Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/035,760

CORRECTION DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 23, 2025
Priority
Mar 12, 2024 — CN 202410282056.4
Examiner
MERENE, JAN CHRISTOP L
Art Unit
3773
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Gaoxi Li
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 9m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allowance Rate
643 granted / 944 resolved
-1.9% vs TC avg
Strong +49% interview lift
Without
With
+48.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
987
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
79.7%
+39.7% vs TC avg
§102
13.8%
-26.2% vs TC avg
§112
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 944 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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: “control assembly” and “mounting assembly” in claim 1, “resetting member” in claim 4, “limiting structure” in claim 8. 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. 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. Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Colloca US 2007/0150004. Regarding Claim 1, Colloca discloses a correction device (Figs 7-11) for correcting a first rib (paragraph 3 capable of correcting a first rib through “electromechanical adjusting instruments that have a waveform tuned to the nature of the body to allow more bone movement and broader neural receptor stimulation with less force”), comprising: a housing assembly provided with a receiving cavity (see Fig below), the receiving cavity having a clearance hole (see Fig below); an electromagnet comprising a coil (#180) and an armature (#182, see Fig below), the coil having a clearance channel, and the armature passing through the clearance channel (see Fig below) and being movable in an axial direction of the coil (paragraph 38); a correction assembly disposed on the housing assembly and movable along the axial direction of the coil (see Fig below, paragraph 34, 38), an end of the correction assembly being connected to the armature (see Fig below), and a further end of the correction assembly passing through the clearance hole (see Fig below); a control assembly (#330) disposed on the housing assembly (Fig 5, 7), the control assembly being electrically connected to the coil to control the coil to be energized or de-energized (paragraph 54); and a mounting assembly disposed on the housing assembly (see Fig below), the mounting assembly being configured to mount the correction device to a support (see Fig below, it can be plugged into a support, examiner notes that the support is not positively recited and not claiming how it mounts to the support), wherein the armature is configured to, upon the coil being energized, push the further end of the correction assembly to move in a direction extending out of the housing assembly (paragraph 34, 38, 42, 54). PNG media_image1.png 769 1048 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 2, Colloca discloses the correction assembly comprises a correction member (#130) and a first piston (#170, Fig 9), the first piston being connected to an end of the armature (Fig 9), the correction member passing through the clearance hole (Fig 7), and the first piston, upon the coil being energized, being able to push the correction member to extend out of the housing assembly (Fig 9, paragraph 38, moves with the armature #182). PNG media_image2.png 393 631 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 3, Colloca disclose the correction assembly further comprises a second piston (see fig in claim 2), an end of the second piston being connected to the correction member (Fig 9), and the first piston is configured in such a way that, upon the coil being energized, an end of the first piston (end facing the second piston, Fig 8, 12-13) away from the armature abuts against an end (end facing the first piston, Fig 8, 12-13) of the second piston away from the correction member (as seen in configuration going from Fig 12 to Fig 13 and back, paragraph 42, the pistons are abutting each other, it is noted that the plain meaning of abut can also include “lie adjacent” and “be next to”, see, https://www.thefreedictionary.com/abut ). Regarding Claim 4, Colloca disclose wherein the correction assembly further comprises a resetting member (#160), the resetting member being disposed between the first piston and the second piston (Fig 9, 11), and the resetting member being configured to reset the first piston (paragraph 39). Regarding Claim 5, Colloca disclose the correction assembly further comprises an elastic member (#145), the elastic member being configured to move the second piston (#131) in the direction extending out of the housing assembly (Fig 11, paragraph 34, as seen in Fig 12-13 where the spring is compressed and then released and helps to move the second piston in the direction extending out of the housing). Regarding Claim 6, Colloca disclose a guide structure (#151) is provided between the first piston and the second piston (Fig 9, 11). Regarding Claim 6, Colloca disclose the guide structure comprises a guide shaft (#151) provided in the second piston (Fig 9) and a guide hole provided in the first piston (as seen in Fig 9 where the guide shaft #151 extends out from a guide hole of the first piston #170), the guide shaft passing through the guide hole and being connectable to a side wall of the guide hole (see Fig below). PNG media_image3.png 280 632 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 8, Colloca disclose a limiting structure (see limiting projection and limiting recess below) is provided between the second piston and the housing assembly (see Fig below), and the limiting structure is configured to limit a movement stroke of the second piston (paragraph 35). PNG media_image4.png 761 841 media_image4.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 9, Colloca disclose the limiting structure comprises a limiting recess provided in a side wall of the receiving cavity (see Fig below) and a limiting projection provided on the second piston (see Fig below), the limiting projection being accommodated in the limiting recess and being able to abut against a side wall of the limiting recess (see Fig below, paragraph 35). 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colloca US 2007/0150004 in view of Zhu CN 215900312 (reference is made to the English Translation attached herein). Regarding Claim 1, Colloca discloses a correction device (Figs 7-11) for correcting a first rib (paragraph 3 capable of correcting a first rib through “electromechanical adjusting instruments that have a waveform tuned to the nature of the body to allow more bone movement and broader neural receptor stimulation with less force”), comprising: a housing assembly provided with a receiving cavity (see Fig below), the receiving cavity having a clearance hole (see Fig below); an electromagnet comprising a coil (#180) and an armature (#182, see Fig below), the coil having a clearance channel, and the armature passing through the clearance channel (see Fig below) and being movable in an axial direction of the coil (paragraph 38); a correction assembly disposed on the housing assembly and movable along the axial direction of the coil (see Fig below, paragraph 34, 38), an end of the correction assembly being connected to the armature (see Fig below), and a further end of the correction assembly passing through the clearance hole (see Fig below); a control assembly (#330) disposed on the housing assembly (Fig 5, 7), the control assembly being electrically connected to the coil to control the coil to be energized or de-energized (paragraph 54); and wherein the armature is configured to, upon the coil being energized, push the further end of the correction assembly to move in a direction extending out of the housing assembly (paragraph 34, 38, 42, 54). PNG media_image5.png 766 1016 media_image5.png Greyscale Colloca discloses that the housing assembly has first and second lateral sides (see Fig below) but does not disclose a mounting assembly disposed on the housing assembly, the mounting assembly being configured to mount the correction device to a support, wherein the mounting assembly comprises a first clamping member and a second clamping member arranged opposite each other, the housing assembly is provided with a first connecting portion and a second connecting portion arranged opposite each other, the first clamping member is disposed on the first connecting portion, the second clamping member is disposed on the second connecting portion, the first clamping member is configured to abut against a side of the support, and the second clamping member is configured to abut against a further opposite side of the support. PNG media_image6.png 524 979 media_image6.png Greyscale Zhu discloses a correction device (Fig 1) having a housing assembly (see Fig below), a mounting assembly disposed on the housing assembly (see Fig below), the mounting assembly being configured to mount the correction device to a support (Fig 3, see Fig below), wherein the mounting assembly comprises a first clamping member and a second clamping member arranged opposite each other (see Fig below, the clamping members in the form of screws #16 with a knob #4), the housing assembly is provided with a first connecting portion and a second connecting portion arranged opposite each other (Fig below, the first and second connection portions in the form of respective openings on opposites of the housing assembly that receive the first and second clamping members), the first clamping member is disposed on the first connecting portion (see Fig below), the second clamping member is disposed on the second connecting portion (see Fig below), the first clamping member is configured to abut against a side of the support (see Fig below), and the second clamping member is configured to abut against a further opposite side of the support (see Fig below), where the mounting assembly allows one to secure the correction device to a support, which can then be mounted to a table or the ground to liberate the hand of the user so that the user is more comfortable to use the device (page 3 lines 5-10). It would have been obvious one having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the correction device of Colloca to include the mounting assembly in view of Zhu (where the first and second lateral sides would include first and second connecting portions that receive the first and second clamping members) because this allows one to secure the correction device to a support, which can then be mounted to a table or the ground to liberate the hand of the user so that the user is more comfortable to use the device. Examiner notes that since the clamping members are threaded, they can also be removed such that the correction device can be used with out the support attached to the correction device. Conclusion See PTO-892 for art of cited interest, in particular other correction devices. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAN CHRISTOPHER L MERENE whose telephone number is (571)270-5032. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30 am - 6pm 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, 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. /JAN CHRISTOPHER L MERENE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3773
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 23, 2025
Application Filed
Jun 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12661153
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PEDICLE SCREW STABILIZATION OF SPINAL VERTEBRAE
4y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12661234
PIEZOELECTRIC SPINAL IMPLANT AND METHODS OF MAKING AND USING SAME
3y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12661160
ROD REDUCER RATCHET LOCK-OUT MECHANISM
2y 11m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12636160
ORTHOPEDIC IMPLANTS, INSTRUMENT SYSTEMS AND METHODS OF USE
1y 7m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12616582
Expandable Interbody Spacer for Spinal Fusion
3y 5m to grant Granted May 05, 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
68%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+48.7%)
3y 2m (~1y 9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 944 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