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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “at least one connecting point located in the front region”, as per claim 1, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Furthermore, “the articulated joint includes: a ball that is stably fixed to the upper assembly and faces towards the lower assembly; a receiving body that is fixed to the lower assembly and faces towards the upper assembly to receive the ball; the ball and the receiving body defining one between a ball and socket joint, a rotoidal joint or a universal joint”, as per claims 10 and14 , must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-20 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.
In claim 1, line 1, “the ESR (energy-storing-and-returning) type” lacks a prior antecedent basis. Furthermore, in lines 14-16, “the upper one” (recited twice) lacks prior antecedent basis. It is unclear to what applicant is referring to, i.e. the “upper assembly” or the “upper blade”. In claim 14 applicants refer to the “upper assembly”, thus it would be considered as such for examination purposes. Applicant should amend lines 14-16, accordingly.
In claim 2, lines 5-6, “the longitudinal axis” lacks prior antecedent basis. For examination purposes, “the longitudinal axis” will be considered to mean -- the longitudinal direction --. Claim 2 should be amended accordingly.
In claim 3, line 3, “a plurality of equilibrium positions” is indefinite because it is unclear what defines an “equilibrium positions”. Are these mechanical detents, stable positions, or force-balance points? Applicant’s specification does not provide any definition or clarification with regard to what applicants mean by “equilibrium positions”. For example, the specification recites only four times the term “equilibrium positions”, i.e.” According to an aspect of the disclosure, the prosthetic implant comprises a slider that is extractable or retractable relative to the upper assembly along the movement direction through a plurality of equilibrium positions”;
“The prosthetic implant also comprises a slider, to which the first end of the connector is pivoted. In this situation, the method also comprises a step of extracting or retracting the slider relative to the upper assembly along the movement direction through a plurality of equilibrium positions”; “As shown in Figures 2A-2C, the prosthetic implant 100 comprises a slider 700 that is extractable or retractable relative to the upper assembly 200 along the movement direction X (that is, along a movement axis X defined by the slider 700) through a plurality of equilibrium positions”; and “In this situation, the method comprises a step of extracting or retracting the slider 700 relative to the upper assembly 200 along the movement direction X through a plurality of equilibrium positions”. None of these four instances explain what applicant mean by “equilibrium positions”.
In claim 14, line 1, “the ESR (energy-storing-and-returning) type” lacks a prior antecedent basis.
In claim 15, lines 5-6, “the longitudinal axis” lacks prior antecedent basis. For examination purposes, “the longitudinal axis” will be considered to mean -- the longitudinal direction --. Claim 15 should be amended accordingly.
In claim 19, line 1, “the ESR (energy-storing-and-returning) type” lacks a prior antecedent basis.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5-7, 9, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Clausen (Pub. No.: US 2020/0375764 A1, cited by applicant in IDS filed 07/11/2024).
With regard claims 1 and 14, Clausen discloses a prosthetic implant (see annotated Figure 22A below) comprising: an upper assembly configured to be connected to a patient’s lower limb (see annotated Figure 22A below); a lower assembly (see annotated Figure 22A below), configured to define a foot having a front region, a middle region and a rear region and including: a lower blade, extending along a main direction, between a heel end and a toe end; an intermediate blade, partly superposed on the lower blade; an upper blade, partly superposed on the intermediate blade; wherein the upper, lower and intermediate blades are fastened stably to each other at one connecting point located in the middle region of the foot and diverge from each other away from the connecting point towards the rear region of the foot (see annotated Figure 22A below); an articulated joint (see annotated Figure 22A below), interposed between the lower assembly and the upper assembly to allow relative motion between the lower assembly and the upper assembly; a connector (see annotated Figure 22 A below) having a first end that is connected to the upper assembly and a second end that is connected to the intermediate blade of the lower assembly to apply a force on the intermediate blade of the lower assembly, wherein at least one between the first and the second end of the connector is movable along a movement direction to vary the force applied on the intermediate blade of the lower assembly (see annotated Figure 22A below and Figures 1-19 for details of the connector and how its adjustment mechanism expands along the movement direction). With regard to method claim 14, it is noted that the method is inherent in the use of the device of Clausen, e.g. the one of the first end or second end of the connector along the movement direction which will vary the force apply by the connector to the intermediate blade of the lower assembly (see annotated Figure 22A above and Figures 1-9 that show how the first and second end of the connector are adjusted).
PNG
media_image1.png
930
1653
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, Clausen further discloses that the upper assembly extends along a longitudinal direction between a hook-up end, where it is operatively connected to the patient’s lower limb, and a fixing end, where it is fixed to the articulated joint (see annotated Figure 22A above). The first end of the connector is slidably movable relative to the upper assembly (e.g. the first end connector slides into upper assembly connection space when they are being assembled). The movement direction is transverse to the longitudinal direction (see annotated Figure 22A above, where we can see the movement direction and the longitudinal direction will transverse each other).
With regard to claim 5, Clausen further discloses the second end of the connector is articulated to the intermediate blade of the lower assembly (see annotated Figure 22A above and Figures 1-19).
With regard to claim 6, Clausen further discloses an actuator capable of slidably move the first end of the connector (see Figures 1-19).
With regard to claim 7, Clausen further discloses the second end of the connector is slidably movable along the intermediate blade (e.g. when the device is assembled the second end of the connector has the ability to be slid along the intermediate blade and into position).
With regard to claim 9, Clausen discloses the connector is a rigid element and wherein the length of the connector is adjustable (see Figures 1-19).
With regard to claim 15, Clausen discloses the upper assembly extends along a longitudinal direction between a hook-up end, where it is operatively connected to the patient’s lower limb, and a fixing end, where it is fixed to the articulated joint, the method comprising a step of sliding the first end of the connector relative to the upper assembly (e.g. when the first end of the connector is attached to the upper assembly, the first end is slid into position). The movement direction is transverse to the longitudinal axis (see annotated Figure 22A above).
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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clausen in view of Lindhe (Sweden reference SE 1451220 A1).
Clausen discloses the claimed invention except for the lower, intermediate and upper blades being made from a spring laminated composite material.
Lindhe discloses a prosthetic foot (see Figure 4 below) including a lower, intermediate and upper blades (see annotated Figure 4 below). The blades are made from a spring laminated composite material that include glass fiber. Lindhe discloses a number of advantages for making the blades from spring laminated composite material such as they flexed to a higher degree before breaking (see page 3, first paragraph); they are highly functional, light-weight that can be produced at low cost and involving a minimum of components (see page 3, first paragraph); also they can be made from any colors (see page 3, lines 18-22).
PNG
media_image2.png
866
1223
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the implant of Clausen with the blade being made from a spring laminated composite material in view of Lindh, in order to provide blades that have a higher degree of flexibility to prevent breaking, that are light-weight and can be produced at a low cost and also that can be of any color.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4 , 8, 10, 12, 13, and 16-18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 19-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 19-20 in the instant application have not been rejected using prior art because no references, or reasonable combination thereof, could be found which disclose, or suggest, a prosthetic implant, as claimed in claim 19, and specifically having a connector extending from a first end to a second end along a connection axis and wherein at least one between the first end and the second end of the connector is movable along a movement direction, the movement direction being inclined with respect to the connection axis, as set forth in claim 19.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for prior art of interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eduardo C Robert whose telephone number is (571)272-4719. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8 AM-4:30 PM.
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, Edward Lefkowitz can be reached at 571-272-2180. 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.
/EDUARDO C ROBERT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3773
Prosecution Insights