DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to applicant’s amendment received on July 2nd, 2026.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-10, 12-17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shoham (U.S. Publication 2012/0143084) in view of Salyer (U.S. Patent 4,811,632).
Regarding claims 1-3 and 5-7:
Shoham discloses a device (for example see Figure 2) comprising:
(claim 1) a motor drive (32, 34, 36, 38, etc.)
(claim 1) a cutting head (13)
(claim 1) wherein the cutting head is coupled to the motor drive
(claim 1) wherein the cutting head includes a cutting surface
(claim 6) wherein the cutting surface is provided on the cutting head
(claim 1) wherein during use the cutting head simultaneously precesses about a precession axis (19) and rotates about a rotation axis (17)
(claim 2) wherein the precession axis and the rotation axis extend from a center of rotation of the cutting head (the axes both from an intersection near element 15, which the cutting head rotates about the intersection point as shown in Figure 2)
(claim 2) wherein the precession axis and the rotation axis are offset from one another by an angle relative to the center of rotation to define an intended cutting area of the cutting head
(claim 2) wherein during use the cutting surface of the cutting head pass through the cutting area such that only a portion of the cutting teeth are located in the intended cutting area (as shown in Figure 2 only a portion of the cutting head is in contact with the cutting area during use)
(claim 3) wherein the cutting surface is located at positions more aligned with the rotation axis that the precession axis
(claim 6) wherein the cutting head simultaneously precesses about the precession axis and rotates about the rotation axis from a center of rotation
(claim 6) wherein a distance from the center of rotation to all points on the surface of the cutting head is not uniform
Shoham fails to disclose the invention wherein the reamer head is semi-hemispherical reamer with cutting teeth on the surface. Shoham teaches a device as discussed above comprising a cutting head, such as a drill, milling head, or any other surgical tool (paragraph 33), in order to cut bone. Salyer teaches a device comprising a cutting head (for example see Figure 2), wherein the cutting head includes a semi-hemispherical reamer cup having a central cutting tooth and a set of concentric cutting teeth rings that surround the central cutting tooth in order to cut bone. Because both the device of Shoham and the device of Salyer disclose devices including cutting heads in order to cut bone, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to substitute one cutting head for the other in order to achieve the predictable results of cutting bone.
Regarding claim 3, the invention of Shoham as modified by Salyer discloses a device wherein the cutting teeth are located at positions that are more aligned with the rotation axis than the precession axis.
Regarding claims 8-10 and 12-14 the invention of Shoham as modified by Salyer discloses a method of using the device above including the step causing, via the motor drive, the cutting head to simultaneously precess about the precession axis and rotate about a rotation axis.
Regarding claims 15-17, 19, and 20:
Shoham discloses a device (for example see Figure 2) comprising:
(claim 15) a motor drive (32, 34, 36, 38, etc.)
(claim 15) a cutting head (13)
(claim 15) wherein the cutting head is coupled to the motor drive
(claim 15) wherein during use the cutting head simultaneously precesses about a precession axis (19) and rotates about a rotation axis (17)
(claim 17) wherein the rotation axis extends from a center of rotation through a center of the reamer head (the axes both from an intersection near element 15)
(claim 17) wherein the precession axis extends from the center of rotation through a portion of the reamer head that is based on an angle relative to the center of rotation between the rotation axis and the precession axis (at a small enough angle axis 19 will extend through a portion of the cutting head)
(claim 18) wherein the rotation axis extends from a center of rotation (the axes both from an intersection near element 15)
Shoham fails to disclose the invention wherein the reamer head is semi-hemispherical reamer with cutting teeth on the surface. Shoham teaches a device as discussed above comprising a cutting head, such as a drill, milling head, or any other surgical tool (paragraph 33), in order to cut bone. Salyer teaches a device comprising a cutting head (for example see Figure 2), wherein the cutting head includes a semi-hemispherical reamer cup having a central cutting tooth and a set of concentric cutting teeth rings that surround the central cutting tooth in order to cut bone. Because both the device of Shoham and the device of Salyer disclose devices including cutting heads in order to cut bone, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to substitute one cutting head for the other in order to achieve the predictable results of cutting bone.
Regarding claim 19, the invention of Shoham as modified by Salyer discloses a device wherein the cutting teeth are located at positions that are more aligned with the rotation axis than the precession axis.
Claims 4, 11, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shoham (U.S. Publication 2012/0143084) in view of Salyer (U.S. Patent 4,811,632).
The invention of Shoham as modified by Salyer discloses the invention as claimed, see above, except for the angle being in the range of approximately 3 degrees to 6 degrees. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was provide the invention of Shoham as modified by Salyer wherein the angle is in the range of approximately 3 degrees to 6 degrees, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 2nd, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant’s argument that the device of Shoham does not disclose the cutting head simultaneously precessing about a precession axis while rotating about a rotation axis is not persuasive. As discussed in the rejection above, during use the cutting head rotates about rotation axis 17, i.e. the cutting axis for the cutting tool, while simultaneously rotating/moving about the axis of the handle (19), i.e. a precession axis. As a surgeon’s hand drifts or shakes during use, the cutting head rotates about an axis that is offline/off-center the handle axis (19) causing the cutting head to precess, i.e. rotate/move, about the axis 19 during use meeting the claim limitations as presented. The claims only require that the cutting head simultaneously rotate about the rotation axis and precesses, i.e. rotate/move, about a precession axis, which the reference clearly does. The applicant’s argues that the reference does not disclose that the rotation axis and the precession axis be deliberately and persistently offset from each other during use, but these limitations are not in the claims and are not required to be disclosed by the references. However, one might argue that the device allowing the surgeon’s hand to deviate from the cutting axis during use is deliberate and persistent in order to keep the cutting head of the tool in the proper alignment during use. Therefore, the references disclose the limitations of the claims as presented.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicholas Woodall whose telephone number is (571) 272-5204. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8am to 5:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Truong, at (571. 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.
/NICHOLAS W WOODALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Prosecution Insights