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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 27, 2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed May 27, 2026. As directed by the amendment: Claims 1, 11, and 12 have been amended. Claims 4-6, 8, 10, and 13 have been cancelled. Claims 1-3, 7, 9, 11, 12, and 14 are presently pending in this application.
Examiner’s Note
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7, 9 , 11, 12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mast et al. (US 2017/0086812), herein referred to as Mast, and in view of Serra et al. (US 2023/0240671), herein referred to as Serra.
Regarding claim 1, Mast discloses a surgical retractor (100) (figure 1), comprising a plurality of worm gears (210, 212, 214), a first leg (102) comprising a first leg proximal end (figure 1) and a first leg distal end (figure 1), a second leg (106) comprising a second leg proximal end (figure 1) and a second leg distal end (figure 1), first and second retractor blades (118, 120) (figure 1), wherein the first retractor blade (120) is removably connected (¶35 and figure 6B) to the first leg distal end (figure 6B) and second retractor blade (118) is removably connected (¶35 and figure 6A) to the second leg distal end (figure 6A), and wherein the first and second retractor blades (118, 120) and the first and second legs (102, 106) each comprise a plastic (¶60) or composite radiolucent material (¶60), an adjustment component (128) comprising a rotatable knob (¶27 and figure 1), the plurality of gears (210, 212, 214) operably coupled between the adjustment component (128) (¶31 and figure 2) and the first and second legs (102, 106) for providing a continuous rotational motion (¶27, ¶31) to the first leg (102) about the first leg proximal end (figure 1) and to the second leg (106) about the second leg proximal end (figure 1) when the adjustment component (128) is rotated (¶27, ¶31), wherein the gears (210, 212, 214) are configured to (i.e. capable of) provide continuous, sub-millimeter incremental adjustment of the spacing between the first leg (102) and the second leg (106) without mechanical ratcheting (figures 1 and 2), and the first and second legs (102, 106) configured to (i.e. capable of) move between a closed position (figure 3A) and a plurality of open positions (figure 3B), wherein rotation of the adjustment component (128) in opposite directions adjusts spacing between the first leg (102) and the second leg (106) (¶31, ¶32).
Yet, Mast lacks the plurality of gears includes a bevel gear operably coupled to a worm gear, the worm gear operably coupled to a pinion gear.
However, Serra teaches a plurality of gears that can achieve movement in a variety of ways that uses one or combinations of: a bevel gear (¶88), a worm gear (¶88), and a pinion gear (¶88).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Mast’s plurality of gears with the plurality of gears includes a bevel gear operably coupled to a worm gear, the worm gear operably coupled to a pinion gear as taught by Serra, since such a modification would provide alternative gear types to achieve movement.
Regarding claim 2, the modified Mast’s surgical retractor has further comprising a housing (126 of Mast) enclosing the gears (the modified Mast’s gears).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Mast’s surgical retractor has wherein the plurality of gears (the modified Mast’s gears) is enclosed in the housing (126 of Mast) such that solids, liquids, and gases cannot enter the housing (126 of Mast) when the surgical retractor is in use (¶26 of Mast).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Mast’s surgical retractor has wherein the plurality of gears (the modified Mast’s gears) is made from stainless steel (¶60 of Mast).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Mast’s surgical retractor has wherein the adjustment component (128 of Mast) extends along an axis (considered as an x-axis) perpendicular to an axis (considered as a longitudinal axis) extending from the housing (126 of Mast) to distal ends of the legs in the closed position (figure 3A of Mast), and perpendicular to a plane (considered as an arbitrary plane) defined by movement of the legs between the closed position (figure 3A of Mast) and plurality of open positions (figure 3B of Mast).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Mast’s surgical retractor has further comprising a set of retractor blades (118, 120, 122) (figure 1), wherein the first and second retractor blades (118, 120) are selected from the set of retractor blades (118, 120, 122).
Regarding claim 12, Mast discloses a surgical retractor (100) (figure 1) comprising an adjustment component (128) comprising a rotatable knob (¶27 and figure 1), a gear (210) by the adjustment component (128), a worm gear (212) rotationally coupled with the gear (210) (figure 2), a housing (126), in which the gear (210) and worm gear (212) are disposed (figures 1 and 2), first and second legs (102, 106) operatively coupled to the gear (210) and the worm gear (212), first and second retractor blades (118, 120) removably attached (¶35 and figures 6A, 6B) to respective ones of the first and second legs (102, 106), wherein the first and second retractor blades (118, 120) are each constructed from radiolucent materials (¶60) selected from the group consisting of aluminum (¶60), carbon fiber (¶60), titanium (¶60), and composite materials, wherein the first and second legs (102, 106) and the first and second retractor blades (118, 120) having low X-ray radiodensity (¶60), and wherein actuation of the adjustment component (128) causes rotation of the gear (210) and the worm gear (212) such that the first and second legs (102, 106) rotate about an axis and move relative to one another between a closed position (figure 3A) and a plurality of open positions (figure 3B).
Yet, Mast lacks the gear is a bevel gear.
However, Serra teaches a plurality of gears that can achieve movement in a variety of ways that uses one or combinations of: a bevel gear (¶88) and a worm gear (¶88).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute Mast’s worm gear with a bevel gear as taught by Serra, since such a modification is a mere substitution of one known gear type for another to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 14, the modified Mast’s surgical retractor has wherein the axis (figure 3B of Mast) is transverse to one or more rotational axes (figure 2 of Mast) of the bevel and worm gear (the modified Mast’s gears).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 27, 2026 have been fully considered. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), 112(b), 112(d), and 101 are moot.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SI MING KU whose telephone number is (571)270-5450. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30am-6pm.
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, Kevin Truong can be reached at (571)272-4705. 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.
/SI MING KU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Prosecution Insights