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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 07/08/26. Claim(s) 1, 11, and 18 have been amended, no new claims have been added, and no claims have been cancelled. Thus, claims 1-20 are presently pending in this application.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: "a first dynamic force mechanism", "a second dynamic force mechanism", "an actuator mechanism", and "a resilient force element" in claim 1; and "dynamic force mechanism", "an actuator mechanism", and "a resilient force element" in claim 11.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bonutti (2019/0343705).
With respect to claim 1, Bonutti discloses an orthosis (10, fig 1) for increasing range of motion of a body joint (see [0002]) comprising a first dynamic force mechanism (12, fig 1) configured to apply dynamic stretch to a first body portion of the body joint (see [0040]); a second dynamic force mechanism (14, fig 1) configured to apply dynamic stretch to a second body portion of the body joint (see [0040]); an actuator mechanism (16, fig 1) operatively connected to the first and second dynamic force mechanisms (see fig 1 and [0041]) to selectively transmit a flexion force and an extension force to the respective first and second dynamic force mechanisms (see [0044]); a first body portion securement member (24, fig 2) coupled to the first dynamic force mechanism (see fig 2) and configured to couple the first body portion to the first dynamic force mechanism (see [0040]); and a second body portion securement member (26, fig 2) coupled to the second dynamic force mechanism (see fig 2) and configured to couple the second body portion to the second dynamic force mechanism (see [0040]), wherein each of the first and second dynamic force mechanisms includes a resilient force element (108, fig 8 and [0048]) configured to selectively: i) apply a dynamic extension force to the respective first and second body portions when the first and second body portions are coupled to the respective first and second body portion securement members and the actuator mechanism is operated in a first direction to transmit the extension force to the respective first and second dynamic force mechanisms; and ii) apply a dynamic flexion force to the respective first and second body portions when the first and second body portions are coupled to the respective first and second body portion securement members and the actuator mechanism is operated in a second direction, opposite the first direction, to transmit the flexion force to the respective first and second dynamic force mechanisms (see [0044,48, and 53] where the direction of the knob adjusts the flexion or extension of the device thus the force element moves in two directions).
With respect to claim 2, Bonutti discloses the actuator mechanism includes first and second bell cranks (76, fig 1; two instances) operatively connected to the respective first and second dynamic force mechanisms (see fig 2 and [0047]).
With respect to claim 3, Bonutti discloses each of the first and second dynamic force mechanism comprises a lever arm (104, fig 2) pivotably connected to a corresponding one of the first and second bell cranks (see [0047]), wherein the resilient force element of each of the first and second dynamic force mechanisms is configured to act on the respective lever arm to apply the dynamic extension force and the dynamic flexion force (see fig 8 and [0048]).
With respect to claim 4, Bonutti discloses each resilient force element comprises a torsion spring (see [0048]) including first (108a, fig 8) and second spring arms (108b, fig 8).
With respect to claim 5, Bonutti discloses the first spring arm is configured to apply the dynamic extension force (see [0048-49]; note the spring is capable of applying force in the extension direction since they apply a counter force), wherein the second spring arm is configured to apply the dynamic flexion force (see [0048-49]).
With respect to claim 6, Bonutti discloses the second spring arm is configured to act on the corresponding bell crank (see [0048]) when the first spring arm is applying the dynamic extension force, wherein the first spring arm is configured to act on the corresponding bell crank when the second spring arm is applying the dynamic flexion force (see [0048-49]).
With respect to claim 7, Bonutti discloses each of the first and second dynamic force mechanisms includes a force-applying actuator (131, fig 8) coupled to the corresponding lever arm (see figs 2 and 8 and [0050] note the connection is via 76), wherein the first and second spring arms are configured to engage the force-applying actuator (see [0048]).
With respect to claim 8, Bonutti discloses each force-applying actuator comprises a pin (shaft 131, fig 8) secured to the corresponding lever arm (secured via pin 106, fig 2 and 10).
With respect to claim 9, Bonutti discloses the actuator mechanism is configured to rotate the first and second body portion securement members (see fig 2 and [0044]; note knob 48 is part of the actuator mechanism 16).
With respect to claim 10, Bonutti discloses the first and second dynamic force mechanisms are configured to rotate the respective first and second body portion securement members independently from the rotation of the first and second body portion securement members by the actuator mechanism (see [0055] by the anti-back off mechanism this action is achieved).
With respect to claim 11, Bonutti discloses an orthosis (10, fig 1) for increasing range of motion of a body joint (see [0002]) comprising a dynamic force mechanism (12, fig 1) configured to apply dynamic stretch to a body portion of the body joint (see [0040]); an actuator mechanism (16, fig 1) operatively connected to the dynamic force mechanism (see fig 1 and [0041]) to selectively transmit a flexion force and an extension force to the dynamic force mechanism (see [0044]); and a body portion securement member (24, fig 2) coupled to the dynamic force mechanism (see fig 2) and configured to couple the body portion to the dynamic force mechanism (see [0040]), wherein the dynamic force mechanism includes a resilient force element (108, fig 8 and [0048]) configured to selectively: i) apply a dynamic extension force to the body portion when the body portion is coupled to the body portion securement member and the actuator mechanism is operated in a first direction, to transmit the extension force to the dynamic force mechanism; and ii) apply a dynamic flexion force to the body portion when the body portion is coupled to the body portion securement member and the actuator mechanism is operated in a second direction, opposite the first direction, to transmit the flexion force to the dynamic force mechanism (see [0048 and 53]).
With respect to claim 12, Bonutti discloses the actuator mechanism includes a bell crank (76, fig 1) operatively connected to the dynamic force mechanism (see fig 2 and [0047]).
With respect to claim 13, Bonutti discloses the dynamic force mechanism comprises a lever arm (104, fig 2) pivotably connected to the bell crank (see [0047]), wherein the resilient force element is configured to act on the lever arm to selectively apply the dynamic extension force and the dynamic flexion force (see fig 8 and [0048]).
With respect to claim 14, Bonutti discloses the resilient force element comprises a torsion spring (see [0048]) including first (108a, fig 8) and second spring arms (108b, fig 8).
With respect to claim 15, Bonutti discloses the first spring arm is configured to apply the dynamic extension force (see [0048-49]; note the spring is capable of applying force in the extension direction since they apply a counter force), wherein the second spring arm is configured to apply the dynamic flexion force (see [0048-49]).
With respect to claim 16, Bonutti discloses the second spring arm is configured to act on the corresponding bell crank (see [0048]) when the first spring arm is applying the dynamic extension force, wherein the first spring arm is configured to act on the corresponding bell crank when the second spring arm is applying the dynamic flexion force (see [0048-49]).
With respect to claim 17, Bonutti discloses the dynamic force mechanism includes a force-applying actuator (131, fig 8) coupled to the corresponding lever arm (see figs 2 and 8 and [0050] note the connection is via 76), wherein the first and second spring arms are configured to engage the force-applying actuator (see [0048]).
With respect to claim 18, Bonutti discloses the force-applying actuator comprises a pin (shaft 131, fig 8) secured to the lever arm (secured via pin 106, fig 2 and 10).
With respect to claim 19, Bonutti discloses the actuator mechanism is configured to rotate the body portion securement member (see figs 12-15 and [0046]).
With respect to claim 20, Bonutti discloses dynamic force mechanisms are configured to rotate the respective first and second body portion securement members independently from the rotation of the first and second body portion securement members by the actuator mechanism (see [0055] by the anti-back off mechanism this action is achieved).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/08/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues on pg. 7 of the remarks that "In fact, Bonutti does not disclose any mechanism by which the torsion spring 108 could selectively apply either an extension force or a flexion force based on operating the actuator mechanism in opposite directions." This is not persuasive since Bonutti clearly states in paragraph 44 that the knob 48 is moved one direction for flexion and the opposite direction for extension, which means the force element moves in two directions as well to move the cuffs respectively. Thus, the rejection stands.
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 KELSEY E BALLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8153. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 4 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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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.
/KELSEY E BALLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TU A VO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights