Detailed Action
This is the first office action on the merits for US application number 18/956,985.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 17/607,222 filed on October 28, 2021.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 12 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12 line 15 should read “to lock the jaw members”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “release member” in claims 1, 12, and 17.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claim 1 is drawn to a genus which is anticipated by the species of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 1 as identified in the below table, where differences in claim language are shown in bold.
Instant claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 1
A surgical rotational tool driver comprising:
A surgical rotational tool driver comprising:
a substantially hollow shaft having a proximal end and a distal end;
a driveline having a proximal end connectable to a rotational power tool for applying torque through the driveline and a distal end opposite the proximal end; and
a driveline extending within the hollow shaft, the driveline having: a proximal end connectable to a rotational power tool for applying torque through the driveline; and
a head part coupled to the distal end of the driveline, the head part including:
a head part extending distally from the distal end of the shaft, the head part including connection features for connecting to a connection member of a surgical rotational tool, the head part having an axis of rotation for rotation of the surgical rotational tool on rotation of the driveline, the connection features of the head part comprising: a housing;
a first jaw member and a second jaw member, wherein each jaw member is movable between an open position to allow attachment of a surgical rotational tool to the head part and a closed position to retain the attachment of the surgical rotation tool to the head part, and
a pair of jaw members, each jaw member including a pair of jaws for receiving the connection member of the surgical rotational tool, wherein each jaw member is pivotally mounted on the housing for rotation about an axis substantially perpendicular to the axis of rotation of the head part between: a first position for receipt of the connection member within the jaws of each jaw member; and a second position for retaining the connection member within the jaws of each jaw member to prevent removal of the surgical rotation tool from the surgical rotational tool driver; and
a locking mechanism including: a pair of ramps for engaging with a respective catch of each jaw member to lock the jaw members in the closed position,
a locking mechanism comprising: a pair of ramps for engaging with a respective catch of each jaw member to lock the jaw members in the second position,
a release member slideably moveable to release the ramps of the locking mechanism from the respective catches of the jaw members to allow the jaw members to return to the open position, and
a release member slideably moveable within the housing to release the ramps of the locking mechanism from the respective catches of the jaw members to allow the jaw members to return to the first position for removal of the surgical rotational tool from the surgical rotational tool driver; and
a leaf spring having a first end configured to bias the first jaw member to the open position and a second end configured to bias the second jaw member to the open position.
a biasing element mounted on the housing for biasing the jaw members toward the first position, wherein the biasing element includes a leaf spring having a first end for biasing a first of the jaw members and a second end for biasing a second of the jaw members.
Claims 3-5 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims 3-5 are drawn to a genus which is anticipated by the species of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 2 as identified in the below table, where differences in claim language are shown in bold.
Instant claims 3-5
U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 2
3. The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 1, wherein each ramp of the locking mechanism is attached to an opposing side of the release member and includes:
2. The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 1, wherein the ramps of the locking mechanism each comprise:
a ramped surface extending laterally from the corresponding side of the release member, and
a ramped surface extending laterally from the release member; and
a retaining surface located at an end of the corresponding ramped surface.
a retaining surface located at an end of the ramped surface,
4. The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 3, wherein the catches of the jaw members are configured to ride on the ramped surface of the respective ramp as the jaw members are moved from the open position to the closed position.
wherein the catches of the jaw members are operable to ride along the ramped surface as the jaw members pivot from the first position to the second position and
5. The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 4, wherein the catches of the jaw members are configured to engage the retaining surface of the respective ramp when the catches reach an end of the ramped surface of the respective ramp.
engage with the retaining surfaces when they reach the end of the ramped surface to lock the jaw members in the second position.
Claim 6 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claim 6 is drawn to a genus which is anticipated by the species of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 3 as identified in the below table, where differences in claim language are shown in bold.
Instant claim 6
U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 3
The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 5, wherein the release member is slideably movable to disengage the catches of the jaw members from the retaining surface of the respective ramp to allow the jaw members to return to the open position.
The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 2, wherein the release member is slideably moveable within the housing to disengage the catches of the jaw members from the retaining surfaces of the ramps on the release member.
Claim 7 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claim 7 is drawn to a genus which is anticipated by the species of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 6 as identified in the below table, where differences in claim language are shown in bold.
Instant claim 7
U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 5
The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 1, wherein head part has an axis of rotation for rotation of the surgical rotational tool and further includes a housing, wherein each jaw member is pivotally mounted on the housing, and
The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 1,
(From claim 1:
the head part having an axis of rotation for rotation of the surgical rotational tool on rotation of the driveline, the connection features of the head part comprising: a housing;…. wherein each jaw member is pivotally mounted on the housing for rotation about an axis substantially perpendicular to the axis of rotation of the head part between:)
wherein the locking mechanism further includes a biasing element located within the housing and configured to bias the release member along the axis of rotation of the head part in a distal direction.
wherein the locking mechanism further comprises a biasing element located within the housing for biasing the release member along the axis of rotation of the head part in a distal direction.
Claim 8 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claim 8 is drawn to a genus which is anticipated by the species of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 8 as identified in the below table, where differences in claim language are shown in bold.
Instant claim 8
U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 8
The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 1, wherein the driveline is substantially hollow, and wherein the locking mechanism further comprises an actuation member extending within the substantially hollow driveline, wherein a distal end of the actuation member is attached to the release member, and wherein the actuation member is connected to the locking mechanism for operating the release member from a position on the surgical rotational tool driver located proximally with respect to the head part.
The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 1, wherein the driveline is substantially hollow, and wherein the locking mechanism further comprises an actuation member extending within the substantially hollow driveline, wherein a distal end of the actuation member is attached to the release member, and wherein the actuation member is connected to the release mechanism for operating the release member from a position on the surgical rotational tool driver located proximally with respect to the head part.
Claim 9 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claim 9 is drawn to a genus which is anticipated by the species of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 12 as identified in the below table, where differences in claim language are shown in bold.
Instant claim 9
U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 12
9. The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 8, wherein the actuation member comprises a substantially flexible tension member.
The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 8, wherein the actuation member comprises a substantially flexible tension member.
Claim 12 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claim 12 is drawn to a genus which is anticipated by the species of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 16 as identified in the below table, where differences in claim language are shown in bold.
Instant claim 12
U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 16
A method of operating a surgical rotational tool driver, the method comprising:
A method of operating a surgical rotational tool driver, the method comprising:
connecting a head part of the surgical rotation tool driver to a surgical rotation tool, the head part including
connecting one or more connection features of a head part of a driveline of a surgical rotational tool driver to a connection member of a surgical rotational tool, the surgical rotational tool driver comprising: a substantially hollow shaft having a proximal end and a distal end; the driveline extending within the hollow shaft, the driveline having: a proximal end connectable to a rotational power tool for applying torque through the driveline; and said head part extending distally from the distal end of the shaft, the head part having an axis of rotation for rotation of the surgical rotational tool on rotation of the driveline, the connection features of the head part comprising: a housing;
(i) a pair of jaw members movable between an open position to allow attachment of a surgical rotational tool to the head part and a closed position to retain the attachment of the surgical rotation tool to the head part and
a pair of jaw members, each jaw member including a pair of jaws for receiving the connection member of the surgical rotational tool, wherein each jaw member is pivotally mounted on the housing for rotation about an axis substantially perpendicular to the axis of rotation of the head part between: a first position for receipt of the connection member within the jaws of each jaw member; and a second position for retaining the connection member within the jaws of each jaw member to prevent removal of the surgical rotation tool from the surgical rotational tool driver; and.
(ii) a locking mechanism including a pair of ramps for engaging with a respective catch of each jaw member to lock the jaw members in the closed position and
a locking mechanism comprising: a pair of ramps for engaging with a respective catch of each jaw member to lock the jaw members in the second position, and
a release member slideably moveable to release the ramps of the locking mechanism from the respective catches of the jaw members;
a release member slideably moveable within the housing to release the ramps of the locking mechanism from the respective catches of the jaw members to allow the jaw members to return to the first position for removal of the surgical rotational tool from the surgical rotational tool driver;
riding the catch of each jaw member along a ramped surface of a respective ramp of the locking mechanism as the jaw members move from the first position to the second position;
riding the catch of each jaw member along a respective ramped surface extending laterally from the release member as the jaw members pivot from the first position to the second position and
engaging the catch of each jaw member with a retaining surface of the respective ramp to lock the jaw embers in the closed position, wherein the retaining surface is located at an end of the ramped surface of the respective ramp;
engaging the catches of the jaw members with retaining surfaces located at an end of the respective ramped surfaces when they reach the end of the ramped surfaces, to lock the jaw members in the second position;
operating the release member to allow the jaw members to return to the open position; and
operating the release mechanism by sliding the release member within the housing; and
removing, while the jaw members are in the open position, the surgical rotational tool from the head part of the surgical rotational tool driver.
removing the surgical rotational tool from the surgical rotational tool driver.
Claim 15 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claim 15 is drawn to a genus which is anticipated by the species of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 17 as identified in the below table, where differences in claim language are shown in bold.
Instant claim 15
U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 17
The method of claim 12, wherein operating the release member comprises sliding the release member to disengage the catch of each jaw member from the retaining surface of the respective ramp.
The method of claim 16, further comprising sliding the release member within the housing to disengage the catch of each jaw member from the retaining surfaces of the respective ramped surfaces on the release member.
Claim 17 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claim 17 is drawn to a genus which is anticipated by the species of U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 4 as identified in the below table, where differences in claim language are shown in bold.
Instant claim 17
U.S. Patent No. 12,178,452 claim 1+4
A surgical rotational tool driver comprising:
A surgical rotational tool driver comprising:
a substantially hollow shaft having a proximal end and a distal end;
a driveline having a proximal end connectable to a rotational power tool for applying torque through the driveline and a distal end opposite the proximal end; and
a driveline extending within the hollow shaft, the driveline having: a proximal end connectable to a rotational power tool for applying torque through the driveline; and
a head part coupled to the distal end of the driveline, the head part configured for attachment to a surgical rotational tool and having an axis of rotation for rotation of the surgical rotational tool, the head part including:
a head part extending distally from the distal end of the shaft, the head part including connection features for connecting to a connection member of a surgical rotational tool, the head part having an axis of rotation for rotation of the surgical rotational tool on rotation of the driveline, the connection features of the head part comprising: a housing;
a first jaw member and a second jaw member, wherein each jaw member is movable between an open position to allow attachment of a surgical rotational tool to the head part and a closed position to retain the attachment of the surgical rotation tool to the head part, and
a pair of jaw members, each jaw member including a pair of jaws for receiving the connection member of the surgical rotational tool, wherein each jaw member is pivotally mounted on the housing for rotation about an axis substantially perpendicular to the axis of rotation of the head part between: a first position for receipt of the connection member within the jaws of each jaw member; and a second position for retaining the connection member within the jaws of each jaw member to prevent removal of the surgical rotation tool from the surgical rotational tool driver; and
a locking mechanism including: a first ramp and a second ramp, wherein each of the ramps includes a retaining surface configured to engage a respective catch of each jaw member to lock the jaw members in the closed position,
a locking mechanism comprising: a pair of ramps for engaging with a respective catch of each jaw member to lock the jaw members in the second position,
a release member slideably moveable along a direction substantially parallel to the axis of rotation of the head part to disengage the catches of the jaw members from the retaining surfaces of the ramps of the release member.
a release member slideably moveable within the housing to release the ramps of the locking mechanism from the respective catches of the jaw members to allow the jaw members to return to the first position for removal of the surgical rotational tool from the surgical rotational tool driver; and
a biasing element mounted on the housing for biasing the jaw members toward the first position, wherein the biasing element includes a leaf spring having a first end for biasing a first of the jaw members and a second end for biasing a second of the jaw members.
2. The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 1, wherein the ramps of the locking mechanism each comprise: a ramped surface extending laterally from the release member; and a retaining surface located at an end of the ramped surface, wherein the catches of the jaw members are operable to ride along the ramped surface as the jaw members pivot from the first position to the second position and engage with the retaining surfaces when they reach the end of the ramped surface to lock the jaw members in the second position.
3. The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 2, wherein the release member is slideably moveable within the housing to disengage the catches of the jaw members from the retaining surfaces of the ramps on the release member.
a release member slideably moveable along a direction substantially parallel to the axis of rotation of the head part to disengage the catches of the jaw members from the retaining surfaces of the ramps of the release member.
4. The surgical rotational tool driver of claim 3, wherein the release member is slideably moveable along a direction substantially parallel to the axis of rotation of the head part.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Crandall et al. (US 2017/0000499, hereinafter “Crandall”).
As to claim 12, Crandall discloses a method of operating a surgical rotational tool driver (10, 202, Figs. 1-8, ¶22 discloses use of 10 to secure tool 12 (Fig. 3) to spindle 202 (Fig. 8)), the method comprising: connecting a head part of the surgical rotation tool driver (24, Figs. 1-5 and 7) to a surgical rotation tool (12, Fig. 3), the head part including (i) a pair of jaw members (left of each of: portion of 26 that of defines slot 28, 134, 142 as shown in Fig. 7, right of each of: portion of 26 that of defines slot 28, 134, 142 as shown in Fig. 7, Fig. 7) capable of moving between an open position (130, Fig. 2) capable of allowing attachment of a surgical rotational tool to the head part (Fig. 2, ¶s 42 and 44) and a closed position (132, Fig. 1) capable of retaining the attachment of the surgical rotation tool to the head part (Fig. 1, ¶s 41 and 42), and (ii) a locking mechanism (68, Figs. 1-6, ¶27) including a pair of ramps (left of each of: 90, 72, surfaces of 98 and 62 as shown in Fig. 6, right of each of: 90, 72, surfaces of 98 and 62 as shown in Fig. 6, Fig. 6, ¶28) capable of engaging with a respective catch (142) of each jaw member capable of locking the jaw members in the closed position (Fig. 1) and a release member (18) capable of slidingly moving to release the ramps of the locking mechanism from the respective catches of the jaw members (at least from the ramps retaining surface 72, Figs. 1 and 2); riding the catch of each jaw member along a ramped surface of a respective ramp of the locking mechanism as the jaw members move from the first position to the second position (Figs. 1 and 2); engaging the catch of each jaw member with a retaining surface (72) of the respective ramp to lock the jaw embers in the closed position (Fig. 1), wherein the retaining surface is located at an end of the ramped surface of the respective ramp (Figs. 1-4 and 6); operating the release member to allow the jaw members to return to the open position (Fig. 2, ¶42); and removing, while the jaw members are in the open position, the surgical rotational tool from the head part of the surgical rotational tool driver (Fig. 2, ¶42).
As to claim 13, Crandall discloses that riding the catch of each jaw member along the ramped surface of the respective ramp of the locking mechanism comprises riding the catch of each jaw member along the ramped surface of the respective ramp of the locking mechanism until the catch of each jaw member engages the retaining surface of the respective ramp of the locking mechanism (Fig. 1).
As to claim 14, Crandall discloses that operating the release member comprises sliding the release member to release the ramps of the locking mechanism from the respective catches of the jaw members (Figs. 1 and 2, ¶42).
As to claim 15, Crandall discloses that operating the release member comprises sliding the release member to disengage the catch of each jaw member from the retaining surface of the respective ramp (Figs. 1 and 2, ¶42).
As to claim 16, Crandall discloses that the head part has an axis of rotation (A-A) capable of rotation of the surgical rotation tool (Fig. 3), and wherein operating the release member comprises sliding the release member along a direction substantially parallel to the axis of rotation of the head part (Figs. 1, 2, and 5, ¶39) capable of allowing the jaw members to return to the open position (Fig. 2, ¶42).
As to claim 17, Crandall discloses a surgical rotational tool driver (10, 202, Figs. 1-8, ¶22 discloses use of 10 to secure tool 12 (Fig. 3) to spindle 202 (Fig. 8)) comprising: a driveline (202) having a proximal end (left portion of 202 as shown in Fig. 8, Fig. 8) capable of connecting to a rotational power tool (due to structure shown in Fig. 8, Fig. 8, i.e. for rotation of 12 shown in Fig. 3) capable of applying torque through the driveline (due to structure shown in Fig. 8, Fig. 8, i.e. for rotation of 12 shown in Fig. 3) and a distal end (right portion of 202 as shown in Fig. 8, Fig. 8) opposite the proximal end (as defined, Fig. 8); and a head part (24, Figs. 1-5 and 7) coupled to the distal end of the driveline (via 114, ¶32), the head part capable of attaching to a surgical rotational tool (12, Fig. 3) and having an axis of rotation (A-A) capable of rotation of the surgical rotational tool (Fig. 3), the head part including: a first jaw member (left of each of: portion of 26 that of defines slot 28, 134, 142 as shown in Fig. 7, Fig. 7) and a second jaw member (right of each of: portion of 26 that of defines slot 28, 134, 142 as shown in Fig. 7, Fig. 7), wherein each jaw member is capable of moving between an open position (130, Fig. 2) capable of allowing attachment of the surgical rotational tool to the head part (Fig. 2, ¶s 42 and 44) and a closed position (132, Fig. 1) capable of retaining the attachment of the surgical rotation tool to the head part (Fig. 1, ¶s 41 and 42), and a locking mechanism (68, Figs. 1-6, ¶27) including: a first ramp (left of each of: 90, 72, surfaces of 98 and 62 as shown in Fig. 6, Fig. 6, ¶28) and a second ramp (right of each of: 90, 72, surfaces of 98 and 62 as shown in Fig. 6, Fig. 6, ¶28), wherein each of the ramps includes a retaining surface (72) capable of engaging a respective catch (142) of each jaw member capable of locking the jaw members in the closed position (Fig. 1), a release member (18) capable of slidingly moving along a direction substantially parallel to the axis of rotation of the head part (Figs. 1, 2, and 5, ¶39) capable of disengaging the catches of the jaw members from the retaining surfaces of the ramps of the release member (Fig. 2, ¶42).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMY R SIPP whose telephone number is (313)446-6553. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Thurs 6-4.
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 or telephone the Examiner.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Truong can be reached on (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 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.
/AMY R SIPP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775