Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/629,482

METHODS FOR DRILLING-GUIDEWIRE TARGETING OF CANNULATED DEVICES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 08, 2024
Examiner
SHIRSAT, MARCELA
Art Unit
3775
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Exsomed Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
467 granted / 641 resolved
+2.9% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
674
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.9%
-35.1% vs TC avg
§103
40.8%
+0.8% vs TC avg
§102
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
§112
23.3%
-16.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 641 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation recites “first side of a bone” in line 3 which is believed should recite “first side of the bone” (emphasis added). Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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, 3-5, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Medoff et al (US Patent Pub. 20150112343A1) in view of Wagenknecht (US Patent 4978350). Medoff recites a method of inserting a bone fastener through a bone. Specifically in regards to claim 1, Medoff recites positioning a first bone plate (100, Fig. 24) having a first hole (hole for 118 shown in Fig. 14) on a first side of a bone (12, Fig. 15); drilling a channel (Fig. 25) through the bone (12) from the first side of the bone to a second side of the bone using a drilling guidewire (150), wherein the first end of the first portion (tapered end that allow wire 150 to drill into bone as shown in Fig. 25, see Fig. below) is positioned in the first hole (hole for 118) of the first bone plate (100) prior to drilling the channel through the bone so that the drilling guidewire (150) is fed through the first hole in the first bone plate (100); placing at least a part of the second portion (see Fig. below}of the drilling guidewire within the bone (12); sliding a bone fastener (144, Fig. 26) over the second portion of the drilling guidewire (150), wherein the bone fastener comprises a cannulation configured to receive the second portion of the drilling guidewire (150); and driving the bone fastener (144) through the first hole of the first bone plate (100) and the channel in the bone (100) (Fig. 24-27; and Para. [0122]-[0137]). However, the reference is silent as to the guidewire having two differing diameters. PNG media_image1.png 317 460 media_image1.png Greyscale Figure 1: Medoff demonstrating portions of the guidewire. Wagenknecht in regards to claim 1, discloses a drilling guidewire ( 2) wherein the drilling guidewire (2) comprises a first portion (6,16,17) having a drill unit (17) and a second portion (3), the first portion (6,16,17) comprising a first end (17) and a second end (tapered end of 6 connected to 3), the second portion (3) extending from the second end of the first portion (6,16,17), and wherein a diameter of the first portion (6,17,16) is greater than a diameter of the second portion (3) (Fig. 2,4; and Col. 4 lines 6-41). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the drilling guidewire (150) of Medoff to have differing diameters as taught in Wagenknecht so as to simultaneously drill and tap into a bone hole (abstract). In regards to claim 3, Medoff recites wherein the bone fastener (144) comprises a bone screw (Fig. 26). In regards to claim 4, Medoff recites positioning a second bone plate (120) with a second hole on the second side of the bone (12, Fig. 24-27). In regards to claim 5, Medoff recites wherein at least a part of the first portion of the drilling guidewire (150) passes through the channel of the bone (12) and through the second hole of the second bone plate (Fig. 26). In regards to claim 15, Medoff recites wherein the bone fastener (144) comprises a shaft and a head, wherein a diameter of the head is greater than a diameter of the shaft (Fig. 26). In regards to claim 16, Medoff recites wherein the diameter of the head is greater than the diameter of the first hole in the first bone plate so the head of the bone fastener secures the first bone plate (100) to the bone (12) (Fig. 26). In regards to claim 17, Medoff recites wherein the bone comprises a humerus (12) (Fig. 24-27, Para. [0004], 90122]). In regards to claim 18-19, Medoff in view of Wagenknecht a method of inserting a bone fastener through a bone. Wagenknecht further recites wherein the first portion (6) of the drilling guidewire (2) is in a range of about 1.2 mm to about 6.5 mm (Wagenknecht recites central threaded portion has diameters ranging from 3 to 6 mm.) or, wherein the diameter of the second portion (6) of the drilling guidewire (2) is in a range of about 0.5 mm to about 4.5 mm (Wagenknecht recites that it has a diameter equal to or less than the inner diameter of the thread in the threaded portion 6 it may have a 2, 3, 4 and 5 mm. diameter, respectively.) (Col. 4 lines 54-63). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the drilling guidewire (150) of Medoff to have differing diameters as taught in Wagenknecht so as to simultaneously drill and tap into a bone hole (abstract). In regards to claim 20, Medoff wherein the diameter of the first portion of the drilling guidewire (150) is greater than a diameter of the cannulation of the bone fastener (144) (IF the guidewire 150 of Medoff were to be modified to have the threaded portion 6 of pin 2 of Wagenknecht then it would be larger than the cannulation of the screw 144 of Medoff.) (Fig. 26 of Medoff and Fig. 2 of Wagenknecht). Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Medoff in view of Wagenknecht as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Schoutens (US Patent Pub. 20130274750A1). Medoff in view of Wagenknecht recite a method of inserting a bone fastener through a bone comprising first and second bone plates, a drilling guidewire having first and second portions that creates a channel from a hole in a first plate and through a bone, and then the pin is used to insert a screw therethrough. However, the references are silent as to the diameter of the wire being substantially equal to the diameter of the screw. Schoutens recites in regards to claim 2, wherein a minor diameter of the bone fastener (16) is substantially equal to a diameter of the first portion (fluted portion of 12) of the drilling guidewire (Fig. 1; and Para. [0019]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the drilling guidewire (150) of Medoff to have a diameter that is equal to the fastener as taught in Schoutens so as to allow the screw to securely affix the load carrier to the anatomical structure (Para. [0019]). Claim(s) 7-8 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Medoff in view of Wagenknecht as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Bernstein et al (US Patent Pub. 20130090695 A1). Medoff in view of Wagenknecht recite a method of inserting a bone fastener through a bone comprising first and second bone plates, a drilling guidewire having first and second portions that creates a channel from a hole in a first plate and through a bone, and then the pin is used to insert a screw therethrough. In regards to claim 7, Medoff recites positioning a clamp (148) around the bone (12), wherein the clamp (148) comprises a first guide channel (channel close to 100), wherein positioning the clamp (148) around the bone (12) comprises positioning the first guide channel in line with the first hole in the first bone plate (100) in the first bone plate (100) disposed on the first side of the bone (12) (Fig. 29-30; and Para. [0136]). However, the references are silent as the clamp having two guide channels. Bernstein recite a method of inserting a bone fastener through a bone. Specifically in regards to claim 7, Bernstein recites positioning a clamp around the bone, wherein the clamp (250) comprises a first and second guide channels (channels for passage of 314), wherein positioning the clamp (250) around the bone comprises: positioning the first guide channel in line with the first hole in the first bone plate disposed on the first side of the bone; and positioning the second guide channel in line with the second hole (144) in the second bone plate disposed on the second side of the bone (Fig. 15-17; and Para. [0084]-[0100]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the clamp (148) of Medoff to have two guide channels as taught in Bernstein so as to ensure that the two plates are properly aligned for the fastener to pass therethrough. In regards to claim 8, Medoff recites wherein at least a part of the first portion of the drilling guidewire (150) passes through the first guide channel of the clamp (148, Fig. 30-31), the first hole in the first bone plate (100), the channel of the bone (12), the second hole in the second bone plate (120), and the second guide channel of the clamp (IF the clamp 148 were to be modified to have a second channel as disclosed in Bernstein then the wire would pass through the channel and the plate as taught therein.)(Fig. 30-31). In regards to claim 13, Medoff recites removing the clamp (148); and driving the bone fastener (158) through the first hole in the first plate (100), the channel in the bone, and the second hole in the second bone plate (120) (Fig. 31-34). In regards to claim 14, Medoff recites wherein at least a portion of the bone fastener (158) comprises an external thread and wherein at least one of the first hole of the first bone plate (100) and the second hole of the second bone plate (120) comprises an internal thread configured to mate with the external thread of the bone fastener (Fig. 34). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6 and 9-12 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCELA I SHIRSAT whose telephone number is (571)270-5269. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:30pm MST. 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, Kevin Truong can be reached 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 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. /MARCELA I. SHIRSAT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 08, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594170
COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED SURGICAL PLANNING BASED ON BONE LOSS DURING ORTHOPEDIC REVISION SURGERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582428
A CLAMP AND CABLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582318
ILLUMINATION UNIT AND MEDICAL IMAGING SYSTEM FOR FLUORESCENCE IMAGING IN OPEN SURGERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575839
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR BONE FIXATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569285
DYNAMIC COMPRESSION DEVICES AND PROCESSES FOR MAKING AND USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
73%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+20.9%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 641 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