PTAB

IPR2013-00633

Arthrex v. Bonutti Skeletal Innovations LLC

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition Intelligence

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Apparatus and Method for Securing a Portion of a Body
  • Brief Description: The ’514 patent discloses a surgical apparatus and method for securing body tissue, particularly bone. The system generally consists of a first anchor, a second anchor, and a flexible member (such as a suture) that extends between the two anchors to secure or approximate segments of body tissue.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Anticipation by Hayhurst - Claims 1-8, 13-22, 25-29, and 31 are anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102 by Hayhurst.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Hayhurst (Patent 5,269,809).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Hayhurst discloses every element of the challenged claims. Hayhurst teaches a surgical anchor system for securing bone that includes a rigid first anchor inserted lengthwise through a channel in bone. This first anchor is configured to toggle to a transverse position to span the channel's width. Hayhurst further discloses a second anchor (a "locking washer") and a flexible member ("suture") connecting the first and second anchors. Petitioner asserted that this structure, including its function of securing bone tissue, directly corresponds to the limitations of independent claims 1, 16, 25, 26, and 29, as well as their respective dependent claims. For example, Hayhurst's toggling anchor meets the limitations of a "rigid first anchor having first and second orientations," where one orientation is narrow enough to fit in the channel and the second is long enough to span it.

Ground 2: Anticipation by Ferragamo - Claims 1-31 are anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102 by Ferragamo.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Ferragamo (Patent 5,769,894).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner contended that Ferragamo independently anticipates all challenged claims. Ferragamo describes an apparatus for securing bone that includes a rigid first anchor ("fixation member") that is passed through a channel in a bone (the femur) and is tiltable to secure its position. The system also includes a second anchor and a flexible member (comprising a tissue graft and sutures) that connects the two anchors. Petitioner mapped Ferragamo's disclosure to the claim elements, arguing that its fixation members, passing channel, and flexible connecting member teach all limitations of the apparatus and method claims of the ’514 patent. The petitioner argued Ferragamo's disclosure was comprehensive, anticipating every claim from 1 through 31.

Ground 3: Obviousness over Hayhurst and Graf - Claim 22 is obvious over Hayhurst in view of Graf.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Hayhurst (Patent 5,269,809) and Graf (Patent 5,306,301).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that claim 22, which requires that "at least a portion of the flexible member includes a polymer and at least a portion of the first or second anchor includes a metal," was obvious over the combination of Hayhurst and Graf. Hayhurst discloses that its flexible suture can be made from polymer materials (e.g., Ticron or Dexon) but does not explicitly disclose that its anchors are made of metal. Graf, in contrast, teaches that a similar elongated surgical body can be formed from surgical-quality stainless steel.
    • Motivation to Combine: A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) would combine Hayhurst's polymer suture system with Graf's teaching of using stainless steel for the anchor. The primary motivation would be to improve the surgical device's performance by making the anchor from a well-known, strong, and biocompatible material. This modification would allow the anchor to withstand greater forces during and after implantation and would decrease the likelihood of adverse biological reactions within the body.
    • Expectation of Success: The substitution of a known surgical material like stainless steel for an anchor component was a simple and predictable design choice. A POSITA would have had a high expectation of success in creating a reliable and effective surgical anchor by making such a modification.

4. Key Claim Construction Positions

  • Petitioner stated that for the purposes of the inter partes review (IPR), the challenged claims should be given their broadest reasonable construction in light of the patent's specification. Key proposed constructions included:
    • "Channel": a passage.
    • "Anchor": a device for securing another article.
    • "Flexible member": a pliable structure.
  • Petitioner argued these broad constructions were appropriate under the applicable standard and that, even under these constructions, the prior art rendered the claims unpatentable.

5. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-31 of Patent 8,147,514 as unpatentable.