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
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 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 10-12 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kirschman (US 2014/0012338).
Regarding claim 1, Kirschman discloses an implant extractor comprising an elongated body (see figure below) having a proximal end (12c) for attachment to an extraction device; a first arm (see figure below) fixedly connected to and extending laterally away from the elongated body (figures 1-2; and a second arm (14) pivotably connected to the first arm (figures 1-3A), the second arm having a moment arm (see figure below) for generating a torque about a distal end of the second arm (14d), wherein the second arm extends through a through-hole (18) formed exclusively by the first arm, which circumscribes the second arm (figures 1, 3A). Regarding claim 2, Kirschman discloses the first arm is integrally formed with the elongated body (figure 2). Regarding claim 4, Kirschman discloses the first arm comprises a first arm segment (12e); a second arm segment (12f) extending from the first arm segment; and a tail end (12d) extending laterally of the first and second arm segments (figure 2). Regarding claim 5, Kirschman discloses a proximal end of the second arm is positioned directly above the tail end of the first arm (figure 3A, when in the closed/collapsed/compressed position). Regarding claim 7, Kirschman discloses a threaded connector (102) engaged with the first arm and the moment arm to apply a force to one of the first and second arms (figures 1-3A). Regarding claim 8, Kirschman discloses the threaded connector comprises a screw displacement device (102/112). Regarding claim 10, Kirschman discloses a first jaw (42) releasably attachable to a distal end of the first arm (figures 1-1A, 3A); and a second jaw (44) releasably attachable to the distal end of the second arm (figures 1-1A, 3A). Regarding claim 11, Kirschman discloses a distal portion of at least one of the first and second jaws is substantially cup-shaped, substantially cylinder-shaped, substantially prong-shaped, substantially toothed-shaped, substantially conical, substantially J-shaped, substantially boot-shaped, substantially curved or substantially dog-leg in shape (figure 1). Regarding claim 12, Kirschman discloses the first arm comprises a latch (¶44) for releasably retaining a first jaw thereto (42/44).
Regarding claim 16, Kirschman discloses the second arm further comprises a distal arm segment (22) having a longitudinal axis (considered the central longitudinal axis of 22) substantially parallel to a longitudinal axis of the elongated body (considered the central longitudinal axis of 12, figure 3A).
Regarding claim 17, Kirschman discloses the second arm is received about a midportion of the first arm (figures 1-3A).
Regarding claim 18, Kirschman discloses the second arm pivots proximate a distal end of the first arm (figure 3A).
Regarding claim 19, Kirschman discloses the pivotable connection of the second arm to the first arm is substantially in line with a longitudinal axis of the proximal end of the elongated body (figures 1-3A).
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 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirschman (US 2014/0012338).
Regarding claim 3, Kirschman discloses the first arm comprises a first arm segment (12e) and a second arm segment (12f) having a longitudinal axis (considered the central longitudinal axis) at angle (see figure below) relative to a longitudinal axis of the first arm segment. However, Kirschman fails to expressly teach or disclose the longitudinal axis of the second arm segment is at an angle of about 80° to 160° relative to the longitudinal axis of the first arm segment.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the longitudinal axis of the second arm segment is at an angle of about 80° to 160° relative to the longitudinal axis of the first arm segment of Kirschman, since it is known that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art (the two axes being at an oblique angle to one another), discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 6, Kirschman fails to expressly teach or disclose the second arm distal arm segment (22) having a longitudinal axis (considered the central longitudinal axis of 22) is about 80° to about 160° relative to a longitudinal axis of the moment arm (considered the central longitudinal axis of the moment arm).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the longitudinal axes of the distal arm segment of the second arm and the longitudinal axis of the moment arm to be about 80° to about 160° relative to each other of Kirschman, since it is known that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art (the two axes being at an oblique angle to one another), discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
PNG
media_image1.png
442
370
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
764
574
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirschman (US 2014/0012338) in view of Sweitzer (US 2016/0270929).
Regarding claim 13, Kirschman fails to expressly teach or disclose the elongate
body further comprises a quick connect to attach to an extraction device.
Sweitzer discloses the elongated body further comprises a quick connect (39) to
attach to an extraction device (figure 1) as it provides adequate force to remove the
implant (95).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the
time of filing to have constructed the implant extractor of Kirschman to have a quick
connect as taught by Sweitzer as it provides adequate force to remove the implant. Regarding claim 14, Sweitzer discloses the quick connect comprises a polygonal
shaped base (see figure below) for attachment with a cooperating striking member.
Regarding claim 15, Sweitzer discloses the quick connect of the elongated body
is laterally offset from a remainder of the elongated body (see figure below, the quick
connect extends laterally away from the main portion 21 of the first arm at an angle).
PNG
media_image3.png
650
573
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW JAMES LAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7375. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 6:30-3:00.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-3614. 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.
/MATTHEW J LAWSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
