DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to the response to restriction requirement filed February 17, 2026. Claims 1-25 are pending.
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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I, claims 1-6, in the reply filed on February 17, 2026, is acknowledged.
Claims 7-25 are hereby withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 February 17, 2026.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chapman et al. (US 5,190,544).
Regarding claim 1, Chapman teaches a drill guide/reduction system for use with an orthopedic plate 69 to fix a bone and having with a top surface (fig. 28, left) and a bottom surface configured to face the bone (fig. 28, right), comprising the drill guide/reduction system comprising a body 171 having a first surface contoured so as to have a portion that overlaps the plate (portion 199) and which can be secured to the plate 69 as seen at fig. 31 and a portion having a second surface contiguous with the first surface having a concave curve which can envelop a portion of the bone as seen in fig. 31, the second portion having a hook extending and in the direction of the concave curve (portion 175 is considered a hook as claimed) and including at least one drill guide body through hole (the holes through 171 as seen at fig. 29 are considered capable of use as drill guide bodies).
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(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chapman in view of Peterson et al. (US 2017/03331002 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Chapman teaches the limitations of claim 1, but fails to teach a drill guide tube which has a through hole and which is configured to mate with the drill guide body through hole.
Peterson teaches an arrangement at fig. 88 including a plate and a drill guide tube 8835 couplable thereto which has a throughhole and which is configured to mate with a through hole of the plate.
Since plate portion 171 is being considered a drill guide in Chapman, the coupling between 8835 and the through hole of the plate is considered analogous.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use a drill guide tube with the Chapman device by coupling a drill guide tube to one of the through holes thereof, as taught by Peterson. Doing so would have served to protect tissue surrounding a surgical site from undesired interaction with a drill or other tool passed through the tube.
Regarding claim 3, the drill guide tube will now be considered to include a nut, and the through hole of the drill guide tube will now be considered to include a hole through the nut. The through hole of the drill guide tube 8835 (the nut) is threaded and the system further including a threaded k-wire 8806 having threads 8805 that are configured to mate with the threads of the k-wire. (It is noted that other k-wires 8802/8804 are also described which function in the same manner; these k-wires are inserted with bushings which are also considered to be drill guide tubes).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include a threaded k-wire and nut of Peterson with the Chapman device in order to provide for compressional force upon the bone to improve reduction of bone fragments.
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chapman in view of Peterson and Prasad et al. (US 2011/0093018 A1).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, the combination teaches limitations of claim 2, above, and further teaches the drill guide tube being positioned within the screw holes. [1229]
The exterior surface of the drill guide tube 8835, 8827, 8831 are not demonstrated sufficiently to ascertain whether it is threaded. However, coupling a guide to a bone screw hole of a plate by a threaded means is considered to have been old and well known in the art:
Prasad teaches use of drill guides in the form of drill guide tubes which tubes are threaded to engage with threaded screw holes on the plate. , the interior of the drill guide body hole is threaded and the exterior drill guide tube threads and the interior drill guide body threads are configured to mate. [0036]
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to cause the connection between the guide tube and the plate to be by a threaded coupling as taught by Prasad. One would have done so in order to provide for a selectable releasable connection means between the tubes and the plate.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chapman in view of Castaneda et al. (US 2008/0015591 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Chapman teaches the limitations of claim 1, as above. Chapman does not teach the claimed drill guide body structures.
Castaneda teaches a bone plate (analogous to the drill guide body) wherein the drill guide body 10 has a plurality of through holes 18 and a plurality of guide tubes 30 and wherein one or more of the guide tubes 30 can be positioned at a variable angle within a through hole 18 of the drill guide body 10.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use a drill guide tube with the Chapman device by coupling a drill guide tube to one of the through holes thereof, as taught by Castaneda. Doing so would have served to protect tissue surrounding a surgical site from undesired interaction with a drill or other tool passed through the tube.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David Bates whose telephone number is (571)270-7034. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 10AM-6PM
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, Kevin Truong, 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 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.
/DAVID W BATES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799