DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Crawford (US 20130345718 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Crawford teaches an anchor delivery tool comprising a surgical anchor insertion tool ([0347] In some embodiments, the clamping mechanism of the targeting fixture 690 can be configured for clamping to the spinous process 2310, or can be configured for anchoring to bone of the patient 18 such that the fixture 690 is substantially stationary and not easily moved)
a main body shaft comprising a first end configured to engage with a secondary shaft and a second end ([0165] guide tube 50 can be secured within a housing of the end-effectuator 30 with two shafts 32. In some embodiments, the shafts 32 move relative to one other, due to a parallelogram effect of the clearance mechanism 33, the position of the guide tube 50 can mimic the position of the end-effectuator 30 (see FIG. 18B); [0166] during use of the end-effectuator 30 attachment element 37, the relative movement of the two shafts 32 caused by angulation 30e will not cause movement in the pitch 60 direction and will instead cause distraction)
PNG
media_image1.png
412
468
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a handle extending from the second end of the main body shaft ([0471] These rods 6365 pivot farther up the handle 6350 (pivot point not pictured) and the clamp teeth 6330 are forced together)
and a surgical anchor engaging member located on the secondary shaft and configured to receive and secure a surgical sensor anchor ([0347] the clamping mechanism of the targeting fixture 690 can be configured for clamping to the spinous process 2310, or can be configured for anchoring to bone of the patient 18 such that the fixture 690 is substantially stationary and not easily moved; [0351] the robot 15 can hold the guide tube 50; it is understood that the entire targeting mechanism 690 depicted below would be located at distal end 30a in the annotated figure above)
PNG
media_image2.png
564
382
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and a horizontal spool attached to at least a portion of the main body shaft of the surgical anchor insertion tool ([0333] the targeting fixture 690 can comprise a flexible roll configuration)
and comprising a first flanged member, a second flanged member ([0338] within the flexible roll 705, the radio-opaque and active markers (730, 720) can be rigidly coupled to each other; [0330] the calibration frame 700 can comprise a plurality of upright posts 75 that are angled away from the calibration frame by about 10°. In some embodiments, the active markers 720 are mounted on the posts 75)
and a hub separating the first flanged member and the second flanged member ([0399] frame 700)
Regarding claim 2, Crawford teaches the hub is of a sufficient size to allow electrical wires of a sensor or the surgical anchor to be wrapped or unwrapped ([0341] a conventional radiolucent wire can be embedded in the perimeter of the frame 700)
Regarding claim 3, Crawford teaches the first flanged member of the horizontal spool is configured to store one or more of the surgical sensor anchor or a surgical sensor connector ([0324] the calibration frame 700 can comprise a plurality of upright posts 75 that are angled away from the frame 700 (see FIG. 20B). In some embodiments, the plurality of active markers 720 can be mounted on the plurality of upright posts 75)
Regarding claim 4, Crawford teaches the first flanged member comprises a sensor anchor cradle with prongs configured to maintain the surgical sensor anchor in place when secured thereto and a hood ([0330] the active markers 720 are mounted on the posts 75)
PNG
media_image3.png
227
200
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Crawford teaches the first flanged member comprises a sensor connector cradle with prongs configured to maintain a sensor connector in place when secured thereto ([0330] the active markers 720 are mounted on the posts 75)
Regarding claim 6, Crawford teaches the horizontal spool comprises a central opening sufficient in diameter to allow portions of the surgical anchor insertion tool to pass through ([0338] within the flexible roll 705, the radio-opaque and active markers (730, 720) can be rigidly coupled to each other, with each radio-opaque marker 730 coupled to three or more active markers 720. Alternatively, in some embodiments, the markers can simultaneously serve as radio-opaque and active markers (for example, an active marker 720 whose position can be detected from cameras or other sensors), and the position determined from the 3D medical image can substantially exactly correspond to the center of the marker 720. In some embodiments, as few as three such markers 720 could be embedded in the flexible roll 705 and still permit determination of the spatial relationship between the robot 15 and the anatomy of the patient 18)
Regarding claim 7, Crawford teaches the handle is integrally formed with the main body shaft ([0471] FIG. 65 shows an alternative embodiment of the clamping piece 6300 actuation on a spinous process 6301. As shown, the groups of teeth 6330 are attached to rods 6365 that run down the hollow cavities 6360a of the hollow tool tips 6360. These rods 6365 pivot farther up the handle 6350)
Regarding claim 8, Crawford teaches the handle is configured to be removably coupled to the second end of the main body shaft ([0474] each dilator 6800, 6810 may have its own removable conventional handle)
Regarding claim 10, Crawford teaches wherein the secondary shaft is integrally formed with the surgical anchor engaging member ([0165] guide tube 50 can be secured within a housing of the end-effectuator 30 with two shafts 32)
Regarding claim 11, Crawford teaches ([0135] surgical instrument 35 being removably attached to the end-effectuator 30).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crawford as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nino (US 20150367487 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Crawford fails to teach the handle is a T-shaped handle.
However, Nino teaches the handle is a T-shaped handle ([0034] Torque-limiting ratcheting driver 100 may have a generally T-shaped handle or other structure to facilitate use by a user. For example, the handle may by “T-shaped.” The handle may include arms 4 at one end of an axially extending generally hollow cylindrical body 6. Cap 2 covers the same end of the handle)
Crawford and Nino are considered analogous because both disclose handheld surgical devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to design the handle of the device in a T-shape so that Cap 2 may be snap-fitted to cylindrical body 6, or may be welded, adhered, or attached by any equivalent thereof (Nino [0034]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL VICTOR POPESCU whose telephone number is (571)272-7065. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM.
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, Anne Kozak can be reached at (571) 270-0552. 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.
/GABRIEL VICTOR POPESCU/ Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/ANNE M KOZAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights