Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/788,499

CERVICAL DISC INTRUMENTS

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jul 30, 2024
Examiner
HAMMOND, ELLEN CHRISTINA
Art Unit
3773
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Globus Medical Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
799 granted / 1025 resolved
+8.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1058
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.1%
-36.9% vs TC avg
§103
35.6%
-4.4% vs TC avg
§102
33.8%
-6.2% vs TC avg
§112
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1025 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention II, Species 6, shown in Figs. 23A-26 in the reply filed on 03/11/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-9 and 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Specification The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The Specification fails to disclose the claimed sheath or tamp of elected Species 6, shown in Figs. 23A-24. 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, the sheath and tamp of elected Species 6 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 10-17, as best understood 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. It is noted that Species 6 includes clip 2306 which is disclosed as being connected to handle engaging portion 2308 via a male/female connection. During insertion of the implant the handle 2304 is disconnected from the clip 2306 (see par. 0145). Once the disc implant 2302 reaches its final implant position that handle is used to retrieve the clip and remove the clip form the disc space (see par. 0146). Claim 10 was identified as reading on the elected Species. The Specification, and Drawings fail to support the claimed sheath surrounding the jaw component, or the claimed tamp. Accordingly, it is unclear how the sheath and tamp operate with elected Species 6. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claim(s) 10-17, as best understood is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Berry et al. (U.S. 8,801,721 B2), as cited in the IDS filed 08/19/2025. Concerning claim 10, Berry et al. disclose a cervical disc replacement system, comprising: a disc implant (see Fig. 20, element G5); and a cervical disc instrument configured to insert the disc implant into a disc space, wherein the cervical disc instrument includes: a jaw component (see below) configured to grasp the disc implant for insertion of the disc implant into the disc space; a sheath (1916) at least partially surrounding the jaw component and configured to move the jaw component to grasp the disc implant; a drive shaft (1914) configured to extend through the sheath; and a tamp (1918) coupled to the drive shaft and configured to translate along a longitudinal axis of the cervical disc instrument to release the disc implant from the jaw component. [AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Cavity)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Jaw Shaft)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Jaws)][AltContent: textbox (Jaw Component)] PNG media_image1.png 568 791 media_image1.png Greyscale Concerning claim 11, wherein the sheath is configured to translate along the longitudinal axis towards and away from the jaw component (see col. 16, lines 11-26). Concerning claim 12, wherein the jaw component includes: a jaw shaft (see above); and jaws (see above) extending from the jaw shaft, wherein the sheath (1916) is configured to contact the jaws to compress the jaws toward one another to grasp the disc implant. Concerning claim 13, wherein the jaw shaft defines a cavity (see above) therein, and the drive shaft (1914) extends through the cavity. Concerning claim 14, wherein the tamp (1918) is positioned between the jaws. Concerning claim 15, wherein the drive shaft (1914) is configured to translate along the longitudinal axis to translate the tamp (1918) along the longitudinal axis. Concerning claim 16, further comprising: an impact cap (1940), wherein movement of the impact cap along the longitudinal axis is configured to move the drive shaft (1914) and the tamp (1918) along the longitudinal axis. Concerning claim 17, wherein the sheath (1916) is configured to move along the longitudinal axis based on rotation of a knob (1940) coupled to the sheath. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLEN HAMMOND whose telephone number is (571)270-3819. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 - 4 PM . If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Eduardo C. Robert, at 571 272-4719. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ELLEN C HAMMOND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3773
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 30, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 05, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599409
HINGEAPPARATUS FOR EXTERNAL BONE FIXATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599410
MULTI-CLAMP APPARATUS FOR EXTERNAL BONE FIXATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12582393
RETRACTOR FOR SPINAL SURGERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575940
INTERVERTEBRAL IMPLANTS, INSTRUMENTS, AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569282
Tissue Retraction And Vertebral Displacement Devices, Systems, And Methods For Posterior Spinal Fusion
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+12.1%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1025 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