Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/586,448

SPINAL STABILIZATION SYSTEM WITH ADJUSTABLE INTERLAMINAR DEVICES

Non-Final OA §101§DP
Filed
Feb 24, 2024
Examiner
GREEN, MICHELLE CHRISTINE
Art Unit
3773
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Jcbd LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
712 granted / 857 resolved
+13.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
891
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
39.5%
-0.5% vs TC avg
§102
31.7%
-8.3% vs TC avg
§112
15.3%
-24.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 857 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §DP
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 . Double Patenting A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim(s) 1-7 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,950,813 B2. This is a statutory double patenting rejection. The table below shows the application claims and the patent claims side by side for direct comparison, with the differences between the claims are highlighted below by bolding all the limitations that differ, italicizing additional limitations, and underlining limitations that will be addressed below. Application Claims: Patent Claims: 1. A method for medial stabilization of a spinal column, the spinal column including a midline having a left and a right side, a first vertebra having a first lamina, a first spinous process, the first spinous process having a superior aspect opposite an inferior aspect, the method comprising: a) positioning a first rod having a cranial portion opposite a caudal portion and a first longitudinal axis and a second rod having a cranial portion opposite a caudal portion and a second longitudinal axis against the spinal column such that: i. the second rod is spaced apart from and substantially parallel with the first rod; ii. the first rod is positioned against the first lamina and against the left side of the first spinous process and the second rod is positioned against the first lamina and against the right side of the first spinous process; and iii. the cranial portions of the first and second rods extend cranially from the superior aspect of the first spinous process and the caudal portions of the first and second rods extend caudally from the inferior aspect of the first spinous process; b) delivering a first interlaminar member into operative engagement with the first rod and the second rod via an approach that is substantially perpendicular to the first longitudinal axis, the first interlaminar member comprising a U-shaped body defined by an elastic midsection, two spaced apart end portions, and a pair of juxtaposed legs, each leg extending substantially parallel to one another from one of the respective ends in a direction outwardly away from the spinal column; c) securing the first interlaminar member to both the caudal portion of the first rod and the caudal portion of the second rod such that the first interlaminar member seats against the inferior aspect of the first spinous process; d) delivering a second interlaminar member into operative engagement with the first rod and the second rod via an approach that is substantially perpendicular to the first longitudinal axis; and e) securing the second interlaminar member to both the cranial portion of the first rod and the cranial portion of the second rod such that the second interlaminar member seats against the superior aspect of the first spinous process. 1. A method for medial stabilization of a spinal column, the spinal column including a midline having a left and a right side, a first vertebra having a first lamina, a first spinous process, the first spinous process having a superior aspect opposite an inferior aspect, the method comprising: a) positioning a first rod having a cranial portion opposite a caudal portion and a first longitudinal axis and a second rod having a cranial portion opposite a caudal portion and a second longitudinal axis against the spinal column such that: i. the second rod is spaced apart from and substantially parallel with the first rod; ii. the first rod is positioned against the first lamina and against the left side of the first spinous process and the second rod is positioned against the first lamina and against the right side of the first spinous process; and iii. the cranial portions of the first and second rods extend cranially from the superior aspect of the first spinous process and the caudal portions of the first and second rods extend caudally from the inferior aspect of the first spinous process; b) delivering a first interlaminar member into operative engagement with the first rod and the second rod via an approach that is substantially perpendicular to the first longitudinal axis, the first interlaminar member comprising a U-shaped body defined by an elastic midsection, two spaced apart end portions, and a pair of juxtaposed legs, each leg extending substantially parallel to one another from one of the respective ends in a direction outwardly away from the spinal column; c) securing the first interlaminar member to both the caudal portion of the first rod and the caudal portion of the second rod such that the first interlaminar member seats against the inferior aspect of the first spinous process; d) delivering a second interlaminar member into operative engagement with the first rod and the second rod via an approach that is substantially perpendicular to the first longitudinal axis; and e) securing the second interlaminar member to both the cranial portion of the first rod and the cranial portion of the second rod such that the second interlaminar member seats against the superior aspect of the first spinous process. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the pair of juxtaposed legs of the U-shaped body of the first interlaminar member includes an uppermost leg and a lowermost leg, the uppermost leg being longer than the lowermost leg. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the pair of juxtaposed legs of the U-shaped body of the first interlaminar member includes an uppermost leg and a lowermost leg, the uppermost leg being longer than the lowermost leg. 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the second interlaminar member comprises a U-shaped body, the U-shaped body including a pair of oppositely positioned ears extending laterally outwardly from the body in opposing directions, each of the ears containing an aperture structured and arranged to slideably receive one of the first and second rods. 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the second interlaminar member comprises a U-shaped body, the U-shaped body including a pair of oppositely positioned ears extending laterally outwardly from the body in opposing directions, each of the ears containing an aperture structured and arranged to slideablv receive one of the first and second rods. 4. The method of claim 2, wherein the second interlaminar member comprises a U-shaped body, the U-shaped body including a pair of oppositely positioned ears extending laterally outwardly from the body in opposing directions, each of the ears containing an aperture structured and arranged to slideably receive one of the first and second rods. 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the second interlaminar member comprises a U-shaped body, the U-shaped body including a pair of oppositely positioned ears extending laterally outwardly from the body in opposing directions, each of the ears containing an aperture structured and arranged to slideablv receive one of the first and second rods. 5. The method of claim 2, wherein the first leg of the U-shaped body includes a rod coupling interface adapted to couple to the first rod and to the second rod. 5. The method of claim 2, wherein the first leg of the U-shaped body includes a rod coupling interface adapted to couple to the first rod and to the second rod. 6. The method of claim 2 wherein the longer uppermost leg is a handle adapted to insert and position the first interlaminar member during surgery. 6. The method of claim 2 wherein the longer uppermost leg is a handle adapted to insert and position the first interlaminar member during surgery. 7. The method of claim 4 wherein each of the pair of oppositely positioned ears further includes a fastener extending therethrough and adapted to releaseably engage the one of the respective first and second rods slideably received therein. 4. The method of claim 3 wherein each of the pair of oppositely positioned ears further includes a fastener extending therethrough and adapted to releaseably engage the one of the respective first and second rods slideably received therein. As is evident from the table above, Patent claims 1-7 are drawn to identical subject matter of application claims 1-7. The only differences highlighted in the table above, are the order in which the claims are presented, and do not change the subject matter or scope of the claim. As shown in the table above, claim 3 corresponds to patent claim 7; and claim 7 depends from claim 4, which is the same limitation presented in patent claim 3 that patent claim 4 depends from. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892. The following references disclose adjustable spinous process spacer devices combined with rods: PNG media_image1.png 132 610 media_image1.png Greyscale The following references disclose interspinous vertebral motion spacer devices combined with rods: PNG media_image2.png 176 616 media_image2.png Greyscale Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michelle C. Green whose telephone number is (571)270-7051. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday between 9am-5pm. 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, Eduardo C. Robert, at (571) 272-4719. 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. /M.C.G/ Examiner, Art Unit 3773 /EDUARDO C ROBERT/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3773
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 24, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594099
ROD REDUCTION INSTRUMENT FEEDBACK SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589006
Expandable Vertebral Implant and Method
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588935
INTERSPINOUS IMPLANT INSERTION INSTRUMENT WITH STAGGERED PATH IMPLANT DEPLOYMENT MECHANISM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588936
LAG SCREW SYSTEMS AND NAIL SYSTEMS AND METHODS INCORPORATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582447
ORTHOPEDIC EXTENDABLE RODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+11.7%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 857 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month