, and with the elongate rod in the open channel of the receiver, rotatably advancing the closure within the open channel of the receiver so as to secure the elongate rod to the receiver in the locked configuration (paragraphs [0096, 115]).
PNG
media_image1.png
393
683
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
667
861
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Jackson (244) is silent regarding the limitations that the HEIEG has an outwardly facing vertically extending groove surface; and the head being monolithic with the distal end of the shank; and that the entire lower clearance surface and that the entire outer crest surface of the thread form of the closure are spaced apart from the thread form of the receiver.
Colleran teaches an analogous method (Abstract) comprising a receiver (ref. 20) having an HCEIEG (Fig. 1 at “Fig. 5”) having a substantially square shape (Fig. 1), thus having a downward facing surface (top surface), outwardly-facing vertically extending surface (middle) and upwardly facing surface (bottom). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Jackson (244) such that the HCEIEG has an outwardly facing vertically extending groove or substantially square profile, as taught by Colleran, for the purpose of better mating with an insertion instrument and since applicant has not disclosed that such solve any stated problem or is anything more than one of numerous shapes or configurations a person ordinary skill in the art would find obvious for the purpose of providing a forming edge in the heating portion or clamp. In re Dailey and Eilers, 149 USPQ 47 (1966).
Peterson teaches an analogous method (Abstract) comprising a shank (Fig. 4, ref. 106) and a head (Fig. 4, ref. 104). Peterson teaches that the head may be separate or monolithic (paragraph [0006]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Jackson (244) such that the head is monolithically formed with the shank, as taught by Peterson, for the purpose of manufacturing simplicity.
Jackson (794) teaches an analogous method (Abstract) wherein the entire lower clearance surface of a closure (ref. 43) and the entire outer cylindrical crest surface of the thread form of the closure are spaced apart from the thread form of the receiver (Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Jackson (244) such that the entire lower clearance surface and the entire outer cylindrical crest surface of the thread form of the closure are spaced apart from the thread form of the receiver, as taught by Jackson (794) for the purpose of allowing considerably higher, more positive clamping force to be applied to the closure while also limiting splaying of the arms of the receiver (paragraph [0037]).
Regarding claim 2, Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Peterson and in view of Jackson (794) discloses the method of claim 1, wherein a distance between the outer crest surface and the axially extending cylindrical root surface defines a thread depth (Jackson (244), Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 4, Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Peterson and in view of Jackson (794) discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the cylindrical body of the closure further comprises a top end surface, a bottom end surface, and a plurality of vertical tool engagement surfaces aligned parallel with the central axis (Jackson (244), Fig. 6 best shows a plurality of vertical tool engagement surfaces in the form of a star pattern in a top surface of the closure).
Regarding claim 23, Jackson (244) discloses a method for securing an elongate rod to a bone of a patient with a pivotal bone anchor assembly (Abstract, paragraph [0014]), the method comprising:
providing a receiver (ref. 20, Fig. 8) having a longitudinal axis (see remarked Fig. 8 below), a base portion (see remarked Fig. 6 below) having a bottom surface (see remarked Fig. 6), and an upper portion having a pair of opposed upright arms (see remarked Fig. 6 below) extending upwardly from the base portion to define an open channel (ref. 156) therebetween configured to receive the elongate rod (Fig. 6), the open channel extending between a front facing portion and a back facing portion of the receiver (Fig. 5 shows a front surface located at ref. 150, the opposite back surface is hidden) and opening onto top surfaces of the upright arms to define a top of the receiver (ref. 154), the upright arms having interior surfaces with a discontinuous helically wound thread form formed therein (ref. 162) and outer side surfaces opposite the interior surfaces (Fig. 7 shows an outer surface opposite the inner surface), the outer side surfaces having first and second horizontal elongated instrument engaging grooves (HEIEG) formed therein (ref. 164) and being proximate the top surface of the receiver (Fig. 7), each of the first and second HEIEG including a downward- facing groove surface, an opposed upwardly-facing groove surface (paragraph [0079] and Figs. 7 – 9, see remarked Fig. 9 below);
providing an elongate rod-engaging insert configured to be positioned within the receiver (paragraph [0062], ref. 24, Fig. 5);
providing a shank having a distal end (Fig. 5, ref. 124), a head integral with the distal end having a partially spherically shaped with an outer continuous surface extending above and below a hemisphere thereof (paragraphs [0082-83], Fig. 5, refs. 22, 18 shows a partially spherical head, the head is considered to be integral because it is essential to the completeness of the bone anchor/shank and because the description uses the term “integral with the bone screw shank” in paragraph [0083]), the head including a central internal drive socket formed in an upper portion thereof (Fig. 5, ref. 144), and entirely surrounded by an annular planar surface (ref. 192), the head of the shank configured to be positioned within the receiver and spaced apart from the elongate rod positioned within the open channel by the insert (Fig. 9);
providing a closure (ref. 30) configured to be positioned within the open channel to secure the elongate rod to the receiver in a locked configuration (Fig. 9), the closure comprising a cylindrical body (Fig. 5) having a central axis and an outer surface with a mating helically wound thread form formed thereon (Figs. 5, 9), the thread form of the closure being configured to limit splaying between the pair of upright arms upon rotatably advancing the closure within the open channel of the receiver (paragraph [0078] discloses that splaying is resisted, not prevented entirely), the thread form of the closure having a thread pitch (paragraph [0105]), an axially extending cylindrical root surface, an outer crest surface, an upper portion with a linear radially extending thrust surface (see remarked Figure 9 below, “upper thrust surface”) and a lower portion with a linear radially extending clearance surface (see remarked Fig. 9 below, “lower clearance surface), the linear radially extending clearance surface and the linear radially extending thrust surface sloping upwardly and outwardly with respect to the central axis of the cylindrical body of the closure (Fig. 9),
wherein when the pivotal bone anchor assembly is in the locked configuration, the closure does not extend over any part of the top surface of the upright arms (Fig. 9);
and with the distal end of the shank in the bone of the patient and the head positioned within the receiver, and with the elongate rod-engaging insert positioned in the receiver, and with the elongate rod in the open channel of the receiver, rotatably advancing the closure within the open channel of the receiver so as to secure the elongate rod to the receiver in the locked configuration (paragraphs [0096, 115]).
PNG
media_image1.png
393
683
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
667
861
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Jackson (244) is silent regarding the limitations that the HEIEG has an outwardly facing vertically extending groove surface; and that the head is monolith with the distal end of the shaft; and that the entire lower clearance surface and the entire outer crest surface of the thread form of the closure are spaced apart from the thread form of the receiver.
Colleran teaches an analogous method (Abstract) comprising a receiver (ref. 20) having an HCEIEG (Fig. 1 at “Fig. 5”) having a substantially square shape (Fig. 1), thus having a downward facing surface (top surface), outwardly-facing vertically extending surface (middle) and upwardly facing surface (bottom). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Jackson (244) such that the HEIEG has an outwardly facing vertically extending groove or substantially square profile, as taught by Colleran, for the purpose of better mating with an insertion instrument and since applicant has not disclosed that such solve any stated problem or is anything more than one of numerous shapes or configurations a person ordinary skill in the art would find obvious for the purpose of providing a forming edge in the heating portion or clamp. In re Dailey and Eilers, 149 USPQ 47 (1966).
Peterson teaches an analogous method (Abstract) comprising a shank (Fig. 4, ref. 106) and a head (Fig. 4, ref. 104). Peterson teaches that the head may be separate or monolithic (paragraph [0006]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Jackson (244) such that the head is monolithically formed with the shank, as taught by Peterson, for the purpose of manufacturing simplicity.
Jackson (794) teaches an analogous method (Abstract) wherein the entire lower clearance surface of a closure (ref. 43) and the entire outer cylindrical crest surface of the thread form of the closure are spaced apart from the thread form of the receiver (Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Jackson (244) such that the entire lower clearance surface and the entire outer cylindrical crest surface of the thread form of the closure are spaced apart from the thread form of the receiver, as taught by Jackson (794) for the purpose of allowing considerably higher, more positive clamping force to be applied to the closure while also limiting splaying of the arms of the receiver (paragraph [0037]).
Regarding claim 24, Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Peterson and in view of Jackson (794) discloses the method of claim 23, wherein a distance between the outer crest surface and the axially extending cylindrical root surface defines a thread depth (this definition may apply to both Jackson references).
Regarding claim 26, Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Peterson and in view of Jackson (794) discloses the method of claim 23, wherein the cylindrical body of the closure further comprises a top end surface, a bottom end surface, and a plurality of vertical tool engagement surfaces aligned parallel with the central axis (Jackson (244), Fig. 6 best shows a plurality of vertical tool engagement surfaces in the form of a star pattern in a top surface of the closure).
Claim(s) 3 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson (US 2007/0055244 A1) in view of in view of Colleran et al. (US 2005/021600 A1) and in view of Peterson (US 2008/0294202 A1) and in view of Jackson (US 2006/0058794 A1) and in view of DeLange et al. (US 5,092,635) and further in view of Corradi et al. (US 2005/0267478 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Peterson and in view of Jackson (794) discloses the method of claim 2, except wherein the thread pitch is greater than twice the thread depth.
Regarding claim 25, Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Peterson and in view of Jackson (794) discloses the method of claim 24, except wherein the thread pitch is greater than twice the thread depth.
DeLange discloses a thread form (Abstract) in the related field of helical wound thread forms in which a thread depth (L8, Fig. 2) is within a range of 0.02 inches and 0.100 inches. (Col. 4, table). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the closure of Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Jackson (794) such that the thread depth is in a range of 0.05 to 0.9 mm (the range as taught by DeLange is inclusive), as taught by DeLange, for the purpose of better preventing the occurrence of cross-threading while also maintaining structural integrity.
Corradi teaches a surgical fastener (Abstract) having a pitch which can be 0.050 inches (paragraph [0101]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the closure of Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Jackson (794) and in view of DeLange, such that the pitch is 0.050 inches, for the purpose of better load distribution (the forces between the closure and receiver will be more evenly distributed across the threads). Note that the pitch would be greater than twice the thread depth given the taught ranges.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson (US 2007/0055244 A1) in view of in view of Colleran et al. (US 2005/021600 A1) and in view of Peterson (US 2008/0294202 A1) and in view of Jackson (US 2006/0058794 A1) and in view of Mueller (US 2006/0200128 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Peterson and in view of Jackson (794) discloses the method of claim 4, except wherein the mating helically wound thread form on the closure is configured as a dual lead thread form with diametrically opposite start structure adjacent the bottom end surface.
Mueller teaches an analogous method and device (Abstract, Fig. 1) comprising a closure having a helically wound thread form configured as a dual lead thread form with diametrically opposite start structures (paragraph [0020]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Jackson (244) in view of Jackson (794) such that the mating helically wound thread form on the closure is configured as a dual lead thread form with diametrically opposite start structure adjacent the bottom end surface, as taught by Mueller for the purpose of preventing cross threading (Mueller, paragraph [0020]).
Claim(s) 30, 31, 33 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson (US 2007/0055244 A1) in view of in view of Colleran et al. (US 2005/021600 A1) and in view of Peterson (US 2008/0294202 A1) and in view of Jackson (US 2005/0182410 A1).
Regarding claim 30, Jackson (244) discloses a method for securing an elongate rod to a bone of a patient with a pivotal bone anchor assembly (Abstract, paragraph [0014]), the method comprising:
providing a receiver (ref. 20, Fig. 8) having a longitudinal axis (see remarked Fig. 8 below), a base portion (see remarked Fig. 6 below) having a bottom surface (see remarked Fig. 6), and an upper portion having a pair of opposed upright arms (see remarked Fig. 6 below) extending upwardly from the base portion to define an open channel (ref. 156) therebetween configured to receive the elongate rod (Fig. 6), the open channel extending between a front facing portion and a back facing portion of the receiver (Fig. 5 shows a front surface located at ref. 150, the opposite back surface is hidden) and opening onto top surfaces of the upright arms to define a top of the receiver (ref. 154), the upright arms having interior surfaces with a discontinuous helically wound thread form formed therein (ref. 162); and outer side surfaces opposite the interior surfaces (Fig. 7 shows an outer surface opposite the inner surface), the outer side surfaces having first and second horizontal elongated instrument engaging grooves (HEIEG) formed therein (ref. 164) and being proximate the top surface of the receiver (Fig. 7), each of the first and second HEIEG including a downward-facing groove surface, an opposed upwardly-facing groove surface (paragraph [0079] and Figs. 7 – 9, see remarked Fig. 9 below);
providing an elongate rod-engaging insert configured to be positioned within the receiver (paragraph [0062], ref. 24, Fig. 5);
providing a shank having a distal end (Fig. 5, ref. 124), a head integral with the distal end having a partially spherically shaped with an outer continuous surface extending above and below a hemisphere thereof (paragraphs [0082-83], Fig. 5, refs. 22, 18 shows a partially spherical head, the head is considered to be integral because it is essential to the completeness of the bone anchor/shank and because the description uses the term “integral with the bone screw shank” in paragraph [0083]), and entirely surrounded by an annular planar surface (ref. 192), the head including a central internal drive socket formed in an upper portion thereof (Fig. 5, ref. 144), the head of the shank configured to be positioned within the receiver and spaced apart from the elongate rod positioned within the open channel by the insert (Fig. 9);
providing a closure (ref. 30) configured to be positioned within the open channel to secure the elongate rod to the receiver in a locked configuration (Fig. 9), the closure comprising a cylindrical body (Fig. 5) having a central axis and an outer surface with a mating helically wound thread form formed thereon (Figs. 5, 9), the thread of the closure being configured to limit splaying between the pair of upright arms upon rotatably advancing the closure within the open channel of the receiver (paragraph [0078] discloses that splaying is resisted, not prevented entirely), the thread of the closure having a thread pitch (paragraph [0105]), an axially extending cylindrical root surface, an outer thread portion having a first height (the height of the crest surface measured axially), an axially extending base opposite the outer thread portion having a second height (the height of the thread at the root measured axially), an upper portion with a linear radially extending thrust surface (see remarked Figure 9 below, “upper thrust surface”) and a lower portion with a linear radially extending clearance surface (see remarked Fig. 9 below, “lower clearance surface), the linear radially extending thrust surface extending outwardly and perpendicular with respect to the central axis of the cylindrical body of the closure (Fig. 9 shows a portion of the thrust surface, radially closer to the root before the sloped “toe”, extending perpendicularly),
wherein when the pivotal bone anchor assembly is in the locked configuration, the closure does not extend over any part of the top surface of the upright arms (Fig. 9); and
with the distal end of the shank in the bone of the patient and the head positioned within the receiver, and with the elongate rod-engaging insert positioned in the receiver, and with the elongate rod in the open channel of the receiver, rotatably advancing the closure within the open channel of the receiver so as to secure the elongate rod to the receiver in the locked configuration (paragraphs [0096, 115]).
PNG
media_image1.png
393
683
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
667
861
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Jackson (244) is silent regarding the limitations that the HEIEG has an outwardly facing vertically extending groove surface; and where the head is monolithic with the distal end of the shaft; and wherein the first height is less than or equal to the second height and that the entire lower clearance surface and the entire outer cylindrical crest surface of the thread form of the closure are spaced apart from the thread form of the receiver.
Colleran teaches an analogous method (Abstract) comprising a receiver (ref. 20) having an HCEIEG (Fig. 1 at “Fig. 5”) having a substantially square shape (Fig. 1), thus having a downward facing surface (top surface), outwardly-facing vertically extending surface (middle) and upwardly facing surface (bottom). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Jackson (244) such that the HEIEG has an outwardly facing vertically extending groove or substantially square profile, as taught by Colleran, for the purpose of better mating with an insertion instrument and since applicant has not disclosed that such solve any stated problem or is anything more than one of numerous shapes or configurations a person ordinary skill in the art would find obvious for the purpose of providing a forming edge in the heating portion or clamp. In re Dailey and Eilers, 149 USPQ 47 (1966).
Peterson teaches an analogous method (Abstract) comprising a shank (Fig. 4, ref. 106) and a head (Fig. 4, ref. 104). Peterson teaches that the head may be separate or monolithic (paragraph [0006]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Jackson (244) such that the head is monolithically formed with the shank, as taught by Peterson, for the purpose of manufacturing simplicity.
Jackson (410) teaches an analogous method (Abstract) wherein a first height is less than or equal to a second height (Figs. 16 – 17 show the height of the thread being substantially equal and, in some portions, at ref. 125, being less than a root height) and that an entire lower clearance surface and an entire outer cylindrical crest surface of the thread form of the closure are spaced apart from the thread form of the receiver (Figs. 16 – 17). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the thread profile and the method of Jackson (244) such that the first height is less than or equal to the second height and the entire lower clearance surface and the entire outer cylindrical crest surface of the thread form of the closure are spaced apart from the thread form of the receiver, as taught by Jackson (410) for the purpose of allowing considerably higher, more positive clamping force to be applied to the closure while also limiting splaying of the arms of the receiver (paragraph [0051]).
Regarding claim 31, Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Peterson and in view of Jackson (7410) discloses the method of claim 30, wherein a distance between a cylindrical crest surface on the outer thread portion and the axially extending cylindrical root surface defines a thread depth (this definition may be applied to any of the applied art).
Regarding claim 33, Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Peterson and in view of Jackson (7410) discloses the method of claim 30, wherein the cylindrical body of the closure further comprises a top end surface, a bottom end surface, and a plurality of vertical tool engagement surfaces aligned parallel with the central axis (Jackson (244), Figs. 5 – 6, paragraph [0089], ref. 262).
Regarding claim 35, Jackson (244) in view of Colleran and in view of Peterson and in view of Jackson (7410) discloses the method of claim 30, except wherein pitch is between 0.039 inches and 0.060 inches. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the thread form such that the pitch is between 0.039 inches and 0.060 inches for purpose of providing a relatively fine pitch for increased resistance to loosening under vibration and, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 27 and 34 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.
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 TESSA M MATTHEWS whose telephone number is (571)272-8817. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8am - 1pm.
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.
/TESSA M MATTHEWS/Examiner, Art Unit 3773
Prosecution Insights