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 .
Response to Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed 04/14/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 11-12 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Zeiner et al. (US 20220079581 A1) in view of Shelton, IV et al. (US 20180235626 A1) and further in view of Marczyk et al. (US 20130153633 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Zeiner et al. discloses an anvil buttress loading assembly (310) comprising: an anvil buttress loading tool including a carrier (310) having a support plate (314 and/or buttress material dispenser) and a clip roller (334, 338) extending proximally from the support plate (figs. 14-17); and an anvil buttress (110, 112) including a buttress body (110), the anvil buttress releasably retained on the anvil buttress loading tool with the buttress body positioned on the support plate (314 and/or buttress material dispenser) and transferrable to an anvil assembly (18, [0074-0088], figs. 1-3 and 14-17).
Zeiner et al. fails to disclose the anvil having a clip, with the clip roller configured to move the clip to an open position when advancing the anvil buttress loading tool onto the anvil assembly.
Shelton, IV et al. teaches having flexible retaining elements (3172/3182) that are on anvil (3168 [0299]) to secure a buttress/adjunct (3106, 3126, 3138, 3156 figs. 15, 18-20, 23, and 26-28), retaining elements 3188 on anvil (3184, figs. 29-30 [0291-0302]), clip retainer 10506 ([0535-0550], fig. 72-74) to hold buttress/adjunct (10500) on anvil (34 and also teaches anvil (14704) having flexible longitudinal projections that contract to fit in recesses of adjunct/buttress (14720) and then expand in the recess ([0785-0787], figs. 125-127).
Marczyk et al. also teaches an anvil (124) having a clip (130 and/or 28), with a clip driver (36) configured to move the clip (130/28) to an open position (forcing clips 130/28 downwardly within slots/holes 60/132, frictionally retained within clip slot 132 figs. 30-32) when advancing the anvil buttress loading tool onto the anvil assembly ([0096-0105] figs. 19-34).
Given the teachings of Zeiner et al. to have a clip roller to apply a buttress onto an anvil, it 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 to modify the anvil with having a clip, with the clip roller configured to move the clip to an open position when advancing the anvil buttress loading tool onto the anvil assembly to have precise secure attachment of the buttress, have rollers for guiding/alignment, reducing friction and/or for easier insertion of the loader in the jaws as taught by Shelton, IV et al. and Marczyk et al.
Regarding claim 12, Zeiner et al. discloses the clip roller includes a post (projection portions with rollers 334, 338) extending proximally from the support plate (see annotation and figs. 14-17) and a cylinder (334, 338) extending laterally from the post ([0074-0088], figs. 1-3 and 14-17).
PNG
media_image1.png
416
472
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Zeiner et al. teaches the anvil buttress loading tool further includes a cover (326 and/or 320) disposed over the support plate (314 and/or buttress material dispenser) of the carrier (310).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 are allowed.
Claims 13-14 and 16-20 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Reasons for Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious an anvil buttress loading system comprising all the structural and functional limitations and further comprising, amongst other limitations/features, an anvil assembly including a tissue facing surface and a snap clip disposed on the tissue facing surface, the snap clip movable between a closed position having a generally concave shape relative to the tissue facing surface and an open position having a generally convex shape relative to the tissue facing surface; an anvil buttress loading tool including a carrier having a support plate and a clip roller extending proximally from the support plate; and an anvil buttress including a buttress body, the anvil buttress releasably retained on the anvil buttress loading tool with the buttress body positioned on the support plate, the anvil buttress transferrable from the anvil buttress loading tool to the anvil assembly such that the buttress body is captured between the snap clip and the tissue facing surface of the anvil assembly, the snap clip movable from the closed position to the open position by the clip roller when advancing the anvil buttress loading tool onto the anvil assembly and from the open position to the closed position when separating the anvil buttress loading tool from the anvil assembly. Though Bakos et al. (US 20220079592 A1) and Zeiner et al. (US 20220079581 A1) teach a similar anvil buttress loader with rollers, Bakos et al. and Zeiner et al. fail to disclose a snap clip disposed on the tissue facing surface to have the anvil buttress “transferrable from the anvil buttress loading tool to the anvil assembly such that the buttress body is captured between the snap clip and the tissue facing surface of the anvil assembly, the snap clip movable from the closed position to the open position by the clip roller when advancing the anvil buttress loading tool onto the anvil assembly and from the open position to the closed position when separating the anvil buttress loading tool from the anvil assembly” . Having the efficiency and ease of a buttress loader having a snap clip open/closed with a roller to secure the buttress onto the anvil, provides and effective secure buttress loading system.
While various features of the claimed subject matter are found individually in the prior art, a skilled artisan would have to include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed subject matter, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Additional prior art considered pertinent: see form 892.
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 ROBERT LONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm, 8-9pm (EST).
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, SHELLEY SELF can be reached at (571) 272-4524. 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.
/ROBERT F LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights