Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/692,044

VARIABLE FIXATION BONE PLATES

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Mar 14, 2024
Examiner
CHANG, OLIVIA C
Art Unit
3775
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Smith & Nephew Asia Pacific Pte. Limited
OA Round
4 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
612 granted / 726 resolved
+14.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
749
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§102
37.0%
-3.0% vs TC avg
§112
25.4%
-14.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 726 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Response to Amendment This office action is in response to the amendment filed February 24, 2026. As directed by the amendment, claims 1-3, 5-6, 9-16 have been amended. As such, claims 1-3, 5-6, 9-16 remain under consideration in the instant application. 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. Claims 9, 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 9 recites the limitation “the plurality of slots”. However, both “a plurality of slots arranged on the brim segment” and “a plurality of slots arranged on the QLS segment” are recited in claim 1. It is unclear to which plurality of slots this limitation refers. Correction is required. Claim 12 recites the limitation “the plurality of slots”. However, both “a plurality of slots arranged on the brim segment” and “a plurality of slots arranged on the QLS segment” are recited in claim 1. It is unclear to which plurality of slots this limitation refers. Correction is required. Claims 14 and 15 recite the limitation “the at least one elongated slot”. However, both “at least one elongated slot” arranged on the brim segment and “at least one elongated slot arranged on the QLS segment” are recited in claim 1. It is unclear to which plurality of slots this limitation refers. Correction is required. 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) 1-3, 5-6, 9-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guo (2017/0319249). Regarding claim 1, Guo discloses a suprapectineal or infrapectineal bone plate system, comprising: bone fasteners including a first fastener and a second fastener (“screws” ¶88); and a suprapectineal or infrapectineal bone plate (FIGS. 3-4) comprising: a brim segment (B1 with B2) coupled to a quadrilateral surface (QLS) segment (5 with 10) via at least one bridge (4), wherein the brim segment is configured to be affixed to one of a portion of a pelvic brim or the quadrilateral surface (QLS) below the pelvic brim of a patient (FIG. 4)s the QLS segment is configured to be arranged directly adjacent to the QLS of the pelvis (FIG. 4); a plurality of slots (screw holes) arranged on the brim segment, at least a portion of the plurality of slots configured to receive the first fastener to affix the bone plate to the pelvic brim or the quadrilateral surface (QLS) below the pelvic brim (¶88), the plurality of slots comprising at least one elongated slot (slot adjacent 12, FIG. 4) capable to receive the second fastener to non-rigidly affix the bone plate to the pelvic brim or the quadrilateral surface (QLS) below the pelvic brim to facilitate adjustment of the bone plate in an adjustment direction during an implantation procedure (¶88); and a plurality of slots (holes at 10) arranged on the QLS segment including at least one elongated slot arranged on the QLS segment, wherein each elongated slot comprises a short dimension (narrow dimension) configured to prevent movement of the bone plate in a short direction when the second fastener is arranged within the elongated slot, and a long dimension (elongate dimension) capable to allow linear movement of the bone plate in the adjustment direction when the bone plate is non-rigidly affixed to the pelvic brim or the quadrilateral surface (QLS) below the pelvic brim. Regarding claim 2, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 1, wherein the adjustment direction is one of a medial/lateral direction or a superior/inferior direction (FIG. 4). Regarding claim 3, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 1, wherein the at least one elongated slot on the brim segment has the adjustment direction of medial/lateral and the at least one elongated slot on the QLS segment has the adjustment direction of superior/inferior (FIG. 4). Regarding claim 5, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 1, wherein the bone plate is a suprapectineal bone plate wherein the brim segment is configured to be affixed on the pelvic brim (FIG. 4). Regarding claim 6, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 1, wherein the bone plate is an infrapectineal bone plate wherein the brim segment is configured to be affixed to the QLS below the pelvic brim (FIG. 4). Regarding claim 9, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of slots comprises at least one non-locking slot and at least one locking slot (FIG. 4). Regarding claim 10, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 1, the plurality of slots arranged on the brim segment in a brim slot pattern comprising alternating locking slots and non-locking slots arranged along a longitudinal length of the brim segment (FIG. 4). Regarding claim 11, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 10, the brim slot pattern comprising the at least one elongated slot arranged between a locking slot and a non-locking slot of the brim slot pattern (hole to side of elongated slot can be locking, hole above elongated slot can be non-locking, ¶88). Regarding claim 12, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 1, the plurality of slots comprising at least one set of elongated slots configured to facilitate movement in one adjustment direction (FIG. 4). Regarding claim 13, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 12, the at least one set comprising one of a medial/lateral adjustment set or a superior/inferior adjustment set (FIG. 4). Regarding claim 14, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 1, the at least one elongated slot comprising a plurality of slots arranged at a slot orientation angle (FIG. 4). Regarding claim 15, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 1, the at least one elongated slot is configured to facilitate movement of about 1 mm to about 10 mm (FIG. 4). Regarding claim 16, Guo discloses the bone plate system of claim 1, wherein the at least one elongated slot on the brim segment is angled with an inter-slot orientation angle with respect to the at least one elongated slot on the QLS segment (FIG. 4). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection. The newly presented rejection was necessitated by the amendments to the claims of February 24, 2026. 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 extension fee 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 OLIVIA C CHANG whose telephone number is (571) 270-5017. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30AM-5:00PM. 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. /OLIVIA C CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 14, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Aug 11, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 12, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112
Jan 30, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 31, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Feb 24, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 09, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582419
TIBIAL SUPRAPATELLAR ENTRY PORTAL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12558135
OSSEOUS ANCHORING IMPLANT WITH CORTICAL STABILIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12514623
ORTHOPEDIC PLATE FOR TREATMENT OF TIBIAL FRACTURES AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12514624
BONE FIXATION DEVICE AND METHOD OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12491014
OSTEOSYNTHESIS PLATE SUITABLE AS A REPLACEMENT OF A SYNARTHROSIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+13.3%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 726 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