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/Restriction
This application contains claims directed to the following patentably distinct species:
1) Figure 1 directed towards an adjustable prosthetic socket
2) Figure 2 directed towards an adjustable prosthetic socket with side portions on the distal support
3) Figures 3-5 directed towards an adjustable prosthetic socket with metal members
4) Figure 6 directed towards an adjustable socket with opposing handles and a sleeve and a tubular tightening system
5) Figure 7 directed towards an adjustable socket with spring members to adjust a tightening system
6) Figure 8 directed towards an adjustable socket with a tightening system that uses notches to receive locking members
7) Figures 9-10 directed towards an adjustable socket with a tubular sleeve that can be rolled or unrolled to adjust strut compression and covers the distal end of the socket
8) Figures 11-12 directed towards an adjustable socket with an outer tubular sleeve that does not cover the distal end of the socket
9) Figures 13-14 directed towards an adjustable socket with an outer sleeve that covers the entire socket and a proximal brim member
10) Figure 15 directed towards an adjustable socket with a tubular brim member
11) Figures 16-18 directed towards an adjustable socket with an outer sleeve covering the entire socket and a distal cup
12) Figures 19-20 directed towards an adjustable socket system with a zig zag tensioning element anchored to a sleeve
13) Figures 21-22 directed towards an adjustable socket system with a tightening system including a sleeve having a plurality of sections with a corrugated configuration
14) Figures 23-24 directed towards an adjustable socket system with telescoping struts
15) Figure 25 directed towards an adjustable socket system with support members on the struts and a tensioning cable through the support members
16) Figures 26 directed towards an adjustable socket system with a distal segment forming a netted structure to adjust the socket fit
17) Figures 27 directed to an adjustable socket system with a tensioning mechanism that can tighten or loosen different areas of the socket and provide feedback with a dial indicator
18) Figure 28 directed towards an adjustable socket system with an LED to provide feedback regarding the fit of the socket and a tensioning control mechanism
19) Figure 29 directed towards an adjustable socket system with a tensioning control mechanism that uses multiple spools to tighten different socket areas
20) Figure 30 directed towards an adjustable socket system with a tensioning control mechanism that comprises a gear member between two spools that rotate at different speeds to allow the user to tightening different socket areas with one dial
21) Figure 31 directed towards an adjustable socket system with a tensioning control mechanism that comprises two gear members with alternating spools in between
22) Figure 32 directed towards an adjustable socket system with a tensioning control mechanism with a controller and a plurality of teeth, the controller arranged to switch between spools
23) Figures 33-34 directed towards an adjustable socket system with a crank, gear and handle to adjust the socket
24) Figures 35-36 directed towards an adjustable socket system with a tensioning element comprising a spool and disc
25) Figures 37-38 directed towards an adjustable socket system with distal supports that can move inwards and outwards to vary the socket volume and a tightening system with an actuating part
26) Figures 39-40 directed to an adjustable socket system with a tightening system that tightens or loosens in response to loading or unloading using a hinged connection and teeth to rotate the struts
27) Figures 41-43 directed to an adjustable socket system which tightens as a user inserts their limb using a tensioning element
The species are independent or distinct because they are structurally different sockets and adjustment mechanisms. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record.
Applicant is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 to elect a single disclosed species, or a single grouping of patentably indistinct species, for prosecution on the merits to which the claims shall be restricted if no generic claim is finally held to be allowable. Currently, no claims are generic to all species.
There is a serious search and/or examination burden for the patentably distinct species as set forth above because at least the following reason(s) apply:
Due to the large number of species and additional text searching strategies and searching in additional classes needed for various adjustment mechanisms and socket structures there would be a significant search burden on the examiner.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of a species to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species, including any claims subsequently added. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered nonresponsive unless accompanied by an election.
The election may be made with or without traverse. To preserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the election of species requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable on the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the species, or groupings of patentably indistinct species from which election is required, are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing them to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the species unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other species.
Upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which depend from or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowable generic claim as provided by 37 CFR 1.141.
During a telephone conversation with Spencer Fennemore on 6/4/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of the species directed toward the embodiment of Species 7 directed towards figures 9-10, claims 1-20. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1 and 16 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regard to claims 1 and 16, “wherein the tubular member comprises a tubular member” appears to be a typo of a repeat limitation. The duplicate limitation should be removed. If two elements are named as the tubular member, then one should be renamed in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hurley (2013/0123940A1) in view of Kristinsdottir (2013/0190895A1).
In regard to claim 1, Hurley teaches an adjustable socket (figure 2) defining a
distal portion, a proximal portion, and a central axis extending between the distal portion and the proximal portion (see fig 2),
the adjustable socket (fig 2) comprising:
first and second struts (24) having an elongated configuration and distributed circumferentially about the axis (fig 2).
However, Hurley does not teach a tubular member as claimed.
Kristinsdottir teaches a tubular member 18 selectively positionable on an outer surface of the first and second struts about the central axis (placed on outer socket, fig 2; [0029: placed in a similar manner to figure 2; therefore outside the socket which would include outside the struts when applied to the socket of Hurley]);
wherein the tubular member 18 comprises a tubular member 10 having a body portion 14 extending between the distal portion and the proximal portion of the adjustable socket (see fig 2-3);
wherein the tubular member 18 is formed by a breathable material selected from the group consisting of an elastomeric material (abstract: polymer layer), a fabric material (abstract: fabric layer on outer surface of the sleeve), and a combination thereof;
wherein the tubular member 18 defines a substantially continuous inner surface (fig 3), and forms at least in part an inner volume for the adjustable socket. When applied to the adjustable socket of Hurley, the sleeve will form at least a part of an inner volume because the sleeve will be directly against the limb between the struts of Hurley.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the tubular member of Kristinsdottir in the socket of Hurley because the sleeve provides additional suspension [0002] and a tight fluid seal [0003] with increased durability [0004].
In regard to claim 2, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and further teaches at least one of the first and second struts 24 is radially adjustable relative to the axis to vary the inner volume of the adjustable socket. [0112: expandable or adjustable; 0025; 0073; 0124; 0186: adjustable angle]. If the strut angle is adjusted or has a hinge at least a portion of the strut will be radially adjustable relative to the central axis.]
In regard to claim 3, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and further teaches the first strut 24 is movable between an expanded configuration and a closed configuration, such that the first strut is arranged to be moved or forced radially outward relative to the axis for increasing the inner volume or increasing a circumference of the system. [0187: strut 20 has an adjustable angle]
In regard to claim 4, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 3, and further teaches the second strut 24 is movable between an expanded configuration and a closed configuration, such that the second strut is arranged to be moved or forced radially outward relative to the axis for increasing the inner volume or increasing a circumference of the adjustable socket. [0187: strut 20 has an adjustable angle]
In regard to claim 5, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, but does not teach a telescoping mechanism in the embodiment of figure 2.
In the embodiment of figure 1, Hurley further teaches the first strut includes a telescoping mechanism 10 and is adjustable in length. [0185; 0044]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the telescoping mechanism of the embodiment of figure 1 in the embodiment of figure 2 because this allows the strut height to be adjusted to meet the need of the individual user [0185] and for growth.
In regard to claim 6, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and further teaches a base connector 21 at the distal portion of the adjustable socket (fig 2) and connecting to the first and second struts 24 (see fig 2), the base connector 21 being adapted to connect to a prosthetic component. (capable of being attached given the right connections or adhesive)
In regard to claim 7, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, but does not teach the tubular member as claimed.
Kristinsdottir further teaches the body portion (of the tubular member) 14 is elastically resilient (abstract: polymeric layer) and radially stretchable. [0028: some elasticity in radial direction 16]
In regard to claims 8-9, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, but does not teach the tubular member as claimed.
Kristinsdottir further teaches the tubular member 18 is arranged to extend over at least proximal ends of the first and second struts (arranged to extend over the socket brim as shown in figure 2, [0029] and will therefore extend over the struts when applied to the socket of Hurley); wherein the tubular member 18 is arranged to exert a compressive force on at least proximal ends of the first and second struts. (made of silicone elastomer [0032-0033] and therefore able to exert a compressive force [0038: elastic; 0002]
In regard to claim 10, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, but does not teach the tubular member as claimed.
Kristinsdottir further teaches the tubular member 18 is arranged to roll over proximal ends of the first and second struts. (applied over the proximal socket brim as shown in figure 2, 0029) When applied to the socket of Hurley, the tubular member will be over the first and socket struts that make up the socket brim. Since the sleeve is elastomer and fabric (abstract), the sleeve is fully capable of being rolled over the struts/socket brim. This is a statement of intended use, patentable only based on the resulting structure of a sleeve that is able to roll over the socket/struts.
In regard to claim 11, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the first strut 24 is arranged to move independently from the tubular member. [0186: angle of struts is moveable; 0044: telescoping mechanism that can affect strut length or width]
However, Hurley does not teach the tubular member.
Kristinsdottir teaches a tubular member 18 that fits over a socket (2). Since the tubular member is able to be removed, in one interpretation, when the tubular member is removed, the strut is capable of moving independently from the tubular member. In an alternative interpretation, the width of the strut of Hurley may be moved independently from the tubular member of Kristinsdottir since movement or expansion of the strut width or telescoping longitudinally will not affect the tubular member when applied to the outside of the socket.
In regard to claim 12, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, but does not teach the tubular member as claimed.
Kristinsdottir further teaches the tubular member 18 extends beyond the first and second struts (extends beyond socket brim, fig 2; 0029; therefore will extend beyond struts when applied to the socket of Hurley) toward the proximal portion of the adjustable socket. (fig 2)
In regard to claim 13, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and further teaches the first strut 24 protrudes outwardly toward the proximal portion and relative to the central axis. (fig 1-2; also see 12 which adjusts the strut angle [0122])
However, Hurley does not teach the tubular member as claimed.
Kristinsdottir further teaches the tubular member 18 has a continuous circumference (see figure 3).
In regard to claim 14, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, but does not teach the tubular member as claimed.
Kristinsdottir further teaches the tubular member 18 extends over at least part of the distal portion of the adjustable socket (fig 2) and is arranged to extend over the first and second struts (proximal brim, fig 2; 0029) toward the proximal portion (fig 2 extends over the socket brim and will therefore extend over the struts of Hurley when combined into the socket of Hurley). The distal portion of the socket is interpreted to mean part of the distal half of the socket. It is suggested to further clarify the claim language.
In regard to claim 15, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 1, but does not teach the tubular member as claimed.
Kristinsdottir further teaches the tubular member 18 is formed by a textile material. (abstract: fabric layer; [0033-0034: textile material])
In regard to claim 16, Hurley teaches an adjustable socket (fig 2) defining a distal portion, a proximal portion, and a central axis extending between the distal portion and the proximal portion (fig 2), the adjustable socket comprising:
first and second struts 24 having an elongated configuration and distributed circumferentially about the axis (fig 2);
wherein the first strut (lateral 24) is movable between an expanded configuration and a closed configuration [0025: volume, circumference may be adjustable; 0073; 0124],
such that the first strut 24 is arranged to be moved or forced radially outward relative to the axis for increasing the receiving volume or increasing a circumference of the system [0124: hinge]
wherein at least one of the first and second struts is radially adjustable relative to the axis to vary the inner volume of the adjustable socket [0025; 0073; 0124; 0186: adjustable angle]. If the strut angle is adjusted or has a hinge at least a portion of the strut will be radially adjustable relative to the central axis.
However, Hurley does not teach a tubular member as claimed.
Kristinsdottir teaches a tubular member 18 selectively positionable on an outer surface of the first and second struts about the central axis (fig 1; 0029; positioned on the outer socket and therefore the outer struts when applied to the socket of Hurley);
wherein the tubular member 18 comprises a tubular member having a body portion 6 extending between the distal portion and the proximal portion of the adjustable socket (fig 2; 0029);
wherein the tubular member 18 is formed by a breathable material selected from the group consisting of an elastomeric material (abstract: polymeric layer), a fabric material (abstract: fabric), and a combination thereof;
wherein the tubular member 18 defines a substantially continuous inner surface (fig 3), and forms at least in part an inner volume for the adjustable socket (fig 2-3; will form part of an inner volume of the socket when applied to the socket of Hurley since the sleeve is applied to the outside of the socket and the space between struts will allow the sleeve to form part of an inner volume);
wherein the body portion 6 is elastically resilient and radially stretchable. [0032: reinforcement later is embedded within silicone elastomer layer; 0028; 0036: elastic in a radial direction]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the tubular member of Kristinsdottir in the socket of Hurley because the sleeve provides additional suspension [0002] and a tight fluid seal [0003] with increased durability [0004].
In regard to claim 17, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 16, but does not teach a telescoping mechanism in the embodiment of figure 2.
In the embodiment of figure 1, Hurley further teaches the first strut includes a telescoping mechanism 10 and is adjustable in length. [0185; 0044]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use the telescoping mechanism of the embodiment of figure 1 in the embodiment of figure 2 because this allows the strut height to be adjusted to meet the need of the individual user [0185] and for growth.
In regard to claim 18, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 16, and further teaches a base connector 21 at the distal portion of the adjustable socket (fig 2) and connecting to the first and second struts 24, the base connector 21 being adapted to connect to a prosthetic component. (capable of being attached given the right connections or adhesive)
In regard to claim 19, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 16, but does not teach the tubular member as claimed.
Kristinsdottir further teaches the body portion is elastically resilient [0032: reinforcement later is embedded within silicone elastomer layer] and radially stretchable. [0028; 0036: elastic in a radial direction]
In regard to claim 20, Hurley meets the claim limitations as discussed in the rejection of claim 16, but does not teach the tubular member as claimed.
Kristinsdottir further teaches the tubular member 18 is arranged to extend over at least proximal ends of the first and second struts (fig 2; 0029; extends over the socket brim and will therefore extend over the struts when applied to the socket of Hurley); wherein the tubular member 18 is arranged to exert a compressive force on at least proximal ends of the first and second struts. (made of silicone elastomer [0032-0033] and therefore able to exert a compressive force [0038: elastic; 0002]
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTIE BAHENA whose telephone number is (571)270-3206. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-3.
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, Thomas Barrett can be reached at 571-272-4746. 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.
/CHRISTIE BAHENA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3774
Prosecution Insights