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
In response to the amendment filed on 6/16/2026, Claims 6-39 and 41-43 have been withdrawn, no new claims have been added and Claims 1-5 and 40 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding applicant’s arguments to claim 1 and 40, “Fisher does not disclose or suggest the amended Claim 1 features of a lower portion of a static component that connects to ends of a plurality of rails”, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Fisher discloses a plurality of rails (206e, Fig. 4e) that each include an end portion adjacent the cutting blade (as seen in Fig. 4e) and the lower portion (204d) connects the ends of the plurality of rails (206e) (as seen in Fig. 4e, paragraph 72). Furthermore, Claims 1 and 40 are rejected under USC 103 as being unpatentable over US 20100292701 A1 Fisher et al. in view of US 10906108 B2 Rubens et al. and further in view of US 20080243125 Guzman et al. as described below.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 and 40 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 – “a plurality of rails that each include an end portioned”, “portioned” should be “portion”; Claim 40 – “a plurality of rails that each include an end portioned”, “portioned” should be “portion”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 40 is 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 40 recites the limitation "adjacent the cutting blade" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination, Examiner interprets this to be “adjacent a cutting blade”.
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 1-2, 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20100292701 A1 Fisher et al. (hereinafter Fisher) in view of US 10906108 B2 Rubens et al. (hereinafter Rubens) and further in view of US 20080243125 Guzman et al. (hereinafter Guzman).
Regarding claim 1, Fisher discloses a cutting device (201, Fig. 2a-b) comprising:
a working blade body (213, Fig. 4b) being configured for operable connection to a source of movement (710, Fig. 7-9b, paragraph 95);
a cutting blade (203, Fig. 2a-d, 4b-c), attached to an end of the working blade body (as seen in Fig. 4b-c); and
a static component (204, Fig. 2a-b) being configured for operable connection to the source of movement (paragraph 68, 98, as seen in Fig. 8b-9b, proximal end 204b of the static component 204 has a drive unit coupling member 212 that is connected to the drive unit 710), wherein the static component comprises a plurality of rails (206e, Fig. 4e) that each include an end portion adjacent the cutting blade (as seen in Fig. 4e), wherein the static component comprises an upper portion (204c, Fig. 4b-e) and a lower portion (204d, Fig. 4b-e), wherein the lower portion (204d) connects the ends of the plurality of rails (206e) (as seen in Fig. 4e, paragraph 72).
Fisher is silent on wherein the upper portion and the lower portion are detachable from each other, and wherein the upper portion and the lower portion encloses at least a portion of the cutting blade when the upper portion is attached to the lower portion.
However, Rubens teaches a blade accessory guide (106, Fig. 3b-4b) that comprises an upper portion (108, Fig. 4c-8) and a lower portion (110, Fig. 4c-8) wherein the upper portion and the lower portion are detachable from each other (seen in Fig. 7-8, col. 7 line 10-23).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fisher with Rubens to have wherein the upper portion and the lower portion are detachable from each other in order to provide ease of replacement, cleaning and disuse as disclosed by Rubens (col. 10 line 30-32).
Furthermore, Guzman teaches an orthopedic surgical cutter (abstract, paragraph 2) comprising a cutting blade (118, Fig. 8-9), an upper portion (130) and a lower portion (134) wherein the upper portion and the lower portion encloses at least a portion of the cutting blade (as seen in Fig. 9, paragraph 83).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modification of Fisher with Rubens with the teachings of Guzman in order to adjust the cutting ability of the cutting blade as disclosed by Guzman (paragraph 83).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Fisher, Rubens and Guzman teaches the limitations of claim 1, and Rubens further discloses wherein a distal portion of the upper portion or lower portion is detachable (Fig. 7-8, col. 7 line 10-23, the distal portion of the upper portion (108) is detachable from the lower portion (110) and the distal portion of the lower portion (110) is detachable from the upper portion (108)).
Regarding claim 40, Fisher discloses a method (paragraph 31, 34) comprising:
providing a cutting device (201, Fig. 2a-b) comprising:
a working blade body (213, Fig. 4b) being configured for operable connection to a source of movement (710, Fig. 7-9b, paragraph 95); and
a static component (204, Fig. 2a-b) being configured for operable connection to the source of movement (paragraph 68, 98, as seen in Fig. 8b-9b, proximal end 204b of the static component 204 has a drive unit coupling member 212 that is connected to the drive unit 710), wherein the static component comprises a plurality of rails (206e, Fig. 4e) that each include an end portion adjacent a cutting blade (203, Fig. 2a-d, 4b-c) (as seen in Fig. 4e), wherein the static component comprises an upper portion (204c, Fig. 4b-e) and a lower portion (204d, Fig. 4b-e), wherein the lower portion (204d) connects the ends of the plurality of rails (206e) (as seen in Fig. 4e, paragraph 72); and using the cutting device to cut into an object (paragraph 31, 31).
Fisher is silent on wherein the upper portion is attachable to and detachable from the lower portion, and wherein the upper portion and the lower portion encloses at least a portion of the cutting blade when the upper portion is attached to the lower portion.
However, Rubens teaches a blade accessory guide (106, Fig. 3b-4b) that comprises an upper portion (108, Fig. 4c-8) and a lower portion (110, Fig. 4c-8) wherein the upper portion is attachable to and detachable from the lower portion (seen in Fig. 7-8, col. 7 line 10-23).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fisher with Rubens to have wherein the upper portion is attachable to and detachable from the lower portion in order to provide ease of replacement, cleaning and disuse as disclosed by Rubens (col. 10 line 30-32).
Furthermore, Guzman teaches an orthopedic surgical cutter (abstract, paragraph 2) comprising a cutting blade (118, Fig. 8-9), an upper portion (130) and a lower portion (134) wherein the upper portion and the lower portion encloses at least a portion of the cutting blade (as seen in Fig. 9, paragraph 83).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modification of Fisher with Rubens with the teachings of Guzman in order to adjust the cutting ability of the cutting blade as disclosed by Guzman (paragraph 83).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fisher in view of Rubens and Guzman as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20190314040 A1 Greenhalgh et al. (hereinafter Greenhalgh).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Fisher, Rubens and Guzman teaches the limitations of claim 1.
The combination is silent on wherein one of the upper portion and the lower portion defines at least one protrusion that fits to at least one corresponding aperture of the other of the upper portion of the lower portion.
However, Greenhalgh teaches a bone graft filling container (2240, Fig. 49a-d) having a upper portion (2244) and a lower portion (2246), the lower portion having protrusions (2249) that fits into corresponding apertures of the upper portion (paragraph 357, shafts 2247 of the upper portion 2244 are hollow and configured to align with and receive the posts 2249 of lower portion).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modification of Fisher with Rubens and Guzman with the teachings of Greenhalgh to have wherein one of the upper portion and the lower portion defines at least one protrusion that fits to at least one corresponding aperture of the other of the upper portion of the lower portion, in order to provide a secure attachment of the upper portion and lower portion.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fisher in view of Rubens and Guzman as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20160228093 A1 Seo et al. (hereinafter Seo).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Fisher, Rubens and Guzman teaches the limitations of claim 1.
The combination is silent on wherein the upper portion and the lower portion comprises magnetic components for attaching to each other.
However, Seo teaches an echographic apparatus having an upper portion (600, Fig. 7-8b) comprising a magnet (650), a lower portion (500) comprising a magnet (550), the upper portion and lower portion are attached via magnetic force (paragraph 87-88).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modification of Fisher with Rubens and Guzman with the teachings of Seo to have wherein the upper portion and the lower portion comprises magnetic components for attaching to each other in order to provide a secure attachment of the upper portion and lower portion.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fisher in view of Rubens and Guzman as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20180256395 A1 Escaf et al. (hereinafter Escaf).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Fisher, Rubens and Guzman teaches the limitations of claim 1.
The combination is silent on wherein the upper portion and the lower portion define slide features for attaching to each other.
However, Escaf teaches a system for viscoelastic container support that comprises an upper portion (174, Fig. 11a, 12), a lower portion (184, Fig. 11a, 13), the upper portion and lower portion defining slide features for attaching to each other (paragraph 167, 169, Fig. 12-13, the lower portion 184 has an elongated rail 198 that slidingly corresponds with the recess 182 of the upper portion 174 for attachment of the upper portion and lower portion).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention modify the modification of Fisher with Rubens with Guzman with the teachings of Escaf to have wherein the upper portion and the lower portion define slide features for attaching to each other in order to provide a secure attachment of the upper portion and lower portion.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 KHOA TAN LE whose telephone number is (703)756-1252. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 4:30pm.
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, Jackie Ho can be reached at 571-272-4696. 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.
/KHOA TAN LE/Examiner, Art Unit 3771 /MOHAMED G GABR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights