DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Status
The reply and amendments made to the claims in response to the election requirement dated 2 August 2026 featured a mistake that has since been clarified. Examiner spoke with attorney James Sheridan on 17 August 2026 to clarify the election of Species I, claims 2-5 and 9, despite what the response filed 2 August 2026 states.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I, claims 2-5 and 9 via the telephonic discussion on 17 August 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 12, 10, and 20-27 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2 August 2026.
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 “top surface”, “bottom surface”, “thickness”, of claim 9 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 § 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 2-3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2015/0057751 A1), “Kim”.
Regarding claim 9, Kim teaches
A packaged allograft implant configured for implantation in a human recipient (acellular dermal graft used for skin tissues on the human body (abstract, [0005])), the packaged allograft implant comprising:
an acellular dermal matrix sheet Fig. 1, multi-slit-treated graft [0057]) having a top surface (upper surface of graft [0124]) and
a bottom surface in opposition to one another (bottom surface of graft [0124]),
a perimeter surrounding the top surface and the bottom surface (edges of the graft [0058] implies a perimeter), and
a thickness extending between the top surface and the bottom surface (lateral side of graft [0127] implies a thickness to the graft); and
a mesh pattern extending across at least a portion of the top surface and the bottom surface of the acellular dermal matrix sheet (Fig. 8, graft comprises a multi-slit pattern across entire graft),
the mesh pattern providing through-holes extending between the top surface and the bottom surface of the acellular dermal matrix sheet (Fig. 8, graft comprises slits formed therethrough (i.e., through upper and lower surfaces)), and
the mesh pattern having a plurality of mesh lines extending in a first direction and a second direction (Fig. 4, multi-slit pattern includes slits in various directions [0058]),
wherein the first direction and the second direction are orthogonal to one another so as to allow a given amount of stretch in each of the first direction and the second direction (Fig. 4, multi-slit pattern includes slits in a transverse direction to each other [0058]),
wherein the mesh pattern is a multiple quadrant pattern (Modified Fig. 4, graft comprises four quadrants cut similar to the fourth panel of Fig. 9) with parallel mesh lines in opposing quadrants (Modified Fig. 4, quadrants pointing toward each other comprise parallel slit patterns) and
perpendicular mesh lines in neighboring quadrants (Modified Fig. 4, quadrants sharing sides comprise perpendicular slit patterns), and
the multiple quadrant pattern contained in a circular shaped perimeter with the mesh lines (multi-puncture patterns may be formed in a circular shape [0061]).
PNG
media_image1.png
141
187
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 4
Regarding claim 2, Kim teaches
wherein the mesh lines have a length of 1.0mm to 3.48mm (Fig. 5, multi-slit pattern comprises slits having a 3-5mm longitudinal direction [0058]).
Regarding claim 3, Kim teaches
wherein the mesh lines have a length of 3.48mm (Fig. 5, multi-slit pattern comprises slits having a 3-5mm longitudinal direction [0058]).
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.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2015/0057751 A1), “Kim”.
Regrading claim 4, Kim teaches wherein the mesh lines have a spacing apart from one another of 1.0mm to 1.5mm (Fig. 5, multi-slit pattern comprises slits having gaps between that range from 2-5mm [0058]). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include spacing apart from one another between 1-1.5mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05-II-A.
Regarding claim 5, Kim teaches wherein the mesh lines have a spacing apart from one another of 1.5mm (Fig. 5, multi-slit pattern comprises slits having gaps between that range from 2-5mm [0058]). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include spacing apart from one another of 1.5mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable value involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05-II-A.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2011/0251602 A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIELLA G. B. RIOS whose telephone number is (703)756-5958. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9:00AM-6:00PM CST.
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, THOMAS BARRETT can be reached at (571) 272-4746. 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.
/G.G.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3774
/JERRAH EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3774
Prosecution Insights