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 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the projection of the first press component" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 12 currently depends from claim 10, which does not recite “the projection of the first press component” or “a first press component”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the projection of the second press component" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 13 currently depends from claim 10, which does not recite “the projection of the second press component” or “a second press component”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Higgins et al, US 2023/0113040 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Higgins discloses a system (10, Figs. 1-7, para[0013]), comprising: a press (12); and a plate assembly (14, 16) including a first plate (14) defining a cavity (42, Fig. 2, para [0019]) configured to receive harvested tissue (tissue 68, see para [0031]) and a second plate (16) including a projection (58, Fig. 3, para [0023]) insertable into the cavity, wherein the press is configured to apply pressure to the plate assembly to compress the harvested tissue (para [0031]), and wherein the plate assembly (14, 16) is configured to hold the harvested tissue under compression when the plate assembly is removed from the press (see para [0034]; harvested tissue remains in compressed state for implantation or suturing).
Regarding claim 2, Higgins discloses the system as recited in claim 1, wherein the second plate includes a post (66, Fig. 3) and the first plate includes an opening (50, Fig. 2) configured to receive the post (para [0025]).
Regarding claim 4, Higgins discloses the system as recited in claim 2, wherein: the post is a first post (66, Fig. 3) and the second plate includes a second post (another 66, Fig. 3), the opening is a first opening (50, Fig. 3) and the first plate includes a second opening (another 50, Fig. 3), and the second opening is configured to receive the second post (para [0025]).
Regarding claim 5, Higgins discloses the system as recited in claim 4, wherein the first and second openings are through holes (para [0021], through holes 50), and wherein the first and second posts are configured to project through the first plate (Figs. 4-6, para [0025]).
Regarding claim 6, Higgins discloses the system as recited in claim 1, wherein the first plate (14) includes a first slot (holes 48) and the second plate (16) includes a second slot (holes 64) shaped substantially the same as first slot and configured to vertically overlap with the first slot (see para [0024]).
Regarding claim 10, Higgins discloses the system as recited in claim 6, wherein the first slot is one of four first slots of the first plate (holes 48 are on each of the four corners, Fig. 2), and the second slot is one of four second slots of the second plate (holes 64 are on each of the four corners, Fig. 3, para [0024]).
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higgins.
Regarding claim 3, Higgins discloses the system as recited in claim 2, but is silent as to wherein the first plate includes an elastomeric liner within the opening and configured to directly contact the post. Examiner is taking Official Notice that it is old and well known in the prior art to use an elastomeric liner or a rubber O-ring to seal and/or contact an opening and join a post within an opening in order to form a water tight seal and/or prevent the post from disengaging from the opening to ensure a proper sealing arrangement between two portions.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Higgins in view of Munnelly, US 2015/0091219 A1.
Regarding claim 16, Higgins discloses the system as recited in claim 1, but is silent as to the first plate includes a recessed section, the second plate includes a recessed section, and the system further comprises a clamp configured to interface with the recessed sections of the first plate and second plate to hold the harvested tissue under compression.
However, Munnelly, in the same field of art, teaches an assembly (400, Figs. 4A-B) having a first plate (410) and a second plate (420) for compression of tissue (para [0052]), where the first plate includes a recessed section (444, 442, areas of different elevations are recessed; or 412 has a recessed corner, para [0052]), the second plate includes a recessed section (444, 442, areas of different elevations are recessed; or 412 has a recessed corner), and the system further comprises a clamp (480) configured to interface with the recessed sections of the first plate and second plate to hold the harvested tissue under compression (Fig. 4B, para [0052]; according to BRI of claim clamp can interface either directly or indirectly with sections 444, 442, 412 by being engaged around plates 410, 420).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the plates of Higgins with the recessed portions and having a clamp configured to interface with the recessed sections of the first plate and second plate to hold the harvested tissue under compression as taught by Munnelly in order to provide the stated benefits of applying vibrations during compression to enhance contouring or other formation of the harvest tissue (Munnelly, paras [0052]-[0053]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-20 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record, including but not limited to Higgins and Munnelly, fails to disclose or render obvious the method of claim 17, and in particular the combination with the step of removing the first plate, second plate, and harvested tissue from the press with the first and second plate held together such that the first and second plate hold the harvested tissue under compression.
Claims 7-9, 11, 14-15 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.
Claims 12-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATRINA M STRANSKY whose telephone number is (571)270-3843. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am-5:00 pm EST.
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, Thomas Barrett can be reached at (571) 272-4649. 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.
/KATRINA M STRANSKY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3700