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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (handle claims 102-112 and added claims 122-123) and reamer Species C (Figs. 12A-15) in the reply filed on March 17, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 122-123 are withdrawn as being directed towards the reamer assembly which is the combination and the subcombination was elected.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraphs [0079]-[0080] state “handle 352” in four instances, however it should be –handle 325—as it is originally presented and to stay consistent with the drawings.
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 122-123 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.
The claims are directed towards a handle. However, the body of the claim is directed towards a reamer assembly. The claim seems to be in reverse order which makes it deceptive and unclear on what it is actually trying to claim.
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.
Claim(s) 102-103, 105-107, 109, and 111-112 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Weekes (US 2016//0143649).
Claim 102, Weekes discloses a handle (Figs. 5-6; 38) for use with a reamer assembly (abstract), the handle comprising: a body (Fig. 6; where 38 generally points); a movable protrusion (tip of 70) movably coupled to the body and configured to be moved between an extended position in which the movable protrusion extends beyond the body and a retracted position (Figs. 5-8; paragraphs [0030]-[0035]); a lever (Fig. 6; 76) coupled to the movable protrusion and configured to move the movable protrusion between the extended position and the retracted portion (Figs. 5-8; paragraphs [0030]-[0035]); and a connection portion (Fig. 6, all the parts like 70 and the ring that connects the handle to the reamer) configured to interface with a reamer assembly (Figs. 5-8).
Claim 103, Weekes discloses the handle of claim 102, further comprising: a rod (Fig. 6; 70) located within a channel (68) of the body (Fig. 6), wherein the movable protrusion is secured to the rod (Fig. 6); and a biasing member (72) configured to bias the rod such that the movable protrusion is biased in the extended position (Figs. 5-8; paragraphs [0030]-[0035]).
Claim 105, Weekes discloses the handle of claim 103, wherein the biasing member is a spring (Fig. 6; 72; paragraph [0030]).
Claim 106, Weekes discloses the handle of claim 103, wherein the rod includes an aperture (Fig. 6; where 74 points) and the lever includes a lever aperture (where the pin enters the know 54), and further comprising: a pin (74) configured to couple the lever to the rod via the aperture and the lever aperture (Fig. 6; paragraph [0030]).
Claim 107, Weekes discloses the handle of claim 102, wherein the connection portion includes a protrusion (Fig. 5; 40), and wherein the movable protrusion and the protrusion are configured to seat in apertures (the gap that on the reamer that 40 fits on, furthermore, the reamer is not positively recited so it could be a different shaped reamer, for instance the reamer could have a cup like shape that allows 40 to slide in the cup and the cup can have a U shaped cutout for 54 etc. to fit in) of the reamer assembly to secure the handle to the reamer assembly (Fig. 6).
Claim 109, Weekes discloses the handle of claim 102, wherein the body includes a plurality of elongated apertures (apertures that 70 and 74 go through), and wherein the lever is coupled to the movable protrusion through one of the plurality of apertures (Fig. 6; 74).
Claim 111, Weekes discloses the handle of claim 102, wherein the connection portion is semicircular (Fig. 6; it’s a full circle which encompasses semicircular, furthermore, half of the portion 40 near the rod 70 can be considered the connection portion and the other half could be considered something else like a retaining portion).
Claim 112, Weekes discloses the handle of claim 102, wherein the connection portion includes an opening (Fig. 6; opening that 70 goes through), and wherein the movable protrusion is configured to extend through the opening (Fig. 6).
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.
Claim(s) 104 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weekes (US 2016/0143649), in view of Rosse (US 9078672).
Claim 104, Weekes discloses the handle of claim 103,
However, Weekes does not disclose the rod having a smaller diameter portion where the biasing member seats on.
Rosse teaches a rod member that includes an end portion (Fig. 11; 144) having a smaller diameter than an upper portion of the rod (144C), wherein the biasing member seats on the end portion (Fig. 11; col. 8, lines 22-41).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the rod of Weekes to include a smaller diameter portion that goes inside the biasing member, as taught by Rosse, since this is a well-known design for a spring biased rod member (Fig. 11; col. 8, lines 22-41) and applicant has not disclosed that such solve any stated problem or is anything more than one of numerous shapes or configurations a person ordinary skill in the art would find obvious.
Claim(s) 108 and 110 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weekes (US 2016/0143649).
Claim 108, Weekes the handle of claim 102.
However, Weekes does not disclose the lever being located on a flat surface.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the rounded shaft that the lever 76 is on to be hexagonal, square or just have flats on opposite sides, which would result in a limitation wherein the body includes a least one flat surface, and wherein the lever is located on one of the at least one flat surfaces, since applicant has not disclosed that such solve any stated problem or is anything more than one of numerous shapes or configurations a person ordinary skill in the art would find obvious for allowing a lever to slide on a shaft.
Claim 110, Weekes discloses the handle of claim 102.
However, it is not entirely clear if the body and connection portion are monolithically formed (Figs. 3 and 6; paragraph [0025]; look to be monolithic but doesn’t say that in the spec)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the body and the connection portion to be monolithically formed, since injection molding a single part is a well-known process in the art, furthermore, it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art.
Furthermore, it is noted that the device of Weekes appears to be substantially identical to the device claimed, although produce by a different process, therefore the burden is upon the applicant to come forward with evidence establishing an unobvious difference between the two.
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 Zade Coley whose telephone number is (571)270-1931. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (9-5) PT.
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.
/Zade Coley/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Prosecution Insights