Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/761,424

ANTERIOR CERVICAL PLATE ASSEMBLY

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jul 02, 2024
Examiner
RAMANA, ANURADHA
Art Unit
3775
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Globus Medical Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
1022 granted / 1237 resolved
+12.6% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1274
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
§102
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
§112
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1237 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION 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 1-3, 6-7, 11-13 and 16-17 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. The preamble of each of claims 1 and 11, recites “automatic lock” and “manual lock,” however the body of each respective claim does not support the qualifiers “automatic” and “manual” with adequate functional recitation associated with the claimed structure. It is suggested that Applicant amend the preamble of each of claims 1 and 11 to remove “manual” and “automatic” and instead recite “A plate assembly having locking features, the assembly comprising:” to avoid confusion. In claims 1 and 11, the recitation “..and lobes disposed between the opposing cutouts, and wherein each lobe has a slot configured to engage a driver tool” renders the claim vague and indefinite because of the earlier recitation of “elastically deformable portion.” The elected species (Figs. 6A-6C) describes the lobes of the blocking mechanism to be deformable and the recitation of lobes and the elastically deformable portion amounts to double recitation of features of the elected species. It is suggested that Applicant recite in claim 1, lines 14-16 that the elastically deformable portion of the blocking mechanism is in the form of a lobe wherein the blocking mechanism has opposing cutouts and lobes disposed between the opposing cutouts and wherein each lobe has a slot configured to engage a driver tool. This comment also applies to claim 11. Appropriate correction is required. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered by the Examiner. New grounds of rejection have been made in this office action. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-3, 6-7, 11-13, 16 and 17 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. 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 Anu Ramana whose telephone number is (571)272-4718. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am-5:00 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, Kevin Truong can be reached 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 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. March 31, 2026 /Anu Ramana/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 02, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 16, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 31, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599414
RECEIVING PART FOR RECEIVING A ROD FOR COUPLING THE ROD TO A BONE ANCHORING ELEMENT AND A BONE ANCHORING DEVICE WITH SUCH A RECEIVING PART
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594102
SURGICAL SUTURE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594083
UNIVERSAL BROACH SYSTEM FOR HUMERAL IMPLANTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594095
LAPAROSCOPIC WORKSPACE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589007
INTRADISCAL FIXATION SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+22.6%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1237 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