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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/31/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 5, 7, 10-13, 31-33, 35- 36, & 41-46 have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection. Since applicant’s amendments changed the scope of claims, new reference, Charles et al (US20190380566A1), in introduced in new grounds of rejection to teach all limitations as recited in amended claim(s) in combination with other cited references. See detail in later 103 rejections.
Overall, applicant’s arguments submitted on 10/31/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot. Applicant’s amendments result in new grounds of rejection.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 5, 7, 10, 31-36, and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weide et al (US20180042517A1; hereinafter referred to as Weide) in view of Charles et al (US20190380566A1; hereinafter referred to as Charles)
Regarding Claim 7, Weide discloses a wireless localization system ("systems, devices, assemblies, and methods for localization of one or more tags in a patient" [0002]) comprising:
a camera having a camera perspective ("the display integrates tag and/or medical device information with previously obtained or concurrently obtained medical images of the patient or target tissue (e.g., CT, Mill, ultrasound, or other imaging modalities)." [0050]),
a pad including an exciter coil and a sensor coil (“The attachment component, having one, two, three or more location emitters therein or thereon, is shown receiving a signal from a remote activating device 250.” [0085], “a remote activating device comprising a pad configured to be placed in proximity to a patient having the tag embedded in the patient …the pad further comprises a plurality of witness stations” [0021], “The pad may be integrated or placed on a surgical table or imaging system, may be integrated into the patient's clothing, or otherwise placed in the surgical field. FIG. 5 provides exemplary remote activating device 250 containing an excitation coil 252 and connected to a generator 254 by wires.” [0103]);
a first wireless tag coupled to a medical device (“The attachment component, having one, two, three or more location emitters therein or thereon, is shown receiving a signal from a remote activating device 250.” [0085], “FIGS. 10A-10C. FIG. 10A (side view) and FIG. 10B (top view) show an attachment component 10 attached to a medical device 20…The attachment component 10 has one, two, three or more location emitters 70 therein (not pictured; see FIG. 6)” [0086]),
the first wireless tag configured to generate a first signal in response to a magnetic field generated by the exciter coil (“provided herein are systems, devices, and methods employing one or more or all of… a remote activating device that generates an electromagnetic field within a region of the one or more tags;” [0092], “The attachment component, having one, two, three or more location emitters therein or thereon, is shown receiving a signal from a remote activating device 250.” [0085], “FIGS. 10A-10C. FIG. 10A (side view) and FIG. 10B (top view) show an attachment component 10 attached to a medical device 20…The attachment component 10 has one, two, three or more location emitters 70 therein (not pictured; see FIG. 6)” [0086]),
wherein the first signal is detected by the sensor coil (“The location emitters then provide a signal (e.g., sideband signal) to the witness stations 30, which may be separate (as depicted in FIG. 9) or integrated into the remote activating device.” [0085]);
a second wireless tag coupled to a tissue of a patient ("the tag is placed within tissues" [0055], “which allows the three-dimensional orientation of the medical device 20 and device tip 25 to be determined relative to the tag 100… FIG. 10C shows a display component 40 that includes a display screen 45, which displays: 1) a total distance indicator 80; 2) a tag indicator (e.g., schematic image, symbol, dot, circle, etc.) 101 that corresponds to the location of the actual tag 100; 3) a medical device indicators (e.g., schematic image, line, etc.) 21 and device tip indicator (e.g., schematic image, line, circle, etc.” [0086]),
the second wireless tag configured to generate a second signal in response to the magnetic field generated by the exciter coil (“provided herein are systems, devices, and methods employing one or more or all of: a) one or more tags placed into an object, such as a patient; b) a remote activating device that generates an electromagnetic field within a region of the one or more tags; c) a plurality of witness stations that receive information from the one or more tags that have been exposed to the electromagnetic field; d) one or more emitters positioned on a medical device that are exposed to the electromagnetic field and that emit information received by the witness stations; and e) a computer system for analyzing information received by the witness station and generating and displaying information about the positions of the medical device and/or tag or tags (e.g., relative location, relative distance, orientation, etc.)” [0092]),
wherein the second signal is detected by the sensor coil (“The location emitters then provide a signal (e.g., sideband signal) to the witness stations 30, which may be separate (as depicted in FIG. 9) or integrated into the remote activating device.” [0085])
a processor configured to determine the location of the first wireless tag and the second wireless tag based on the first signal and the second signal detected by the sensor coil (“provided herein are systems, devices, and methods employing one or more or all of: a) one or more tags placed into an object, such as a patient; b) a remote activating device that generates an electromagnetic field within a region of the one or more tags; c) a plurality of witness stations that receive information from the one or more tags that have been exposed to the electromagnetic field; d) one or more emitters positioned on a medical device that are exposed to the electromagnetic field and that emit information received by the witness stations; and e) a computer system for analyzing information received by the witness station and generating and displaying information about the positions of the medical device and/or tag or tags (e.g., relative location, relative distance, orientation, etc.)” [0092])
The embodiment of Weide discussed above does not teach a surgical robot assembly including a robotic arm and a tool coupled to the robotic arm, the first wireless tag coupled to the camera of the surgical robot assembly, and a third wireless tag coupled to the camera of the surgical robot assembly, the third wireless tag configured to generate a third signal in response to the magnetic field generated by the exciter coil, wherein the third signal is detected by the sensor coil; and its location determined.
However, In a separate embodiment Weide discloses a surgical robot assembly including ("Where a more complex medical device, such as a robotic surgical system (e.g., da Vinci surgical system) is employed, multiple emitters located on multiple different locations of the device are employed to provide location, orientation, and other position information of multiple components (e.g., arms) of the device." [0048])
a robotic arm ("Where a more complex medical device, such as a robotic surgical system (e.g., da Vinci surgical system) is employed, multiple emitters located on multiple different locations of the device are employed to provide location, orientation, and other position information of multiple components (e.g., arms) of the device." [0048]),
and a tool coupled to the robotic arm ("Where a more complex medical device, such as a robotic surgical system (e.g., da Vinci surgical system) is employed, multiple emitters located on multiple different locations of the device are employed to provide location, orientation, and other position information of multiple components (e.g., arms) of the device." [0048], Da Vinci surgical system comprises a surgical instrument coupled to a robotic arm)
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment of Weide as outlined above with a surgical robot assembly including a robotic arm and a tool coupled to the robotic arm as taught by Weide, because the system can automatically (e.g., robotically) controls the medical device or one or more functions thereof [0050].
Although Weide does not specifically disclose that the first wireless tag coupled to the camera of the surgical robot assembly, and the third wireless tag is coupled to the camera of the surgical robot assembly, Weide implies and encourages the using of different emitters (wireless tags) on different components of the system (which could include the camera) for the purpose of better localization of multiple components (see [0048]).
In addition, in a similar field of endeavor, Charles teaches a surgical device including a plurality of cameras integrated with a surgical robotic system [Abstract, 0336-0338].
Charles also teaches that the first wireless tag coupled to the camera of the surgical robot assembly, and the third wireless tag is coupled to the camera of the surgical robot assembly (“Multiple cameras can each have a position and/or orientation that is tracked, e.g., electronically or optically…. Tracking options include electromagnetic tracking (as, for example, using NDI Aurora or Ascension medSafe). In such systems, 6-DOF sensors may be less than 1 mm in outer diameter. These systems do not require a line-of-sight, as in optical tracking systems. Electromagnetic tracking sensors can be easily integrated within the surgical devices at relatively low cost….. The EM tracking may take the form of EM sensor coils, or other techniques…. Electromagnetic tracker coils can be positioned within sufficient proximity to the cameras and the tracking device included therewith such that the relative location and/or orientation of the cameras can be determined. Such electromagnetic coils can provide 6-DOF position and orientation information, which may then be transmitted to the image processor.” [0340-0342]; Charles uses multiple electromagnetic coils (first and third wireless tag), which would each elicit a magnetic signal response, placed around the camera to fully encompass all 6 DOFs of the cameras)
and a control console, and wherein the location of the second wireless tag is displayed on the control console from the camera perspective (“Electromagnetic trackers can also be positioned on a patient, for example on a bone or anatomic landmarks, as well as being positioned on external fixation systems, for example a cranial fixation system for neurosurgery. The position of the cameras with relation to these external tracked points can be used as input to guide optical navigation systems, for example those provided by Medtronic, Stryker, or BrainLabs.” [0345], “The position and orientation information can be used to reduce the computational load required to stitch or tile the various images into the composite image and/or to render the image in stereo for which a key application is a touch screen user interface… These sensors can measure the physical motion of the cameras due to movement of the device. This motion can be subtracted from the image in order to render a displayed image in which the area of interest is relatively still, despite any movement by the surgical device.” [0342-0343]; the composite image is used from multiple cameras to image a region of interest wherein an electromagnetic tracker is placed on the region of interest, the position information of the electromagnetic tracker is used to further improve the construction of the composite image to ensure the region of interest is properly mapped for navigation)
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Weide as outlined above with the first wireless tag coupled to the camera of the surgical robot assembly, and the third wireless tag is coupled to the camera of the surgical robot assembly; and a control console, and wherein the location of the second wireless tag is displayed on the control console from the camera perspective as taught by Charles, because The position and orientation information can be used to reduce the computational load required to stitch or tile the various images into the composite image and/or to render the image in stereo for which a key application is a touch screen user interface [0342].
Regarding Claim 5, Weide discloses that the tissue that the second wireless tag is coupled to is one of a lung tissue, a bone tissue, a soft tissue, and an artery ("the tag is placed within tissues, such as…bone…tissue" [0055], “The attachment component 10 has one, two, three or more location emitters 70 therein (not pictured; see FIG. 6), which allows the three-dimensional orientation of the medical device 20 and device tip 25 to be determined relative to the tag 100” [0086]).
Regarding Claim 10, in a separate embodiment Weide discloses that the sensor coil is a first sensor coil and the system further includes a second sensor coil coupled to the robotic arm ("the witness stations are integrated into or attached to a medical device used in the medical procedure." [0045], "location of the emitters is accomplished geometrically by measuring the quasi-simultaneous power detected from the emitters at a plurality of witness stations" [0047], "Where a more complex medical device, such as a robotic surgical system (e.g., da Vinci surgical system) is employed, multiple emitters located on multiple different locations of the device are employed to provide location, orientation, and other position information of multiple components (e.g., arms) of the device." [0048]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment of Weide as outlined above with the sensor coil is a first sensor coil and the system further includes a second sensor coil coupled to the robotic arm as taught by Weide, because the system can automatically (e.g., robotically) controls the medical device or one or more functions thereof [0050].
Regarding Claim 31, Weide discloses that the location of the second wireless tag is displayed on the control console ("FIG. 10C shows a display component 40 that includes a display screen 45, which displays: 1) a total distance indicator 80; 2) a tag indicator (e.g., schematic image, symbol, dot, circle, etc.) 101 that corresponds to the location of the actual tag 100; 3) a medical device indicators (e.g., schematic image, line, etc.) 21 and device tip indicator (e.g., schematic image, line, circle, etc.) 26, which correspond to the actual medical device 20 and device tip 25; 4) a tag-tip vector indicator (e.g., broad line, skinny line, tapered shape, etc.) 85, which extends from the tag indicator (e.g., schematic image) 101 to the device tip indicator (e.g., image) 26; and 5) a depth indicator 90, which provides a visual indicator of how high above or below the device tip 25 is compared to the tag 100." [0086]).
Weide does not specifically disclose the location overlayed on a field of view of the camera.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Charles teaches the location overlayed on a field of view of the camera (“Electromagnetic trackers can also be positioned on a patient, for example on a bone or anatomic landmarks, as well as being positioned on external fixation systems, for example a cranial fixation system for neurosurgery. The position of the cameras with relation to these external tracked points can be used as input to guide optical navigation systems, for example those provided by Medtronic, Stryker, or BrainLabs.” [0345], “The position and orientation information can be used to reduce the computational load required to stitch or tile the various images into the composite image and/or to render the image in stereo for which a key application is a touch screen user interface… These sensors can measure the physical motion of the cameras due to movement of the device. This motion can be subtracted from the image in order to render a displayed image in which the area of interest is relatively still, despite any movement by the surgical device.” [0342-0343]; the composite image is used from multiple cameras to image a region of interest wherein an electromagnetic tracker is placed on the region of interest, the position information of the electromagnetic tracker is used to further improve the construction of the composite image to ensure the region of interest is properly mapped for navigation)
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Weide as outlined above with the location overlayed on a field of view of the camera as taught by Charles, because The position and orientation information can be used to reduce the computational load required to stitch or tile the various images into the composite image and/or to render the image in stereo for which a key application is a touch screen user interface [0342].
Regarding Claim 32, in a separate embodiment Weide discloses that the robotic arm is one of a plurality of robotic arms ("Where a more complex medical device, such as a robotic surgical system (e.g., da Vinci surgical system) is employed, multiple emitters located on multiple different locations of the device are employed to provide location, orientation, and other position information of multiple components (e.g., arms) of the device." [0048])
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment of Weide as outlined above with the robotic arm is one of a plurality of robotic arms as taught by Weide, because the system can automatically (e.g., robotically) controls the medical device or one or more functions thereof [0050].
Regarding Claim 33, Weide discloses the wireless tag includes a layer of material positioned between a winding and the robotic arm ("the tag comprises a coil antenna. In some embodiments, the coil antenna is a ferrite-core coil antenna." [0094], in applicant specification paragraph [0132] it is stated “the first layer 1204 is a ferrite core”)
in a separate embodiment Weide discloses that the assembly further comprises a fourth wireless tag coupled to the robotic arm ("Where a more complex medical device, such as a robotic surgical system (e.g., da Vinci surgical system) is employed, multiple emitters located on multiple different locations of the device are employed to provide location, orientation, and other position information of multiple components (e.g., arms) of the device." [0048], "an attachment component 10 that is attached to a medical device 20, which has a device tip 25. The attachment component 20 has two location emitters 70 located therein." [0124], see FIG 6 for longitudinally placed location emitters (70) in line with a device tip (25) which in a Da Vinci Surgical system would be a surgical instrument on a robotic arm).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment of Weide as outlined above with the assembly further comprises a fourth wireless tag coupled to the robotic arm as taught by Weide, because the system can automatically (e.g., robotically) controls the medical device or one or more functions thereof [0050].
Regarding Claim 35, Weide discloses that the layer of material is iron, manganese, zinc,silicon, aluminum, nickel, electrical steel, or cobalt-iron ("the tag comprises a coil antenna. In some embodiments, the coil antenna is a ferrite-core coil antenna." [0094] it is known in the art that ferrite is most commonly iron, nickel, zinc or manganese)
Regarding Claim 36, in a separate embodiment Weide discloses that the sensor coil is a first sensor coil and the system further includes a second sensor coil coupled to the robotic arm ("the witness stations are integrated into or attached to a medical device used in the medical procedure." [0045], "location of the emitters is accomplished geometrically by measuring the quasi-simultaneous power detected from the emitters at a plurality of witness stations" [0047], "Where a more complex medical device, such as a robotic surgical system (e.g., da Vinci surgical system) is employed, multiple emitters located on multiple different locations of the device are employed to provide location, orientation, and other position information of multiple components (e.g., arms) of the device." [0048], “the emitters are also used as detectors (e.g., provide witness stations on the medical device” [0049])
wherein the second sensor coil is oriented orthogonal to a coil in the fourth wireless tag ("an exemplary configuration of a witness station 30, with three detection coils 34 (aka antennas), one oriented in the x plane, one in the y plane, and one in the z plane." [0106])
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment of Weide as outlined above with the sensor coil is a first sensor coil and the system further includes a second sensor coil coupled to the robotic arm as taught by Weide, because the system can automatically (e.g., robotically) controls the medical device or one or more functions thereof [0050].
Regarding Claim 41, Weide discloses that the determined location of the fourth wireless tag is compared to a planned movement of the robotic arm (“the display provides a graphical representation of the tag, patient, and/or medical device on a monitor. In other embodiments, the display provides directional information for moving or positioning the medical device. In some embodiments, the system automatically (e.g., robotically) controls the medical device or one or more functions thereof.” [0050])
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weide in view of Charles as applied to claim 7, and further in view of Ramirez et al (US 20190327394 A1; hereinafter referred to as Ramirez)
Regarding Claim 11, Weide in view of Charles teaches all limitations noted above except that the system further includes a movable object including a fourth wireless tag, wherein the movable object is moved to various positions and detected by the camera to register the field of view of the camera.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Ramirez teaches a robotic imaging apparatus includes a robotic arm, a stereoscopic camera, and a sensor positioned between the robotic arm and the stereoscopic camera [Abstract].
Ramirez also teaches that the system further includes a movable object including a fourth wireless tag, wherein the movable object is moved to various positions and detected by the camera to register the field of view of the camera ("an instrument may include one or more fiducials and/or other markers. The example stereoscopic visualization camera 300 records images that include the fiducials. The processor 4102 and/or the robotic arm controller 4106 may perform a coordinate transform from the camera frame space to robot space to determine how the instrument is being moved along the x,y,z axes. The example processor 4102 and/or the robotic arm controller 4106 track how the fiducials move in the image and determine the corresponding x,y,z movement vectors." [0603])
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Weide in view of Charles as outlined above with the system further including a movable object including a fourth wireless tag, wherein the movable object is moved to various positions and detected by the camera to register the field of view of the camera as taught by Ramirez, because it would allow for the system to to determine how the instrument is being moved along the x,y,z axes in the field of view [0603].
Claim 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weide in view of Charles and further in view of Ramirez as applied to claim 11 above, and further and further in view of Macivar et al (US20200250386A1; hereinafter referred to as Macivar)
Regarding Claim 12, Weide in view of Charles and further in view of Ramirez teaches all limitations noted above except that the movable object includes an outer shell, an inner sphere movable with respect to the outer shell, wherein the fourth wireless tag is positioned within the inner sphere.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Macivar teaches a self-righting radio frequency tracking tag [Abstract].
Macivar also teaches that the movable object includes an outer shell, an inner sphere movable with respect to the outer shell, wherein the fourth wireless tag is positioned within the inner sphere ( "the self-righting mechanism is configured to allow for a RFID tracking tag to maintain an optimally (e.g. generally vertically) oriented position at all times by using a double-spherical design, in which a ballasted inner spherical shell or ball containing a RFID tracking tag rotates freely within an outer spherical shell or ball" [0005])
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Weide as outlined above with the movable object includes an outer shell, an inner sphere movable with respect to the outer shell, wherein the fourth wireless tag is positioned within the inner sphere as taught by Charles, because it would always maintain the RFID tag in an optimal orientation even when the outer-sphere is prevented from rotating [0006].
Regarding Claim 13, Weide in view of Charles and further in view of Ramirez teaches all limitations noted above except that the inner sphere includes a weighted portion to orient the sphere in a default orientation with respect to gravity.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Macivar teaches a self-righting radio frequency tracking tag [Abstract].
Macivar also teaches that the inner sphere includes a weighted portion to orient the sphere in a default orientation with respect to gravity ( "the self-righting mechanism is configured to allow for a RFID tracking tag to maintain an optimally (e.g. generally vertically) oriented position at all times by using a double-spherical design, in which a ballasted inner spherical shell or ball containing a RFID tracking tag rotates freely within an outer spherical shell or ball" [0005])
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Weide in view of Charles and further in view of Ramirez as outlined above with the inner sphere includes a weighted portion to orient the sphere in a default orientation with respect to gravity as taught by Macivar, because it would always maintain the RFID tag in an optimal orientation even when the outer-sphere is prevented from rotating [0006].
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weide in view of Charles as applied to claim 7 above, and further and further in view of Lee et al (US 20170312046 A1; hereinafter referred to as Lee)
Regarding Claim 42, Weide in view of Charles teaches all limitations noted above except that the second wireless tag comprise an outer housing including an anchor, wherein the anchor is configured to be secured within the tissue of the patient; and wherein the anchor extends radially outward from a longitudinal axis of the outer housing.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Lee teaches systems for localization of a tag in a tissue of a patient [Abstract].
Lee also teaches that the second wireless tag comprise an outer housing including an anchor, wherein the anchor is configured to be secured within the tissue of the patient; and wherein the anchor extends radially outward from a longitudinal axis of the outer housing (“the tag comprises a fixing component on the outer surface (e.g., of the housing, if present) to anchor the tag in the desired location. In some embodiments, the fixing component is a hook, barb, or other physical extension.” [0057]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Weide and Charles as outlined above with the second wireless tag comprise an outer housing including an anchor, wherein the anchor is configured to be secured within the tissue of the patient; and wherein the anchor extends radially outward from a longitudinal axis of the outer housing as taught by Lee, because it would ensure that the tag is the desired location [0057].
Claims 43-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weide in view of Charles as applied to claim 7 above, and further and further in view of Rudie et al (US20190365478A1; hereinafter referred to as Rudie)
Regarding Claim 43, Weide in view of Charles teaches all limitations noted above except that the exciter coil is a first exciter coil and the pad further includes a second exciter coil, a third exciter coil, and a fourth exciter coil positioned circumferentially around a center; and wherein the magnetic field generated by the first exciter coil, the second exciter coil, the third exciter coil, and the fourth exciter coil comprises three orthogonal magnetic fields.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Rudie teaches systems for generating exciter signals to activate a remotely located tag [Abstract].
Rudie also teaches the exciter coil is a first exciter coil and the pad further includes a second exciter coil, a third exciter coil, and a fourth exciter coil positioned circumferentially around a center; and wherein the magnetic field generated by the first exciter coil, the second exciter coil, the third exciter coil, and the fourth exciter coil comprises three orthogonal magnetic fields (“ a remote activation device (e.g., exciter assembly) that generates a magnetic field (e.g., time varying magnetic field) within a region of the tag, the remote activating device comprising four or more exciter coils each configured to flow current in either a clockwise or counterclockwise direction such that the magnetic field generated by the remote activating device may be selectively generated in substantially any of X, Y, or Z directions” [0011]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Weide and Charles as outlined above with the exciter coil is a first exciter coil and the pad further includes a second exciter coil, a third exciter coil, and a fourth exciter coil positioned circumferentially around a center; and wherein the magnetic field generated by the first exciter coil, the second exciter coil, the third exciter coil, and the fourth exciter coil comprises three orthogonal magnetic fields as taught by Rudie, because it would ensure that the tag(s) can be excited for any angle that it may be placed [0011].
Regarding Claim 44, Weide in view of Charles teaches all limitations noted above except that the sensor coil is a first sensor coil, the pad further including a second sensor coil, a third sensor coil, and a fourth sensor coil; wherein the first sensor coil, the second sensor coil, the third sensor coil, and the fourth sensor coil are positioned circumferentially around the first exciter coil.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Rudie teaches that the sensor coil is a first sensor coil, the pad further including a second sensor coil, a third sensor coil, and a fourth sensor coil; wherein the first sensor coil, the second sensor coil, the third sensor coil, and the fourth sensor coil are positioned circumferentially around the first exciter coil (“ a remote activation device (e.g., exciter assembly) that generates a magnetic field (e.g., time varying magnetic field) within a region of the tag, the remote activating device comprising four or more exciter coils each configured to flow current in either a clockwise or counterclockwise direction such that the magnetic field generated by the remote activating device may be selectively generated in substantially any of X, Y, or Z directions” [0011], “the assembly comprising the exciter further comprises sensors (e.g., the receiving antenna/sensing/witness station coils).” [0093], “location of the location emitters is accomplished geometrically by measuring the quasi-simultaneous power detected from the emitters at a plurality of witness stations (e.g., four or more stations)” [0119]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Weide and Charles as outlined above with the sensor coil is a first sensor coil, the pad further including a second sensor coil, a third sensor coil, and a fourth sensor coil; wherein the first sensor coil, the second sensor coil, the third sensor coil, and the fourth sensor coil are positioned circumferentially around the first exciter coil as taught by Rudie, because it would determine the location of the emitter without ambiguity [0119].
Regarding Claim 45, Weide in view of Charles teaches all limitations noted above except that the first sensor coil includes a first sensor axis and the third sensor coil includes a third sensor axis, wherein the first sensor axis is parallel to the third sensor axis, and wherein the second sensor coil includes a second sensor axis and the fourth sensor coil includes a fourth sensor axis, wherein the second sensor axis is parallel to the fourth sensor axis.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Rudie teaches that the first sensor coil includes a first sensor axis and the third sensor coil includes a third sensor axis, wherein the first sensor axis is parallel to the third sensor axis, and wherein the second sensor coil includes a second sensor axis and the fourth sensor coil includes a fourth sensor axis, wherein the second sensor axis is parallel to the fourth sensor axis (“ a remote activation device (e.g., exciter assembly) that generates a magnetic field (e.g., time varying magnetic field) within a region of the tag, the remote activating device comprising four or more exciter coils each configured to flow current in either a clockwise or counterclockwise direction such that the magnetic field generated by the remote activating device may be selectively generated in substantially any of X, Y, or Z directions” [0011], “the assembly comprising the exciter further comprises sensors (e.g., the receiving antenna/sensing/witness station coils).” [0093], “location of the location emitters is accomplished geometrically by measuring the quasi-simultaneous power detected from the emitters at a plurality of witness stations (e.g., four or more stations)” [0119], “The exemplary exciter assembly 250 in FIG. 4A is also shown with twelve witness station assemblies 161 (each with a witness coil 160). The twelve witness coils 160 alternate opposite orientation (along x and y axes)” [0149]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Weide and Charles as outlined above with the first sensor coil includes a first sensor axis and the third sensor coil includes a third sensor axis, wherein the first sensor axis is parallel to the third sensor axis, and wherein the second sensor coil includes a second sensor axis and the fourth sensor coil includes a fourth sensor axis, wherein the second sensor axis is parallel to the fourth sensor axis as taught by Rudie, because it would reduce cross talk (This isolation is also important because crosstalk between the exciter coil and witness coils would otherwise greatly impede navigation because the crosstalk term would contribute significant signal) [0149, 0021].
Regarding Claim 46, Weide in view of Charles teaches all limitations noted above except that the first sensor axis is perpendicular to the second sensor axis; and wherein the first exciter coil includes an exciter coil axis perpendicular to the first sensor axis and the second sensor axis.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Rudie teaches that the first sensor axis is perpendicular to the second sensor axis; and wherein the first exciter coil includes an exciter coil axis perpendicular to the first sensor axis and the second sensor axis (“ a remote activation device (e.g., exciter assembly) that generates a magnetic field (e.g., time varying magnetic field) within a region of the tag, the remote activating device comprising four or more exciter coils each configured to flow current in either a clockwise or counterclockwise direction such that the magnetic field generated by the remote activating device may be selectively generated in substantially any of X, Y, or Z directions” [0011], “the assembly comprising the exciter further comprises sensors (e.g., the receiving antenna/sensing/witness station coils).” [0093], “location of the location emitters is accomplished geometrically by measuring the quasi-simultaneous power detected from the emitters at a plurality of witness stations (e.g., four or more stations)” [0119], “The exemplary exciter assembly 250 in FIG. 4A is also shown with twelve witness station assemblies 161 (each with a witness coil 160). The twelve witness coils 160 alternate opposite orientation (along x and y axes)” [0149]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Weide and Charles as outlined above with the first sensor axis is perpendicular to the second sensor axis; and wherein the first exciter coil includes an exciter coil axis perpendicular to the first sensor axis and the second sensor axis as taught by Rudie, because it would reduce cross talk (This isolation is also important because crosstalk between the exciter coil and witness coils would otherwise greatly impede navigation because the crosstalk term would contribute significant signal) [0149, 0021].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN MALDONADO whose telephone number is 703-756-1421. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am-4:00 pm PST M-Th 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, Christopher Koharski can be reached on (571) 272-7230. 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.
/Steven Maldonado/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/CHAO SHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797