DETAILED ACTION
Note: 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 responsive to the Request for Continued Examination (RCE) received on 06 November 2025. Claims 1-12 and 14-34 are currently pending.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06 November 2025 has been entered.
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 1-3, 7-10, 12, 14 and 17-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Campbell et al. (U.S. Patent 10,231,767).
Regarding claims 1-3 and 7, Campbell et al. disclose (as to claim 1) a fracture plating system (1) capable of stabilizing a first fracture (e.g. fracture similar to 10 between 102 and 104) of a bone (i.e. rib) of a patient, the bone comprising an interior surface (i.e. surface facing 4 as best seen in Figure 50a) facing toward an interior body cavity (i.e. cavity as best seen in Figure 48) of the patient, and an exterior surface (i.e. surface facing 30 as best seen in Figure 50a) facing away from the interior body cavity, the fracture plating system comprising a plate (4) comprising one or more slots (11 and 12) and capable of spanning the first fracture; a first fastener (8 or 20) capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate (see Figures 4 and 5) to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 50c); a second fastener (8 or 20) capable of being received in one of the one or more slots (see Figures 4 and 5) and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 50c); and one or more tethers (i.e. two instances of 130) each comprising a flexible material (see Figure 40, and column 12, lines 49-54) and capable of guiding the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener through the interior body cavity to the interior surface of the bone (i.e. together, both instances of 130 are capable of guiding the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener, see Figures 44-45, column 12, lines 55-56 and see Note below regarding functional language); wherein with at least one of the one or more tethers received in the first fastener and the second fastener (i.e. in this case, with one tether received in the first fastener and one slot and another tether received in the second fastener and another slot), a tension (i.e. a tension placed upon each instance of 130 by a surgeon while each instance of 132 is in contact with each instance of 20) on the one of the one or more tethers is capable of being uniform along its length during guidance of the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener to the interior surface (i.e. as each instance of 130 is being pulled, tension is uniform along its length between the point of contact by a surgeon/tool and 132, see Note below regarding functional language), wherein (as to claim 2) the one or more tethers are further capable of facilitating reduction of the first fracture by, with the first fastener and the second fastener secured to the interior surface on opposite sides of the first fracture, urging the first fastener and the second fastener towards each other (i.e. with each instance of 130/132 in place and 20 locked relative to 4, a surgeon is fully capable of pulling each instance of 130 toward each other to urge each instance of 20 toward the other, see Note below regarding functional language), wherein (as to claim 3) the one or more tethers are further capable of guiding the first fastener through a first hole (e.g. one hole receiving an instance of 8 and 9 as best seen in Figure 1) in the bone and to guide the second fastener through a second hole (e.g. the other hole receiving an instance of 8 and 9 as best seen in Figure 1) in the bone, wherein the first hole and the second hole are on opposite sides of the first fracture (see Note below regarding functional language), and wherein (as to claim 7) the bone comprises a rib (e.g. R1, R2 or R3); and the one or more tethers are further capable of drawing the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener through the interior body cavity to an interior surface (i.e. surface facing 4 as best seen in Figure 50a) of the rib (i.e. together, both instances of 130 are capable of drawing the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener, see Figures 44-45 and column 12, lines 55-56, see Note below regarding functional language) (see Figures 1-53, and column 9, line 13 – column 13, line 34).
Regarding claims 8-10, 12 and 25, Campbell et al. disclose (as to claim 8) a fracture plating system (1) capable of stabilizing a first fracture (e.g. fracture similar to 10 between 102 and 104) of a bone (i.e. rib) of a patient, the bone comprising an interior surface (i.e. surface facing 4 as best seen in Figure 50a) facing toward an interior body cavity (i.e. cavity as best seen in Figure 48) of the patient, and an exterior surface (i.e. surface facing 30 as best seen in Figure 50a) facing away from the interior body cavity, the fracture plating system comprising a plate (4) comprising one or more slots (11 and 12) and capable of spanning the first fracture; a first fastener (8 or 20) capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate (see Figures 4 and 5) to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 50c); a first nut (e.g. one instance of 30) comprising a first body length (i.e. length as best seen in Figure 50a) and capable of engaging (i.e. via a threaded connection) the first fastener; a second fastener (8 or 20) capable of being received in one of the one or more slots (see Figures 4 and 5) and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 50c); a second nut (e.g. a second instance of 30) comprising a second body length (i.e. length as best seen in Figure 50a) and capable of engaging (i.e. via a threaded connection) the second fastener; and one or more tethers (i.e. two instances of 130) capable of applying a force (i.e. via pulling) to the first fastener and the second fastener to guide the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener through the interior body cavity to the interior surface of the bone (i.e. together, both instances of 130 are capable of guiding the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener, see Figures 44-45 and column 12, lines 55-56, see Note below regarding functional language); wherein the first nut and the second nut are capable of being selected from a set of nuts, each having a different body length to accommodate a different thickness of the bones; the first body length is capable of extending into the bone a first depth; and the second body length is capable of extending into the bone a second depth different from the first depth (see column 12, lines 15-18 referring to the use of various nut sizes depending upon the depth of a hole in the bone), wherein (as to claim 9) the one or more tethers are further capable of facilitating reduction of the first fracture by, with the first fastener and the second fastener secured to the interior surface on opposite sides of the first fracture, urging the first fastener and the second fastener towards each other (i.e. with each instance of 130/132 in place and 20 locked relative to 4, a surgeon is fully capable of pulling each instance of 130 toward each other to urge each instance of 20 toward the other, see Note below regarding functional language), wherein (as to claim 10) the bone comprises a rib (e.g. R1, R2 or R3); and the one or more tethers are further capable of drawing the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener through the interior body cavity to an interior surface (i.e. surface facing 4 as best seen in Figure 50a) of the rib (i.e. together, both instances of 130 are capable of drawing the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener, see Figures 44-45 and column 12, lines 55-56, see Note below regarding functional language), wherein (as to claim 12) the first fastener comprises a first cannulation (28) capable of receiving a first end of one of the one or more tethers (see Note below regarding functional language), and the second fastener comprises a second cannulation (28) capable of receiving a second end of the one of the one or more tethers (see Note below regarding functional language), and wherein (as to claim 25) the fracture plating system further comprises a solid bead (132) secured to one of the one or more tethers and capable of conveying the force to one of the first fastener and the second fastener (see Figures 44-45, column 12, lines 55-64 and see Note below regarding functional language) (see Figures 1-53, and column 9, line 13 – column 13, line 34).
Regarding claims 14 and 17-20, Campbell et al. disclose (as to claim 14) a fracture plating system (1) capable of stabilizing a first fracture (e.g. fracture similar to 10 between 102 and 104) of a bone (i.e. rib) of a patient, the bone comprising an interior surface (i.e. surface facing 4 as best seen in Figure 50a) facing toward an interior body cavity (i.e. cavity as best seen in Figure 48) of the patient, and an exterior surface (i.e. surface facing 30 as best seen in Figure 50a) facing away from the interior body cavity, the fracture plating system comprising a plate assembly (1) comprising a plate (4) comprising one or more slots (11 and 12) and capable of spanning the first fracture; a first fastener (8 or 20) capable of being coupled to (i.e. via the interaction between 14 and 22) one of the one or more slots and securing the plate (see Figures 4 and 5) to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 50c); a second fastener (8 or 20) capable of being coupled to (i.e. via the interaction between 14 and 22) one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 50c); and one or more tethers (i.e. two instances of 130) capable of applying a force (i.e. via pulling) directly to the first fastener and the second fastener to guide the plate (i.e. pulling on each instance of 130 results in the force being applied directly, with the assistance of each instance of 132, each fastener), the first fastener, and the second fastener through the interior body cavity to the interior surface of the bone (i.e. together, both instances of 130 are capable of guiding the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener, see Figures 44-45, column 12, lines 55-56 and see Note below regarding functional language); wherein the first fastener and one of the one or more slots are further configured so that the first fastener is captive within one of the one or more slots through direct contact between the first fastener and the plate (i.e. via the interaction between 14 and 22); and the second fastener and one of the one or more slots are further configured so that the second fastener is captive within one of the one or more slots through direct contact between the second fastener and the plate (i.e. via the interaction between 14 and 22), wherein (as to claim 17) the one or more tethers are further capable of facilitating reduction of the first fracture by, with the first fastener and the second fastener secured to the interior surface on opposite sides of the first fracture, urging the first fastener and the second fastener towards each other (i.e. with each instance of 130/132 in place and 20 locked relative to 4, a surgeon is fully capable of pulling each instance of 130 toward each other to urge each instance of 20 toward the other, see Note below regarding functional language), wherein (as to claim 18) the bone comprises a rib (e.g. R1, R2 or R3); and the one or more tethers are further capable of drawing the plate assembly through the interior body cavity to an interior surface (i.e. surface facing 4 as best seen in Figure 50a) of the rib (i.e. together, both instances of 130 are capable of drawing the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener, see Figures 44-45 and column 12, lines 55-56, see Note below regarding functional language), wherein (as to claim 19) the first fastener comprises a first cannulation (28) capable of receiving a first end of one of the one or more tethers (see Note below regarding functional language), and the second fastener comprises a second cannulation (28) capable of receiving a second end of the one of the one or more tethers (see Note below regarding functional language), wherein (as to claim 20) the fracture plating system further comprises a first nut (e.g. one instance of 30) capable of receiving (i.e. via a threaded connection) the first fastener and cooperating with the first fastener to secure the plate to the interior surface of the bone, and a second nut (e.g. a second instance of 30) capable of receiving (i.e. via a threaded connection) the second fastener and cooperating with the second fastener to secure the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figures 1-53, and column 9, line 13 – column 13, line 34).
Regarding claims 21-24, Campbell et al. disclose (as to claim 21) a fracture plating system (1) capable of stabilizing a first fracture (e.g. fracture similar to 10 between 102 and 104) of a bone (i.e. rib) of a patient, the bone comprising an interior surface (i.e. surface facing 4 as best seen in Figure 50a) facing toward an interior body cavity (i.e. cavity as best seen in Figure 48) of the patient, and an exterior surface (i.e. surface facing 30 as best seen in Figure 50a) facing away from the interior body cavity, the fracture plating system comprising a plate (4) comprising one or more slots (11 and 12) and capable of spanning the first fracture; a first fastener (8 or 20) comprising a first threaded portion (24) and capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate (see Figures 4 and 5) to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 50c); a first nut (e.g. one instance of 30) capable of engaging (i.e. via a threaded connection) the first fastener; a second fastener (8 or 20) comprising a second threaded portion (24) and capable of being received in one of the one or more slots (see Figures 4 and 5) and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 50c); a second nut (e.g. a second instance of 30) capable of engaging (i.e. via a threaded connection) the second fastener; and one or more tethers (i.e. two instances of 130) capable of applying a force (i.e. via pulling) to the first fastener and the second fastener to guide the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener through the interior body cavity to the interior surface of the bone (i.e. together, both instances of 130 are capable of guiding the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener, see Figures 44-45 and column 12, lines 55-56, see Note below regarding functional language); wherein with the first nut engaged with the first fastener, the first threaded portion does not extend beyond the first nut (see Figure 50C); and with the second nut engaged with the second fastener, the second threaded portion does not extend beyond the second nut (see Figure 50C), wherein (as to claim 22) the first fastener comprises a first cannulation (28) capable of receiving a first end of one of the one or more tethers (see Note below regarding functional language), and the second fastener comprises a second cannulation (28) capable of receiving a second end of the one of the one or more tethers (see Note below regarding functional language), wherein (as to claim 23) the one or more tethers are further capable of facilitating reduction of the first fracture by, with the first fastener and the second fastener secured to the interior surface on opposite sides of the first fracture, urging the first fastener and the second fastener towards each other (i.e. with each instance of 130/132 in place and 20 locked relative to 4, a surgeon is fully capable of pulling each instance of 130 toward each other to urge each instance of 20 toward the other, see Note below regarding functional language), and wherein (as to claim 24) the fracture plating system further comprises a solid bead (132) secured to one of the one or more tethers and capable of conveying the force to one of the first fastener and the second fastener (see Figures 44-45, column 12, lines 55-64 and see Note below regarding functional language) (see Figures 1-53, and column 9, line 13 – column 13, line 34).
Regarding claims 26-29, Campbell et al. disclose (as to claim 26) a fracture plating system (1) capable of stabilizing a first fracture (e.g. fracture similar to 10 between 102 and 104) of a bone (i.e. rib) of a patient, the bone comprising an interior surface (i.e. surface facing 4 as best seen in Figure 50a) facing toward an interior body cavity (i.e. cavity as best seen in Figure 48) of the patient, and an exterior surface (i.e. surface facing 30 as best seen in Figure 50a) facing away from the interior body cavity, the fracture plating system comprising a plate (4) comprising one or more slots (11 and 12) and capable of spanning the first fracture; a first fastener (8 or 20) capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate (see Figures 4 and 5) to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 50c); a second fastener (8 or 20) capable of being received in one of the one or more slots (see Figures 4 and 5) and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 50c); and one or more tethers (i.e. two instances of 130) each comprising a flexible material (see Figure 40, and column 12, lines 49-54) and capable of guiding the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener through the interior body cavity to the interior surface of the bone (i.e. together, both instances of 130 are capable of guiding the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener, see Figures 44-45, column 12, lines 55-56 and see Note below regarding functional language); wherein at least one of the one or more tethers comprises a solid bead (132), the solid bead capable of engaging at least one of the first fastener and the second fastener (see Figures 44-45, column 12, lines 55-64 and see Note below regarding functional language), wherein (as to claim 27) the solid bead is spherical (see Figures 44-45 and column 12, lines 55-64), wherein (as to claim 28) the one or more tethers are further capable of guiding the first fastener through a first hole (e.g. one hole receiving an instance of 8 and 9 as best seen in Figure 1) in the bone and to guide the second fastener through a second hole (e.g. the other hole receiving an instance of 8 and 9 as best seen in Figure 1) in the bone, wherein the first hole and the second hole are on opposite sides of the first fracture (see Note below regarding functional language), and wherein (as to claim 29) the one or more tethers are further capable of facilitating reduction of the first fracture by, with the first fastener and the second fastener secured to the interior surface on opposite sides of the first fracture, urging the first fastener and the second fastener towards each other (i.e. with each instance of 130/132 in place and 20 locked relative to 4, a surgeon is fully capable of pulling each instance of 130 toward each other to urge each instance of 20 toward the other, see Note below regarding functional language) (see Figures 1-53, and column 9, line 13 – column 13, line 34).
Note: Regarding functional language, "[a]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987) (see MPEP 2114(II)).
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.
Claims 4-6, 11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell et al. (U.S. Patent 10,231,767), as applied to claims 1, 8 and 14 above respectively, in view of Bernstein et al. (U.S. Patent 9,808,297).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Campbell et al. disclose the claimed invention except for wherein (as to claim 4) the bone further comprises a second fracture; and the plate is further capable of stabilizing the second fracture via attachment of the plate to the bone such that the plate spans the first fracture and the second fracture; and the fracture plating system further comprises a third fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone; and a fourth fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone, and wherein (as to claim 5) the one or more tethers are further capable of guiding the third fastener to a first slot of the one or more slots and guiding the fourth fastener to a second slot of the one or more slots.
Bernstein et al. teach the use of a fracture plating system (50) capable of stabilizing one or more fractures (58) of a rib bone (54) of a patient, the fracture plating system comprising a plate (52) comprising one or more apertures (70) and capable of spanning the one or more fractures (spanning as best seen Figure 1); a first fastener (e.g. third-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone; a second fastener (e.g. fourth-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone; a third fastener (e.g. fifth-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone; and a fourth fastener (e.g. sixth-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone (see Figures 1-24, and column 6, line 52 – column 19, line 34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Campbell et al. with wherein the bone further comprises a second fracture; and the plate is further capable of stabilizing the second fracture via attachment of the plate to the bone such that the plate spans the first fracture and the second fracture; and the fracture plating system further comprises a third fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone; and a fourth fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone in view of Bernstein et al. in order to provide a well-known, obvious system for spanning more than one fractures to yield predictable results.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Campbell et al. with an additional tether capable of guiding the third fastener and the fourth fastener to the interior surface of the bone, wherein the additional tether is further capable of guiding the third fastener to a first slot of the one or more slots and guiding the fourth fastener to a second slot of the one or more slots in view of the teachings of Bernstein et al. in order to provide an additional tether for stabilizing an additional fracture, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts (i.e. duplicating or providing a second tether) of a device involves only routine skill in the art (St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8).
Regarding claim 6, Campbell et al. in view of Bernstein et al. disclose the system being further capable of stabilizing one or more fractures, wherein the plate is further capable of spanning the one or more fractures (see rejections of claims 4 and 5 above); however, fail to explicitly disclose wherein the system is further capable of stabilizing three or more fractures of the bone, wherein the plate is further capable of spanning the three or more fractures and the each of the one or more tethers is capable of guiding two fasteners to the interior surface of the bone and to one of the one or more slots.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Campbell et al. with wherein the system is further capable of stabilizing three or more fractures of the bone, wherein the plate is further capable of spanning the three or more fractures and each of the one or more tethers is capable of guiding two fasteners to the interior surface of the bone and to one of the one or more slots in view of the teachings of Bernstein et al. in order to provide a plate capable of spanning three or more fractures and additional tethers for stabilizing the three or more fractures, since 1.) such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component (i.e. a change in plate length), and a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955)), and 2.) it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts (i.e. duplicating or providing a second tether and additional plate slots/fasteners) of a device involves only routine skill in the art (St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8).
Regarding claim 11, Campbell et al. disclose the claimed invention except for wherein the bone further comprises a second fracture; and the plate is further capable of stabilizing the second fracture via attachment of the plate to the bone such that the plate spans the first fracture and the second fracture; and the fracture plating system further comprises a third fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone; and a fourth fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone.
Bernstein et al. teach the use of a fracture plating system (50) capable of stabilizing one or more fractures (58) of a rib bone (54) of a patient, the fracture plating system comprising a plate (52) comprising one or more apertures (70) and capable of spanning the one or more fractures (spanning as best seen Figure 1); a first fastener (e.g. third-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone; a second fastener (e.g. fourth-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone; a third fastener (e.g. fifth-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone; and a fourth fastener (e.g. sixth-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone (see Figures 1-24, and column 6, line 52 – column 19, line 34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Campbell et al. with wherein the bone further comprises a second fracture; and the plate is further capable of stabilizing the second fracture via attachment of the plate to the bone such that the plate spans the first fracture and the second fracture; and the fracture plating system further comprises a third fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone; and a fourth fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone in view of Bernstein et al. in order to provide a well-known, obvious system for spanning more than one fractures to yield predictable results.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Campbell et al. with an additional tether capable of guiding the third fastener and the fourth fastener to the interior surface of the bone, wherein the additional tether is further capable of guiding the third fastener to a first slot of the one or more slots and guiding the fourth fastener to a second slot of the one or more slots in view of the teachings of Bernstein et al. in order to provide an additional tether for stabilizing an additional fracture, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts (i.e. duplicating or providing a second tether) of a device involves only routine skill in the art (St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8).
Regarding claim 16, Campbell et al. disclose the claimed invention except for wherein the bone further comprises a second fracture; and the plate is further capable of stabilizing the second fracture via attachment of the plate to the bone such that the plate spans the first fracture and the second fracture; and the fracture plating system further comprises a third fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone; and a fourth fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone.
Bernstein et al. teach the use of a fracture plating system (50) capable of stabilizing one or more fractures (58) of a rib bone (54) of a patient, the fracture plating system comprising a plate (52) comprising one or more apertures (70) and capable of spanning the one or more fractures (spanning as best seen Figure 1); a first fastener (e.g. third-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone; a second fastener (e.g. fourth-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone; a third fastener (e.g. fifth-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone; and a fourth fastener (e.g. sixth-from-left most instance of 64 as best seen in Figure 1) capable of being received in one of the one or more apertures and securing the plate to the bone (see Figures 1-24, and column 6, line 52 – column 19, line 34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Campbell et al. with wherein the bone further comprises a second fracture; and the plate is further capable of stabilizing the second fracture via attachment of the plate to the bone such that the plate spans the first fracture and the second fracture; and the fracture plating system further comprises a third fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone; and a fourth fastener capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone in view of Bernstein et al. in order to provide a well-known, obvious system for spanning more than one fractures to yield predictable results.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Campbell et al. with an additional tether capable of guiding the third fastener and the fourth fastener to the interior surface of the bone, wherein the additional tether is further capable of guiding the third fastener to a first slot of the one or more slots and guiding the fourth fastener to a second slot of the one or more slots in view of the teachings of Bernstein et al. in order to provide an additional tether for stabilizing an additional fracture, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts (i.e. duplicating or providing a second tether) of a device involves only routine skill in the art (St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8).
Claims 15, 30 and 32-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell et al. (U.S. Patent 10,231,767), as applied to claims 1, 8 and 14 above respectively, in view of Davison et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0188001).
Regarding claims 15 and 33, Campbell et al. disclose the claimed invention except for wherein (as to claim 15) one of the one or more tethers are further capable of drawing the first fastener through a first hole in a first portion of the bone proximate a first side of the first fracture; and drawing the second fastener through a second hole in a second portion of the bone proximate a second side of the first fracture, and wherein (as to claim 33) the one or more tethers comprises a single tether.
Davison et al. teach the use of a fracture plating system (1210) capable of stabilizing a first fracture of a bone (i.e. rib) of a patient (see paragraph 0112, and Note above regarding functional language), the bone comprising an interior surface (e.g. surface adjacent 20 as best illustrated in Figure 1) facing toward an interior body cavity of the patient, and an exterior surface (e.g. surface opposite that adjacent 20 as best illustrated in Figure 1) facing away from the interior body cavity, the fracture plating system comprising a plate assembly (i.e. assembly defined by 1220, 1320a, 1320b and 1350) comprising a plate (1220) comprising one or more slots (i.e. disclosed as openings in paragraph 0110; however, disclosed as being capable of being slots in paragraphs 0135/0139 and claims 10/14) and capable of spanning the first fracture; a first fastener (1320a) capable of being coupled to (i.e. via 1360a) one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 27, and paragraph 0110); a second fastener (1320b) capable of being coupled to (i.e. via 1360b) one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 27, and paragraph 0110); and a single tether (1350) capable of applying a force directly to the first fastener and the second fastener to guide the plate assembly through the interior body cavity to the interior surface of the bone (see paragraph 0110), wherein the tether is further capable of drawing the first fastener through a first hole in a first portion (1) of the bone proximate a first side of the first fracture; and drawing the second fastener through a second hole in a second portion (2) of the bone proximate a second side of the first fracture (see paragraph 0110, and Note above regarding functional language) (see Figure 27, paragraphs 0110-0112, 0135 and 0139, and claims 10 and 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Campbell et al. with wherein one of the one or more tethers are further capable of drawing the first fastener through a first hole in a first portion of the bone proximate a first side of the first fracture; and drawing the second fastener through a second hole in a second portion of the bone proximate a second side of the first fracture, and wherein the one or more tethers comprises a single tether in view of Davison et al. in order to provide an alternative, well-known, obvious means for guiding the plate assembly to the interior surface of the bone for repair thereof to yield predictable results.
Note: Campbell et al. disclose wherein the plate assembly is capable of being provided in a pre-assembled state (see column 7, lines 58-67). Therefore, it is the examiner’s position that replacing the two tethers as disclosed by Campbell et al. with a single tether as taught by Davison et al. would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, and would remain commensurate in scope with and not teach away from the disclosed invention.
Regarding claim 30, Campbell et al. disclose the claimed invention except for wherein the one or more tethers comprises a single tether.
Davison et al. teach the use of a fracture plating system (1210) capable of stabilizing a first fracture of a bone (i.e. rib) of a patient (see paragraph 0112, and Note above regarding functional language), the bone comprising an interior surface (e.g. surface adjacent 20 as best illustrated in Figure 1) facing toward an interior body cavity of the patient, and an exterior surface (e.g. surface opposite that adjacent 20 as best illustrated in Figure 1) facing away from the interior body cavity, the fracture plating system comprising a plate (1220) comprising one or more slots (i.e. disclosed as openings in paragraph 0110; however, disclosed as being capable of being slots in paragraphs 0135/0139 and claims 10/14) and capable of spanning the first fracture; a first fastener (1320a) capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 27, and paragraph 0110); a second fastener (1320b) capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 27, and paragraph 0110); and a single tether (1350) capable of guiding the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener through the interior body cavity to the interior surface of the bone (see paragraph 0110) (see Figure 27, paragraphs 0110-0112, 0135 and 0139, and claims 10 and 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Campbell et al. with wherein the one or more tethers comprises a single tether in view of Davison et al. in order to provide an alternative, well-known, obvious means for guiding the plate assembly to the interior surface of the bone for repair thereof to yield predictable results.
Note: Campbell et al. disclose wherein the plate assembly is capable of being provided in a pre-assembled state (see column 7, lines 58-67). Therefore, it is the examiner’s position that replacing the two tethers as disclosed by Campbell et al. with a single tether as taught by Davison et al. would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, and would remain commensurate in scope with and not teach away from the disclosed invention.
Regarding claim 32, Campbell et al. teach the claimed invention except for wherein the one or more tethers comprises a single tether.
Davison et al. teach the use of a fracture plating system (1210) capable of stabilizing a first fracture of a bone (i.e. rib) of a patient (see paragraph 0112, and Note above regarding functional language), the bone comprising an interior surface (e.g. surface adjacent 20 as best illustrated in Figure 1) facing toward an interior body cavity of the patient, and an exterior surface (e.g. surface opposite that adjacent 20 as best illustrated in Figure 1) facing away from the interior body cavity, the fracture plating system comprising a plate (1220) comprising one or more slots (i.e. disclosed as openings in paragraph 0110; however, disclosed as being capable of being slots in paragraphs 0135/0139 and claims 10/14) and capable of spanning the first fracture; a first fastener (1320a) capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and secure the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 27, and paragraph 0110); a first nut (1360a) comprising a first body length (i.e. not shown; however, the nut inherently includes a length) capable of engaging the first fastener (see paragraph 0110); a second fastener (1320b) capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and secure the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 27, and paragraph 0110); a second nut (1360b) comprising a second body length (i.e. not shown; however, the nut inherently includes a length) capable of engaging the second fastener (see paragraph 0110); and a single tether (1350) capable of applying a force to the first fastener and the second fastener to guide the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener through the interior body cavity to the interior surface of the bone (see paragraph 0110) (see Figure 27, paragraphs 0110-0112, 0135 and 0139, and claims 10 and 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Campbell et al. with wherein the one or more tethers comprises a single tether in view of Davison et al. in order to provide an alternative, well-known, obvious means for guiding the plate assembly to the interior surface of the bone for repair thereof to yield predictable results.
Note: Campbell et al. disclose wherein the plate assembly is capable of being provided in a pre-assembled state (see column 7, lines 58-67). Therefore, it is the examiner’s position that replacing the two tethers as disclosed by Campbell et al. with a single tether as taught by Davison et al. would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, and would remain commensurate in scope with and not teach away from the disclosed invention.
Regarding claim 34, Campbell et al. teach the claimed invention except for wherein the one or more tethers comprises a single tether.
Davison et al. teach the use of a fracture plating system (1210) capable of stabilizing a first fracture of a bone (i.e. rib) of a patient (see paragraph 0112, and Note above regarding functional language), the bone comprising an interior surface (e.g. surface adjacent 20 as best illustrated in Figure 1) facing toward an interior body cavity of the patient, and an exterior surface (e.g. surface opposite that adjacent 20 as best illustrated in Figure 1) facing away from the interior body cavity, the fracture plating system comprising a plate (1220) comprising one or more slots (i.e. disclosed as openings in paragraph 0110; however, disclosed as being capable of being slots in paragraphs 0135/0139 and claims 10/14) and capable of spanning the first fracture; a first fastener (1320a) comprising a first threaded portion (i.e. portion as best seen in Figure 27) and capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 27, and paragraph 0110); a first nut (1360a) capable of engaging the first fastener (see paragraph 0110); a second fastener (1320b) comprising a second threaded portion (i.e. portion as best seen in Figure 27) and capable of being received in one of the one or more slots and securing the plate to the interior surface of the bone (see Figure 27, and paragraph 0110); a second nut (1360b) capable of engaging the second fastener (see paragraph 0110); and a single tether (1350) capable of applying a force to the first fastener and the second fastener to guide the plate, the first fastener, and the second fastener through the interior body cavity to the interior surface of the bone (see paragraph 0110) (see Figure 27, paragraphs 0110-0112, 0135 and 0139, and claims 10 and 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the invention of Campbell et al. with wherein the one or more tethers comprises a single tether in view of Davison et al. in order to provide an alternative, well-known, obvious means for guiding the plate assembly to the interior surface of the bone for repair thereof to yield predictable results.
Note: Campbell et al. disclose wherein the plate assembly is capable of being provided in a pre-assembled state (see column 7, lines 58-67). Therefore, it is the examiner’s position that replacing the two tethers as disclosed by Campbell et al. with a single tether as taught by Davison et al. would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, and would remain commensurate in scope with and not teach away from the disclosed invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 31 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-12, 14-30 and 32-34 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARRY E WAGGLE, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-7110. The examiner can normally be reached TEAP: Monday - Friday (7:45am - 3:45pm).
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.
/LARRY E WAGGLE, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775