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 § 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 1-20 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 "wherein the at least one surgical instrument is releasabley secured to the surgical retractor, the at least one surgical instrument is positioned adjacent at least a portion of the interior surface of the surgical retractor" in lines 11-12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Prior to this recitation, in line 8 of the claim, “at least one surgical instrument” is recited as a component of a functional limitation. Because the surgical retractor is never properly introduced, the positive recitation of the component later in the claim is not proper. In order to advance prosecution, the office will interpret the aforementioned recitation to read, “wherein the at least one surgical instrument is configured to be releasabley secured to the surgical retractor, and the at least one surgical instrument is configured to be positioned adjacent at least a portion of the interior surface of the surgical retractor”.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the elastically deformable plate" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The elastically deformable plate is introduced in claim 8, however claim 9 is dependent on claim 6. In order to advance prosecution, the office will interpret this claim to be dependent on claim 8.
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, 3-4, 6-8, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fleischer (US 20220409196 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Fleischer teaches a surgical instrument securement system (10) for use with a surgical retractor (14), comprising:
(a) a bracket (16) comprising first and second opposing bracket arms (42); and
(b) an instrument securement base (44) that is releasably engageable with one or both of the first and second opposing bracket arms (42), the instrument securement base (44) comprising an instrument retention seat (46), the instrument retention seat (46) configured to retain a portion of at least one surgical instrument (see Para. [0089]),
wherein, the bracket (16) and instrument securement base (44), when assembled, are configured to secure the at least one surgical instrument to a surgical retractor (note that 12, amongst other surgical instruments, may be attached thereto) that has an elongate body having a proximal end (near 32), a distal end (near 18, see Fig. 1), an interior surface (described in Para. [0089]), and an exterior surface (shown in Fig. 1), and a retractor axis (along the length of retractor 14) defined along the elongate body from the proximal to the distal end (see Fig. 1), and
wherein when the at least one surgical instrument is configured to be releasably secured to the surgical retractor (14), and the at least one surgical instrument (such as 12) is configured to be positioned adjacent at least a portion of the interior surface of the surgical retractor (see Para. [0089]).
Regarding claim 3, Fleischer teaches the surgical instrument securement system according to claim 1, wherein the surgical retractor (14) includes affixed clip extensions (12) for contacting and displacing soft tissue away from the surgical field (see Para. [0082]).
Regarding claim 4, Fleischer teaches the surgical instrument securement system according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the first and second opposing bracket arms (42) includes an emplacement (36) for retaining one or more nerve retractors (see Para. [0078]).
Regarding claim 6, Fleischer teaches the surgical instrument securement system according to claim 1, wherein the bracket (16) is configured to releasably attach to a handle (32) of the surgical retractor (14; note that the bracket indirectly attaches to handle 32 via the connection of both components to cannula retractor 14).
Regarding claim 7, Fleischer teaches the surgical instrument securement system according to claim 6, wherein the bracket comprises a central plate (38) positioned between the opposing bracket arms (42), the plate including on a back side a pair of opposing recesses for releasable receiving the handle of the surgical retractor (above and below upper plate 38).
Regarding claim 8, Fleischer teaches the surgical instrument securement system according to claim 6, wherein the bracket comprises an elastically deformable plate (38; note that the plate may be made of a radiolucent material, such as PEEK, which is elastically deformable, see Para. [0081]) having a front side and a back side (see labelled diagram of Fig. 5 below), and first and second rails (34, 36) extending from the back side of the elastically deformable plate (38), each of the first and second rails (34, 36) including at least one receptacle (above top plate 38), the first rail (34) including at least a first receptacle and the second rail (36) including at least a second receptacle (below top plate 38), the first receptacle on the first rail disposed facing the second receptacle on the second rail (see labelled diagram of Fig. 5 below), wherein the first and second receptacles are arranged to receive and secure the handle (32) of the surgical retractor (note that the receptacles indirectly attach to handle 32 via the connection of both components to cannula retractor 14).
PNG
media_image1.png
884
802
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19, Fleischer teaches a kit for securing a surgical instrument to surgical retractor (see Fig. 1), comprising:
(a) a surgical instrument securement system according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above);
(b) at least one nerve retractor (see Para. [0078]); and
(c) a cylindrical surgical retractor (14) comprising a handle (32).
Regarding claim 20, Fleischer teaches a method for accessing the surgical field in a patient, comprising:
(a) providing surgical instrument securement system according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above);
(b) affixing the surgical instrument securement system to a tubular surgical retractor in a surgical field to provide a surgical retractor assembly (see Claim 10);
(c) passing a selected surgical instrument into the tubular surgical retractor, and as determined by the surgeon, the maneuvering a distal end of the surgical instrument for into contact with tissue below/adjacent a distal end of the surgical retractor so as to initially displace soft tissue away from the distal end of the surgical retractor (see Claim 12);
(d) securing the instrument securement by engagement with the instrument retention seat of the instrument securement base (see Claims 15-16);
(e) locking the instrument to the instrument retention seat (see Claim 15);
(f) optionally, intermittently releasing the instrument from the instrument securement base (see Para. [0080]); and
(g) upon completion of the surgical procedure, removing the surgical retractor assembly (see Para. [0078]).
Claims 1, 2, 5, 10-11, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oberlander et al. (US 10390811 B2) (hereon referred to as Oberlander).
Regarding claim 1, Oberlander teaches a surgical instrument securement system (10) for use with a surgical retractor (12), comprising:
(a) a bracket (18) comprising first and second opposing bracket arms (68); and
(b) an instrument securement base (28) that is releasably engageable with one or both of the first and second opposing bracket arms (46), the instrument securement base (28) comprising an instrument retention seat (36), the instrument retention seat (36) configured to retain a portion of at least one surgical instrument (38),
wherein, the bracket (18) and instrument securement base (28), when assembled, are configured to secure the at least one surgical instrument (38) to a surgical retractor (12) that has an elongate body having a proximal end (16), a distal end (14), an interior surface (described in Col. 15, ll. 50-64), and an exterior surface (shown in Fig. 2), and a retractor axis (XV) defined along the elongate body from the proximal to the distal end (see Fig. 1), and
wherein when the at least one surgical instrument (38) is configured to be releasably secured to the surgical retractor (12), and the at least one surgical instrument (38) is configured to be positioned adjacent at least a portion of the interior surface of the surgical retractor (see Col. 8, ll. 27-41).
Regarding claim 2, Oberlander teaches the surgical instrument securement system according to claim 1, wherein the surgical retractor (12) is generally cylindrical in shape (see Col. 7, ll. 39-51).
Regarding claim 5, Oberlander teaches the surgical instrument securement system according to claim 1, wherein the bracket is integral with the surgical retractor (see Col. 18, ll. 64-67 and Col. 19, ll. 1-11).
Regarding claim 10, Oberlander teaches the surgical instrument securement system according to claim 1, wherein the instrument securement base (28) comprises a clamp comprising first and second compression wings (210, 208), each of the first and second opposing compression wings comprising a releasable lock (202), each of the first and second compression wings configured to receive and releasably compress (see Col. 18, ll. 52-63), respectively, the first and second opposing bracket arms (46), and the instrument retention seat (36).
Regarding claim 11, Oberlander teaches the surgical instrument securement system according to claim 10, wherein the releasable lock on each of the first and second compression wings of the clamp includes opposing and interfitting flange and tab extensions (note that the lock is configured by the tab projections formed by 210 and 208, which mates with the flange recess as shown in Fig. 22).
Regarding claim 16, Oberlander teaches the surgical instrument securement system according to claim 10, wherein the instrument retention seat (36) comprises a single recess (34) for receiving a portion of a surgical instrument (160).
Regarding claim 17, Oberlander teaches the surgical instrument securement system according to claim 10, wherein the instrument retention seat (36) comprises at least one recess (34) for receiving a generally cylindrical portion of a surgical instrument handle (160).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOLLY J LANE whose telephone number is (703)756-4702. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Eduardo Robert can be reached 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 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.
/H.J.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3773 /EDUARDO C ROBERT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3773
Prosecution Insights