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. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “22” (see for example ¶ [0019]); “12A” (see for example ¶ [0024]); “12B” (see for example ¶ [0024]); “410” (see for example ¶ [0031]); “412” (see for example ¶ [0031]) . The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "22", "22A" and “22B” have been used to designate the “channel”. In addition, reference characters “410”, “410A” and “410B” have been used to designate the “first tail”; reference characters “430”, “430A” and “430B” have been used to designate the “hooks”; reference characters “412”, “412A” and “412B” have been used to designate the “second tail”. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “53” has been used to designate the “slit”, “longitudinal sides” and “hems” (see for example ¶ [0094] and [0098]). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 19 and 20 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 19 recites the limitations "the first portion of the connective tissue augmentation and fixation device" (lines 1-2) and “the second portion of the connective tissue augmentation and fixation device” (lines 5-6). There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. 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. Claims 1- 8, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a )(1) as being anticipated by SUDEKUM (Pub. No.: US 2014/0257349 A1) . With regard to claim 1, SUDEKUM discloses a device (see for example Figure 23, i.e. embodiment of Figures 16-22 with the additional tails ) comprising a central body configured to at least partially surround a graft (see ¶ [0023]) , the central body extending longitudinally between a first end and a second end (see annotated Figure 23 below) ; a first side tail extending from the first end of the central body and configured to attach to a first bone of a patient; and a second side tail extending from the second end of the central body and configured to attach to a second bone of the patient (see annotated Figures 16 and 23). It is noted that 1 st and 2 nd tails have the ability to being attached to bones, e.g. with suture anchors. With regard to claim 2, SUDEKUM further discloses that the central body comprises: a bifurcation , i.e. slit 50 . The bifurcation allows access to a graft within the device, the bifurcation located between the first end and the second end of the central body (see for example Figures 16-20 and 23) . With regard to claim 3, SUDEKUM further discloses the central body includes a first section 51 and a second section 52 , the first section and the second section are joined at the bifurcation (see ¶ [0092], lines 9-13) . With regard to claim 4 , SUDEKUM further discloses that the first section 51 and the second section 52 are removably attached at the bifurcation , e.g. if the laces are loosened or relaxed the sections are disconnected. . With regard to claim 5, SUBEKUM further discloses the central body includes two or more hooks , e.g. holes 54, around a periphery of the central body. It is noted that as shown in Figure 22, the periphery includes multiple holes 54 that are considered hooks. This are similar to the “hooks” shown by applicant in Figure 4B of the application, i.e. basically holes that allows a tail to be passed through . With regard to claim 6, SUBEKUM further discloses the two or more hooks move towards each other as the central body surrounds a graft to secure to one another and hold the device on the graft . See for example that holes 54 of the central body move from a configuration as shown in Figure 22 to a configuration as shown for example in Figure 17. With regard to claim 7 , SUBEKUM further discloses a tensioning line configured to engage with the two or more hooks as the central body partially surrounds a graft, the tensioning line can be tightened to secure the device on a graft (see annotated Figure 16, above, and the transformation of Figure 22 to Figure 17) . With regard to claim 8, SUBEKUM further discloses at least a portion of the connective tissue augmentation and fixation device is made of a bioabsorbable material (see for example ¶ [0067], lines 5-6). With regard to claim 10, SUBEKUM discloses a device (see for example Figure 23, i.e. embodiment of Figures 16-22 with the additional tails ) comprising a first portion extending longitudinally between a first end and a second end (see annotated Figure 23 above) . T he first portion including a first tail extending from the first end of the first portion (the first tail is shown for example in Figure 16, see annotated Figure 16 above) ; and a second tail extending from the second end of the first portion . The device further has a second portion extending longitudinally between a first end and a second end (see annotated Figure 23 above) , the second portion includ es a third tail extending from the second end of the second portion; and a hook , i.e. a hole, extending from the first end of the second portion (see annotated Figures 16 and 23 above). It is noted that the hook , i.e. hole, has the ability if someone desire to receive the second tail of the first portion. For example the 2 nd tail could be passed through hole 54 , i.e. hole identified as a hook in annotated Figure 23. With regard to claim 11, SUBEKUM further discloses that the first portion defines a first cavity , extending from the first end to the second end of the first portion , and the second portion defines a second cavity , extending from the first end to the second end of the second portion (see Figures 16-20, 23) . The combination of the first cavity and second cavity forms the whole cavity that receives a graft (see for example Figure 23 showing the opening of the whole cavity toward the first end of the central body. Claim s 1-3, 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Woo et al. (Pub . No.: US 2016/0000554 A1). Note that Bates (Pub. No.: US 2005/0220848 A1) is being used as an evidence reference in the rejection. With regard to claim 1, Woo et al. disclose a device (combination of elements 10, 30, 32, 33 ( see Figure 12 ) ) comprising a central body 10 configured (has the ability) to at least partially surround a graft , i.e. an ECM bioscaffold /sheet wrapper wrapping the ligament or tendon 15 (see for example ¶ [0051]) . It is noted that the term “ECM bioscaffolds ” is another way to refer to graft material as explained by evidence reference Bates in ¶ [0061], i.e. “ ECM is the noncellular part of a tissue and consists of protein and carbohydrate structures secreted by the resident cells. ECM serves as a structural element in tissues. The extracellular matrix can be isolated and treated in a variety of ways. When harvested from the tissue source and fabricated into a graft material, the ECMs may be referred to as naturally occurring polymeric scaffolds, bioscaffolds , biomatrices, ECM scaffolds , extracellular matrix material (ECMM), or naturally occurring biopolymers. ” (underline added by the examiner). T he central body extend s longitudinally between a first end and a second end (see annotated Figure 1 1 below). A first side tail 32 extend s from the first end of the central body and configured to attach to a first bone of a patient (see Figure 12) ; and a second side tail 30 extending from the second end of the central body and configured to attach to a second bone of the patient (see Figure 12) . With regard to claim 2, Woo et al. further disclose bifurcation s , e.g. notch es 14 , between the first end and the second end of the central body (see for example annotated Figure 11 above) . With regard to claim 3 , Woo et al. further disclose a first section and a second section, the first section and the second section are joined at the bifurcation (see explode view of annotated Figure 11 below) . With regard to claim 1 6 , Woo et al. disclose a method of implanting a device into a patient, the device includes a central body extending between a first end and a second end and defining a cavity extending between the first end and the second end (see annotated Figures 11 and 12 above). T he method includes the steps of installing the device around a graft such that the graft is within the cavity of the central body , e.g. as shown in Figure 12 and explained in ¶ [0051], ligament or tendons 15 are wrapped with an ECM bioscaffold (graft) and the central body 10 received the tendons 15 wrapped with the ECM bioscaffold (see Figures 11 and 12). Woo et al. further disclose the step of inserting a first tail 32 of the device into a bone tunnel 21 in a first bone of the patient, the first tail 32 extending from the first end of the central body (see annotated Figures 11 and 12 above). Woo et al. also disclose inserting a second tail 30 of the device into a bone tunnel 24 in a second bone of the patient, the second tail 30 extending from the second end of the central body (see annotated Figures 11 and 12) . With regard to claim 17, Woo et al. further disclose the step of stitching one or more connective stitches , e.g. 33, between the device and the graft to hold the graft and tendon/ligament within the cavity of the central body. With regard to claim 18, Woo et al further disclose the step of inserting a first portion of a torn connective tissue of the patient within a first section of the cavity, the first section of the cavity defined by a first segment of the device; securing , e.g. with stitch 33, the first portion of the torn connective tissue to the device to hold the first portion of the torn connective tissue within the first section of the cavity; inserting a second portion of the torn connective tissue of the patient within a second section of the cavity, the second section of the cavity defined by a second segment of the device; and securing , e.g. with stitch 33, the second portion of the torn connective tissue to the device to hold the second portion of the torn connective tissue within the second section of the cavity (see annotated Figures 11 and 12) . 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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUBEKUM in view of COOK (Pub. No.: US 2024/0108325 A1) . SUBEKUM discloses that the device and various components may be manufactured from many materials, e.g. resorbable material, high density polyethylene, etc. (see ¶ [0100]). SUBEKUM further discloses that his description is not restrictive and that what was described may be used in combination with each other (see ¶ [0104]). SUBEKUM discloses the claimed invention and suggests that various components can be manufactured from many materials. However, SUBEKUM does not specifically states that a first portion of the device being polyethylene and a second portion is a bioabsorbable material. It would have been obvious to one skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the device of SUBEKUM with the central body being made of a polyethylene non-absorbable central body and absorbable tails or sutures, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Allowable Subject Matter Claim s 12-15 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 19 and 20 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 for cited art of interest. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT Eduardo C Robert whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-4719 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F: 8 AM-4:30 PM . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Edward Lefkowitz can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-2180 . 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. /EDUARDO C ROBERT/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3773