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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 16 and 18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/27/2026.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the surface area" in line 1. Claim 5 recites “the corresponding fixation connecting mesh” in line 1. Claim 12 recites “the perimeter” in line 2. Claim 13 recites “the size, “the interface” and “the magnesium framework”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 15 recites “two or more fixation point openings” which is already directly recited in line 7 of claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-15, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tadic (US 2018/0036127).
Tadic shows a dental bone grafting device (Fig. 3, 7-8) comprising a mesh (“mesh-like area 7”), comprising a framework fabricated of a material selected from the group consisting of magnesium metal and a magnesium-based metal alloy ([0068]); and a geometric design formed within the framework (entirety of Fig. 3) comprising a plurality of design features, comprising: two or more fixation point openings (5) each having a corresponding fixation connecting feature corresponding thereto (body of framework surrounding each 5); and one or more non-fixation point openings (perforations in mesh-like 7; [0074]) each having a corresponding non-fixation connecting feature corresponding thereto (body of framework surrounding each perforation), wherein each of the corresponding fixation connecting feature and the corresponding non-fixation connecting feature surrounds and/or connects each of the two or more fixation point openings and the one or more non-fixation point openings, respectively (as seen in Fig. 3), and wherein each of the corresponding fixation connecting feature and the corresponding non-fixation connecting feature has a size that is structured to provide progressive and/or staged corrosion and/or absorption of the mesh ([0041] and [0051] in particular discuss the implant to be dissolved/bioresorbed and therefore would be of a size to provide such). With respect to claim 2, wherein each of the two or more fixation point openings and the one or more non-fixation point openings, and the corresponding fixation connecting feature and the corresponding non-fixation connecting feature corresponding thereto, respectively, has a corresponding size (have sizes as seen in Fig. 3). With respect to claim 3, wherein the size of each of the corresponding fixation connecting feature and the corresponding non-fixation connecting feature is selected from the group consisting of surface area, width, and thickness (the features have each of these since they occupy three dimensional space). With respect to claim 4, wherein the surface area of the corresponding fixation connecting feature of the two or more fixation point openings is greater than the surface area of the corresponding non-fixation connecting feature of the non-fixation point openings (as seen in Fig. 3, area around 5 is greater than area around each of the perforations of 7). With respect to claim 5, wherein the corresponding fixation connecting mesh that surrounds the two or more fixation point openings corrodes or absorbs over a longer period of time as compared to the corresponding non-fixation connecting feature that surrounds the one or more non-fixation point openings (due to the different surface areas resulting from the perforations, those of 7 will dissolve before those of 5). With respect to claim 6, wherein the two or more fixation point openings are structured to receive a fastening device ([0073]). With respect to claim 7, wherein the fastening device is selected from the group consisting of a bolt and screw (while the fastening device is not positively recited as part of the device, [0073]). With respect to claim 8, wherein the magnesium-based metal alloy, comprises from about 0.85 to about 1.4 weight percent zinc, from about 0.2 to about 0.5 weight percent calcium, from about 0.2 to about 0.5 weight percent manganese, and a balance of magnesium based on a total weight percent of the magnesium- based alloy ([0032] shows the overlap of ranges and in regards to manganese, 0.6 is considered “about 0.5”). With respect to claim 9, wherein the framework is a magnesium foil (Fig. 3, where foil is considered a sheet of magnesium as seen). With respect to claim 10, wherein the magnesium foil has a thickness from about 0.15 mm to about 0.55 mm or a thickness of about 0.35 mm ([0018] 50 and 300 μm is equivalent to 0.05 mm to 0.3 mm, where 0.3 mm is considered “about 0.35 mm”; it is also noted that [0090] states “at least 50 μm”, with an open upper limit, in order to prevent decomposing in too short of a time). With respect to claim 12, wherein the two or more fixation point openings are positioned along the perimeter of the framework (as seen at 5 in each corner; Fig. 3). With respect to claim 13, wherein the size of the corresponding fixation connecting feature of the two or more fixation point openings is greater at the interface of the fastening device and the magnesium framework as compared to another portion of the two or more fixation point openings (as seen in Fig. 3, particularly the larger portions extending toward the center of the implant away from the opening compared to the smaller portions extending to the perimeter). With respect to claim 14, wherein there are at least two different sizes of the corresponding fixation connecting feature and/or the corresponding non- fixation connecting feature to promote a progressive and/or staged corrosion and/or absorption profile (“two different sizes of the corresponding fixation connecting feature and the corresponding non-fixation connecting feature”: fixation connecting feature surrounding opening 5 is larger size than that of perforations of 7). With respect to claim 15, wherein the device comprises two or more fixation point openings (Fig. 3).
Apparatus claim 17 is rejected similarly to the above since it is simply a broader version of claim 1, particularly with regards to dental use and therefore of a size that could be used for such.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW NELSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5898. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:00pm EDT.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Eric Rosen, at (571) 270-7855. 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.
/MATTHEW M NELSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772