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 § 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) 1-5, 9-14, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Errico et al. (Pat. No. US 5,669,911).
Regarding claims 1-5 and 9, Errico et al. discloses an apparatus (figure 9), comprising: a screw 120, comprising a shaft 126 and a screw head 122 fixedly attached with the shaft (figure 4), wherein the screw head 122 further comprises a portion of a sphere (figure 4); a movable head 200 comprising a top portion and a bottom portion (figure 6), a concave interior 205 larger than the screw head 122 (figure 9), and being movable with respect to the screw head (figures 8 and 9); a connecting rod 250; a locking element 185, capable of engaging the movable head 200 and creating an axial compression force on the connecting rod (figure 9); and a collet 150 having a central opening with a longitudinal axis (figure 5), a collet interior surface 154 (figure 5), and a collet exterior surface 152, wherein the collet 150 is interposed between the screw head 122 and the concave interior 205 of the movable head (figure 9), wherein the collet interior surface 154 and the screw head 122 are related such that, when the collet 150 is constrained against outward radial deformation, the screw head 122 is prevented from sliding distally relative the collet (figure 9). The collet interior surface 154 is partially spherical and resembles at least a portion of an external surface of the screw head 122 (figure 5 and 9). The collet interior surface 154 and the screw head form a cradle for receiving the connecting rod (figure 9). The collet interior surface 154 has a larger radius of curvature than the portion of the sphere of the screw head (figure 8; col. 9, lines 49-54). The collet 150 further comprises at least one flexible hinge that extends vertically from a top end of the collet towards a bottom end of the collet (col. 7, lines 26-43- due to the slot 166, the opposite portion of the collet 150 forms a hinge that allows for expansion and contraction of the collet). The collet 150 includes one or more open slots 166 extending in a direction between a top end of the collet and a bottom end of the collet (figure 5).
Regarding claims 10-14 and 18, Errico et al. discloses a collet 150 for a polyaxial screw assembly, comprising: a top end 156 configured to receive a connecting rod; a bottom end 160 configured to interface with a screw head (figure 5 and 9); a central opening 162 with a longitudinal axis extending between the top end and the bottom end; and a collet interior surface 154 (figure 5); wherein the collet interior surface 154 and the screw head 122 are related such that, when the collet 150 is constrained against outward radial deformation, the screw head is prevented from sliding distally relative the collet (figure 9). The collet interior surface 154 is partially spherical and resembles at least a portion of an external surface of the screw head 122 (figure 5 and 9). The collet interior surface 154 and the screw head form a cradle for receiving the connecting rod (figure 9). The collet interior surface 154 has a larger radius of curvature than the portion of the sphere of the screw head (figure 8; col. 9, lines 49-54). The collet 150 further comprises at least one flexible hinge that extends vertically from a top end of the collet towards a bottom end of the collet (col. 7, lines 26-43- due to the slot 166, the opposite portion of the collet 150 forms a hinge that allows for expansion and contraction of the collet). The collet 150 includes one or more open slots 166 extending in a direction between a top end of the collet and a bottom end of the collet (figure 5).
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) 6, 7, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Errico et al. (Pat. No. US 5669911) in view of Richelsoph et al. (Pat. No. US 6,010,503).
Regarding claims 6, and 15, Errico et al. discloses the claimed invention except wherein the at least one flexible hinge extends from the top end of the collet and for a distance spaced from the bottom end of the collet.
Richelsoph et al. teaches wherein a collet 84” comprises a flexible hinge 102 and tabs 98, wherein the at least one flexible hinge 102 extends from the top end of the collet and for a distance spaced from the bottom end of the collet (due to the presence of the notch which creates tabs 98, figure 9), for the purpose of providing a hinge which allows for hinging or collapsing of the collet about its diameter while also providing alignment means for maintaining the alignment of the collet relative to the movable head 12” (col. 6, lines 38-55; figures 9 and 10).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the collet disclosed by Errico et al. such that it extends from the top end of the collet and for a distance spaced from the bottom end of the collet and has notches, as taught by Richelsoph et al., in order to provide a hinge which allows for hinging or collapsing of the collet about its diameter while also providing alignment means for maintaining the alignment of the collet relative to the movable head 12” (col. 6, lines 38-55; figures 9 and 10).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Errico et al. discloses the claimed invention except wherein the at least one flexible hinge further includes a concave interior intersecting the central opening and extending radially outward away from the central opening and the longitudinal axis.
Richelsoph et al. teaches wherein a flexible hinge 102 includes a concave interior intersecting the central opening and extending outward away from the central opening and the longitudinal axis for the purpose of allowing for hinging or collapsing of the insert 84” about its diameter (figure 9; col. 6, lines 43-50).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the hinge of the collet disclosed by Errico et al. such tthat it further includes a concave interior intersecting the central opening and extending radially outward away from the central opening and the longitudinal axis, as taught by Richelsoph, for the purpose of allowing for easier hinging or collapsing of the insert 84” about its diameter (figure 9; col. 6, lines 43-50).
. Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 10507043 B1 in view of Errico et al. (Pat. No. US 5669911).
Regarding claims 1-20, the patent claims claim the same invention except wherein the collet interior surface and the screw head are related such that, when the collet is constrained against outward radial deformation, the screw head is prevented from sliding distally relative the collet.
Errico et al. teaches wherein the collet interior surface and the screw head are related such that, when the collet is constrained against outward radial deformation, the screw head is prevented from sliding distally relative the collet (figure 9).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed for the patent claims to require that the collet interior surface and the screw head are related such that, when the collet is constrained against outward radial deformation, the screw head is prevented from sliding distally relative the collet, as taught by Errico et al., in order to retain the screw head within the movable head.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 11890034 B1 in view of Errico et al. (Pat. No. US 5669911).
Regarding claims 1-20, the patent claims claim the same invention except wherein the collet interior surface and the screw head are related such that, when the collet is constrained against outward radial deformation, the screw head is prevented from sliding distally relative the collet.
Errico et al. teaches wherein the collet interior surface and the screw head are related such that, when the collet is constrained against outward radial deformation, the screw head is prevented from sliding distally relative the collet (figure 9).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed for the patent claims to require that the collet interior surface and the screw head are related such that, when the collet is constrained against outward radial deformation, the screw head is prevented from sliding distally relative the collet, as taught by Errico et al., in order to retain the screw head within the movable head.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO form 892.Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lynnsy Summitt whose telephone number is (571)270-7856. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday from 8am until 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Eduardo Robert, 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LYNNSY M SUMMITT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3773
Prosecution Insights