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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 7/20/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sculco et al. (WO2020102886).
Regarding claim 6, Sculco teaches a computer system for positioning a stability component of an implant system associated with a joint (Sculco: 0002), the implant system further comprising a first component (implant 3300, Sculco: FIG.33A) and a second component (cup without reference sign, FIG.33A), wherein the stability component is configured to be interposed between the first component and the second component to stabilize the first component and the second component relative to each other (lipped liners 3302, Sculco: FIG.33A), the computer system comprising:
A processor; and a memory coupled to the processor, the memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the computer system to:
Receive a standing sacral slope and a sitting sacral slope associated with a spine of a patient (“receive respective tilt coordinates (e.g. on the standing lateral image and the sitting lateral image respectively) as input, and determine a change in tilt parameter (between the standing AP image and the standing lateral image) of the” (Sculco: 0090). “One such landmark that could be used is the sacral slope (angle of the superior aspect of the sacrum)” (Sculco: 0099). Also refer to para 0062);
Determine a spine mobility based on the standing sacral slope and the sitting sacral slope (“calculates the change in pelvic tilt angle based on the coordinates of the standing and lateral images.” (Sculco: 0063, 0048));
Receive a pose of the first component of the implant system (receiving pose of a femoral component of the THA system (Sculco: 0079));
Receive a pose of the second component of the implant system; receive a selection for the stability component (receiving pose of an acetabular cup component of the THA system (Sculco: 0071, 0074, FIG.7));
Determine a location of a contact point between the first component and the second component (3D position of the femoral neck (3208/3300) relative to the femoral head and stem (Sculco: 0167)) through a range of motion of the joint (tracking the spatial trajectory of the femoral neck across joint movements (transition between standing and sitting) to evaluate motion until contact or impingement (Sculco: 0170, 0181, 0173)) based on the determined spine mobility (measuring spinal mobility (Sculco: 0099, 0063, 0048)), the received pose of the first component (receiving 3D position coordinates and angles that defines the pose of the femoral stem and neck components (Sculco: 0079)), and the received pose of the second component (received 3D position and angles that defines the pose of the acetabular cup relative to the pelvic reference frame (Sculco: 0071, 0074));
Output the determined location of the contact point and the determined location of the portion of the first implant at one or more positions within the range of motion relative to a configuration of the selected stability component (rendering the relative positions of the femoral neck and contact/impingement points across multiple positions (standing, sitting) by displaying 3D overlays, indications for impingement and safe zone boundaries (Sculco: 0140, 0141, 0173)), wherein the configuration of the selected stability component comprises an inclination angle and an anteversion angle for the stability component (the defined spatial orientation of the acetabular cup / stability component using inclination and anteversion and anteversion angles (Sculco: 0071, 0160));
Receive an updated inclination angle and an updated anteversion angle for the stability component (updated inclination and anteversion angles through GUI inputs (Sculco: 0075, 0073, 0123), and applying the updates to the 3D model rendering of the implant/stability component (Sculco: 0073, 0171));
And output an updated configuration for the stability component (outputting an updated rendering of the acetabular cup and associated safe zone graphical elements (Sculco: 0074, 0008)) relative to the determined location of the contact point and the determined location of the portion of the first component (the spatial interaction between the cup/liner and the femoral neck and updating the safe zone indicators (Sculco: 0146, FIG.33A-33D))
based on the updated inclination angle and the updated anteversion angle (the updated 3D rendering, safe zone, graphical overlays and contact point locations in response to the updated inclination and anteversion angles input by the user (Sculco: 0121, 0157)).
Regarding claim 7, Sculco teaches the computer system of claim 6, wherein the implant system comprises a total hip arthroplasty system (a computer implemented planning system for THA (Sculco: 0002, 0047)).
Regarding claim 8, Sculco teaches the computer system of claim 7, wherein the first implant comprises a femoral component, the portion of the femoral component comprises a femoral neck, and the second implant comprises an acetabular cup component (the THA system of Sculco teaches a femoral component comprising a femoral neck and an acetabular cup component (Sculco: 0047, 0079, 0167)).
Regarding claim 9, Sculco teaches the computer system of claim 6, wherein the memory stores further instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the computer system to:
Receive an updated selection of the stability component (the GUI receives user inputs to select or update implant choices (Sculco: 0174, 0179));
And output the determined location of the contact point and the determined location of the portion of the first implant at one or more positions within the range of motion relative to the configuration of the updated selection of the stability component (re-evaluating the range of motion constraints and outputting an updated safe zone display and graphical impingement/contact indicators (Sculco: 0008, 0173)).
Regarding claim 10, Sculco teaches the computer system of claim 6, wherein the memory stores further instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the computer system to: determine a jump distance associated with the implant system based on the selected stability component; and output the determined jump distance (calculating, modeling and displaying the jump distance that is based on the stability implant (femoral head size, dual-mobility assembly (Sculco: 0168, FIG.30A-30B) (Sculco: 0171, FIG.32A-32B)).
Claim(s) 1-5 are corresponding method claim(s) of claim(s) 6-10. The limitations of claim(s) 1-5 are substantially similar to the limitations of claim(s) 6-10. Therefore, it has been analyzed and rejected substantially similar to claim(s) 1-5.
Claim(s) 11-15 are corresponding non-transitory computer readable medium claim(s) of claim(s) 6-7. The limitations of claim(s) 11-15 are substantially similar to the limitations of claim(s) 6-7. Therefore, it has been analyzed and rejected substantially similar to claim(s) 11-15. Note, Sculco teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium (Sculco: 0087).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David H Chu whose telephone number is (571)272-8079. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30 - 1:30pm, 3:30-8:30pm.
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, Daniel F Hajnik can be reached at (571) 272-7642. 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.
/DAVID H CHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2616
Prosecution Insights