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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 02/25/2026 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein pertaining to Office Action mailed on 16 July 2024 in MX has not been considered.
Specification
The amendment to the Abstract has been entered. The amendment to the Abstract overcomes the objection to the Abstract.
Response to Amendment
The amendment to the claims filed on 02/25/2026 has been entered.
In the amendment, claim 1 is amended. Claims 2-16 are added. Claims 1-16 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9, filed 02/25/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly cited Enzerink (US 2006/0293624).
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9-10, filed 02/25/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under double patenting have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Bejarano (US Patent No. 12263111).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the slot of claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 2 recites the limitation “a plurality of buckles, each comprising”. For clarity, it is suggested that it be amended to recite --a plurality of buckles, each buckle comprising--. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Enzerink (US 2006/0293624).
Regarding claim 1, Enzerink discloses a brace (10) configured to restrict a range of motion of a joint of a subject ([0014], the hinge is configured to allow movement of one of the upper and lower struts about an axis defined by the hinge thus a range of motion of a joint is restricted by the hinge; capable of intended use), the brace comprising: an upper support arm (12) (annotated Fig. 1 below);
PNG
media_image1.png
793
818
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a lower support arm (14) (annotated Fig. 1 above) rotatably coupled to the upper support arm by a hinge assembly (16) ([0012] to [0014]; [0028], each of the upper and lower support arms is rotatable via the hinge assembly thus the lower support arm is rotatably couple to the upper support arm by a hinge assembly; capable of intended use); a slider (18) (annotated Fig. 2 above) configured to slidably couple to the upper support arm or to the lower support arm (Fig. 2A, Fig. 2B; [0028], only one side of the assembly is shown but an identical mirror image assembly is provided on the opposite side of the leg; [0037], the entire wing assembly 18 can be translated up or down the slot 46 and the slot 46 is a part of the upper support arm or the lower support arm thus the slider is configured to slidably couple to the upper support arm or to the lower support arm) at any of a plurality of incremental amounts of extension) [0037]; as the slider slides along up or down the slot it slides along a plurality of amounts of extension and each of these amounts are incremental amounts in that they are comprised of some increment); and a plurality of indexing apertures (62a, 62b) (annotated Fig. 3 below; see in Applicant’s specification at Fig. 8B that indicates apertures 168 that are as shown in Enzerink in annotated Fig. 3)
PNG
media_image2.png
417
767
media_image2.png
Greyscale
disposed along a slot (60) (entire elongated opening as seen in Fig. 3) and configured to receive a slider lock (30, 40) ([0035] to [0037], the bushing 40 which is a part of the slider lock 30 is urged into the selected pair of opposing notches [apertures] and pushed out of the opposing notches [apertures]); and the slider lock, wherein the slider lock is configured to deflect and clear the plurality of indexing apertures when force is applied to the slider lock ([0035] to [0037], when a finger applies downward pressure on the push-button top 32, the spring is compressed and pushes the connected bushing 40 down and out of the opposing notches 62a, 62b [thus the bushing is deflected/prevented from contact with the notches] and with pressure still applied the entire wing assembly 18 can be translated up or down the slot or vice-versa until pressure on the button is removed) thereby allowing the slider to translate freely with respect to the upper support arm or the lower support arm during adjustment between apertures ([0035] to [0037]; capable of intended use).
Regarding claim 15, Enzerink discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 1.
Enzerink further discloses where the slider comprises at least one tab (48) (Fig. 3; projecting lip) integrally formed with the slider (Fig. 7 shows it is integral with the slider) and configured to contact the upper support arm or the lower support arm ([0032], lip receives and retains and guides the strut/arm; Fig. 3) at least when the slider is disposed at a greatest amount of extension with respect to the upper support arm or the lower support arm ([0032]; capable of intended use, when the slider is disposed at a greatest amount of extension the tab would contact the strut/arm).
Regarding claim 16, Enzerink discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 1.
Enzerink further discloses wherein the at least one tab is integrally formed (Fig. 7 shows the tab 48 is integral with the slider) or molded with the slider.
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) 2-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Enzerink (US 2006/0293624) in view of Darugar (US 2015/0272766) and in further view of Holt (US 2013/0269628)
Regarding claim 2, Enzerink discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 1.
Enzerink does not disclose a plurality of buckles, each comprising: a first planar portion; a second planar portion separated from the first planar portion by a space; a first bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions and coupling a first outer edge of the first planar portion to a first outer edge of the second planar portion; and a second bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions and coupling an opposing second outer edge of the first planar portion to an opposing second outer edge of the second planar portion.
Darugar teaches an analogous brace 10 ([0018], knee brace) further comprising a plurality of buckles (52) ([0021]; Fig. 6A, 6B, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide a plurality of buckles to the brace of Enzerink in order to provide an improved brace that facilitates securing straps to the support arms (Darugar, [0021]) and to the legs of the wearer (Darugar, [0024]).
Enzerink in view of Darugar discloses the invention as described above.
The combination does not disclose each comprising: a first planar portion; a second planar portion separated from the first planar portion by a space; a first bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions and coupling a first outer edge of the first planar portion to a first outer edge of the second planar portion; and a second bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions and coupling an opposing second outer edge of the first planar portion to an opposing second outer edge of the second planar portion.
Holt teaches an analogous buckle 18 (strap adjuster 18, Figs. 4 and 5, [0024]) for a strap ([0022]) comprising: a first planar portion (26) ([0025]; annotated Fig. 4 below);
PNG
media_image3.png
681
1298
media_image3.png
Greyscale
a second planar portion (25) ([0025]; annotated Fig. 4 and Fig. 5) separated from the first planar portion by a space (37); a first bridging element (24) ([0025]) disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions (annotated Fig. 4) and coupling a first outer edge of the first planar portion to a first outer edge of the second planar portion (25) ([0025]; annotated Fig. 4, rear portion opposing front portion); and a second bridging element (23) disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions (annotated Fig. 4 and Fig. 5) and coupling an opposing second outer edge of the first planar portion to an opposing second outer edge of the second planar portion.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that each buckle of the plurality of buckles of the brace of Enzerink in view of Darugar is comprising: a first planar portion; a second planar portion separated from the first planar portion by a space; a first bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions and coupling a first outer edge of the first planar portion to a first outer edge of the second planar portion; and a second bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions and coupling an opposing second outer edge of the first planar portion to an opposing second outer edge of the second planar portion, as taught by Holt, in order to provide an improved brace that facilitates adjusting the length of the strap (Holt, [0012]).
Regarding claim 3, Enzerink in view of Darugar and in further view of Holt discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 2.
Holt further teaches wherein the first bridging element and the second bridging element each have an elliptical or football-shaped cross-section (annotated Fig. 8 below)
PNG
media_image4.png
667
670
media_image4.png
Greyscale
perpendicular to upper surfaces of the first and second planar portions (annotated Fig. 8, depending on the orientation of the buckle the outer surface of the first planar portion is an upper surface and the inner surface of the second planar portion is an upper surface) such that a middle of each of the first bridging element and the second bridging element bows outward perpendicularly to the upper surfaces of the first and second planar portions (the element 24 bows outward relative to the upper surface of the first planar portion as shown by the arrow and is perpendicular to the first planar portion line as shown, therefore the first bridging element bows outward perpendicularly to the upper surface of the first planar portion and the same would be true of the opposing upper surface of the second planar portion where the second bridging element would bow outwardly relative to the second planar portion and perpendicularly relative to the upper surface of the second planar portion), thereby limiting lateral movement of a respective strap within the buckle ([0031]; capable of intended use).
Regarding claim 4, Enzerink in view of Darugar and in further view of Holt discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 3.
Holt further teaches wherein the buckle further comprises a shaft (35) ([0028]) extending between the first and second bridging elements in the space between the first and second portions (Fig. 4, a height of the shaft/rib 35 extends in a space between the first and second bridging portions), a longitudinal axis of extension of the shaft being parallel to an upper surface of at least one of the first planar portion and the second planar portion (annotated Fig. 8 below shows the longitudinal axis of extension of the shaft is parallel to an upper surface of the first planar portion; NOTE: the surface is an upper surface depending on orientation) and perpendicular to facing surfaces of the first and second bridging elements (Fig. 4; annotated Fig. 8, NOTE: a height of the shaft 35 [longitudinal extension of the shaft] is perpendicular to a bottom length of the facing surfaces of the first and second bridging elements).
PNG
media_image5.png
605
796
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Enzerink in view of Darugar and in further view of Holt discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 4.
Holt further teaches wherein the longitudinal axis of extension of the shaft is in a plane below a plane of the upper surface of at least one of the first planar portion and the second planar portion (See annotated Fig. 8 above with regard to the claim 4 rejection; NOTE: depending on orientation, the longitudinal axis of extension of the shaft is in a plane below a plane of the upper surface of the first planar portion e.g. where the buckle is rotated the longitudinal axis is in a plane below a plane of the upper surface of the first planar portion).
Regarding claim 6, Enzerink in view of Darugar and in further view of Holt discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 2.
Holt further teaches wherein the first planar portion comprises a beveled edge facing the second planar portion (annotated Fig. 8 and annotated Fig. 4 below; bevel is defined as the angle that one surface or line makes with another when they are not at right angles, merriamwebster.com; The outer and inner corners of the body, at the intersection of the side rails 23 and 24 and end rails 25 and 26, may be rounded to reduce the sharp edges and corners on the strap adjuster 18, [0025]; NOTE as the inner and outer corners have rounded edges they are not at right angles and thus are beveled and a corner of a second portion would face a corner of a first portion, see annotated Fig. 4 below)
PNG
media_image6.png
352
670
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
488
544
media_image7.png
Greyscale
and configured to direct a respective strap within the buckle ([0031]; Fig. 3; NOTE: inside corners are capable of directing the strap as strap contacts inside corner; capable of intended use).
Regarding claim 7, Enzerink in view of Darugar and in further view of Holt discloses the invention as applied above to claim 6 above.
Holt further teaches wherein facing edges of the first and second planar portions are parallel (annotated Fig. 6 below shows the facing edges and the edges are parallel).
PNG
media_image8.png
764
542
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Enzerink in view of Darugar and in further view of Holt discloses the invention as applied above to claim 6 above.
Holt further teaches wherein opposing outer edges of the first and second planar portions are curved (see annotated Fig. 7 above with regard to the rejection to claim 8).
Regarding claim 9, Enzerink in view of Darugar and in further view of Holt discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 3.
Enzerink in view of Darugar and in further view of Holt does not disclose wherein the upper surface of the first planar portion comprises a plurality of ridges configured to provide increased resistance to movement of the respective strap when the brace is secured to the appendage of the subject.
Holt further teaches the upper surface of the first planar portion comprises a plurality of ridges ([0030], notches [ridges] are provided on the shaft 35 and the shaft is connected to the upper surface of the first planar portion via bridging elements 24 and 23, thus the planar portion comprises a plurality of ridges) configured to provide increased resistance to movement of the respective strap when the brace is secured to the appendage of the subject ([0030]; capable of intended use).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Enzerink (US 2006/0293624) in view of Ceriani (US 2006/0155229).
Regarding claim 2, Enzerink discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 1.
Enzerink does not disclose a plurality of buckles, each comprising: a first planar portion; a second planar portion separated from the first planar portion by a space; a first bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions and coupling a first outer edge of the first planar portion to a first outer edge of the second planar portion; and a second bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions and coupling an opposing second outer edge of the first planar portion to an opposing second outer edge of the second planar portion.
Ceriani teaches an analogous brace 10 (orthopedic brace 10, [0027]; Fig. 1; Fig. 2) configured to restrict a range of motion of a joint of a subject (The lateral central joint 12a is preferably a dynamic joint, which dynamically connects the lateral upper and lower support assemblies 14a, 16a, and is more preferably a rotational hinge, which rotationally connects the lateral upper and lower support assemblies 14a, 16a. The lateral central joint 12a is most preferably a releasably locking rotational hinge with adjustable rotation limits as shown herein, [0031]; capable of intended use), the brace comprising: an analogous upper support arm 20b ([0033]); an analogous lower support arm 24b ([0030]); a plurality of buckles (52a, 52b, 66a, 66b) (upper distal strap attachment member 52a, [0042]; lower distal strap attachment member 52b, [0037]; [0038]; upper proximal strap attachment member 66a, [0036]; [0038]; lower proximal strap attachment member 66b, [0038]; buckle is defined as a clasp consisting of a rectangular or curved rim with one or more movable tongues, fixed to one end of a belt or strap, used for fastening to the other end of the same strap or to another strap; any similar contrivance, dictionary.com; NOTE: as the strap attachment members are similar contrivance to the definition of a buckle in that they are fixed to one end of a belt and used for fastening, they are buckles), each comprising: a first planar portion (see annotated Fig. 3 below which is a magnified portion of Fig. 3; NOTE: a first planar portion is a first edge portion of the buckle that has a planar section; [0036]; [0038]);
PNG
media_image9.png
716
888
media_image9.png
Greyscale
a second planar portion (annotated Fig. 3 above; NOTE: a second planar edge portion is a second portion of the buckle that has a planar section) separated from the first planar portion by a space 54 (strap attachment loop 54, [0043]; see annotated Fig. 3 above); a first bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions (see annotated Fig. 3 above; NOTE: a height of the first bridging element is disposed perpendicular to a lower surface of the first and second planar portions) and coupling a first outer edge of the first planar portion to a first outer edge of the second planar portion (annotated Fig. 3 above); and a second bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions (see annotated Fig. 3 above; NOTE: a height of the second bridging element is disposed perpendicular to a lower surface of the first and second planar portions) and coupling an opposing second outer edge of the first planar portion (annotated Fig. 3) to an opposing second outer edge of the second planar portion (annotated Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide to the brace of Enzerink a plurality of buckles, each comprising: a first planar portion; a second planar portion separated from the first planar portion by a space; a first bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions and coupling a first outer edge of the first planar portion to a first outer edge of the second planar portion; and a second bridging element disposed perpendicular to the first and second planar portions and coupling an opposing second outer edge of the first planar portion to an opposing second outer edge of the second planar portion, as taught by Ceriani, in order to provide an improved brace that facilitates strap attachment at upper and lower positions along contours of the body including the leg (Ceriani, [0035] to [0038]; [0040]).
Claim(s) 10-11 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Enzerink (US 2006/0293624) in view of Ceriani (US 2006/0155229) as applied to claim 2 above, and in further view of Ceriani II (US 2006/0155232).
Regarding claim 10, Enzerink in view of Ceriani discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 2.
Ceriani further teaches a plurality of cuffs (72) (NOTE: pad 72 is a cuff as it encircles partially around the leg Fig. 3), wherein each of the plurality of cuffs comprises a respective hook (50) ([0034]).
The combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the second planar portion of each of the plurality of buckles comprises an aperture configured to receive any one of the respective hooks and, thereby, secure the respective buckle to the respective cuff.
Ceriani II teaches an analogous brace (10) having an analogous plurality of buckles (52a) and an analogous plurality of cuffs (72), wherein each of the plurality of cuffs comprises an analogous respective hook (50) (Fig. 6 shows 56 is an aperture and 50 is a hook in at least that it is hook shaped and hooks through the opening) and wherein an analogous second planar portion (planar portion around aperture 56, see Fig. 6) of each of the plurality of buckles comprises an aperture (56) configured to receive any one of the respective hooks (Fig. 6)and, thereby, secure the respective buckle to the respective cuff (capable of intended use; Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that the second planar portion of each of the plurality of buckles of the brace of Enzerink in view of Ceriani comprises an aperture configured to receive any one of the respective hooks and, thereby, secure the respective buckle to the respective cuff, as taught by Ceriani II in order to provide an improved brace that facilitates uncoupling and recoupling (Ceriani II, [0077], [0078]).
Regarding claim 11, Enzerink in view of Ceriani and in further view of Ceriani II discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 10.
Ceriani II further teaches wherein the aperture has a square or rectangular form factor (annotated Fig. 6 below, the aperture is four sided and thus has an element contributing to the result of a square and thus has a form factor of a square) with rounded corners (annotated Fig. 6 below).
PNG
media_image10.png
731
716
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Enzerink in view of Ceriani and in further view of Ceriani II discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 10.
Ceriani further discloses wherein at least a portion of the buckle is configured to conform to a contour of an ankle of the subject (see Fig. 3 where the buckles is near the ankle and as it is extendable is capable of being extended lower to the ankle and to is show encircling the leg thus is capable of conforming to contour of an ankle).
Regarding claim 14, Enzerink in view of Ceriani and in further view of Ceriani II discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 10.
Ceriani teaches an analogous cuff 38a (Fig. 1, upper distal strap guide member 38a; The upper distal strap guide and connection members 38a, 42a are preferably fabricated from a relatively rigid material, such as a high-strength plastic, and have an arcuate configuration, which corresponds to the contours of the body of a user on whom the orthopedic brace 10 is to be mounted in a manner described below, [0035]) comprises a strap retaining element comprising a rotatable cam 46 ([0034], rotationally-connected strap lock 46 or a flap) having a hook and loop fastener (The length of the posterior segment 90 is adjusted in correspondence with the size of the leg 74 and releasably fixed by fastening the strap lock 46 on the upper distal strap guide member 38a to the upper distal strap 82a using fastening means (not shown), such as hook and loop fasteners mounted on the inner face of the strap lock 46 and outer face of the upper distal strap 82a, [0042]) configured to attach to and immobilize the respective strap (Fig. 1, for example, strap 82a having posterior segment 90; capable of intended use).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that wherein at least one of the plurality of cuffs coupled to buckles of the brace of Enzerink in view of Ceriani and in further view of Ceriani II comprises a strap retaining element comprising a rotatable cam or a flap having a hook and loop fastener configured to attach to and immobilize the respective strap, as taught by Ceriani, in order to provide an improved brace that facilitates releasably fixing the strap to at least one of the plurality of cuffs (Ceriani, [0042]).
Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that wherein at least one of the plurality of cuffs coupled to a bracket comprises a strap retaining element comprising a rotatable cam or a flap having a hook and loop fastener configured to attach to and immobilize the respective strap as Ceriani discloses a rotatable cam as claimed for some cuffs [not directly coupled to brackets] and since it has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced and here no new or unexpected result would be produced where the claimed cuff coupled to a bracket comprises a strap retaining element as claimed. See MPEP 2144.04 B, VI, citing In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Enzerink (US 2006/0293624) in view of Ceriani (US 2006/0155229) and in further view of Ceriani II (US 2006/0155232) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Saderholm (US 2006/0265845).
Regarding claim 12, Enzerink in view of Ceriani and in further view of Ceriani II discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 11.
Enzerink in view of Ceriani and in further view of Ceriani II fails to disclose wherein the second planar portion of each of the plurality of buckles comprises a recessed portion adjacent to the aperture, the recessed portion having a reduced thickness compared to immediately adjacent portions of the second planar portion and being configured to abut at least a portion of the respective hook of any of the plurality of cuffs and, thereby, restrain lateral movement of the buckle when coupled to any of the plurality of cuffs.
Saderholm teaches an analogous buckle 120 (Fig. 2, [0014]) having an analogous first planar portion 290 (foot 290, [0028]; Fig. 2; NOTE: a first end portion of the bracket has planar sections) and an analogous second portion 280 (back 280, [0028]; NOTE: a second end portion has planar sections) and an analogous aperture 321 (circular portion 321 [the larger portion of engagement aperture 122], [0022]) wherein the second planar portion of the buckle comprises a recessed portion 322 (elliptical portion 322, [0021]; NOTE: as the smaller diameter elliptical portion is indented from the larger circular portion 321 it is recessed) adjacent to the aperture (see annotated Fig. 2 below), the recessed portion having a reduced thickness compared to immediately adjacent portions of the second planar portion (FIG. 3 is a bottom view of buckle 120 according to an embodiment of the invention. As illustrated in FIG. 3, a portion of locking extension 123 extends into engagement aperture 122 when cover 210 [see FIG. 2] is closed over base 220, [0021]) and being configured to abut at least a portion of an analogous respective hook 142 (cap 142, [0024]) and, thereby, restrain lateral movement of the buckle (Recall from above that cap 142, in one embodiment, is unable to pass through elliptical portion 322. In that embodiment, closing cover 210 over base 220, thereby placing the portion of locking extension 123 into circular portion 321, is equivalent to locking buckle 120 onto attachment piece 102, [0024]; NOTE: thus the aperture has a reduced thickness compared to immediately adjacent portions of the second planar portion as locking extension provides areas with less thickness than adjacent portions; capable of intended use).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that the second planar portion of each of the plurality of buckles of Enzerink in view of Ceriani and in further view of Ceriani II comprises a recessed portion adjacent to the aperture, the recessed portion having a reduced thickness compared to immediately adjacent portions of the second planar portion and being configured to abut at least a portion of the respective hook and, thereby, restrain lateral movement of the buckle, as taught by Saderholm, in order to provide an improved brace that facilitates locking the buckle onto an attachment piece (Saderholm, [0024]).
The combination of Ceriani and Saderholm discloses the invention as described above. The combination further discloses wherein the second planar portion of each of the plurality of buckles comprises a recessed portion adjacent to the aperture, the recessed portion having a reduced thickness compared to immediately adjacent portions of the second planar portion and being configured to abut at least a portion of the respective hook of any of the plurality of cuffs and, thereby, restrain lateral movement of the buckle when coupled to any of the plurality of cuffs (as described above, Saderholm teaches wherein the second planar portion of the buckle comprises a recessed portion adjacent to the aperture, the recessed portion having a reduced thickness compared to immediately adjacent portions of the second planar portion and being configured to abut at least a portion of the respective hook of and thereby restrain lateral movement of the buckle; Ceriani teaches a plurality of buckles, a plurality of cuffs and a plurality of hooks [see claim 1 rejection] thus the combination discloses wherein the second planar portion of each of the plurality of buckles comprises a recessed portion adjacent to the aperture, the recessed portion having a reduced thickness compared to immediately adjacent portions of the second planar portion and being configured to abut at least a portion of the respective hook of any of the plurality of cuffs and, thereby, restrain lateral movement of the buckle when coupled to any of the plurality of cuffs as the teaching of Saderholm is applicable to each buckle and the buckles are coupled to a plurality of cuffs as disclosed by Ceriani).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12263111.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12263111. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claim 1 of the instant application recites: A brace configured to restrict a range of motion of a joint of a subject, the brace comprising: an upper support arm; a lower support arm rotatably coupled to the upper support arm by a hinge assembly; a slider configured to slidably couple to the upper support arm or to the lower support arm at any of a plurality of incremental amounts of extension; and a plurality of indexing apertures disposed along a slot and configured to receive a slider lock; and the slider lock, wherein the slider lock is configured to deflect and clear the plurality of indexing apertures when force is applied to the slider lock, thereby allowing the slider to translate freely with respect to the upper support arm or the lower support arm during adjustment between apertures.
Claim 1 of the patent recites: A brace configured to restrict a range of motion of a joint of a subject, the brace comprising: an upper support arm; a lower support arm; a hinge assembly configured to rotatably couple the upper support arm to the lower support arm; a plurality of cuffs, each coupled directly or indirectly to the upper support arm or the lower support arm and configured to receive a respective strap for securing the brace to an appendage of the subject; a plurality of buckles, each configured to be coupled to a respective one of the plurality of cuffs and to receive one of the respective straps; an upper slider configured to slidably couple to the upper support arm at any of a first plurality of incremental amounts of extension; and a lower slider configured to slidably couple to the lower support arm at any of a second plurality of incremental amounts of extension, wherein: the lower slider comprises a slider lock, and the lower support arm comprises a plurality of indexing apertures disposed along a slot configured to receive the slide lock, wherein the slider lock is configured to deflect sufficiently to clear the plurality of indexing apertures when sufficient force is applied to the slider lock, thereby allowing the lower slider to translate freely within the slot and with respect to the lower support arm during adjustment between apertures.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between claim 1 of the current application and claim 1 of the reference patent lies in the fact that the reference patent claims includes many more elements and is thus much more specific. Thus, the invention of claim 1 of the patent is in effect a “species” of the “generic” invention of current application claim 1. It has been held that the generic invention is “anticipated” by the “species”. See In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Since claim 1 of the current application is anticipated by claim 1 of the patent, it is not patentably distinct from claim 1 of the patent.
The limitations of application claim 2 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 2.
The limitations of application claim 3 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 8.
The limitations of application claim 4 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 10.
The limitations of application claim 5 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 11.
The limitations of application claim 6 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 12.
The limitations of application claim 7 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 13.
The limitations of application claim 8 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 14.
The limitations of application claim 9 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 9.
The limitations of application claim 10 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 3.
The limitations of application claim 11 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 6.
The limitations of application claim 12 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 7.
Claim 13 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12263111. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claim 13 of the instant application recites: wherein at least a portion of the buckle is configured to conform to a contour of an ankle of the subject.
Claim 4 of the patent recites: wherein the second planar portion of each of the plurality of buckles comprises a segment, separating an edge of the second planar portion abutting the space and an adjacent edge of the aperture, having a sufficiently small extent to allow the buckle to conform to a contour of an ankle of the subject.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between claim 13 of the current application and claim 4 of the reference patent lies in the fact that the reference patent claims includes many more elements and is thus much more specific. Thus, the invention of claim 4 of the patent is in effect a “species” of the “generic” invention of current application claim 13. It has been held that the generic invention is “anticipated” by the “species”. See In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Since claim 13 of the current application is anticipated by claim 4 of the patent, it is not patentably distinct from claim 4 of the patent.
The limitations of application claim 14 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 5.
The limitations of application claim 15 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 15.
The limitations of application claim 16 are substantially disclosed in patent claim 16.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Carene (US 2012/0246894).
Carene teaches an analogous buckle (34) comprising an analogous first planar portion (52) ([0018], [0019]; a portion of the center portion that extends towards a left side with ridges 64 is a first planar portion) that comprises a plurality of ridges (64).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GINA MCCARTHY whose telephone number is (408)918-7594. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00-3:30 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, Alireza Nia can be reached at 571-270-3076. 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.
/G.M./ Examiner, Art Unit 3786
/ALIREZA NIA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3786
Prosecution Insights