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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-3, 6-12 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyden et al. (US 2010/0262160) in view of Nycz (US 2009/0234456). Regarding claim 1, Boyden et al. disclose an interbody measurement system (figure 3 or alternatively figure 4) comprising an interbody tool comprising an upper contact surface (see figure below); a plurality of actuators (310’s/410’s) configured to selectively adjust a distance between the upper contact surface and the lower contact surface (¶87-89, ¶93-95); and at least one sensor (330/430) for measuring a characteristic of at least one actuator in the plurality of actuators (¶33-34); a processor (¶88, ¶106); and a memory (¶87, ¶106) storing data for processing by the processor, the data, when processed, causes the processor to activate the plurality of actuators (¶94); receive data corresponding to the characteristic from the at least one sensor (¶88); and determine whether to de-activate the plurality of actuators based on the data corresponding to the characteristic (¶34-35, ¶96). Boyden et al. fails to expressly teach or disclose the upper contact surface having a plurality of upper legs, the lower contact surface having a plurality of lower legs, each of the lower legs moveably connected to one of the upper legs and each actuator connecting a corresponding upper leg of the plurality of upper legs and a corresponding lower leg of the plurality of lower legs. Rather, Boyden et al. teaches the use of generic motors (310’s and 410’s) which adjust the dimensions of the implant and the motors can be constructed as fluid pressure mechanisms (¶81).
Nycz teaches the use of an interbody tool (figure 1) which includes an upper contact surface (102/114) having a plurality of upper legs (146, figure 6, ¶32), a lower contact surface (104/118) having a plurality of lower legs (148, figure 6, ¶32), each of the lower legs moveably connected to one of the upper legs (¶33) and each actuator connecting a corresponding upper leg of the plurality of upper legs and a corresponding lower leg of the plurality of lower legs (figure 6) as it is a known alternative fluid pressure mechanism for adjusting parameter of an interbody tool.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have constructed the upper and lower contact surfaces to have mating legs for dynamic adjustment of the interbody tool as taught by Nycz as it is a known alternative fluid pressure mechanism for adjusting parameter of an interbody tool.
Regarding claim 2, Boyden et al. disclose the memory stores further data for processing by the processor that, when processed, causes the processor to receive information about the distance between the upper contact surface and the lower contact surface (¶34, ¶80, ¶88); identifying an implant based on the information about the distance between the upper contact surface and the lower contact surface at each of a plurality of points (¶68, ¶95-96); and update at least one parameter of a global alignment plan based on the identified implant (¶68).
Regarding claim 3, Boyden et al. disclose the interbody tool further comprises a plurality of gauges (¶95 “DVRLT’s” or “LVDT’s”) positioned at the plurality of points between the upper contact surface and the lower contact surface, and wherein the information about the distance between the upper contact surface and the lower contact surface is received from the plurality of gauges at each of the plurality of points (¶95).
Regarding claim 6, Boyden et al. disclose the characteristic comprises a force (¶33), and memory (¶34, ¶88) stores further data for processing by the processor that, when processed, causes the processor to: deactivate the at least one actuator when the force, as measured by the at least one sensor, reaches a predetermined threshold (¶34).
Regarding claim 7, Boyden et al. in view of Nycz teach each actuator of the plurality of actuators comprises at least one of a scissor jack, a pneumatic actuator, a hydraulic actuator, or one or more electromagnets (¶81 of Boyden and ¶31-33 of Nycz).
Regarding claim 8, Boyden et al. in view of Nycz teach each actuator of the plurality of actuators comprises a plurality of independently operable hydraulic actuators (106, 108, 110, 112, figure 6.”all the same type of supports” ¶30) and the at least one sensor comprises a plurality of pressure sensors (330’s and 430’s of Boyden and 158, 160, figure 9 of Nycz).
Regarding claim 9, Boyden et al. disclose an interbody measurement system comprising an interbody tool (figure 3 or alternatively figure 4) comprising an upper contact surface (see figure below); a lower contact surface (see figure below); a plurality of actuators (310’s or 410’s) configured to selectively adjust a distance between the upper contact surface and the lower contact surface (¶87-89, ¶93-95); at least one sensor (330’s or 430’s) for measuring a characteristic of at least one actuator in the plurality of actuators; and a communication interface (340/440) to receive one or more first signals (¶33) to activate the plurality of actuators; send data (¶33) corresponding to the characteristic as measured by the at least one sensor; and receive one or more second signals to de-activate the plurality of actuators (¶34), the one or more second signals being generated based on the data corresponding to the characteristic (¶34).
Boyden et al. fails to expressly teach or disclose the upper contact surface having a plurality of upper legs, the lower contact surface having a plurality of lower legs, each of the lower legs moveably connected to one of the upper legs and each actuator connecting a corresponding upper leg of the plurality of upper legs and a corresponding lower leg of the plurality of lower legs. Rather, Boyden et al. teaches the use of generic motors (310’s and 410’s) which adjust the dimensions of the implant and the motors can be constructed as fluid pressure mechanisms (¶81).
Nycz teaches the use of an interbody tool (figure 1) which includes an upper contact surface (102/114) having a plurality of upper legs (146, figure 6, ¶32), a lower contact surface (104/118) having a plurality of lower legs (148, figure 6, ¶32), each of the lower legs moveably connected to one of the upper legs (¶33) and each actuator connecting a corresponding upper leg of the plurality of upper legs and a corresponding lower leg of the plurality of lower legs (figure 6) as it is a known alternative fluid pressure mechanism for adjusting parameter of an interbody tool.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have constructed the upper and lower contact surfaces to have mating legs for dynamic adjustment of the interbody tool as taught by Nycz as it is a known alternative fluid pressure mechanism for adjusting parameter of an interbody tool.
Regarding claim 10, Boyden et al. disclose a processor (¶88, ¶106); and a memory (¶87, ¶106) storing data for processing by the processor, the data, when processed, causes the processor to generate and send the one or more first signals to the communication interface (¶33); receive, from the communication interface, the data corresponding to the characteristic as measured by the at least one sensor (¶33); and generate the one or more second signals based on the data corresponding to the characteristic (¶34).
Regarding claim 10, Boyden et al. disclose the interbody tool further comprises a plurality of gauges (“LVDT’s” and “DVRT’s” ¶95) positioned at a plurality of points between the upper contact surface and the lower contact surface (¶95).
Regarding claim 12, Boyden et al. disclose the memory stores further data for processing by the processor that, when processed, causes the processor to receive, from the plurality of gauges, information about the distance between the upper contact surface and the lower contact surface at each of the plurality of points (¶80, ¶95); identify an implant based on the information about the distance between the upper contact surface and the lower contact surface at each of the plurality of points (¶68, ¶95-96); and update at least one parameter of a global alignment plan based on the identified implant (¶68). Regarding claim 15, Boyden et al. disclose the characteristic comprises a force (¶33), and wherein the communication interface receives the one or more second signals to deactivate the plurality of actuators in response to the force, as measured by the at least one sensor, reaching a predetermined threshold (¶34).
Regarding claim 16, Boyden et al. in view of Nycz disclose each of the plurality of actuators comprises at least one of a scissor jack, a pneumatic actuator, a hydraulic actuator, or one or more electromagnets (¶81 of Boyden et al. and ¶31-33 of Nycz).
Regarding claim 17, Boyden et al. in view of Nycz disclose the plurality of actuators comprises a plurality of independently operable hydraulic actuators (106, 108, 110, 112, figure 6.”all the same type of supports” ¶30) and the at least one sensor comprises a plurality of pressure sensors (330’s and 430’s of Boyden and 158, 160, figure 9 of Nycz).
Regarding claim 18, Boyden et al. disclose an interbody measurement system comprising an interbody tool (300 figure 3 or 400, figure 4) comprising an upper contact surface (see figure below); a lower contact surface (see figure below); a plurality of actuators (310’s/410’s) configured to selectively adjust a distance between the upper contact surface and the lower contact surface (¶87-89, ¶93-95); and at least one sensor (330/430) for measuring a force exerted by at least one actuator in the plurality of actuators (¶33-34); a processor (¶88, ¶106); and a memory (¶87, ¶106) storing data for processing by the processor, the data, when processed, causes the processor to activate the plurality of actuators (¶94); and deactivate the plurality of actuators when the force, as measured by the at least one sensor, reaches a predetermined threshold (¶34-35, ¶96).
Boyden et al. fails to expressly teach or disclose the upper contact surface having a plurality of upper legs, the lower contact surface having a plurality of lower legs, each of the lower legs moveably connected to one of the upper legs and each actuator connecting a corresponding upper leg of the plurality of upper legs and a corresponding lower leg of the plurality of lower legs. Rather, Boyden et al. teaches the use of generic motors (310’s and 410’s) which adjust the dimensions of the implant and the motors can be constructed as fluid pressure mechanisms (¶81).
Nycz teaches the use of an interbody tool (figure 1) which includes an upper contact surface (102/114) having a plurality of upper legs (146, figure 6, ¶32), a lower contact surface (104/118) having a plurality of lower legs (148, figure 6, ¶32), each of the lower legs moveably connected to one of the upper legs (¶33) and each actuator connecting a corresponding upper leg of the plurality of upper legs and a corresponding lower leg of the plurality of lower legs (figure 6) as it is a known alternative fluid pressure mechanism for adjusting parameter of an interbody tool.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have constructed the upper and lower contact surfaces to have mating legs for dynamic adjustment of the interbody tool as taught by Nycz as it is a known alternative fluid pressure mechanism for adjusting parameter of an interbody tool.
Regarding claim 19, Boyden et al. in view of Nycz disclose each of the plurality of actuators comprises at least one of a scissor jack, a pneumatic actuator, a hydraulic actuator, or one or more electromagnets (¶81 of Boyden et al. and ¶31-33 of Nycz).
Regarding claim 20, Boyden et al. in view of Nycz disclose the plurality of actuators comprises a plurality of independently operable hydraulic actuators (106, 108, 110, 112, figure 6.”all the same type of supports” ¶30) and the at least one sensor comprises a plurality of pressure sensors (330’s and 430’s of Boyden and 158, 160, figure 9 of Nycz).
PNG
media_image1.png
343
514
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyden et al. (US 2010/0262160) in view of Nycz (US 2009/0234456) in further view of Copf, Jr. (US 2011/0257655). Regarding claims 4 and 7, Boyden et al. in view of Nycz disclose the claimed invention except for each of the plurality of gauges comprises at least one of an encoder and an optical distance sensor.
Rather, Boyden et al. teaches the gauges are LVDT
S or DVRT’s (¶95).
Copf, Jr. discloses the use of a gauge being at least one of an encoder and an optical distance sensor (¶90-91) as it is a known alternative gauge for providing the surgeon or technician with real-time feedback as to the position of the components of the implant (¶91).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have substituted in the gauge of Copf, Jr. in for the gauges of Boyden et al. as they are well known alternative gauges for providing the surgeon or technician with real-time feedback as to the position of the components of the implant.
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyden et al. (US 2010/0262160) in view of Nycz (US 2009/0234456) in further view of Permeswaran et al. (US 2021/0038408).
Regarding claims 5 and 13, Boyden et al. in view of Nycz disclose the claimed invention except for wherein the memory stores further data for processing by the processor that, when processed, causes the processor to cause a robot to insert the identified implant into an interbody space.
Permeswaran et al. disclose memory stores further data for processing by the processor that, when processed, causes the processor to cause a robot to insert the identified implant into an interbody space (figure 3, ¶30) to accurately track the positions of the implant within a virtual coordinate system for accurate final placement of the implant (¶30).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have constructed the device of Boyden et al. in view of Nycz to have the memory store further data for processing by the processor that, when processed, causes the processor to: cause a robot to insert the identified implant into an interbody space as taught by Permesaran et al. as it allows for accurate tracking of the positioning of the implant within virtual coordinate system for accurate final placement of the implant.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW JAMES LAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7375. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 6:30-3:00.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/MATTHEW J LAWSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights