Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/720,957

MODULAR INSERTS FOR NAVIGATED SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 17, 2024
Examiner
JACOB, OOMMEN
Art Unit
3797
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Smith & Nephew Orthopaedics AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
692 granted / 880 resolved
+8.6% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
917
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
§103
52.6%
+12.6% vs TC avg
§102
15.2%
-24.8% vs TC avg
§112
25.6%
-14.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 880 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 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 1-5, 7-12, 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ebbitt [US 20190231447 A1]. As per claim 1, Ebbitt teaches surgical instrument assembly (Ebbitt Fig 4) comprising: a surgical instrument body (Ebbitt Fig 4 item 82) configured to interchangeably receive one of a plurality of modular inserts (Ebbitt Fig 4 item bit interface 128 comprising 130/132/42, 44,etc…. Applicant is respectfully reminded that a recitation of functional language of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the functional language claimed, then it meets the claim. In the instant case, the device of Ebbit met the structural limitations of the claim, and is shaped such that it is capable of performing the functional language claimed. For e.g. Ebbit has a body capable of interchanegeably receiving one of a plurality of inserts, with each of the inserts being capable of with engaging with one of the plurality of components as claimed and detailed in the rejection above), wherein each of the plurality of modular inserts is configured to engage with one of a plurality of components associated with the surgical instrument assembly (Ebbitt Fig 4 items 128 configured to engage with different end effectors and tools such as drills burs dissectors and scalpels). wherein the plurality of modular inserts comprises different diameters corresponding to the respective plurality of components (Ebbitt ¶0170, ¶0172. Item 128 is a bit interface 128, configured to engage with connectors and other components, as shown for e.g. in Fig 9. For e.g. a locking body 114 that supports a slider 116, contoured body 108 selectively engages a locking subassembly 110 for concurrent rotation, The support tube 106 comprises external threads 120 which engage corresponding internal threads 122 formed in the blades 102 of the anchor 50. Hence there are multiple diameters for sliding, locking, threaded or splined connections). As per claims 2-3, Ebbitt further teaches wherein the plurality of components comprises a drill bit / nosehead (Ebbitt Fig 5A, items 44 corresponds to drill and 50 corresponds to a nosepiece since it provides additional and/or different functionality as described by applicant). As per claim 4, Ebbitt further teaches wherein further comprising a tracking array coupled to the surgical instrument body (Ebbitt Fig 1 items 62, ¶0147 “trackers 62 to track correspondingly multiple objects within the localizer coordinate system LCLZ”). As per claim 5, Ebbitt further teaches a handle portion couplable to the surgical instrument body (Ebbitt Fig 4 grip 90, capable of being coupled), wherein the surgical instrument body is rotatable relative to the handle portion (Ebbitt ¶0156 “The drive assembly 82 is also provided with a connector, generally indicated at 86, which is configured to releasably secure different types of tools 42 for rotation about the second axis A2. A trigger assembly, generally indicated at 88, is provided with a grip 90 to support a user's hand (e.g., the surgeon's hand)”. Capable of being rotated). As per claim 7, Ebbitt further teaches the surgical instrument body is freely rotatable relative to the handle portion (Ebbitt Fig 4, ¶0194 “the coupling 230 comprises a plurality of coupling elements 234 (e.g., ball bearings) which are supported for radial movement relative to the first axis A1 along respective coupling pockets 236 formed in a carrier ring 238”). As per claims 8-12, 14, they have limitations similar to claims 1-5, 7 and are rejected for same reasons as above. Claims 6, 13, 15-18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebbitt. As per claim 6, Ebbitt further teaches wherein the handle portion and the surgical instrument body Ebbitt does not teach complementary teeth for the coupling element. However, Ebbitt teaches use of complementary teeth for rotation motion, although for another section (Ebbitt ¶0198 “the geartrain 84 comprises at least one bevel gearset, generally indicated at 272, interposed in rotational communication between the rotary instrument 80 and the connector 86. The bevel gearset 272 comprises an input gear 274 and an output gear 276). Hence it was known at the time of filing of the claimed invention that gear train was useful for providing radial / rotational motion. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the he coupling 230 by substituting another mechanism, such as gears, so as to obtain predictable results of radial motion (See MPEP 2143.I.B). As per claim 15, 17 Ebbitt teaches at least one of the plurality of modular inserts comprises a shaft and a channel extending through the shaft (Ebbitt Fig 9 item 106, ¶0172 “the threaded body 98 of the anchor 50, as well as the driveshaft 104 and bit interface 128 of the rotary driving tool 48, are cannulated to, among other things, allow a guidewire GW (e.g., a “K-Wire”) to extend therethrough (not shown in detail).”), the channel comprising a diameter corresponding to the respective plurality of components (Ebbitt Fig 8, at least diameter at 128 corresponds to a component or guidewire). As stroked through above, Ebbitt does not disclose the features in each insert. However, as per MPEP 2144.04,VI.B, mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In this case, the claim is directed to providing features of Ebbitt Fig 8, to all the inserts. Hence it is duplication of parts and an obvious modification. As per claims 16, 18, wherein the channel is oriented at a known pose with respect to the surgical instrument body (Ebbitt Fig 1, the channels are premade and hence known). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OOMMEN JACOB whose telephone number is (571)270-5166. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:00. 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, ANNE M KOZAK can be reached at 571-270-0552. 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. /Oommen Jacob/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 17, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596845
SECURE ULTRASOUND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582342
Method and System to Assess Pulmonary Hypertension Using Phase Space Tomography and Machine Learning
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575752
MICROWAVE BREAST CANCER SCREENING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12557998
DERIVATION OF HEARTBEAT INTERVAL FROM REFLECTION SIGNAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12551134
DEVICES, SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TISSUE ANALYSIS, LOCATON DETERMINATION AND TISSUE ABLATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
79%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+17.4%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 880 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