Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/952,673

DEGRADABLE COMPOSITE AND METHOD OF FABRICATION

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Nov 19, 2024
Priority
May 19, 2022 — provisional 63/343,972 +4 more
Examiner
JONES, DIANA S
Art Unit
3775
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
206 Ortho, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 5m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allowance Rate
292 granted / 392 resolved
+4.5% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
416
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
69.1%
+29.1% vs TC avg
§102
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
§112
3.1%
-36.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 392 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . This action is in response to the set of claims received on June 27, 2025. Claim 1 is currently pending. 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. Claim 1 is 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 "the ductile mode" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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)(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. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Preiss-bloom et al. (US 2021/0205505). Regarding Claim 1, Preiss-bloom et al. disclose a composite (i.e., a medical implant) comprising: a degradable and bioabsorbable polymeric matrix material (104, Figure 1) [paragraph 0032], and a plurality of fiber bundles (102, Figure 1) dispersed in the polymeric matrix material [paragraph 0032], the plurality of fiber bundles including a plurality of degradable fibers [paragraph 0033]; wherein the polymeric matrix material, the degradable fibers, or both are capable of being degradable according to a predetermined degradation profile [paragraph 0036 describes the degradation profile of Elastic Modulus above 10GPa after 8 weeks implantation]; and wherein the composite [paragraph 0106 describe composite layers] occupies an envelope defined at least partially by a perimetric surface geometry [paragraph 0079 describe a layer of fibers “perimetric surface geometry”] and/or a volume of the composite [paragraph 0091]; optionally wherein the composite is employed as an implant or other application [paragraphs 0035 and 0074-0076 describe an implant]; optionally wherein the composite fails in a ductile mode starting from at least an initial use of the composite. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIANA S JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-5963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday (8am to 4pm 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, Kevin Truong can be reached at 571-272-4705. 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. /Diana Jones/Examiner, Art Unit 3775 /Zade Coley/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 19, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12611318
Shoulder Implant Impactor With Stabilization Features
2y 0m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12611283
RETRACTING TOOL FOR ROBOTIC SURGERY
1y 6m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12599389
MULTI-SIDED CUTTING INSTRUMENT FOR MOBILIZING SMALL BONES IN THE FOOT
3y 1m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594134
KINEMATICALLY ALIGNED ROBOTIC TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY
2y 7m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582414
DEVICES AND METHODS FOR REMOVING BONE
3y 7m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+20.4%)
3y 0m (~1y 5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 392 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month