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 .
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment filed on 5/18/2025, no claims have been cancelled, and Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 12303378 (hereinafter Pat’ 378). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding instant claim 1, claim 1 of Pat’ 378 discloses a system for coupling a tendon to a bone comprising:
a tendon coupling device comprising a tendon-facing surface engageable with the tendon (col. 18 line 9-10);
a fastener configured to secure the tendon to the tendon coupling device (col. 18 line 11-12);
a flexible element comprising:
a first portion (col. 18 line 13-14); and
a second portion (col. 18 line 15);
wherein the first portion of the flexible element is couplable with the fastener to securably attach the flexible element to the tendon (col. 18 line 16-18); and
a bone coupling device comprising:
a bone-facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone proximate a bone tunnel formed through the bone (col. 18 line 19-22);
an opposing surface, opposite the bone-facing surface (col. 18 line 23); and
a hole formed through the bone coupling device intermediate and passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposing surface of the bone coupling device (col. 18 line 25-28);
wherein the second portion of the flexible element is receivable through the bone tunnel and the hole to engage the opposing surface of the bone coupling device and securably couple the tendon to the bone (col. 18 line 32-35).
Regarding instant claim 2, claim 2 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 3, claim 3 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 4, claim 4 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 5, claim 5 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 6, claim 6 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 7, claim 7 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 8, claim 8 of Pat’ 378 discloses a system for coupling a tendon to a bone comprising:
a tendon coupler comprising a tendon-facing surface engageable with the tendon (col. 19 line 32-33);
a first fastener configured to couple the tendon coupler to the tendon (col. 19 line 34-35);
a bone coupler connected to the tendon coupler (col. 19 line 36); and
a second fastener configured to secure the bone coupler to the surface of the bone to securably couple the tendon to the bone (col. 19 line 39-41).
Regarding instant claim 9, claim 8 of Pat ‘378 discloses wherein the bone coupler is integrally formed with the tendon coupler (col. 19 line 36-37).
Regarding instant claim 10, claim 9 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 11, claim 10 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 12, claim 11 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 13, claim 12 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 14, claim 13 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 15, claim 14 of Pat’ 378 discloses a system for coupling a tendon to a bone comprising:
a tendon connection device comprising a tendon-facing surface engageable with the tendon (col. 20 line 39-40);
a flexible element comprising:
a first portion (col. 20 line 41-42); and
a second portion (col. 20 line 43); and
a bone connection device comprising:
a bone-facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone proximate a bone tunnel formed through the bone (col. 20 line 44-47);
an opposing surface, opposite the bone-facing surface (col. 20 line 48); and
a hole formed through the bone connection device intermediate and passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposing surface (col. 20 line 50-52);
wherein:
the first portion of the flexible element is configured to couple the tendon connection device to the tendon (col. 20 line 54-56); and
the second portion of the flexible element is receivable through the bone tunnel and the hole to engage the opposing surface of the bone connection device and securably couple the tendon to the bone (col. 20 line 58-62).
Regarding instant claim 16, claim 15 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 17, claim 16 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 18, claim 17 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 19, claim 18 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
Regarding instant claim 20, claim 19 of Pat’ 378 discloses this.
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 1, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US9381019B2 Kubiak in view of US20160008043A1 Bonutti et al. (hereinafter Bonutti).
Regarding claim 1, Kubiak discloses a system for coupling a tendon to a bone (abstract, col. 9 line 40-56) comprising:
a tendon coupling device (carrier member 12, Fig. 1) comprising a tendon-facing surface engageable with the tendon (col. 2 line 42-44);
a fastener (attachment members 18a, 18b, Fig. 1) configured to secure the tendon to the tendon coupling device (col. 1 line 49-59);
a flexible element (flexible members 64, col. 6 line 59-61, Fig. 17a) comprising:
a first portion (first portion connects rows of attachment members 18 on carrier member 12 for attachment to the tendon, col. 6 line 59-61, col. 28 line 11-18, Fig. 17a); and
a second portion (second portion comprises the flexile members 64 being brought together at the bone engaging member 72, col. 28 line 11-18, Fig. 17a);
wherein the first portion of the flexible element (64) is couplable with the fastener (18a, 18b) to securably attach the flexible element to the tendon (col. 7 line 3-16, col. 26 line 27-44, col. 27 line 17-32, Fig. 15a).
Kubiak is silent on
a bone coupling device comprising:
a bone-facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone proximate a bone tunnel formed through the bone;
an opposing surface, opposite the bone-facing surface; and
a hole formed through the bone coupling device intermediate and passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposing surface of the bone coupling device;
wherein the second portion of the flexible element is receivable through the bone tunnel and the hole to engage the opposing surface of the bone coupling device and securably couple the tendon to the bone.
However, Bonutti teaches a bone coupling device (abstract, paragraph 2) comprising: a bone-facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone proximate a bone tunnel formed through the bone (paragraph 9, paragraph 112, Fig. 30 shows fastener 366 with a side contacting the bone 362 proximate a bone tunnel (a bone tunnel is suggested to be formed since the first and second ends of the suture 368 and 370 pass through fasteners 366 and 372)); an opposing surface, opposite the bone-facing surface (paragraph 11, paragraph 112, Fig. 30 shows fastener 366 having a side opposite the bone facing surface); and a hole formed through the bone coupling device intermediate and passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposing surface of the bone coupling device (paragraph 11, paragraph 112, Fig. 30-31 shows fasteners 366 and 372 having through bores passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposite surface); and wherein the second portion of the flexible element (first end 368 and second end 370 of suture 360) is receivable through the bone tunnel and the hole to engage the opposing surface of the bone coupling device and securably couple the tendon to the bone (paragraph 11, paragraph 112, Fig. 30-31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kubiak with the teachings of Bonutti to achieve a bone coupling device comprising: a bone-facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone proximate a bone tunnel formed through the bone; an opposing surface, opposite the bone-facing surface; and a hole formed through the bone coupling device intermediate and passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposing surface of the bone coupling device; and wherein the second portion of the flexible element is receivable through the bone tunnel and the hole to engage the opposing surface of the bone coupling device and securably couple the tendon to the bone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to provide dynamic and rigid fixation of tissue to enhance the healing process of the tissue as disclosed by Bonutti (abstract, paragraph 139).
Regarding claim 15, Kubiak discloses a system for coupling a tendon to a bone (abstract, col. 9 line 40-56) comprising:
a tendon connection device (carrier member 12, Fig. 1) comprising a tendon-facing surface engageable with the tendon (col. 2 line 42-44);
a flexible element (flexible members 64, col. 6 line 59-61, Fig. 17a) comprising:
a first portion (first portion connects rows of attachment members 18 on carrier member 12 for attachment to the tendon, col. 6 line 59-61, col. 28 line 11-18,Fig. 17a); and
a second portion (second portion comprises the flexible members 64 being brought together at the bone engaging member 72, col. 28 line 11-18, Fig. 17a);
wherein the first portion of the flexible element (64) is configured to couple the tendon connection device to the tendon (attachment members 18a, 18b, of Fig. 1 are configured to secure the tendon to the tendon coupling device (col. 1 line 49-59)) (col. 7 line 3-16, col. 26 line 27-44, col. 27 line 17-32, fig. 15a).
Kubiak does not disclose a bone connection device comprising:
a bone-facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone proximate a bone tunnel formed through the bone;
an opposing surface, opposite the bone-facing surface; and
a hole formed through the bone connection device intermediate and passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposing surface;
and wherein the second portion of the flexible element is receivable through the bone tunnel and the hole to engage the opposing surface of the bone connection device and securably couple the tendon to the bone.
However, Bonutti teaches a bone connection device (abstract, paragraph 2) comprising: a bone-facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone proximate a bone tunnel formed through the bone (paragraph 9, paragraph 112, Fig. 30 shows fastener 366 with a side contacting the bone 362 proximate a bone tunnel (a bone tunnel is suggested to be formed since the first and second ends of the suture 368 and 370 pass through fasteners 366 and 372)); an opposing surface, opposite the bone-facing surface (paragraph 11, paragraph 112, Fig. 30 shows fastener 366 having a side opposite the bone facing surface); and a hole formed through the bone coupling device intermediate and passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposing surface of the bone connection device (paragraph 11, paragraph 112, Fig. 30-31 shows fasteners 366 and 372 having through bores passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposite surface); and wherein the second portion of the flexible element (first end 368 and second end 370 of suture 360) is receivable through the bone tunnel and the hole to engage the opposing surface of the bone connection device and securably couple the tendon to the bone (paragraph 11, paragraph 112, Fig. 30-31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kubiak with the teachings of Bonutti to achieve a bone connection device comprising: a bone-facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone proximate a bone tunnel formed through the bone; an opposing surface, opposite the bone-facing surface; and a hole formed through the bone connection device intermediate and passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposing surface of the bone connection device; and wherein the second portion of the flexible element is receivable through the bone tunnel and the hole to engage the opposing surface of the bone connection device and securably couple the tendon to the bone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to provide dynamic and rigid fixation of tissue to enhance the healing process of the tissue as disclosed by Bonutti (abstract, paragraph 139).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Kubiak and Bonutti teach the limitations of claim 15. Kubiak further discloses the tendon connection device (12) is a mesh (col. 19 line 46-55).
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubiak in view of Bonutti as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US20050197699A1 Jacobs et al. (hereinafter Jacobs).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Kubiak and Bonutti teaches the limitations of claim 1. Kubiak further discloses the tendon-facing surface comprises a first tendon-facing surface (col. 2 line 42-44).
The combination is silent on the tendon coupling device comprises a second tendon-facing surface, opposite the first tendon-facing surface; and
the tendon is receivable between the first tendon-facing surface and the second tendon- facing surface of the tendon coupling device to secure the tendon to the tendon coupling device.
However, Jacobs teaches a tendon coupling device 10 (Fig. 1, 2) wherein the tendon-facing surface comprises a first tendon-facing surface (12a with tines 14); tendon coupling device comprises a second tendon-facing surface (12b with tines 14), opposite the first tendon-facing surface; and the tendon 20 is receivable between the first tendon-facing surface and the second tendon- facing surface of the tendon coupling device to secure the tendon to the tendon coupling device (paragraph 23, paragraph 27, Fig. 1, 2, 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the modification of Kubiak with Bonutti with the teachings of Jacobs to achieve a tissue coupling device wherein: the tendon-facing surface comprises a first tendon-facing surface; the tendon coupling device comprises a second tendon-facing surface, opposite the first tendon-facing surface; and the tendon is receivable between the first tendon-facing surface and the second tendon- facing surface of the tendon coupling device to secure the tendon to the tendon coupling device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to securably and reliably affix the tendon to the tendon coupling device and promote proper healing as disclosed by Jacobs (paragraph 8-9).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Kubiak and Bonutti teaches the limitations of claim 15. Kubiak further discloses the tendon-facing surface comprises a first tendon-facing surface (col. 2 line 42-44).
The combination is silent on the tendon coupling device comprises a second tendon-facing surface, opposite the first tendon-facing surface; and
the tendon is receivable between the first tendon-facing surface and the second tendon- facing surface of the tendon coupling device to secure the tendon to the tendon coupling device.
However, Jacobs teaches a tendon coupling device 10 (Fig. 1, 2) wherein the tendon-facing surface comprises a first tendon-facing surface (12a with tines 14); tendon coupling device comprises a second tendon-facing surface (12b with tines 14), opposite the first tendon-facing surface; and the tendon 20 is receivable between the first tendon-facing surface and the second tendon- facing surface of the tendon coupling device to secure the tendon to the tendon coupling device (paragraph 23, paragraph 27, Fig. 1, 2, 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the modification of Kubiak with Bonutti with the teachings of Jacobs to achieve a tissue coupling device wherein: the tendon-facing surface comprises a first tendon-facing surface; the tendon coupling device comprises a second tendon-facing surface, opposite the first tendon-facing surface; and the tendon is receivable between the first tendon-facing surface and the second tendon- facing surface of the tendon coupling device to secure the tendon to the tendon coupling device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to securably and reliably affix the tendon to the tendon coupling device and promote proper healing as disclosed by Jacobs (paragraph 8-9).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubiak in view of Bonutti as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US10350053B2 Kumar.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Kubiak and Bonutti teaches the limitations of claim 1.
The combination is silent on wherein the bone coupling device is integrally formed with the tendon coupling device.
However, Kumar teaches a bone coupling device 110 that is integrally formed with the tendon coupling device 26 (Fig. 5 and 6 show the tendon coupling device 26 snapped into engagement with the elongated groove 34 on the bone coupling device 110 (col. 2, line 16-22, col. 4 line 24-34, col. 5 23-42)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the modification of Kubiak with Bonutti with the teachings of Kumar to achieve wherein the bone coupling device is integrally formed with the tendon coupling device to provide a secure anchor point and mitigate the effects of osteoporosis or cystic changes as disclosed by Kumar (col. 2 line 19-22).
Claims 17, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubiak in view of Bonutti as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of US10350053B2 Kumar.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Kubiak and Bonutti teaches the limitations of claim 15.
The combination is silent on wherein the first portion of the flexible element is configured to weave around the tendon connection device and the tendon to secure the tendon connection device to the tendon.
However, Kumar teaches wherein the first portion of the flexible element 130 is configured to weave around the tendon connection device 26 and the tendon T to secure the tendon connection device to the tendon (col. 4 line 63 – col. 5 line 3, col. 5 line 32-42, Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the modification of Kubiak with Bonutti with the teachings of Kumar to achieve the first portion of the flexible element configured to weave around the tendon connection device and the tendon to secure the tendon connection device to the tendon in order to provide a secure anchor point and mitigate the effects of osteoporosis or cystic changes as disclosed by Kumar (col. 2 line 12-22).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Kubiak and Bonutti teaches the limitations of claim 15. Kubiak further discloses wherein the tendon connection device (12) is configured to fold around the tendon (col. 28, line 4-7, Fig. 8d, Fig. 10c-10d).
The combination is silent on wherein the flexible element is configured to penetrate through the tendon connection device and the tendon to secure the tendon connection device to the tendon.
However, Kumar teaches wherein the flexible element 130 is configured to penetrate through the tendon connection device 26 and the tendon T to secure the tendon connection device to the tendon (col. 4 line 63 – col. 5 line 3, col. 5 line 32-42, Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the modification of Kubiak with Bonutti with the teachings of Kumar to achieve the tendon connection device configured to fold around the tendon, and the flexible element configured to penetrate through the tendon connection device and the tendon to secure the tendon connection device to the tendon, in order to provide a secure anchor point and mitigate the effects of osteoporosis or cystic changes as disclosed by Kumar (col. 2 line 12-22).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Kubiak and Bonutti teaches the limitations of claim 15 as above.
The combination is silent on wherein the bone coupling device is integrally formed with the tendon coupling device.
However, Kumar teaches a bone coupling device 110 that is integrally formed with the tendon coupling device 26 (Fig. 5 and 6 show the tendon coupling device 26 snapped into engagement with the elongated groove 34 on the bone coupling device 110 (col. 2, line 16-22, col. 4 line 24-34, col. 5 23-42)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the modification of Kubiak with Bonutti with the teachings of Kumar to achieve wherein the bone coupling device is integrally formed with the tendon coupling device to provide a secure anchor point and mitigate the effects of osteoporosis or cystic changes as disclosed by Kumar (col. 2 line 19-22).
Claims 8-9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubiak in view of Kumar.
Regarding claim 8, Kubiak discloses a system for coupling a tendon to a bone (abstract, col. 9 line 40-56) comprising:
a tendon coupler (carrier member 12, Fig. 1) comprising a tendon-facing surface engageable with the tendon (col. 2 line 42-44);
a first fastener (attachment member 18 Fig. 17a) configured to couple the tendon coupler to the tendon (col. 1 line 49-59).
Kubiak does not disclose a bone coupler connected to the tendon coupler, the bone coupler comprising a bone-facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone; and
a second fastener configured to secure the bone coupler to the surface of the bone to securably couple the tendon to the bone.
However, Kumar teaches a system for coupling a tendon to a bone (abstract) comprising a bone coupler 110 (col. 1 line 42-48, col. 2 line 5-7, Fig. 5, 6) connected to a tendon coupler 26 (Fig. 5 and 6 show the tendon coupling device 26 snapped into engagement with the elongated groove 34 on the bone coupler 110 (col. 2, line 16-22, col. 4 line 24-34, col. 5 23-42)), the bone coupler comprises a bone- facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone (Figs. 3-6 show bone coupling device 10,110 attached to a bone and having a side in contact with the bone); and a second fastener configured to secure the bone coupler to the surface of the bone to securably couple the tendon to the bone (bone coupling device 10,110 has screw holes 14,114 which receives bone screw 100,200 for anchoring into the bone (col. 3 line 19-30, col. 4 line 35-46, Fig. 3-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kubiak with the teachings of Kumar to achieve a bone coupler connected to the tendon coupler, the bone coupler comprising a bone- facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone; and a second fastener configured to secure the bone coupler to the surface of the bone to securably couple the tendon to the bone, to provide a secure anchor point and mitigate the effects of osteoporosis or cystic changes as disclosed by Kumar (col. 2 line 19-22).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Kubiak and Kumar teaches the limitations of claim 8. Kumar further discloses the bone coupler 110 that is integrally formed with the tendon coupler 26 (Fig. 5 and 6 show the tendon coupling device 26 snapped into engagement with the elongated groove 34 on the bone coupling device 110 (col. 2, line 16-22, col. 4 line 24-34, col. 5 23-42)).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Kubiak and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 8. Kumar further discloses wherein the second fastener comprises a bone screw 100,200 (col. 2 line 5-9, col. 3 line 19-30, col. 4 line 35-46, Fig. 3-6).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubiak in view of Kumar as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Jacobs.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kubiak and Kumar teaches the limitations of claim 8. Kubiak further discloses the tendon-facing surface comprises a first tendon-facing surface (col. 2 line 42-44).
The combination does not teach the tendon coupler comprises a second tendon-facing surface, opposite the first tendon-facing surface; and
the tendon is receivable between the first tendon-facing surface and the second tendon-facing surface of the tendon coupler to secure the tendon to the tendon coupler.
However, Jacobs teaches a tendon coupling device 10 (Fig. 1, 2) wherein the tendon-facing surface comprises a first tendon-facing surface (12a with tines 14); tendon coupling device comprises a second tendon-facing surface (12b with tines 14), opposite the first tendon-facing surface; and the tendon 20 is receivable between the first tendon-facing surface and the second tendon- facing surface of the tendon coupling device to secure the tendon to the tendon coupling device (paragraph 23, paragraph 27, Fig. 1, 2, 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the modification of Kubiak with Kumar with the teachings of Jacobs to achieve a tissue coupling device wherein: the tendon-facing surface comprises a first tendon-facing surface; the tendon coupler comprises a second tendon-facing surface, opposite the first tendon-facing surface; and the tendon is receivable between the first tendon-facing surface and the second tendon- facing surface of the tendon coupler to secure the tendon to the tendon coupler. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modificaiton to securably and reliably affix the tendon to the tendon coupler and promote proper healing as disclosed by Jacobs (paragraph 8-9).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubiak in view of Kumar as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Bonutti.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Kubiak and Kumar teaches the limitations of claim 8. Kubiak further discloses wherein:
the first fastener comprises a first portion of a flexible element (first portion connects rows of attachment members 18 on carrier member 12 for attachment to the tendon, col. 6 line 59-61, col. 28 line 11-18,Fig. 17a);
the second fastener comprises a second portion of the flexible element (second portion comprises the flexile members 64 being brought together at the bone engaging member 72, col. 28 line 11-18, Fig. 17a);
wherein the first portion of the flexible element 64 is configured to secure the tendon coupler to the tendon (attachment members 18a, 18b, of Fig. 1 are configured to secure the tendon to the tendon coupling device (col. 1 line 49-59)) (col. 7 line 3-16, col. 26 line 27-44, col. 27 line 17-32, fig. 15a).
The combination is silent on the bone coupler further comprises:
an opposing surface, opposite the bone-facing surface; and
a hole formed through the bone coupler intermediate and passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposing surface of the bone coupler; and
the bone-facing surface of the bone coupler is engageable with the surface of the bone proximate a bone tunnel formed through the bone; wherein:
the second portion of the flexible element is configured to secure the bone coupler to the bone to secure the tendon to the bone.
However, Bonutti teaches a bone coupler (abstract, paragraph 2) comprising: a bone-facing surface engageable with a surface of the bone proximate a bone tunnel formed through the bone (paragraph 9, paragraph 112, Fig. 30 shows fastener 366 with a side contacting the bone 362 proximate a bone tunnel (a bone tunnel is suggested to be formed since the first and second ends of the suture 368 and 370 pass through fasteners 366 and 372)); an opposing surface, opposite the bone-facing surface (paragraph 11, paragraph 112, Fig. 30 shows fastener 366 having a side opposite the bone facing surface); and a hole formed through the bone coupler intermediate and passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposing surface of the bone coupler (paragraph 11, paragraph 112, Fig. 30-31 shows fasteners 366 and 372 having through bores passing through the bone-facing surface and the opposite surface); and wherein the second portion of the flexible element (first end 368 and second end 370 of suture 360) is configured to secure the bone coupler to the bone to secure the tendon to the bone (paragraph 11, paragraph 112, Fig. 30-31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modification of Kubiak with Kumar with the teachings of Bonutti in order to provide dynamic and rigid fixation of tissue to enhance the healing process of the tissue as disclosed by Bonutti (abstract, paragraph 139).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHOA TAN LE whose telephone number is (703)756-1252. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 4:30pm.
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, Jackie Ho can be reached at 571-272-4696. 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.
/KHOA TAN LE/Examiner, Art Unit 3771 /MOHAMED G GABR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights