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 .
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.
Remarks
This final office action is a response to the reply received on 02/25/2026. Claims 1-2, 4-6, and 8-22 are pending. Claims 1-2, 4, 6, 8-11, and 13-22 have been amended. Claims 3 and 7 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments on Page 6 with respect to the applicant asserting that the prior art does not disclose the different surgical approaches (and therefore 3D zone of movement) being determined for the patient in the ‘same’ “single position” [Page 6 of Remarks] has been considered but is not persuasive.
However, Tillet’s disclosure and the citations provided in the claim rejection illustrate that multiple approaches (lateral, anterior, and posterior – which have corresponding 3D zones of movement) are made by the robotic arm while the patient is in the same single position. For example, this is illustrated in the Figures previously cited:
Figure 3C which illustrates the patient lying on their side (corresponding to a single position), as the robotic arm approaches the patient laterally (corresponding to a 3D zone of movement/lateral approach)
PNG
media_image1.png
355
588
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As well as Figure 3E which illustrates the patient lying on their side (corresponding to the same single position as shown in Figure 3C above), as the robotic arm approaches the patient, for example: posteriorly or anteriorly (corresponding to other 3D zones of movement/other approaches which are the posterior and anterior approaches – both of which are represented by Figure 3E).
PNG
media_image2.png
317
575
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Additionally, Tillet’s disclosure also illustrates evidence that the different approaches can be performed while the patient is in the same single position (such as is illustrated in the figures with the patient lying on their side). For example/clarification, see Tillet ¶0070 via “patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side).” which discloses at least two of the approaches (posterior or anterior) while the patient is lying in the one single position.
Regarding the other amended limitations, for example, the addition of “within which the joints and links can move” with reference to the three-dimensional zones of movements; Tillet’s three-dimensional zones of movements encompass trajectories for the robotic arms. Thus, the zones also include the robotic joint and link movements.
Additionally the amendments to the following limitation: “one or more instructions for actuating the robotic device according to the first three-dimensional zone when the approach is the first surgical approach and the second three-dimensional zone when the approach is the second surgical approach” - which describes the actuating based on the desired approach is also disclosed by Tillet in at least ¶0033 via "A control loop may continuously read the tracking data and the current parameters (e.g., joint parameters) of the robotic arm 101 and may send instructions to a robotic controller to cause the robotic arm 101 to move to a desired position and orientation within the patient coordinate system.”.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 5, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tillett et. al. (WO 2019070997 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Tillett discloses:
A method for robotic assisted surgery, the method comprising: (See at least ¶0056 via "The surgical procedure may be a robot-assisted spinal procedure, such as a minimally-invasive lateral transpsoas interbody fusion.")
providing a robotic device, the robotic device including a plurality of links, a plurality of joints, and a processor configured to manipulator the plurality of links (See at least ¶0021 via " The robotic arm 101 may comprise a multi-joint arm that includes a plurality of linkages connected by joints having actuator(s) and optional encoder(s) to enable the linkages to rotate, bend and/or translate relative to one another in response to control signals from a robot control system." and also ¶0074 via "A typical computing device 1300 may include a processor 1301…")
determining, via the processor, a first three-dimensional zone of movement within which the joints and links can move according to a first surgical approach of a patient in a single position; (See at least Figure 3A-3D which illustrate the first three dimensional zone of movement of which is the space that the robot follows its trajectory in to the first surgical approach as annotated in Figure 3C below. Additionally see ¶0058 which describes the trajectory to the surgical area/approach site being selected and "the path may be selected to minimize disturbance to other anatomic features, such as neural structures (e.g., lumbar nerve plexus) located around or within the psoas muscle." which indicates that the zone of movement is limited to avoid disturbance. Also see ¶0034 which indicates that there can be a plurality of trajectories and target locations. Also, see at least ¶0022 via "The collected image data may be processed using a suitable processor (e.g., computer) to perform a three-dimensional reconstruction of the object…In embodiments, image data may be obtained pre-operatively (i.e., prior to performing a surgical procedure), intra-operatively (i.e., during a surgical procedure) or post-operatively (i.e., following a surgical procedure) by positioning the patient within the bore 107 of the imaging device 103" *Which depicts how the processor is further used to determine the 3D zone of movement)
*Note: The "three dimensional zone of movement" in Figure 3C can either be the first or second three dimensional zone of movement. Additionally, the "surgical zone" as shown in Figure 3C can either be the first or second surgical zone. Regarding Claim 1, Figure 3C is being interpreted as having a first three-dimensional zone of movement with a first surgical approach.
PNG
media_image3.png
355
588
media_image3.png
Greyscale
determining, via the processor, a second three-dimensional zone of movement within which the joints and links can move according to a second surgical approach of the patient in the same single position; (See at least Figure 3E which illustrates a second surgical approach of the patient in the same single position, where the patient is lying on their side. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)". Also see ¶0034 which indicates that there can be a plurality of trajectories and target locations. Also see at least ¶0022 *Which depicts how the processor is further used to determine the 3D zone of movement)
*Note: The "three dimensional zone of movement" in Figure 3E can either be the first or second three dimensional zone of movement. Additionally, the "surgical zone" as shown in Figure 3E can either be the first or second surgical zone. Regarding Claim 1, Figure 3E is being interpreted as having a second three-dimensional zone of movement with a second surgical approach.
PNG
media_image4.png
317
575
media_image4.png
Greyscale
determining, via the processor, one or more instructions for actuating a robotic device according to the first three-dimensional zone when the approach is the first surgical approach and the second three-dimensional zone when the approach is the second surgical approach; and providing, via the processor, the one or more instructions to the robotic device so that at least one of the plurality of links is manipulated according to one or more instructions (See at least ¶0033 via "A control loop may continuously read the tracking data and the current parameters (e.g., joint parameters) of the robotic arm 101 and may send instructions to a robotic controller to cause the robotic arm 101 to move to a desired position and orientation within the patient coordinate system." Additionally, see at least ¶0021 which discloses the control of the links, and also see at least ¶0022 *Which depicts how the processor is further used to determine the 3D zone of movement).
Regarding Claim 2, Tillett discloses the method of Claim 1.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the first three-dimensional zone of movement according to the first surgical approach of the patient in the single position is based on a lateral approach (See at least annotated Figure 3C which illustrates a lateral approach with a preset trajectory in a first three-dimensional zone of movement)
PNG
media_image5.png
315
545
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 5, Tillett discloses the method of Claim 1.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein the single position is a lateral decubitus position (See at least Figures 3A-3E which illustrates the patient lying on their side in a lateral decubitus position).
Regarding Claim 8, Tillett discloses the method of Claim 1.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the second three-dimensional zone of movement according to the second surgical approach of the patient in the single position is based on a posterior approach (See at least Figure 3E which shows a second three dimensional zone of movement with a posterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)"). *Also see Note presented in Claim 1.
PNG
media_image6.png
294
570
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9, Tillett discloses the method of Claim 1.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the first three-dimensional zone of movement according to the first surgical approach of the patient in the single position is based on a lateral approach, (See at least Figure 3C which shows a first* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with a lateral approach.) *Also see Note presented in Claim 1
PNG
media_image5.png
315
545
media_image5.png
Greyscale
wherein determining the second three-dimensional zone of movement according to the second surgical approach of the patient in the single position is based on an anterior approach (See at least Figure 3E which shows a second* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with an anterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)"). *Also see Note presented in Claim 1.
PNG
media_image7.png
294
570
media_image7.png
Greyscale
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 4, 6, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tillett et. al. (WO 2019070997 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, Tillett discloses the method of Claim 1.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the (See at least Figure 3E which shows a* three-dimensional zone of movement with a posterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)"). *Also see Note presented in Claim 1
PNG
media_image6.png
294
570
media_image6.png
Greyscale
However, modified Tillet does not explicitly disclose the first* three-dimensional zone of movement with the posterior approach. Nevertheless, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to consider Tillett and designate the 'three dimensional zone of movement' and the 'surgical site' as the "first" or "second" according to whichever approach (lateral / anterior /posterior) needs to be taken in order to perform the specific surgical task at whichever surgical site is necessary. The terms "first" and "second" are relative terms of both the three dimensional zones of movement and the surgical approaches, so one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to consider the separate surgical approaches and the separate three-dimensional zones of movement illustrated in Figures 3A-3E and assign a "first" and "second" depending on which approach is required to perform a task at the respective surgical site.
Regarding Claim 6, Tillet discloses the method of Claim 1.
Furthermore, Tillet discloses: wherein determining the (See at least Figure 3C which shows a second* three-dimensional zone of movement and a lateral approach.) *Also see Note presented in Claim 1.
PNG
media_image5.png
315
545
media_image5.png
Greyscale
However, modified Tillet does not explicitly disclose the second three-dimensional zone of movement with the lateral approach. Nevertheless, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to consider Tillett and designate the 'three dimensional zone of movement' and the 'surgical site' as the "first" or "second" according to whichever approach (lateral / anterior /posterior) needs to be taken in order to perform the specific surgical task at whichever surgical site is necessary. The terms "first" and "second" are relative terms of both the three dimensional zones of movement and the surgical approaches, so one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to consider the separate surgical approaches and the separate three-dimensional zones of movement illustrated in Figures 3A-3E and assign a "first" and "second" depending on which approach is required to perform a task at the respective surgical site.
Regarding Claim 10, Tillett discloses the method of Claim 1.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the (See at least Figure 3E which shows a first* three dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with a posterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)" **Wherein a three-dimensional zone of movement would be different if the surgery has a posterior or anterior approach respectively). *Also see Note presented in Claim 1
PNG
media_image6.png
294
570
media_image6.png
Greyscale
wherein determining the second three-dimensional zone of movement according to the second surgical approach of the patient in the single position is based on an anterior approach (See at least Figure 3E which shows a second* three dimensional zone of movement and a first* surgical site with an anterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)" **Wherein a three-dimensional zone of movement would be different if the surgery has a posterior or anterior approach respectively). *Also see Note presented in Claim 1.
PNG
media_image7.png
294
570
media_image7.png
Greyscale
However, modified Tillet does not explicitly disclose the first* three-dimensional zone of movement with the posterior approach. Nevertheless, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to consider Tillett and designate the 'three dimensional zone of movement' and the 'surgical site' as the "first" or "second" according to whichever approach (lateral / anterior /posterior) needs to be taken in order to perform the specific surgical task at whichever surgical site is necessary. The terms "first" and "second" are relative terms of both the three dimensional zones of movement and the surgical approaches, so one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to consider the separate surgical approaches and the separate three-dimensional zones of movement illustrated in Figures 3A-3E and assign a "first" and "second" depending on which approach is required to perform a task at the respective surgical site.
Regarding Claim 11, Tillett discloses the method of Claim 1.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the first three-dimensional zone of movement according to of the patient in the single position is based on a posterior approach (See at least Figure 3E which shows a first* three dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with a posterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)"). *Also see Note presented in Claim 1.
PNG
media_image6.png
294
570
media_image6.png
Greyscale
wherein determining the (See at least Figure 3C which shows a second* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with a lateral approach.)
PNG
media_image5.png
315
545
media_image5.png
Greyscale
However, modified Tillet does not explicitly disclose the first* three dimensional zone of movement with the posterior approach, or the second* three-dimensional zone of movement with the lateral approach. Nevertheless, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to consider Tillett and designate the 'three dimensional zone of movement' as ' first' or 'second' according to whichever approach (lateral / anterior /posterior) needs to be taken in order to perform the specific surgical task at a surgical site. The terms "first" and "second" are relative terms of both the three dimensional zones of movement and the surgical approaches, so one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to consider the separate surgical approaches and the separate three-dimensional zones of movement illustrated in Figures 3A-3E and assign a "first" and "second" depending on which approach is required to perform a task at the respective surgical site
Claims 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tillett et. al. (WO 2019070997 A1) in view of Shelton IV et. al. (US 20190201018 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, Tillett discloses the method of Claim 1.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the one or more instructions for actuating the robotic device according to the first three-dimensional zone and the second three- dimensional zone (See at least ¶0033 via "A control loop may continuously read the tracking data and the current parameters (e.g., joint parameters) of the robotic arm 101 and may send instructions to a robotic controller to cause the robotic arm 101 to move to a desired position and orientation within the patient coordinate system.")
However, Tillett does not explicitly disclose the speed or rotational ranges.
Nevertheless Shelton IV-- who is directed towards controlling a surgical instrument--discloses:
includes determining one or more ranges of speed and rotation based on a given three-dimensional zone of the (See at least ¶0595 via "According to such an aspect, the control circuit may determine, using situational awareness (e.g., based on procedural and/or historical data), that the rotation force/torque detected for the rotation/shaft member exceeds a predefined rotation force/torque and/or a predefined rotation force/torque range" and also ¶530 via " The I-beam 153514 may be advanced or retracted at a desired speed, or within a range of desired speeds")
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify the method of modified Tillett to specify a range of speed and rotation such as in Shelton IV according to the first and second three-dimensional zone of movement in order to ensure the safety of the patient, such as in a case where if the range is exceeded- performing a type of emergency stop action: “In such an aspect, the control circuit may be configured to again stop the rotating, alert the surgeon, and/or receive an override command as described” [¶0595]. [0592] also mentions that motor speed may be suggested to be adjusted depending on type of tissue to prevent tearing or harming the patient’s tissue. If a surgical robot is operating at a speed that is too fast or rotating too quickly, there could be a higher risk of altercations or potential harm to the patient’s tissue during the surgery, which is why it would be obvious to indicate a range of speed and rotation for each respective three-dimensional zone of motion that would be associated with a specific surgical task that needs to be performed.
Claims 13-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tillett et. al. (WO 2019070997 A1) in view of Shelton IV et. al. (US 20190201018 A1) and Mintz et. al. (US 20190000576 A1).
Regarding Claim 13, Tillett discloses:
A method for robotic assisted surgery, the method comprising: providing a robotic device, the robotic device including a plurality of links, a plurality of joints, and a processor configured to manipulate the plurality of links; (See at least ¶0021 via " The robotic arm 101 may comprise a multi-joint arm that includes a plurality of linkages connected by joints having actuator(s) and optional encoder(s) to enable the linkages to rotate, bend and/or translate relative to one another in response to control signals from a robot control system." and also ¶0078 via "The steps of a method or algorithm disclosed herein may be embodied in a processor-executable software module executed which may reside on a non-transitory computer-readable medium")
determining, via the processor, a first three-dimensional zone of movement within which the joints and links can move according to a first surgical approach of a patient in a single position, (See at least Figure 3A-3D which illustrate the first three-dimensional zone of movement of which is the space that the robot follows its trajectory for the first surgical approach as annotated in Figure 3C below. Additionally see ¶0058 which describes the trajectory to the surgical area/approach site being selected and "the path may be selected to minimize disturbance to other anatomic features, such as neural structures (e.g., lumbar nerve plexus) located around or within the psoas muscle." which indicates that the zone of movement is limited to avoid disturbance. Also see ¶0034 which indicates that there can be a plurality of trajectories and target locations. Also, see at least ¶0022 via ". The collected image data may be processed using a suitable processor (e.g., computer) to perform a three- dimensional reconstruction of the object…In embodiments, image data may be obtained pre-operatively (i.e., prior to performing a surgical procedure), intra-operatively (i.e., during a surgical procedure) or post-operatively (i.e., following a surgical procedure) by positioning the patient within the bore 107 of the imaging device 103" *Which depicts how the processor is further used to determine the 3D zone of movement)
*Note: The "three dimensional zone of movement" in Figure 3C can either be the first or second three dimensional zone of movement. Additionally, the "surgical zone" as shown in Figure 3C can either be the first or second surgical zone. Regarding Claim 1, Figure 3C is being interpreted as having a first three-dimensional zone of movement at a first surgical site.
PNG
media_image3.png
355
588
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein the single position is a lateral decubitus position; (See at least Figures 3A-3E which illustrates the patient lying on their side in a lateral decubitus position)
determining, via the processor, a second three-dimensional zone of movement within which the joints and links can move according to a second surgical approach of the patient in the single position; (See at least Figure 3E which illustrates a second surgical approach of the patient in the single position. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)". Also see ¶0034 which indicates that there can be a plurality of trajectories and target locations. Also see at least ¶0022 *Which depicts how the processor is further used to determine the 3D zone of movement)
*Note: The "three dimensional zone of movement" in Figure 3E can either be the first or second three dimensional zone of movement. Additionally, the "surgical zone" as shown in Figure 3E can either be the first or second surgical zone. Regarding Claim 1, Figure 3E is being interpreted as having a second three-dimensional zone of movement at a second surgical site.
PNG
media_image4.png
317
575
media_image4.png
Greyscale
determining, via the processor, the one or more instructions for actuating the robotic device according to the first three-dimensional zone and the second three-dimensional zone includes (See at least ¶0033 via "A control loop may continuously read the tracking data and the current parameters (e.g., joint parameters) of the robotic arm 101 and may send instructions to a robotic controller to cause the robotic arm 101 to move to a desired position and orientation within the patient coordinate system." Additionally, see at least ¶0021 which discloses the control of the links, and also ¶0074 via "processor 1301").
However, Tillett does not explicitly disclose the speed or rotational ranges.
Nevertheless Shelton IV-- who is directed towards controlling a surgical instrument--discloses: includes determining one or more ranges of speed and rotation based on a given three-dimensional zone of the (See at least ¶0595 via "According to such an aspect, the control circuit may determine, using situational awareness (e.g., based on procedural and/or historical data), that the rotation force/torque detected for the rotation/shaft member exceeds a predefined rotation force/torque and/or a predefined rotation force/torque range" and also ¶530 via " The I-beam 153514 may be advanced or retracted at a desired speed, or within a range of desired speeds")
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify the method of Tillett to specify a range of speed and rotation such as in Shelton IV according to the first and second three-dimensional zone of movement in order to ensure the safety of the patient. If a surgical robot is operating at a speed that is too fast or rotating too quickly, there could be a higher risk of altercations during the surgery, which is why it would be obvious to indicate a range of speed and rotation for each respective three-dimensional zone of motion that would be associated with a specific surgical task that needs to be performed.
However, Tillett and Shelton IV do not detail the specific joint configuration of the robotic arm, and thus does not explicitly disclose the joints rotating through the mechanical gear system driven by a strain wave gearing.
Nevertheless, Mintz--who is directed towards a medical robotic system--discloses: and at least one of the plurality of joints is rotated by a mechanical gear system driven by a strain wave gearing (See at least ¶0142 via " Each motorized joint 1705A-1705E can comprise a motor, a position sensor, and a gearbox." and also "The gearbox can be a harmonic gearbox using strain wave gearing and thus provides advantages over traditional gear-based gearboxes due to having low or no backlash, high compactness, and light weight.").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to modify Tillet and Shelton IV, in view of Mintz's harmonic gearbox using strain wave gearing in order to enable the robot arm's joints to " hav[e] low or no backlash, high compactness, and [to be] light weight" [Mintz ¶0142], which ultimately would improve the movement capabilities of the robot arm and thereby increase the performance of the surgical system.
Regarding Claim 14, Modified Tillett discloses the method of Claim 13.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the first three-dimensional zone of movement according to the first surgical approach of the patient in the single position is based on a lateral approach (See at least annotated Figure 3C which illustrates a lateral approach with a preset trajectory in a first three-dimensional zone of movement at a first surgical site)
PNG
media_image5.png
315
545
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 15, Modified Tillett discloses the method of Claim 13.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the (See at least Figure 3E which shows a* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with an anterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)"). *Also see Note presented in Claim 13.
PNG
media_image7.png
294
570
media_image7.png
Greyscale
However, Tillett does not explicitly disclose the anterior approach being the first three-dimensional zone of movement according to the first surgical approach.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to consider Modified Tillett and designate the 'three-dimensional zone of movement' and the 'surgical site' as the "first" or “second” according to whichever approach (lateral / anterior /posterior) needs to be taken in order to perform the specific surgical task at whichever surgical site is necessary. The terms "first" and "second" are relative terms of both the three dimensional zones of movement and the surgical approaches, so one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to consider the separate surgical approaches and the separate three-dimensional zones of movement illustrated in Figures 3A-3E and assign a "first" and "second" depending on which approach is required to perform a task at the respective surgical site.
Regarding Claim 16, Modified Tillett discloses the method of Claim 13.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the (See at least Figure 3E which shows a* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with a posterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)"). *Also see Note presented in Claim 13.
PNG
media_image6.png
294
570
media_image6.png
Greyscale
However, Tillett does not explicitly disclose the posterior approach being the first three-dimensional zone of movement according to the first surgical approach.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to consider Tillett in view of Shelton IV and Mintz, and designate the 'three-dimensional zone of movement' and the 'surgical site' as the "first" or “second” according to whichever approach (lateral / anterior /posterior) needs to be taken in order to perform the specific surgical task at whichever surgical site is necessary. The terms "first" and "second" are relative terms of both the three dimensional zones of movement and the surgical approaches, so one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to consider the separate surgical approaches and the separate three-dimensional zones of movement illustrated in Figures 3A-3E and assign a "first" and "second" depending on which approach is required to perform a task at the respective surgical site.
Regarding Claim 17, Modified Tillett discloses the method of Claim 13.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the (See at least Figure 3C which shows a second* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with a lateral approach.) *Also see Note presented in Claim 13.
PNG
media_image5.png
315
545
media_image5.png
Greyscale
However, modified Tillet does not explicitly disclose the second* three-dimensional zone of movement in the second* surgical approach to be the lateral approach. Nevertheless, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to consider Tillett in view of Shelton IV and Mintz, and designate the 'three dimensional zone of movement' and the 'surgical site' as the "first" or "second" according to whichever approach (lateral / anterior /posterior) needs to be taken in order to perform the specific surgical task at whichever surgical site is necessary. The terms "first" and "second" are relative terms of both the three dimensional zones of movement and the surgical approaches, so one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to consider the separate surgical approaches and the separate three-dimensional zones of movement illustrated in Figures 3A-3E and assign a "first" and "second" depending on which approach is required to perform a task at the respective surgical site.
Regarding Claim 18, Modified Tillett discloses the method of Claim 13.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the second three-dimensional zone of movement according to the second surgical approach of the patient in the single position is based on an anterior approach (See at least Figure 3E which shows a second* three dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with an anterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)"). *Also see Note presented in Claim 13
PNG
media_image7.png
294
570
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 19, Modified Tillett discloses the method of Claim 13.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the second three-dimensional zone of movement according to the second surgical approach of the patient in the single position is based on a posterior approach (See at least Figure 3E which shows a second* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with a posterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)"). *Also see Note presented in Claim 13
PNG
media_image6.png
294
570
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 20, Modified Tillett discloses the method of Claim 13.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the first three-dimensional zone of movement according to the first surgical approach of the patient in the single position is based on a lateral approach (See at least Figure 3C which shows a first* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with a lateral approach.) *Also see Note presented in Claim 13
PNG
media_image5.png
315
545
media_image5.png
Greyscale
wherein determining the second three-dimensional zone of movement according to the second surgical approach of the patient in the single position is based on an anterior approach (See at least Figure 3E which shows a second* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with an anterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)" *Also see Note presented in Claim 13.
PNG
media_image7.png
294
570
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 21, Modified Tillett discloses the method of Claim 13.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the (See at least Figure 3E which shows a* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with a posterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)" **Wherein a three-dimensional zone of movement would be different if the surgery has a posterior or anterior approach respectively). *Also see Note presented in Claim 13
PNG
media_image6.png
294
570
media_image6.png
Greyscale
wherein determining the second three-dimensional zone of movement according to the second surgical approach of the patient in the single position is based on an anterior approach (See at least Figure 3E which shows a second* three-dimensional zone of movement and a* surgical site with an anterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)”). *Also see Note presented in Claim.
PNG
media_image8.png
294
570
media_image8.png
Greyscale
However, Tillett does not explicitly disclose the posterior approach being the first three-dimensional zone of movement. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the given invention to consider Modified Tillett, and designate the 'three-dimensional zone of movement' and the 'surgical site' as the "first"/”second” according to whichever approach (lateral / anterior /posterior) needs to be taken in order to perform the specific surgical task at whichever surgical site is necessary. The terms "first" and "second" are relative terms of both the three dimensional zones of movement and the surgical approaches, so one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to consider the separate surgical approaches and the separate three-dimensional zones of movement illustrated in Figures 3A-3E and assign a "first" and "second" depending on which approach is required to perform a task at the respective surgical site.
Regarding Claim 22, Modified Tillett discloses the method of Claim 13.
Furthermore, Tillett discloses: wherein determining the , (See at least Figure 3E which shows a first* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with a posterior approach. Also see ¶0070 via "In particular, patient images 318 on the display device 219 may be used by the surgeon to set one or more trajectories 323 for screw placement (e.g., via a posterior or anterior approach of the patient 300 lying on his/her side)"). *Also see Note presented in Claim 13.
PNG
media_image6.png
294
570
media_image6.png
Greyscale
wherein determining the (See at least Figure 3C which shows a second* three-dimensional zone of movement and a surgical site with a lateral approach.) *Also see Note presented in Claim 13.
PNG
media_image5.png
315
545
media_image5.png
Greyscale
However, modified Tillet does not explicitly disclose the first* three-dimensional zone of movement with the posterior approach, or the second* three-dimensional zone of movement with the lateral approach. Nevertheless, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to consider Tillett and designate the 'three-dimensional zone of movement' as ' first' or 'second' according to whichever approach (lateral / anterior /posterior) needs to be taken in order to perform the specific surgical task at a surgical site. The terms "first" and "second" are relative terms of both the three dimensional zones of movement and the surgical approaches, so one of ordinary skill would have been motivated to consider the separate surgical approaches and the separate three-dimensional zones of movement illustrated in Figures 3A-3E and assign a "first" and "second" depending on which approach is required to perform a task at the respective surgical site.
Conclusion
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAYLA RENEE DOROS whose telephone number is (703)756-1415. The examiner can normally be reached Generally: M-F (8-5) EST.
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, Abby Lin can be reached on (571) 270-3976. 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.
/K.R.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3657
/BHAVESH V AMIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights