DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed February 5, 2026. By that amendment, claims 1, 4, 5, 9-11, 18 and 19 were amended. Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 USC 102 or 103 in view of Biester (US 2018/0014858 A1) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The newly presented rejections are necessitated by the amendments to the claims of February 5, 2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-7, 9, 10, 12, and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carroll (US 2004/0074344 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Carroll teaches a coupling sleeve 40 capable of use with a bone power tool as at fig. 6. It is noted that the fig. 6 embodiment is relied upon, which embodiment, as described at [0027] as a reversed arrangement of the fig. 1 embodiment, which is understood to mean that the splines within 40 are internal, rather than external as in the figs. 1 and 3A-E demonstrations. The fig. 1 embodiment is shown in more detail (especially at figs. 3A-E) and is therefore relied upon for certain features and reference numerals, though the fig. 6 embodiments continues to be the anticipatory teaching. The coupling sleeve includes
a proximal collar (top splined opening of 40 seen in fig. 6; relates to portion 50 as in fig. 3C)) having a first interior wall that defines a first opening through 50 as seen in cross section in fig. 3B capable of receiving a bone power tool (some inferred bone power tool with a proper connector {e.g. such as a splined connector} thereon), wherein the first opening through 50 has a first cross-sectional shape (splined) and a first diameter as can be seen clearly in fig. 6, and the first interior wall is configured to mate with the inferred bone power tool to prevent rotation therebetween;
a distal collar 42 as shown in fig. 3A defining having a second interior wall that defines a second opening for receiving an inferred retention feature for an inferred pedicle screw (e.g. some hexagonal structure), wherein the second opening having has a second cross-sectional shape (hexagonal) and a second diameter (across the hexagonal surfaces of 42), and the second interior wall of 42 is configured to mate with the inferred retention feature to prevent rotation therebetween;
a central portion in a middle region including 48 and portions nearby (see fig. 3B, at the junction of two portions of 40) that extends between the proximal collar 50 and the distal collar 42, wherein:
the proximal collar 50, the distal collar 42, and the central portion 48 cooperate to define a passageway between the first opening and the second opening as seen at fig. 3B; and
the coupling sleeve 40 is formed as a unitary one-piece construction.
Regarding claim 2, the first diameter of 50 is greater than the second diameter of 42. See the figures.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, the first cross-sectional shape at 50 comprises a substantially cylindrical shape (including splines) and the second cross-sectional shape comprises a substantially hexagonal shape at 42. See fig. 3A.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, the central portion near 48 and nearby locations defines a window, as at fig. 3B, through which a grasping member 56 capable of facilitating selective retention of the inferred retention feature of the inferred pedicle screw to the distal collar.
Regarding claim 9, Carroll teaches a coupling assembly as at fig. 6 capable of use for a bone power tool. It is noted that the fig. 6 embodiment is relied upon, which embodiment, as described at [0027] as a reversed arrangement of the fig. 1 embodiment, which is understood to mean that the splines within 40 are internal, rather than external as in the figs. 1 and 3A-E demonstrations. The fig. 1 embodiment is shown in more detail (especially at figs. 3A-E and fig. 5A-E) and is therefore relied upon for certain features and reference numerals, though the fig. 6 embodiments continues to be the anticipatory teaching. The coupling assembly comprising:
a coupling sleeve 70 comprising:
a proximal collar at a proximal portion of 76 (up in fig. 6, down in fig. 5C) defining having a first interior wall that defines a first opening that is configured for mated interface with for receiving an inferred bone power tool, wherein the proximal collar having a first width first interior wall is configured to mate with the inferred bone power tool to prevent rotation therebetween;
a distal collar at a distal portion of 82 defining having a second interior wall that defines a second opening and having a second width that is less than the first width as can be seen in fig. 6 and 5C; and
a central portion 90 (and including a portion of 76 and 82) that extends between the proximal collar and the distal collar and tapers inwardly from the proximal collar to the distal collar (taper first step at junction between 72/90 and second step between 90/82), wherein the proximal collar 76, the distal collar 82, and the central portion 90 cooperate to define a passageway between the first opening and the second opening; and
a retention feature 40 comprising:
a proximal end 50 having an external wall that is configured for insertion into the second opening to facilitate mated interaction between the proximal tip and the distal collar; and
a distal tip 42 that is configured to support an inferred pedicle screw, wherein the second opening and the external wall have complimentary cross-sectional shapes such that the distal collar and the proximal end mate together to prevent rotation therebetween.
Regarding claim 10, the coupling sleeve 70 is formed as a unitary one-piece construction.
Regarding claim 12, the first opening at 76 has a first diameter as seen in fig. 6 and the second opening at 82 has a second diameter (also seen in fig. 5B); and
the first diameter is greater than the second diameter (clearly since 76 is designed to receive 82 therein).
Regarding claim 14, the central portion 90 (and associated portions of 76/82) defines a window 92.
Regarding claim 15, the coupling sleeve 70 further comprises a grasping member 92 that facilitates selective retention of the inferred retention feature to the distal collar at 76.
Regarding claims 16 and 17, the retention feature 92 comprises a retention tip (a tip of 92). The retention tip of 92 further comprises a central portion (middle of 92) that extends between the proximal end (opening of 92) and the distal tip; and the central portion of the retention tip 92 defines a window (the opening therein).
Regarding claim 18, Carroll teaches a coupling sleeve 40 capable of use with a bone power tool. It is noted that the fig. 6 embodiment is relied upon, which embodiment, as described at [0027] as a reversed arrangement of the fig. 1 embodiment, which is understood to mean that the splines within 40 are internal, rather than external as in the figs. 1 and 3A-E demonstrations. The fig. 1 embodiment is shown in more detail (especially at figs. 3A-E) and is therefore relied upon for certain features and reference numerals, though the fig. 6 embodiments continues to be the anticipatory teaching. The coupling sleeve 40 consisting of:
a proximal collar 46 (up in fig. 6) having a first interior wall that defines a first opening capable of receiving an inferred bone power tool, wherein the first interior wall is configured to mate with the inferred bone power tool to prevent rotation therebetween;
a distal collar 42 having a second interior wall that defines a second opening for receiving an inferred retention feature for an inferred pedicle screw, wherein the second interior wall at 42 is configured to mate with the retention feature to prevent rotation therebetween;
a central portion (including 48) that extends between the proximal collar at 46 and the distal collar at 42; and
a grasping 56 member associated with the distal collar 42 and configured to facilitate selective retention of the inferred retention feature to the distal collar 42, wherein:
the proximal collar, the distal collar, and the central portion cooperate to define a passageway between the first opening and the second opening as seen at fig. 3B; and
the coupling sleeve is formed as a unitary one-piece construction as seen at fig. 3A.
Regarding claim 19, the central portion defines a window seen receiving 56.
Regarding claim 20, the proximal collar 46 has a first width;
the distal collar 42 has a second width that is less than the first width (the hex is shown being smaller than the splines in fig. 6); and
the central portion tapers inwardly from the proximal collar to the distal collar (inherently there must be a taper, at least at one step, since 46 is larger than 42 in the fig. 6 embodiment).
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) 3, 8, 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carroll.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, the limitations of claims 2 and 12are taught by Carroll, as above. However, the particular ratio of the sizes of the two diameters is not necessarily within the claimed range. Carroll teaches building his tool in a kit of various sizes and shapes (e.g. claim 15).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to form the Carroll device such that the first diameter in region 50 is at least 1.5 times greater than the second diameter. It is examiner’s position that it is old and well known in the art to produce kits of variously sized sockets for use on nuts/bolts of various sizes and/or adapters between variously sized components. These sets often include a single driving end size on each socket, and a distal end which changes on each socket. Some of these sockets are known to have distal work engaging ends which fall within the claimed ratio of size compared to the opposite proximal tool engaging end. One would have done so in view of the Carroll kit teaching in order to permit the Carroll device to be used with variously sized structures.
Regarding claim 8, Carroll teaches the limitations of claim 7, as above. However, Carroll’s grasping member is a spring-biased ball-detent mechanism [0020] which moves between latched and released positions, rather than the claimed pivotable structure.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to select a different actuation mechanism for the ball-detent structure. Actuation of a ball-detent mechanism by various mechanisms is old and well known in the art and involves only a finite number of known mechanisms. Moving the actuation button from an axial arrangement shown by Carroll to a side-mounted pivotable arrangement to provide for a pivoted button is considered a functionally equivalent mechanism, and a known selection between the functionally equivalent prior art mechanisms.
Regarding claim 11, Carroll teaches the limitations of claim 10, as above. However, Carroll fails to teach the cross-sectional shape of each of the second opening and the proximal end comprises a hexagonal cross-sectional shape. Rather, Carroll teaches each of these portions having a coordinating number of splines which permits selective attachment and rotational interlock between the portions.
Examiner takes the position that it is well known that various shapes function equally well to permit selective attachment and rotational interlock between rod portions. Four side (square); six side (hex); and splined connections, along with ball/detent mechanisms for selective coupling, are all well-known coupling means which function identically for this purpose. Carroll’s own teachings show that each of these three designs were known by him to permit attachment of various structures in a rotationally locked manner. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill to form the coupling between the second opening and proximal end to be coordinatingly sized and shaped hexagonal portions. One would have done so as a matter of design choice between functionally equivalent structures. A hexagonal structure would have been simpler to form during manufacturing process than a splined structure.
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 David Bates whose telephone number is (571)270-7034. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 10AM-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, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Truong, 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 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.
/DAVID W BATES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights