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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 15 April 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 15 April 2026. As directed by the amendment: claims 1, 3, 4, 6-8, 10, and 13-15 have been amended, claims 2, 9, and 12 are cancelled, and claim 16 has been newly added. Claims 1, 3-8, 10, 11, and 13-16 currently stand pending in the application.
The amendments to the claims are sufficient to overcome the previous claim objections, but further claim objections are presented below as necessitated by the current claim amendments.
The amendments to the claims are sufficient to overcome the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b), which are correspondingly withdrawn. The cancellation of claim 12 has rendered moot its relevant rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). Further rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) are presented below as necessitated by the current claim amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination or interpretation of any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Of particular note as to Graser (US 2008/0208349), Applicant contends that Graser’s push rod 30 is driven by rotation of a hex screw 18, when the internal rod is rotated and not pushed. Examiner respectfully submits that the definition of the term “push” is to move forward using force. Graser’s push rod 30 is pushed because it is moved forward using force, since the threaded interaction of portion 18 results in the force that pushes distal end 30 forward, and also since threading the push rod distally requires force applied by the practitioner.
Claim Objections
Claims 7 and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities: improper antecedence and language. Appropriate correction is required. The following amendments are suggested:
As to claim 7 / line 4: “the top end portion of the body”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-8, 10, 11, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As to claim 1 / line 19, the specification is silent as to “a shock absorber fitted to a groove formed on an outer peripheral surface of the header”. The specification recites that the shock absorber is fitted to a groove formed on the header, but not that the groove is formed on an outer peripheral surface of the header. Since the groove is not shown in the drawings, the drawings cannot serve as support for the groove being formed on an outer peripheral surface of the header. Examiner notes that amendment to delete the phrase “an outer peripheral surface of” would require corresponding amendment to claim 1 / lines 23-24, to “[[the]] an outer peripheral surface”.
As to claim 1 / lines 20-21, the specification is silent as to “wherein an outer peripheral surface of the shock absorber has the same diameter as an outer peripheral surface of the anchor sleeve”. The specification recites that an outer peripheral surface of the shock absorber has the same diameter as the anchor sleeve, but not the same diameter as an outer peripheral surface of the anchor sleeve.
As to claim 1 / lines 24-25, the specification is silent as to “at least one dot pattern” which provides for the possibility of more than one dot pattern. The specification recites a dot pattern, but not more than one dot pattern.
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, 3-8, 10, 11, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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.
As to claim 1 / line 11, the limitation “a bottom end of the header” renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear if this refers to the same end as the previously recited lower end of the header body (claim 1 / line 10), or to a different bottom end. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted in the former instance, and amendment is suggested to “the lower end of the header body”. Amendment as such would require corresponding amendment to claim 4 / line 2: “at the lower end of the header body”, and in claim 11 / line 4: “the lower end of the header body”.
Further as to claim 1 / lines 11-12, the limitation “the pin header” renders the claims indefinite because it lacks proper antecedent basis in the claims. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as, and amendment is suggested to, “[[the]] a pin header of the anchor pin”.
As to claim 1 / lines 13-14, the limitation “from the top toward the bottom of the anchor sleeve” renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear if this refers to the top end portion of the anchor sleeve (previously recited in claim 1 / line 10) and the lower end portion of the anchor sleeve (previously recited in claim 1 / line 2), or to a different top and bottom of the anchor sleeve. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted in the former instance, and amendment is suggested to “from the top end portion toward the lower end portion of the anchor sleeve”. Further amendment would be necessary on line 16 to “the top end portion of the anchor sleeve”, and in claim 11 / lines 3-4: “the lower end portion”.
As to claim 1 / line 18, the limitation “a lower side of the header” renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear if this refers to the lower end of the header body (claim 1 / line 10) or to a different lower side of the header. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted in the former instance, and amendment is suggested to “[[a]] the lower end of the header body”.
As to claim 6, the limitation “the header is detachably attached to the anchor sleeve” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how the header is detachably attached to the anchor sleeve when the anchor sleeve comprises the header, i.e. the header is part of the anchor sleeve. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “the header is detachably attached to a rest of the anchor sleeve”.
As to claim 8 / lines 1-2, the limitation “a shock absorber” renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear if this refers back to the previously recited shock absorber (claim 1 / line 19) or to a different shock absorber. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted in the former instance, and amendment is suggested to “wherein the shock absorber is configured to be between the anchor sleeve and the cortical bone”.
As to claim 11 / line 2, the limitation “an end portion of the anchor pin” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this refers back to the top end portion of the pin body or to a different end portion of the anchor pin. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted in the former instance, and amendment is suggested to “[[an]] the top end portion of the body”.
As to claim 11 / line 3, the limitation “a top end of the anchor sleeve” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this refers back to the top end portion of the anchor sleeve or to a different top end. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted in the former instance, and amendment is suggested to “[[a]] the top end portion of the anchor sleeve”.
As to claim 16, the limitation “the header has a smaller diameter than the anchor sleeve” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how the header has a smaller diameter than the anchor sleeve when the anchor sleeve comprises the header, i.e. the header is part of the anchor sleeve. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “the header has a smaller diameter than the top end portion of the anchor sleeve”.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3, 7, 8, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2008/0208349 to Graser in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2009/0292361 to Lopez and U.S. Patent No. US 10,729,480 to Kuster et al. (hereinafter, “Kuster”).
As to claim 1, Graser discloses an anchor for cortical bone comprising: an anchor sleeve (12) having a header (14) located on a lower end portion configured to be inserted into the cortical bone, FIG. 1, enlarged by an external force (par. [0025]-[0027]), and fixed to the cortical bone; and an anchor pin (30) inserted into the anchor sleeve configured to transmit the external force for enlarging the header when the anchor pin is pushed (moved distally) (par. [0028]), FIG. 2B, wherein the header of the anchor sleeve has a header body (14) equally divided into a plurality of bodies (28) with a plurality of incised portions (26a-26c) configured to enlarge through the external force (par. [0027]), FIGS. 2B-2C, wherein the anchor sleeve has a hollow portion configured to receive the anchor pin and extending from a top end portion of the anchor sleeve to a lower end of the header body, FIG. 2B, the hollow portion at a bottom end of the header having a smaller diameter (in the position of FIG. 2B, the diameter of the narrow gap between 28s) than the pin header (tip of 30), FIG. 2B, wherein the header enlarges when the pin header of the anchor pin is pushed and inserted into the hollow portion in a direction from the top toward the bottom of the anchor sleeve, wherein the anchor pin comprises a pin body (30) inserted into the anchor sleeve, a top end portion (18) of the pin body is configured to protrude from the top of the anchor sleeve (at least during assembly, before full seating of the pin body in the anchor sleeve, and/or if the pin body is backed out from the anchor sleeve), and the pin header located on a lower end of the pin body, FIG. 2B, the pin header having a larger area than the hollow portion at a lower side of the header (the pin header has a larger area across it than the hollow portion at the narrow gap between 28s), FIG. 2B, a groove (at line between 12 and 14, which becomes a groove when the header is enlarged to pivot away from the anchor sleeve at/forming the groove) formed on an outer peripheral surface of the header on the lower end portion of the anchor sleeve, FIG. 1.
As to claim 3, Graser discloses the anchor according to claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of the incised portions has an enlarged range enlarging hole (24a-24c), FIG. 2B, defined on an end thereof in a longitudinal direction configured to enlarge an enlarged range of the header (par. [0027]).
As to claim 7, Graser discloses the anchor according to claim 1, further comprising a first fastener (22a-22b) located on the top end portion of the anchor sleeve configured to be fixed to a body of a dedicated applicator (interpreted as language of intended use without positive recitation of a dedicated applicator; fully capable of being fixed to a body of a dedicated applicator) (par. [0026]), FIG. 1; and a second fastener (threaded end of 30 including 20) located on the top end portion of the anchor pin configured to be coupled to a handle rotatably located inside the body of the dedicated applicator (interpreted as language of intended use without positive recitation of a handle and dedicated applicator; fully capable of being fixed to a handle) (par. [0026]), FIGS. 1 and 2B, wherein the anchor sleeve and the anchor pin are coupled with a plurality of screw threads (36a-36b) thereon (par. [0029]), and relatively movable through a rotation of the handle of the dedicated applicator when the body is fixed to the first fastener (interpreted as language of intended use).
As to claim 13, Graser discloses the anchor according to claim 3, wherein each of the enlarged range enlarging holes is a circular hole having a larger diameter than a dimension of a respective one of the plurality of the incised portions, FIG. 2B.
As to claim 14, Graser discloses the anchor according to claim 3, wherein each of the enlarged range enlarging holes is a long hole (because it is longer about a circumferential direction than a width of the incised portion) extending laterally from a respective one of the plurality of the incised portions, FIG. 2B.
As to claim 16, Graser discloses the anchor according to claim 1, wherein the header has a smaller diameter than the anchor sleeve (the header has a smaller internal diameter at the lower end of the header body than an internal diameter at the top end portion of the anchor sleeve).
Graser is silent as to wherein the header has a patterned friction protrusion on at least a portion of the outer peripheral surface thereof, the patterned friction protrusion having at least one dot pattern to increase fixing force with the cortical bone by generating shear force when the header is enlarged by the anchor pin.
Lopez teaches a bone anchor, FIG. 21, comprising a patterned friction protrusion on at least a portion of an outer peripheral surface thereof, the patterned friction protrusion having at least one dot pattern (199) (par. [0141]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Graser’s anchor including the header with a patterned friction protrusion having and created by a dot pattern in the outer surface, to promote bone ingrowth and therefore result in strong anchoring of the anchor in the bone, as taught by Lopez. The dot pattern increases fixing force with the cortical bone because it promote bone ingrowth, and generates shear force when the header is enlarged by the anchor pin since the dots project from the outer surface.
Graser is silent as to a shock absorber fitted to a groove formed on an outer peripheral surface of the header on the lower end portion of the anchor sleeve, wherein an outer peripheral surface of the shock absorber has the same diameter as an outer peripheral surface of the anchor sleeve to prevent damages to the cortical bone caused by friction with a lower surface of the anchor sleeve (claim 1); further comprising a shock absorber located on the outer peripheral surface of the header configured to be between the anchor sleeve and the cortical bone, wherein the shock absorber is configured to absorb a shock transmitted from the anchor sleeve to the cortical bone (claim 8); wherein the shock absorber is made of rubber or silicone (claim 15).
Kuster teaches coating an expanding orthopedic implant with a layer of silicone rubber to avoid ingrowth of bone into the expanded portion (col. 9 / lines 53-62), FIG. 7.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to coat an outer peripheral surface of the anchor sleeve and header in Graser with a layer of silicone rubber, as taught by Kuster, to avoid ingrowth of bone into the enlarged header to prevent interference with the interaction of the anchor pin and the anchor sleeve, and to allow revision surgery if required. The layer of silicone rubber, being a coating on the outer surface of the anchor sleeve and header, would thus be between the anchor sleeve and the cortical bone when the anchor is implanted into the bone, and is a shock absorber because it is fully capable of absorbing a shock transmitted from the anchor sleeve to the bone because of its location between the anchor sleeve and the bone. The thickness of the layer of silicone rubber would absorb or dampen a shock from the anchor sleeve since it is a piece of intervening material. As described above, Graser discloses a groove (at line between 12 and 14, which becomes a groove when the header is enlarged to pivot away from the anchor sleeve at/forming the groove) formed on an outer peripheral surface of the header on the lower end portion of the anchor sleeve where the header is located, so that the layer of silicone rubber which is a coating on the outer surface of the entire device would be fitted into the groove. When the header is enlarged, a distal area of the header (which is a distal area of the anchor sleeve since the anchor sleeve comprises the header) has a larger diameter than a proximal area of the header. Since the shock absorber is a layer on the outer surface of the anchor sleeve/header, it has a slightly greater diameter at its outer peripheral surface than the adjacent outer peripheral surface of the underlying anchor sleeve. Then, an outer peripheral surface of the shock absorber at a particular longitudinal location when the header is enlarged, has the same diameter as an outer peripheral surface of the anchor sleeve at a location distal to where the diameter of the outer peripheral surface of the shock absorber is taken, due to the angle of the bodies of the enlarged header body and since the shock absorber is layered on the outer surface of the anchor sleeve/header. The shock absorber is fully capable of preventing damages to the cortical bone caused by friction with a lower surface of the anchor sleeve since it is a coating on the anchor sleeve that would reduce friction with the bone (interpreted as language of intended use).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graser in view of Lopez and Kuster (hereinafter, “Graser/Lopez/Kuster”), as applied to claims 1, 3, 7, 8, and 13-16 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. US 8,685,034 to Giersch et al. (hereinafter, “Giersch”).
Graser/Lopez/Kuster disclose further comprising a belt insertion groove along a circumferential surface of the anchor sleeve (a belt insertion groove comprising a root of the inner thread along an interior circumferential surface of the anchor sleeve) and the second fastener (the belt insertion groove comprising a root of the thread on the threaded end of the anchor pin); but are silent as to a fixing belt inserted into the belt insertion groove configured to allow the anchor sleeve and the second fastener to be connected to each other wherein the anchor sleeve and the second fastener are coupled with the fixing belt.
Giersch teaches that a fixing belt (O-ring) is inserted into a belt insertion groove (roots of complementary threads) to connect complementarily threaded components to each other without play (col. 3 / lines 36-43).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in Graser/Lopez/Kuster a fixing belt (O-ring; in the shape of a belt, and provides fixing of two components to each other) inserted into the belt insertion groove (between the complementary threads/in the roots of the threads of the anchor sleeve and the second fastener) to allow the anchor sleeve and the second fastener to be connected to each other wherein the anchor sleeve and the second fastener are coupled with the fixing belt, since the fixing belt (O-ring) takes the play out of the threaded connection as taught by Giersch, therefore ensuring that the anchor sleeve and the anchor pin are correctly threaded into each other for accurate deploying of the bodies of the anchor sleeve, and to secure the anchor sleeve and the anchor pin relative to each other in the relatively deployed position.
Claims 1, 4, 5, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2008/0234682 to Park in view of Lopez and U.S. Patent No. US 6,322,895 to Canham.
As to claim 1, Park discloses an anchor, FIGS. 5C-5D, for cortical bone comprising: an anchor sleeve (46) having a header (73s) located on a lower end portion configured to be inserted into the cortical bone (par. [0039]), enlarged by an external force, FIG. 5D, and fixed to the cortical bone (in the enlarged configuration, the anchor is fixed to the cortical bone because its backout is prevented); and an anchor pin (70 and 36) inserted into the anchor sleeve configured to transmit the external force for enlarging the header when the anchor pin is pushed, FIGS. 5C-5D, wherein the header of the anchor sleeve has a header body equally divided into a plurality of bodies (73s) with a plurality of incised portions (slits between 73s) configured to enlarge through the external force, FIGS. 5C-5D, wherein the anchor sleeve has a hollow portion configured to receive the anchor pin and extending from a top end portion of the anchor sleeve to a lower end of the header body, the hollow portion at a bottom end of the header having a smaller diameter (in the position of FIG. 5C, the diameter of the narrow gap between 73s) than the pin header (tapered tip), wherein the header enlarges when the pin header of the anchor pin is pushed and inserted into the hollow portion in a direction from the top toward the bottom of the anchor sleeve, FIGS. 5C-5D, wherein the anchor pin comprises a pin body inserted into the anchor sleeve, a top end portion (36) of the pin body is configured to protrude from the top of the anchor sleeve (at least during assembly, before full seating of the pin body in the anchor sleeve, the top end portion of 70 also protrudes as in FIG. 5C, and/or if the pin body is backed out from the anchor sleeve), and the pin header located on a lower end of the pin body, the pin header having a larger area than the hollow portion at a lower side of the header (the pin header has a larger area across it than the hollow portion at the narrow gap between 73s), FIG. 5C, a groove (groove formed proximal to ends 75) formed on an outer peripheral surface of the header on the lower end portion of the anchor sleeve, FIG. 5C.
As to claim 4, Park discloses the anchor according to claim 1, wherein the hollow portion has a first inner diameter (in the position of FIG. 5C, the diameter of the wider gap between 73s where they connect to 46) greater than the diameter at the bottom end of the header (in the position of FIG. 5C, the diameter of the narrow gap between 73s), the pin header has a slant surface (slanted surface of the tapered tip) on a peripheral surface, wherein the slant surface is tapered in a longitudinal direction of the pin header and a slant angle (angle between a vertical axis along the outer edge of a proximal end of the anchor pin and the slant surface of the pin header) of the slant surface of the pin header is smaller than a slant angle (angle between the vertical axis and the slant surface of 73 against which the anchor pin pushes) of a slant surface of the anchor sleeve, and wherein the slant surface of the pin header is configured to move along the slant surface of the anchor sleeve to enlarge the header, FIGS. 5C-5D.
As to claim 5, Park discloses the anchor according to claim 4, wherein the slant angle of the slant surface of the anchor sleeve is different from the slant angle of the slant surface of the pin header (the pin header is more acutely angled), FIG. 5C, wherein a length of the anchor pin or the header is adjusted to control an enlarged range of the header (at least during manufacture, the lengths of the pin and header are adjusted to control the enlarged range/to obtain desired enlarging; in addition or alternatively, the inserted length of the anchor pin into the header is adjusted to gradually enlarge the header or to stop the enlargement when insertion is stopped).
As to claim 11, Park discloses wherein the anchor pin (where the anchor pin includes the attached driver 36, shown in another embodiment in FIGS. 3A-3B) has a length greater than a length of the anchor sleeve and an end portion (handle end of 36) of the anchor pin opposite the pin header protrudes from a top end of the anchor sleeve opposite the bottom end portion when the pin header is located at the bottom end of the header.
Park is silent as to wherein the header has a patterned friction protrusion on at least a portion of the outer peripheral surface thereof, the patterned friction protrusion having at least one dot pattern to increase fixing force with the cortical bone by generating shear force when the header is enlarged by the anchor pin.
Lopez teaches a bone anchor, FIG. 21, comprising a patterned friction protrusion on at least a portion of an outer peripheral surface thereof, the patterned friction protrusion having at least one dot pattern (199) (par. [0141]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Graser’s header with a patterned friction protrusion having and created by a dot pattern in the outer surface, as taught by Lopez, to increase friction between the header and adjacent tissue and/or bone to reduce the possibility of backout of the anchor. The dot pattern is fully capable of increasing fixing force with the cortical bone (interpreted as language of intended use) because it would promote bone ingrowth when adjacent to bone, and generates shear force when the header is enlarged by the anchor pin since the dots project from the outer surface.
Park is silent as to a shock absorber fitted to a groove formed on an outer peripheral surface of the header on the lower end portion of the anchor sleeve, wherein an outer peripheral surface of the shock absorber has the same diameter as an outer peripheral surface of the anchor sleeve to prevent damages to the cortical bone caused by friction with a lower surface of the anchor sleeve.
Canham teaches coating surgical implants with a layer of polysilicon to improve adhesion with bone (col. 14 / lines 8-15).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to coat an outer peripheral surface of the anchor sleeve and header in Park with a layer of polysilicon to improve adhesion with bone, as taught by Canham, to promote stability of the implanted device. The layer of polysilicon, being a coating on the outer surface of the anchor sleeve and header, would thus be fitted to the groove formed on the outer peripheral surface of the header in Park which is located on the lower end portion of the anchor sleeve, and is a shock absorber because it is fully capable of absorbing a shock transmitted from the anchor to the bone because of its location between the anchor and the bone. The thickness of the layer of polysilicon would absorb or dampen a shock from the anchor since it is a piece of intervening material. In the position of FIG. 5C, the header (where the anchor sleeve comprises the header) has angled distally tapering sides. Since the shock absorber is a layer on the outer surface of the anchor sleeve/header, it has a slightly greater diameter at its outer peripheral surface than the adjacent outer peripheral surface of the underlying anchor sleeve. Then, an outer peripheral surface of the shock absorber at a particular longitudinal location in FIG. 5C, has the same diameter as an outer peripheral surface of the anchor sleeve at a location proximal to where the diameter of the outer peripheral surface of the shock absorber is taken, due to the angle of the outer peripheral surface of the bodies of the header body which distally taper and since the shock absorber is layered on the outer surface of the anchor sleeve/header. The shock absorber is fully capable of preventing damages to the cortical bone caused by friction with a lower surface of the anchor sleeve since it is a coating on the anchor sleeve that would reduce friction with the bone (interpreted as language of intended use).
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. US 8,257,389 to Chanduszko et al. (hereinafter, “Chanduszko”), in view of Lopez.
As to claim 1, Chanduszko discloses an anchor for cortical bone (interpreted as language of intended use; fully capable of insertion into any tissue including bone), FIGS. 6a-6b, comprising: an anchor sleeve (106) having a header (components distal to 106, including 108, 110, and expanding arms) located on a lower end portion configured to be inserted into the cortical bone, enlarged by an external force (col. 5 / lines 45-62), and fixed to the cortical bone (interpreted as language of intended use); and an anchor pin (124) inserted into the anchor sleeve configured to transmit the external force for enlarging the header when the anchor pin is pushed, FIGS. 6a-6b, wherein the header of the anchor sleeve has a header body equally divided into a plurality of bodies (expanding arms) with a plurality of incised portions (proximal arms and distal arms, incised or longitudinally separated from each other) configured to enlarge (radially) through the external force, FIG. 6b, wherein the anchor sleeve has a hollow portion configured to receive the anchor pin and extending from a top end portion of the anchor sleeve to a lower end of the header body, FIG. 6a, the hollow portion at a bottom end of the header having a smaller diameter (diameter taken across the hollow portion between crests of internal threads in 110) than the pin header (diameter taken at crests of external thread on 124), wherein the header enlarges (radially at expanding arms) when the pin header of the anchor pin is pushed and inserted into the hollow portion in a direction from the top toward the bottom of the anchor sleeve, FIG. 6b, wherein the anchor pin comprises a pin body inserted into the anchor sleeve, a top end portion of the pin body is configured to protrude from the top of the anchor sleeve, FIG. 6b, and the pin header located on a lower end of the pin body, the pin header having a larger area (taken across the end of 124 at the crests of external thread on 124) than the hollow portion (area between crests of internal threads of 110) at a lower side of the header, a shock absorber (coating, col. 17 / lines 15-18; fully capable of acting as a shock absorber since it is located between the anchor sleeve and any adjacent tissue) fitted to a groove (recess between proximal and distal expanding arms at 108; the shock absorber/coating is fitted to the groove because it coats the entire device including the recess between the proximal and distal expanding arms) formed on an outer peripheral surface of the header on the lower end portion of the anchor sleeve, wherein an outer peripheral surface of the shock absorber has the same diameter as an outer peripheral surface of the anchor sleeve (because the shock absorber is a coating on top of the anchor sleeve which includes the header, and because the expanding arms are angled, the diameter of the outer peripheral surface of the shock absorber is the same as the diameter of the outer peripheral surface of the anchor sleeve at a different longitudinal location) to prevent damages to the cortical bone caused by friction with a lower surface of the anchor sleeve (interpreted as language of intended use; fully capable of preventing damage to any adjacent tissue including bone since the shock absorber is a coating between the anchor sleeve and the tissue).
As to claim 6, Chanduszko discloses the anchor according to claim 1, wherein the header is detachably attached to the anchor sleeve by a screw thread coupling (threads on 124 and 110; the screw thread coupling detachably attaches the header at 110 and the anchor sleeve at 106 in a compressed position of FIG. 6b) and configured to be replaced (interpreted as language of intended use; the whole device is fully capable of being replaced).
Chanduszko is silent as to wherein the header has a patterned friction protrusion on at least a portion of the outer peripheral surface thereof, the patterned friction protrusion having at least one dot pattern to increase fixing force with the cortical bone by generating shear force when the header is enlarged by the anchor pin.
Lopez teaches a bone anchor, FIG. 21, comprising a patterned friction protrusion on at least a portion of an outer peripheral surface thereof, the patterned friction protrusion having at least one dot pattern (199) (par. [0141]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Chanduszko’s expanding arms of the header with a patterned friction protrusion having and created by a dot pattern in the outer surface, as taught by Lopez, to increase catching power of the expanding arms. The dot pattern increases fixing force with any tissue to which it is adjacent (interpreted as language of intended use) by generating shear force when the header is enlarged by the anchor pin since the dots project from the outer surface.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACY L KAMIKAWA whose telephone number is (571)270-7276. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00-6:30 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, 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.
/TRACY L KAMIKAWA/Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Prosecution Insights