Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/810,763

VERTEBRAL DISC CUTTER AND METHOD

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Aug 21, 2024
Examiner
GIBSON, ERIC SHANE
Art Unit
3775
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Globus Medical Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
738 granted / 863 resolved
+15.5% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
890
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.6%
-36.4% vs TC avg
§103
28.6%
-11.4% vs TC avg
§102
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
§112
28.3%
-11.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 863 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 . 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, “wherein each of the two adjacent posts of the cutting teeth defines a channel having a convex outer exterior surface” of claim 21 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 Objections Claims 21, 24 and 27 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 21, line 4: --cylindrical-- should be added between “the” and “body”. Claim 21, line 5: --cylindrical-- should be added between “the” and “body”. Claim 24, line 1: --cutting-- should be added between “of” and “teeth”. Claim 27, line 1: --cylindrical-- should be added between “the” and “body”. Appropriate correction is required. 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 21-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, 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. Claim 21 recites “wherein each of the two adjacent posts of the cutting teeth defines a channel having a convex exterior surface.” However, neither the specification nor drawings disclose adjacent posts of the cutting teeth defining a channel having a convex exterior surface. Paragraph [0017] and Fig. 2 only disclose disc collection spaces 79 between heads 75 and body 63, wherein such disc collection spaces do not appear to be channels nor do they have a convex exterior surface. Therefore, the original disclosure does not have support for such limitations. 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 21-33 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. Claim 21 recites the limitation "the two adjacent posts" in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 02 February 2026, with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 have been withdrawn. 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 Eric Gibson whose telephone number is (571)270-5274. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday ~6:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. (CST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Truong, 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 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. /ERIC S GIBSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 21, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Nov 14, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 14, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 02, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589008
DYNAMIC IMPLANT FIXATION PLATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589003
SPINAL INTERBODY SPACER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582415
OSCILLATING SURGICAL BONE REMOVAL TOOL WITH FLUTED CUTTING HEAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575838
PERFORATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569259
UNIVERSAL ADAPTER FOR HANDHELD SURGICAL SYSTEMS
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+16.8%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 863 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