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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8, line 4 recites “and though a first portion” and should be amended to recite “and through a first portion”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-14 and 20 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 1 recites the limitation "a first anchor comprising a first tongue, extending from a first inward side of the first anchor connected to the first end groove" in lines 8-9. Firstly, it is unclear as to whether “a first anchor” in line 8 is referring to the first anchor in line 3 of claim 1, or if a new first anchor is being claimed. Secondly, it is unclear as to what element is “connected to the first end groove” (i.e. the first anchor, the first tongue, or the first inward side). For the purpose of examining the claim, “a first anchor comprising a first tongue, extending from a first inward side of the first anchor connected to the first end groove” will be interpreted as “the first anchor comprising a first tongue, extending from a first inward side of the first anchor, and connected to the first end groove”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a second anchor comprising a second tongue, extending from a first inner side of the second anchor connected to the second longitudinal end groove" in lines 10-11. Firstly, it is unclear as to whether “a second anchor” in line 10 is referring to the second anchor in line 3 of claim 1, or if a new second anchor is being claimed. Secondly, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the second longitudinal end groove” in the claim. Thirdly, it is unclear as to what element is “connected to the second end longitudinal groove” (i.e. the second anchor, the second tongue, or the first inner side). For the purpose of examining the claim, “a second anchor comprising a second tongue, extending from a first inner side of the second anchor connected to the second longitudinal end groove” will be interpreted as “the second anchor comprising a second tongue, extending from a first inner side of the second anchor, and connected to the second end groove”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "a surgical instrument" in line 5. It is unclear whether “a surgical instrument” is referring to the surgical instrument of line 3 of claim 4, or if it is referring to a new surgical instrument. For the purpose of examining the claim, “a surgical instrument” in line 5 of claim 4 will be interpreted as “the surgical instrument”.
Claim 8 recites in the limitation “an annular central section comprising a first end groove extending inward through a first portion of the annular central section and a second end groove”. It is unclear as to whether the first end groove extends inward through a first portion of the annular central section AND a second groove, or if the annular central section comprises a first end groove AND a second end groove. For the purpose of examining the claim, “an annular central section comprising a first end groove extending inward through a first portion of the annular central section and a second end groove” will be interpreted as “an annular central section comprising a first end groove extending inward through a first portion of the annular central section, and a second end groove”.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "a first anchor comprising a first tongue, extending from a first inward side of the first anchor connected to the first end groove" in lines 7-8. Firstly, it is unclear as to what element is “connected to the first end groove” (i.e. the first anchor, the first tongue, or the first inward side). For the purpose of examining the claim, “a first anchor comprising a first tongue, extending from a first inward side of the first anchor connected to the first end groove” will be interpreted as “a first anchor comprising a first tongue, extending from a first inward side of the first anchor, and connected to the first end groove”.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "a second anchor comprising a second tongue, extending from a first inner side of the second anchor connected to the second longitudinal end groove" in lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the second longitudinal end groove” in the claim. Furthermore, it is unclear as to what element is “connected to the second end longitudinal groove” (i.e. the second anchor, the second tongue, or the first inner side). For the purpose of examining the claim, “a second anchor comprising a second tongue, extending from a first inner side of the second anchor connected to the second longitudinal end groove” will be interpreted as “a second anchor comprising a second tongue, extending from a first inner side of the second anchor, and connected to the second end groove”.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "a surgical instrument" in line 5. It is unclear whether “a surgical instrument” is referring to the surgical instrument of line 3 of claim 12, or if it is referring to a new surgical instrument. For the purpose of examining the claim, “a surgical instrument” in line 5 of claim 12 will be interpreted as “the surgical instrument”.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "first and second slots" in line 2. It is unclear whether “first and second slots” are referring to the first and second slots disclosed in claim 17 (from which claim 20 depends from), or if they are referring to new first and second slots. For the purpose of examining the claim, “first and second slots” in line 2 of claim 20 will be interpreted as “the first and second slots”.
Claim 20 recites “the tongue is lesser length than the inward side of anchor” in line 4. It is unclear as to what of the inward side of the anchor is being compared to the length of the tongue. For the purpose of examining the claim, “the tongue is lesser length than the inward side of anchor” will be interpreted as “the length of the tongue is less than the length of the inward side of the anchor”.
Appropriate corrections are required.
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.
Claims 1-20, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Trischler et al. (U.S. Publication No.2017/0245997 A1; hereinafter “Trischler”).
Regarding claim 1, Trischler discloses a modular spinal implant adapted for implantation into a surgically created cavity (see embodiment 400 in Figure 41); the modular spinal implant comprising: a) an annular central section (410), a first anchor (430, 440) and a second anchor (450, 460), wherein the annular central section, the first anchor and the second anchor have consistent diameters with respect to each other (diameters of 410, 430 and 450 are consistent as shown in Figure 42); b) the annular central section comprising a first end groove (see coupling mechanism 416 in Figure 26) and an opposed second end groove (see coupling mechanism 418 in Figure 26); c) the first anchor (430, 440) comprising a first tongue (see protrusion defined by track 434 in annotated 41 below), extending from a first inward side of the first anchor (see annotated Figure 41 below), and connected to the first end groove (Figure 42); and d) the second anchor (450, 46) comprising a second tongue (see protrusion defined by track 454 in annotated Figure 41 below), extending from a first inner side of the second anchor (see annotated Figure 41 below), and connected to the second end groove. (Figure 42).
Regarding claim 2, Trischler further discloses wherein: a) a second outward side (440) of the first anchor comprises first grippers (444); and b) a second outer side (460) of the second anchor comprises second grippers (464).
Regarding claim 3, Trischler further discloses wherein: a) the first anchor (430, 440) comprises at least one or more curved edges extending between the first inward side of the first anchor and the second outward side of the first anchor; (see curved outer surfaces of 430 and 440) and b) the second anchor (450, 460) comprises one or more curved margins extending between the first inner side of the second anchor and the second outer side of the second anchor (see curved outer surfaces of 450 and 460).
Regarding claim 4, Trischler further discloses wherein a) the first anchor comprises first and second slots (432) adapted to receive a surgical instrument distinct from the modular spinal implant; and b) the second anchor comprises first and second slits (452) adapted to receive the surgical instrument distinct from the modular spinal implant.
Regarding claim 5, Trischler further discloses a) an internal chamber (422); and b) one or more apertures (420) exposing the internal chamber to the surgically created cavity (Figure 41).
Regarding claim 6, Trischler further discloses wherein: a) the first anchor comprises a first orifice (channel 438 of element 430, and channel extending through 440, as shown in Figure 47) extending through the first anchor (Figure 47); b) the second anchor comprises a second orifice (channel 458 of element 450, and channel extending through 460, as shown in Figure 47) extending through the second anchor (Figure 47); and c) a first portion of the first and second grippers encircles the first and second orifices and a second portion of the first and second grippers spans across the first and second orifices (see annotated Figure 46 below).
Regarding claim 7, Trischler further discloses a device (see embodiment 1000 in Figure 54) distinct from the modular spinal implant for inserting the modular spinal implant into the surgically created cavity, wherein the device comprises: a) a first handle (1110) comprising two prongs (1116) adapted to engage the first and second slots (432) of the first anchor (Figure 55); and b) a second handle (1130) comprising two tines (1136) adapted to engage the first and second slits (452) of the second anchor (Figure 55).
Regarding claim 8, Trischler discloses a modular spinal implant adapted for implantation into a surgically created cavity (see embodiment 400 in Figure 41); the modular spinal implant comprising: a) an annular central section (410) comprising a first end groove (see coupling mechanism 416 in Figure 26) extending inward and through a first portion of the annular central section (see Figure 26), and a second end groove (see coupling mechanism 418 in Figure 26), opposed from the first end groove (Figure 26), extending inward and through a second portion of the annular central section; b) a first anchor (430, 440) comprising a first tongue (see protrusion defined by track 434 in annotated Figure 41 below), extending from a first inward side of the first anchor (see annotated Figure 41 below), and connected to the first end groove (Figure 42); and c) a second anchor (450, 460)comprising a second tongue (see protrusion defined by track 454 in annotated Figure 41 below), extending from a first inner side of the second anchor, and connected to the second end groove (Figure 42).
Regarding claim 9, Trischler further discloses wherein the annular central section (410), the first anchor (430) and the second anchor (450) have consistent diameters with respect to each other (Figures 52-45) .
Regarding claim 10, Trischler further discloses wherein: a) a second outward side (440) of the first anchor comprises first grippers (444); and b) a second outer side (460) of the second anchor comprises second grippers (464).
Regarding claim 11, Trischler further discloses wherein: a) the first anchor (430, 440) comprises at least one or more curved edges extending between the first inward side of the first anchor and the second outward side of the first anchor; (see curved outer surfaces of 430 and 440) and b) the second anchor (450, 460) comprises one or more curved margins extending between the first inner side of the second anchor and the second outer side of the second anchor (see curved outer surfaces of 450 and 460).
Regarding claim 12, Trischler further discloses wherein a) the first anchor comprises first and second slots (432) adapted to receive a surgical instrument distinct from the modular spinal implant; and b) the second anchor comprises first and second slits (452) adapted to receive the surgical instrument distinct from the modular spinal implant (Figure 41).
Regarding claim 13, Trischler further discloses a) an internal chamber (422); and b) one or more apertures (420) exposing the internal chamber to the surgically created cavity (Figure 41).
Regarding claim 14, Trischler further discloses wherein: a) the first anchor comprises a first orifice (channel 438 of element 430, and channel extending through 440 as shown in Figure 47) extending through the first anchor (Figure 47); b) the second anchor comprises a second orifice (channel 458 of element 450, and channel extending through 460, as shown in Figure 47) extending through the second anchor (Figure 47); and c) a first portion of the first and second grippers encircles the first and second orifices and a second portion of the first and second grippers spans across the first and second orifices (see annotated Figure 46 below).
Regarding claim 15, Trischler discloses an anchor (430) comprising an inward side with a tongue (see protrusion defined by track 434 in annotated Figure 41 below) adapted for connection to a groove (track defined by coupling mechanism 416 as shown in Figure 26) of a longitudinal side of an annular central section (410) of a modular spinal implant, wherein diameters of the anchor and the annular central section are consistent with each other (Figures 42-45).
Regarding claim 16, Trischler further discloses a) an outward side (440) comprising grippers (444) adapted to engage a surgical site; and b) curved edges extending between the inward side and the outward side of the anchor (see curved surfaces of elements 430 and 440 in Figure 41).
Regarding claim 17, Trischler further discloses first and second slots adapted to receive a surgical instrument (432) distinct from the modular spinal implant.
Regarding claim 18, Trischler further discloses an orifice extending through the anchor (channel 438 of element 430, and the channel extending through 440, as shown in Figure 47).
Regarding claim 19, Trischler further discloses wherein a first portion of the grippers encircles the orifice and a second portion of the grippers spans across the orifice (see annotated Figure 46 below).
Regarding claim 20, Trischler further discloses wherein: a) the first and second slots traverse an approximate length of each curved edge (see Figures41-42); and b) the length of the tongue is less than the length of the inward side of the anchor (see annotated Figure 43 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
504
344
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
426
500
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
490
344
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
766
264
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
839
604
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
460
650
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Josse et al. U.S. Publication No. 2017/0095348 A1
Refai et al. U.S. Publication No. 2012/0265303 A1
Arnold et al. U.S. Publication No. 2012/0209384 A1
Assaker U.S. Publication No. 2006/0200244 A1
Ibarra et al. U.S. Patent No. 9,603,717 B2
Carpenter U.S. Patent No. 8,353,964 B2
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christina Negrelli whose telephone number is 571-270-7389. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, between 8:00am to 4:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Eduardo 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.
/CHRISTINA NEGRELLI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3773
/EDUARDO C ROBERT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3773