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 .
Preliminary Amendment
The amendment submitted 4/10/2025 has been accepted and entered. Claims 21-39, 41-49 are cancelled. No claims are amended. No new claims are added. Thus, claims 1-20, 40 are examined.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: [(Allowed]) (Original). Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because some of handwritten reference numbers are not clear. 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 § 103
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 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) 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Enerle et al (EP 2304387 B1) in view of Tobias et al (CH 712867 A1).
Regarding claim 40, Enderle et al discloses a calibration ball holder device (page 9), comprising: a base (5) configured to be mounted to a mounting surface (1) (measuring table), wherein the base defines a z-axis extending away from the mounting surface when the base is mounted to the mounting surface (See Fig. 1); a support extending longitudinally parallel to the z-axis; a calibration ball (27) slidingly coupled to the support (25) such that the calibration ball can be selectively moved in a direction parallel to the z-axis. Enderle et al is silent with regards to calibration ball is radiopaque as claimed. Tobias et al discloses a fixation and immobilization device (1) ensures the spatial relationship between the calibration unit (2) with the X-ray opaque balls (3) and bone (4,5) and immobilizes the joint (7) during the two or more exposures , Stereometric analysis and 3D reconstruction of the imaged bone structures (9) can be carried out by imaging the balls of the calibration unit (10) in the X-ray images (8). Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Enderle et al with the teaching of Tobias et al so as to calculate magnification factor of image to determine real time measurements of patient anatomy.
PNG
media_image1.png
558
374
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowable over the prior art.
Regarding independent claim 1, the prior art fails to disclose or reasonably suggest wherein a device for positioning a knee during an x-ray, the device comprising: a first portion having a first surface, a second surface spaced apart from the first surface, a first edge extending between the first surface and the second surface, and a second edge spaced apart from the first edge; a second portion having a first surface, a second surface spaced apart from the first surface, a first edge extending between the first surface and the second surface, and a second edge spaced apart from the first edge, wherein the first edge of the first portion is rotatably coupled to the second edge of the second portion; and a foot plate coupled to the first surface of the first portion, as claimed, so as to enable the device with accuracy and precision of pre-operative determination for knee replacement size.
Regarding independent claim 20, the prior art fails to disclose or reasonably suggest wherein a method of performing an x-ray, the method comprising: providing a device for positioning a knee during an x-ray, the device comprising: a first portion having a first surface, a second surface spaced apart from the first surface, a first edge extending between the first surface and the second surface, and a second edge spaced apart from the first edge, a second portion having a first surface, a second surface spaced apart from the first surface, a first edge extending between the first surface and the second surface, and a second edge spaced apart from the first edge, wherein the first edge of the first portion is rotatably coupled to the second edge of the second portion, and a foot plate coupled to the first surface of the first portion; disposing a foot of a user on the foot plate and a respective knee of the user adjacent the first edge of the first portion; disposing a calibration ball adjacent the first surface of the first portion or the first surface of the second portion; and producing an x-ray image, wherein the x-ray image includes the knee of the user and the calibration ball, as claimed, so as to enable the device with accuracy and precision of pre-operative determination for knee replacement size.
Claims 2-19 are allowable based on dependency.
Prior art reference Stedtfeld et al (US 4,592,362) discloses a device for positioning a knee during an x-ray, comprising: a first portion having a first surface (30), a second surface (32) spaced apart from the first surface, a first edge extending between the first surface and the second surface, and a second edge spaced apart from the first edge (See Fig. and col. 6, lines 63- col. 7, lines 26); a foot plate (8) coupled to the first surface of the first portion (col. 7, lines 52). However, Stedtfeld et al is silent with regards to a second portion as claimed.
PNG
media_image2.png
603
599
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tulaszewski et al (US 4,232,681) disclose a leg positioning device for X-ray filming has a support with which the leg can be fixedly held at two spaced locations, a pressure element which can apply incrementally variable pressure to the leg intermediate these locations, and a device for measuring the applied pressure so that the same can be exactly reproduced whenever desired.
PNG
media_image3.png
453
521
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FANI POLYZOS BOOSALIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2447. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-3:30 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, Uzma Alam can be reached at Uzma.Alam@USPTO.GOV. 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.
/F.P.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights