DETAILED ACTION
This is a second non-final office action. The amendment of December 31, 2025, is under consideration. Claims 1, 3, 7, and 51 were amended; and claims 23 and 64 were canceled. Claims 1-3, 7, 10, 18-22, 42, 51-53, 61-63, and 68 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
The outstanding rejections of claims 3 and 7 under 35 USC 112(b) were overcome by the amendments to the claims of December 31, 2025.
The outstanding rejections of claims 1, 2, 7, 10, 18, 19, 21-23, and 42 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) in view of Cannon et al. (US 2021/0128174 A1); and claims 3, 51-53, 61-63 and 68 under 35 USC 103 in view of Cannon; and claim 20 under 35 USC 103 in view of Cannon and Pedicini (US 2019/0183555 A1); were overcome by the amendment of December 31, 2025.
In the prior office action, the subject matter of claim 64 was identified as being allowable if re-written in independent form. Applicant elected to write claim 64 into independent form and incorporate this allowable feature into claim 1. However, further search has been conducted which has identified additional prior art which must be applied at this time. Examiner apologizes for the late discovery of this art necessitating withdrawing the prior indication of allowable matter.
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, 10, 18, 19, 21, 22, 42, 51-53, 61-63, and 68 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cannon et al. (US 2021/0128174 A1) in view of Del Rio et al. (US 5,601,560).
Regarding claim 1, Cannon teaches a surgical device, comprising:
a handpiece [0050], [0067]; and
an adapter 10 capable of having a portion thereof releasably seated in a cavity formed in the handpiece of a surgical impacting tool (as at fig. 5A [0067]; powered impaction tool [0050])capable of driving impacting of bone via the adapter [0050], wherein the adapter includes
a proximal portion 30 having a substantially cylindrical shape, a substantially circular cross-sectional shape, and a first diameter (as seen at fig. 1),
a distal portion 20/18/11 having at least four sides (six demonstrated; other numbers contemplated [0062]) defining an outer perimeter of the distal portion 20/18/11, and the distal portion 20/18/11 having a second diameter that is greater than the first diameter 30, and
a neck 6 located between the proximal portion 30 and the distal portion 20/18/11, the neck 6 having a substantially cylindrical shape as at fig. 1, a substantially circular cross-sectional shape, and a third diameter that is less than the first diameter of 30 and less than the second diameter of 20/18/11.
Cannon fails to teach the handpiece including first and second pawls, and the first and second pawls being configured to move relative to a housing of the handpiece between a first position, in which the first and second pawls are not engaged with the neck of the adapter, and a second position, in which the first and second pawls are engaged with the neck of the adapter, and the adapter being in a locked position relative to the handpiece with the first and second pawls in the second position.
Rather, Cannon teaches use of a ball/detent locking mechanism in which ball bearings 46 sit within the neck 6. (Hudson connector, [0069])
Del Rio teaches a handpiece 12 as at fig. 1. The handpiece 12 includes first and second pawls 118 as seen in fig. 2. The pawls are used to connect to an adapter on 24, which adapter has a proximal portion 155, a necked region 158, and a wider distal portion beyond 158. The first and second pawls move relative to a housing of 12 as seen comparing figs. 2 and 3 between a first position in fig. 3 in which the pawls 118 are not engaged with the neck 158, and a second position in fig. 2 in which the pawls 118 are engaged with the neck 158. The adapter on 24 is in a locked position relative to the handpiece 12 with the first and second pawls 118 in the position of fig. 2. Examiner notes that Del Rio’s locking mechanism is operated by a pivoted lock lever 138.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the Cannon device to modify it from having the disclosed Hudson connector to having a locking pawl arrangement as shown in Del Rio. One would have done so by replacing the ball/detent mechanism of Cannon’s housing with essentially functionally equivalent pawls which are coupled to the housing by pivot pins 120 as taught by Del Rio (and any other modifications to the housing which are required to permit the placement of pawls, therein). One would have done so as a matter of providing a structure which is more stout and stronger than the locking provided by the ball/detent structure, as well as providing for an easily actuated locking lever which a user can manipulate with certainty that locking position has been achieved.
Regarding claim 2, the proximal portion, the distal portion, and the neck are longitudinally aligned on axis 5.
Regarding claim 3, as seen at fig. 2, a proximal-facing surface of the neck (junction of 6/11) includes a first concave fillet connected to the neck; a distal-facing surface of the neck (junction of 6/30) includes a second concave fillet connected to the neck; and the first concave fillet is defined by a radius greater than a radius defining the second concave fillet.
Regarding claim 7, the proximal portion 30 is immediately proximal to the neck 6; the distal portion 20/18/11 includes a first portion 11 having a substantially cylindrical shape and a substantially circular cross-sectional shape, the first portion 11 being immediately distal to the neck 6; and the distal portion 20/18/11 includes a second portion 20/18 that is immediately distal to the first portion 11 and that includes the at least four sides as seen at fig. 1.
Regarding claim 10, one or more of the at least four sides of the distal portion 20/18 includes a marker configured to indicate an insertion level of the adapter into the cavity: the groove 14 is considered to be a marker formed on the at least four sides of 20, which can be observed to determine an insertion level of the adapter 10 into cavity of 102 .
Regarding claim 18, a distal face of the proximal portion 30 defines a rearward impacting surface (there being no reason impact cannot be applied to the distal facing surface of 30); and a proximal face of the proximal portion 30 defines a forward impacting surface (there being no reason that impact force cannot be applied to a proximal face of 30).
Regarding claim 19, a proximal face of the adapter at 30 is a continuous solid surface; and the proximal face of the adapter at 30 defines a forward impacting surface (there being no reason that impact force cannot be applied to a proximal face of 30).
Regarding claim 21, a distal end 7 of the adapter is configured to releasably couple to a surgical implement configured to impact the bone [0050].
Regarding claim 22, a distally-extending surgical implement configured to impact the bone is non-releasably coupled to the adapter 10 [0050] – when the adapter is coupled to the implement, the connection is considered non-releasable until such time as the connection is actuated to separate the components.
Regarding claim 42, Cannon teaches a surgical method, comprising:
releasably attaching the adapter 10 of claim 1 to the handpiece [0050] by moving the adapter 10 into the cavity of the handpiece substantially along a longitudinal axis 45 defined by the cavity as in fig. 5A; and
impacting a surgical implement relative to bone [0050], [0067], the surgical implement being coupled to the adapter 10 [0050], and a direction of the impacting being substantially along the longitudinal axis 45 defined by the cavity.
Regarding claim 51, Cannon teaches a surgical device as at figs. 1 and 5A, comprising:
a handpiece [0050], [0067]; and
an adapter 10 including a proximal portion 30 configured to be releasably seated in a cavity formed in a handpiece of a surgical impacting tool as at fig. 5A [0050], [0067], and the adapter includes a reduced diameter portion 6 as compared to a first diameter of a first portion 30 of the adapter 10 proximal to the reduced diameter portion 6 and a second diameter of a second portion 20 of the adapter distal to the reduced diameter portion 6;
wherein the reduced diameter portion 6 has a proximal fillet and a distal fillet as seen at fig. 2;
a radius of the distal fillet has a greater radius than the proximal fillet as seen at fig. 2.
Cannon fails to teach the handpiece having first and second pawls, the first and second pawls are configured to move relative to a housing of the handpiece between a first position, in which the first and second pawls are not engaged with the reduced diameter portion of the adapter, and a second position, in which the first and second pawls are engaged with the reduced diameter portion of the adapter, and the adapter is in a locked position relative to the handpiece with the first and second pawls in the second position.
Rather, Cannon teaches use of a ball/detent locking mechanism in which ball bearings 46 sit within the neck 6. (Hudson connector, [0069])
Del Rio teaches a handpiece 12 as at fig. 1. The handpiece 12 includes first and second pawls 118 as seen in fig. 2. The pawls are used to connect to an adapter on 24, which adapter has a proximal portion 155, a necked region 158, and a wider distal portion beyond 158. The first and second pawls move relative to a housing of 12 as seen comparing figs. 2 and 3 between a first position in fig. 3 in which the pawls 118 are not engaged with the neck 158, and a second position in fig. 2 in which the pawls 118 are engaged with the neck 158. The adapter on 24 is in a locked position relative to the handpiece 12 with the first and second pawls 118 in the position of fig. 2. Examiner notes that Del Rio’s locking mechanism is operated by a pivoted lock lever 138.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the Cannon device to modify it from having the disclosed Hudson connector to having a locking pawl arrangement as shown in Del Rio. One would have done so by replacing the ball/detent mechanism of Cannon’s housing with essentially functionally equivalent pawls which are coupled to the housing by pivot pins 120 as taught by Del Rio (and any other modifications to the housing which are required to permit the placement of pawls, therein). One would have done so as a matter of providing a structure which is more stout and stronger than the locking provided by the ball/detent structure, as well as providing for an easily actuated locking lever which a user can manipulate with certainty that locking position has been achieved.
Regarding claim 52, the first portion 30 has a substantially cylindrical shape and a substantially circular cross-sectional shape as seen in fig. 2; the reduced diameter portion 6 has a substantially cylindrical shape and a substantially circular cross-sectional shape as seen in fig. 2; and the second portion 20 of the adapter has at least four sides defining an outer perimeter of the second portion. (six sides demonstrated, see fig. 2)
Regarding claim 53, the first portion 30 has a first diameter; the second portion 20 has a second diameter that is greater than the first diameter of 30; and the reduced diameter portion 6 has a third diameter that is less than the first diameter of 30 and less than the second diameter of 20 as seen at fig. 2.
Regarding claim 61, the first portion 30, the reduced diameter portion 6, and the second portion 20 are longitudinally aligned along axis 5 as seen in fig. 1.
Regarding claim 62, the device includes a surgical implement configured to impact bone (e.g. mounted to 7); wherein a distal end 7 of the adapter 10 is configured to releasably couple to the surgical implement [0050], [0067].
Regarding claim 63, a distally-extending surgical implement configured to impact bone is non-releasably coupled to the adapter 10 [0050]- when the adapter is coupled to the implement, the connection is considered non-releasable until such time as the connection is actuated to separate the components.
Regarding claim 68, Cannon teaches a surgical method, comprising: releasably attaching the adapter 10 to the handpiece of fig. 5A, etc. by moving the adapter 10 into the cavity of the handpiece substantially along a longitudinal axis 45 defined by the cavity ([0050], [0067], see fig. 5A); and impacting a surgical implement relative to bone [0050], [0067], the surgical implement being coupled to the adapter 10 [0050], and a direction of the impacting being substantially along the longitudinal axis 45 defined by the cavity.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cannon in view of Del Rio and Pedicini (US 2019/0183555 A1).
Regarding claim 20, the combination suggests the limitations of claim 1, as above. Further, the proximal face of 30 is capable of use as a forward impacting face.
However, the proximal face of the adapter having a bore formed therein that is configured to receive therein a protrusion of the handpiece that extends into the cavity.
Examiner notes that modification of a proximal portion of the adapter/handpiece is contemplated, in the reverse of the claimed manner, in the Del Rio device. Comparing the figs. 2 and 5 embodiments, it can be seen that Del Rio contemplated modifying the proximal end of the adapter with a protrusion 172 to enhance mechanical coupling between the components.
Pedicini teaches an adapter 202 as at fig. 2A having a proximal surface with a bore formed therein (see the elongated bore). The bore is capable of receiving a protrusion from a handpiece, therein. The end surface of 202 is capable of use as a forward impacting face.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to add a bore into 30 of Cannon as suggested by Pedicini, and in consideration of the variances between embodiments already demonstrated by Del Rio. Such a configuration serves to prevent relative rotation between the handpiece and the adapter when coupled thereto. Addition of such a formation into the combination device and further modifying the handpiece to accommodate the opening would have been useful to permit yet another design of coupling to be utilized with the Cannon adapter.
Conclusion
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