Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/368,980

SYSTEM OF MODULAR REAMERS AND BROACHES

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 15, 2023
Examiner
LAWSON, MATTHEW JAMES
Art Unit
3619
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Zimmer, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
795 granted / 1081 resolved
+21.5% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
1125
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
40.6%
+0.6% vs TC avg
§102
32.9%
-7.1% vs TC avg
§112
22.4%
-17.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1081 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on December 12th, 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on December 12th, 2025. 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. 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: coupling mechanism in claims 3 and 13, see [0017] for the structure (quick-release adapter) and equivalents thereof. 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 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, 5-11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schnieders et al. (US 2005/0288676). Regarding claim 1, Schnieders et al. disclose a system of modular reamers and broaches configured to prepare a bone of a patient for one of a plurality of different implants, the system comprising a reamer (100/102) configured to ream a portion of the bone (¶60-61), the reamer including a cutting edge (see figure below) extending longitudinally; and a handle (the portion of the drill which couples to the cutting edge, ¶5 in view of ¶60) extending longitudinally and removably attached to the cutting edge, the handle configured to rotate the reamer about a central axis of the reamer; and a broach (20) configured to prepare a medullary cavity of the bone to prepare the bone to receive one of the plurality of different implants (figure 11), the broach including a stem (24) extending longitudinally and a plurality of different broach heads (22’s, figure 2), each of the plurality of different broach heads configured to prepare the medullary cavity for one of the plurality of different implants (¶32, ¶45). Regarding claim 5, Schnieders et al. disclose the plurality of different implants includes a fracture implant, a limb salvage implant, or a revision implant (¶32, ¶45, if one so chooses to use the system with one of these functionally recited implants). Regarding claim 6, Schnieders et al. disclose the plurality of different broach heads includes a fracture implant broach head, a limb salvage implant broach head, and a revision implant broach head (¶32, ¶45, if one so chooses to use the system with one of these functionally recited implants). Regarding claim 7, Schnieders et al. disclose the stem of each of the plurality of different broaches tapers radially towards a central axis as the stem extends longitudinally away from a portion of the stem that attaches to the plurality of different broach heads (figures 2-3, 5). Regarding claim 8, Schnieders et al. disclose a system for a modular broach and reamer configured to prepare a bone of a patient for a fracture imp]lant, a limb salvage implant, or a revision implant, the system comprising a plurality of different reamers (100, 102) configured to ream a portion of the bone, each reamer of the plurality of different reamers (¶60-61) including a cutting edge (see figure below) extending longitudinally; and a handle (the portion of the drill which couples to the cutting edge, ¶5 in view of ¶60) extending longitudinally and removably attached to the cuffing edge, the handle configured to rotate the reamer about a central axis of the reamer; and a plurality of different broaches (20’s figure 2) configured to prepare a medullary cavity of the bone to receive an implant (figure 11), each broach of the plurality of different broaches including a stem (24) extending longitudinally; and a plurality of different broach heads (22’s, figure 2), each of the plurality of different broach heads configured to prepare the medullary cavity to receive the fracture implant, the limb salvage implant, or the revision implant (¶31-32). Regarding claim 9, Schnieders et al. disclose each reamer of the plurality of different reamers comprises different sizes from one another (¶60-61, ¶63). Regarding claim 10, Schnieders et al. disclose each broach of the plurality of different broaches comprises different sizes from one another (¶45). Regarding claim 11, Schnieders et al. disclose the size of each of the plurality of different reamers is determined by a diameter of the cutting edge (¶60-61), and the size of each of the plurality of different broaches is determined by a diameter of the stem (¶45). Regarding claim 15, Schnieders et al. disclose the stem of each of the plurality of different broaches tapers radially towards a central axis as the stem extends longitudinally away from a portion of the stem that attaches to the plurality of different broaches (figures 2-3. 5). 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. Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schnieders et al. (US 2005/0288676). Regarding claims 4 and 14, Schnieders et al. disclose each of the plurality of different reamers comprises an extension (see figure below) extending longitudinally between the cutting edge and the handle (figure 2) and removably attached to the cutting edge and the handle (can be connected and disconnected). However, Schnieders et al. fail to expressly teach or disclose the extension including a plurality of markings, each of the plurality of markings indicative of a cutting depth of the reamer. Instead, Schnieders et al. teaches the use of a plurality of markings (30, figures 1-2, 4 ¶66) indicative of a depth of the cutting element (¶66). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have constructed the extension to have a plurality of markings as taught on an alternative piece of the system of Schnieders et al. as the plurality of markings allow for visual alignment and confirmation of proper alignment of the tool relative to the bone canal in which it is being inserted into (¶66). Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schnieders et al. (US 2005/0288676) in view of Borries et al. (US 2016/0074045). Regarding claims 2 and 12, Schnieders et al. disclose the claimed invention except for the cutting edge of the reamer comprises a plurality of indentations, each of the plurality of indentations indicative of a cutting depth of the reamer. Borries et al. disclose a reamer (100) having a cutting edge (110) with a plurality of indentations (114, 116) each of the plurality of indentations indicative of a cutting depth of the reamer (¶47) which allow the user a visual indication of the depth of the hole drilled by the reamer (¶47). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have constructed the cutting edge of the reamer of Schnieders et al. to have a plurality of indentations as taught by Borries et al. as the plurality of indentations allow the user a visual indication of the depth of the hole drilled by the reamer. Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schnieders et al. (US 2005/0288676) in view of McLean et al. (US 2011/0112540). Regarding claims 3 and 13, Schnieders et al. disclose the claimed invention including the handle having a plurality of markings (30’s) thereon, each of the plurality of markings indicative of a cutting depth of the reamer (¶66). However, Schnieders et al. fail to teach the handle of the reamer comprises a coupling mechanism, the coupling mechanism engagable with a tool to rotate the reamer about the central axis. McLean et al. disclose a handle (40) of a reamer (14, figure 2) comprises a coupling mechanism (40, figure 2), the coupling mechanism engagable with a tool (“drill” via 50, ¶59) to rotate the reamer about the central axis (¶59) as it allows for quick and easy coupling of the handle to the reamer as well as the tool to rotate the reamer. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have constructed the handle of the reamer to have a coupling mechanism as taught by McLean et al. as the coupling mechanism allows for quick and easy coupling of the handle to the reamer as well as the tool to rotate the reamer. PNG media_image1.png 716 410 media_image1.png Greyscale Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW JAMES LAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7375. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 6:30-3:00. 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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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. /MATTHEW J LAWSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 15, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599487
TOOLS AND IMPLANTS FOR LATERAL DISC REPLACEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588953
DEVICES, SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR NATURAL FEATURE TRACKING OF SURGICAL TOOLS AND OTHER OBJECTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588914
Meniscal Allograft Transplantation System and Methods for Use
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582753
Systems and Methods for Forming An Antimicrobial Orthopedic Implant
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569314
MEDICAL DEVICES FOR AIRWAY MANAGEMENT AND METHODS OF PLACEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+30.2%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1081 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