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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 9, 22, 24 and 30 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9, line 2, “comprises linear motion” should read --comprises a linear motion--.
Claims 1, 22, and 24, “miniature device” should read --magnetic miniature device--.
Claim 30, line 3, “to coils” should read --to the coils--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9 – 10 and 16 - 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 9, lines 2 - 3, it is unclear if “said platform axis” refers to “a horizontal platform axis” recited in claim 8 as well as how the “linear motion along a horizontal axis” is perpendicular, considering the platform axis is horizontal.
The term “about” in claims 16 – 21 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what the term “about” entails.
Claim 22 recites the limitation “a magnetic miniature device" and “a patient” in line 2 it is unclear if this is a second “magnetic miniature device” and “patient” since claim 1 already contains the same limitation.
Claim 22 recites the limitation “a miniature device" in line 4. This appears to be an instance of double inclusion with the “a magnetic miniature device” of line 2.
Claim 28 and 29 recites the limitation "its" in line 3. The Examiner is uncertain what “its” is referring to for these limitations.
Claim 30, line 4, the limitation “coils”, it is unclear whether these are a new set of coils or the previously recited “two coils” from claim 1. Clarification is requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1 – 13, 15 – 18 and 22 - 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shachar et al (US 20110301497 A1, hereinafter “Shachar”) in view of Park et al (US 20150297065 A1, hereinafter “Park”).
Regarding claim 1, Shachar teaches a system (Figures 1 – 1D, [0132] – [0136]) configured to remotely (“a capsule to be navigated through the lumens and cavities of the human body wirelessly” [0184]; “a magnetically equipped untethered propulsion capsule”, [0063]) maneuver a magnetic miniature device (“propulsion capsule”, abstract [0063]) within a patient (“patient 1” [0186] [0191], Figures 1 - 2; abstract [0060] – [0061]) along a path conforming to a predetermined route (“Path Planning” [0042], [0020] [0038] [0041] – [0043]; “The field gradients are controlled with six degrees of freedom by the gradient regulator to set the direction and magnitude of the highest slope. The capsule rotates into the direction of the maximum gradient with opposite magnetic poles of the capsule and the field generator aligning. The capsule is then propelled along that gradient path by the force calculated by above equation.” [0066]; “One embodiment employs the magnetic cavity with its shaped magnetic regulator to position the tool (capsule) inside a patient's body, further maintaining the capsule's head in the correct position.” [0089]), the system comprising:
two coils (“magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C), each configured to produce a magnetic field (“The magnetic assembly 152 includes both DC coils 150 and AC coils 151 on a common laminated core” [0186]);
a horizontal platform (“movable bed 156” [0186] [0191], Figures 1 - 2) configured to support thereon the patient and to be disposed within said coils (“FIG. 1 is an isometric illustration of the MGCE apparatus 425 showing patient 1 resting on horizontally movable bed 156 with motorized bed moving assembly 155 surrounded by the magnetic assembly 152. The magnetic assembly 152 includes both DC coils 150 and AC coils 151 on a common laminated core.” [0186], Figures 1 – 1B, 1D); and
a controller (“controller 168” [0190] – [0192], Figures 1D – 2A) configured to direct operation of the system (“"The MGCE system suite 500 includes the MGCE magnetic control assembly 425, control computer rack 170, user input joystick or three dimensional controller 168 and console display 176.” [0190]. Figures 1D – 2A);
wherein said predetermined range of angles constrains the system from maneuvering the miniature device along the route (desired position (DP) [0020] [0038] [0041] – [0043], " .. .iv) operates the servo mechanisms using the servo system control apparatus to adjust the condition of one or more electromagnets from the cluster to vary the power relative to distance and/or angle of the electromagnet clusters vis-a-vis the capsule's permanent magnet position, further energizing the electromagnets to control the magnetic element (capsule) within the patient's body; ... " [0100], " ... guided capsule, providing the work to move and propel a medical tool(s) such as capsule endoscope from actual position (AP) to desired position (DP) while negotiating such translational as well as rotational forces ... " [0110], ''This energy produces the work of transporting the permanent magnet from AP location to the DP.” [0113]);
wherein said controller (168) is configured to calculate a path ([0020] [0038] [0041] – [0043]) comprising a plurality of segments (Examiner interprets the algorithm can predict the path in both direction and orientation by discrete the line of movements., "Motion Algorithm-An additional motion that is injected into the standard position control system to provide a useful agitation to the capsule position as to collect data over a greater spatial volume." [0037], "Motion Compensation Filter-Motion compensation filters use a fiducial reference to subtract the movement of that reference position and orientation from that of the tool coordinate position." [0038], "Predictive Motion Control Cursor-The use of a predictive algorithm to produce a realistic capsule cursor that simulates the movement and final location of a capsule before the physician commands the actual cursor there." [0046]),
the path conforming to said route within a predetermined deviation (Examiner interprets predetermined deviation can be defined by obstacle and path planning algorithm. "Obstacle Detection and Avoidance-An algorithm for seeking out a target when it detects contact with an obstacle outside of the targeting manifold and directs the navigation artificial intelligence (Al) to select a different path to Desired Position (DP)." [0041], "Path Planning-The analysis of the acquired mapping geometry of the GI track to optimize the path to Desired Position (DP)." [0042]).
the controller being further configured to operate said coils to induce a magnetic field to maneuver the miniature device along said path ("In response to externally generated and regulated static (DC) or quasi-static (quasi-DC) magnetic and pulsed electromagnetic fields the capsule will levitate, move, and orient in a controlled manner." [0064], ''The capsule 100 is located by the position detection system 165 which interfaces with the DC regulator 173 which in turn interfaces with the AC pulse-burst regulator 172, which each control their respective DC and AC amplifiers 174, 175 to drive the DC and AC coils 150, 151 respectively." [0191]).
Shachar fails to teach two coils to be selectively pivoted about at least a first pivot axis within a first predetermined range of angles; and the controller being configured to operate said coils within range of angles.
However, Park in the related art of control system of a capsule type endoscope, does disclose two coils (121) to be selectively pivoted about at least a first pivot axis within a first predetermined range of angles (see Figure 3 where the pair of coils 121 rotate in three dimension then in three axis., "As shown in FIG. 3, the second coil unit 120 has a pair of the Maxwell coils 121, and the Maxwell coils 121 surround the first coil unit 110." [0061]),
the controller being configured to operate said coils within range of angles (''The coil driving portion 130 can rotate the second coil unit 120 in certain two directions α and β, and hence, can control the direction of the gradient magnetic field generated from the second coil unit 120 into an arbitrary direction." [0064], "In this embodiment, the first and second coil units 110 and 120 and the coil driving portion 130 are controlled by one control portion 220 ... " [0082]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system, as disclosed by Shachar, to include rotation of the coils, as disclosed by Park, because it benefits the minimum configuration of coils (Park: [0008]).
Regarding claim 2, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches said coils, in respective middle positions, being disposed such that through-going coil axes thereof are parallel to one another (Park: see Figure 3 where the pair of coils 121 are parallel, "As shown in FIG. 3, the second coil unit 120 has a pair of the Maxwell coils 121, and the Maxwell coils 121 surround the first coil unit 110." [0061]).
Regarding claim 3, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches said coils, in respective middle positions, being disposed such that they are coaxial with one another (Park: see Figure 3 where the pair of coils 121 are coaxial, "As shown in FIG. 3, the second coil unit 120 has a pair of the Maxwell coils 121, and the Maxwell coils 121 surround the first coil unit 110." [0061]).
Regarding claim 4, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches said first pivot axis is substantially vertical (Park: since the coil unit 120 rotates in three dimension then vertical axis z is one of the pivot axis, fig. 3, "Preferably, the movable arm 133 has an arc shape with a proper radius of curvature that makes the second coil unit 120 rotate three-dimensionally on the center of the second coil unit 120 which coincides with the center of the first coil unit and is a virtual rotation axis.” [0068]).
Regarding claim 5, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches each of the coils (Shachar: “magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C) is further configured to be selectively pivoted about a second pivot axis within a second predetermined range of angles (Park: see Figure 3 where the pair of coils 121 rotate in three dimension then in three axis., "As shown in FIG. 3, the second coil unit 120 has a pair of the Maxwell coils 121, and the Maxwell coils 121 surround the first coil unit 110." [0061]; ''The coil driving portion 130 can rotate the second coil unit 120 in certain two directions α and β, and hence, can control the direction of the gradient magnetic field generated from the second coil unit 120 into an arbitrary direction." [0064], "In this embodiment, the first and second coil units 110 and 120 and the coil driving portion 130 are controlled by one control portion 220 ... " [0082]).
Regarding claim 6, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 5. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches said first (Park: Figure 3 ''The coil driving portion 130 can rotate the second coil unit 120 in certain two directions α and β, and hence, can control the direction of the gradient magnetic field generated from the second coil unit 120 into an arbitrary direction." [0064]) and second pivot axes (Park: Figure 3 ''The coil driving portion 130 can rotate the second coil unit 120 in certain two directions α and β, and hence, can control the direction of the gradient magnetic field generated from the second coil unit 120 into an arbitrary direction." [0064]) of each coil are substantially perpendicular to one another (Park: see annotated Park’s Figure 3 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
580
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches the system configured to selectively move said platform (Shachar: “movable bed 156” [0186] [0191], Figures 1 - 2) within said coils (Shachar: “magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C).
Regarding claim 8, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 7. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches the movement of the platform (Shachar: “movable bed 156” [0186] [0191], Figures 1 - 2) within said coils (Shachar: “magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C) comprises linear motion along a horizontal platform axis (“movable bed 156 with motorized bed moving assembly 155”, [0186], Figure 1).
Regarding claim 9, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 8. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches the movement of the platform (Shachar: “movable bed 156” [0186] [0191], Figures 1 - 2) within said coils (Shachar: “magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C) further comprises linear motion along a horizontal axis perpendicular to said platform axis (Shachar: “movable bed 156 with motorized bed moving assembly 155”, [0186], Figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 9. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches said horizontal axis (Shachar: “movable bed 156 with motorized bed moving assembly 155”, [0186], Figure 1; Examiner interprets the horizontal axis is apparent in Shachar and Park and thus, it is shown the parallel to said first pivot axis as shown in annotated Park’s Figure 3 below.) being parallel to said first pivot axis (Park: Figure 3 ''The coil driving portion 130 can rotate the second coil unit 120 in certain two directions α and β, and hence, can control the direction of the gradient magnetic field generated from the second coil unit 120 into an arbitrary direction." [0064]).
PNG
media_image2.png
634
576
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 7. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches the movement of the platform (Shachar: “movable bed 156” [0186] [0191], Figures 1 - 2) within said coils (Shachar: “magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C) comprises pivoting about a horizontal axis (Park: since the coil unit 120 rotates in three dimension then vertical axis z is one of the pivot axis, fig. 3, "Preferably, the movable arm 133 has an arc shape with a proper radius of curvature that makes the second coil unit 120 rotate three-dimensionally on the center of the second coil unit 120 which coincides with the center of the first coil unit and is a virtual rotation axis.” [0068]).
Regarding claim 12, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches each of said coils (Shachar: “magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C) comprises an electromagnet (Shachar: “electromagnet DC coils 150”, [0205] Figure 13).
Regarding claim 13, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 12. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches the system (Shachar: Figures 1 – 1D, [0132] – [0136]) configured such that electricity is applied to each of said electromagnets (Shachar: “electromagnet DC coils 150”, [0205] Figure 13) but does not teach the electricity is applied in a direction opposite to that of the other.
However, Park discloses “an operation control system for spirally operating a capsule endoscope along a tubular organ” (abstract) and teaches the electricity is applied in a direction opposite to that of the other (Park: “Two Maxwell coils form a pair. The two coils have a specific arrangement to generate a uniform gradient magnetic field when electric currents of the same size are applied to the two coils in the opposite directions.” [0056]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Shachar and Park to incorporate the electricity is applied in a direction opposite to that of the other, as taught by Park, for the benefit of forming “the rotating magnetic field and the gradient magnetic field for the spiral motion of the capsule type endoscope just by the minimum coil system” (Park: [0016]).
Regarding claim 15, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches said coils (Shachar: “magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C) each comprises a fixed magnet (Shachar: “magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C; Examiner interprets the coils of the magnetic assembly of Shachar to be fixed.).
Regarding claims 16 – 18, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Shachar and Park does not teach said predetermined range of angles is no more than about 120°, about 100° and about 90°.
However, Park discloses “an operation control system of a capsule type endoscope and a capsule type endoscope system” (abstract) and teaches adjusting the angle of the coils (Park: [0059] [0066] Figure 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Shachar and Park by making said predetermined range of angles is no more than about 120°, about 100° and about 90° as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A). Lastly, applicant appears to have placed no criticality on the claimed values.
Regarding claim 22, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches a method (abstract, [0063]) of operating a system according to claim 1 (see rejection for claim 1 above) to maneuver a magnetic miniature device (Shachar: “propulsion capsule”, abstract [0038] [0063]) within a patient, the method comprising:
injecting a miniature device (Shachar: “propulsion capsule”, abstract [0038] [0063]) into the patient (Shachar: “guiding an untethered device, such as a capsule endoscope or other medical device through a patient's body cavities”, [0061], [0063], [0066]);
determining a route between a start point and an end point (Shachar: desired position (DP) [0020] [0038] [0041] – [0043], " .. .iv) operates the servo mechanisms using the servo system control apparatus to adjust the condition of one or more electromagnets from the cluster to vary the power relative to distance and/or angle of the electromagnet clusters vis-a-vis the capsule's permanent magnet position, further energizing the electromagnets to control the magnetic element (capsule) within the patient's body; ... " [0100], " ... guided capsule, providing the work to move and propel a medical tool(s) such as capsule endoscope from actual position (AP) to desired position (DP) while negotiating such translational as well as rotational forces ... " [0110], ''This energy produces the work of transporting the permanent magnet from AP location to the DP.” [0113]);
calculating a path (Shachar: [0020] [0038] [0041] – [0043]), comprising one or more line segments along which the system is capable of maneuvering the miniature device (Shachar: “propulsion capsule”, abstract [0038] [0063]) and which conforms to the route (Shachar: Examiner interprets the algorithm can predict the path in both direction and orientation by discrete the line of movements., "Motion Algorithm-An additional motion that is injected into the standard position control system to provide a useful agitation to the capsule position as to collect data over a greater spatial volume." [0037], "Motion Compensation Filter-Motion compensation filters use a fiducial reference to subtract the movement of that reference position and orientation from that of the tool coordinate position." [0038], "Predictive Motion Control Cursor-The use of a predictive algorithm to produce a realistic capsule cursor that simulates the movement and final location of a capsule before the physician commands the actual cursor there." [0046]);
determining how to operate components of the system to generate magnetic fields to maneuver the miniature device along the path (Shachar: "In response to externally generated and regulated static (DC) or quasi-static (quasi-DC) magnetic and pulsed electromagnetic fields the capsule will levitate, move, and orient in a controlled manner." [0064], ''The capsule 100 is located by the position detection system 165 which interfaces with the DC regulator 173 which in turn interfaces with the AC pulse-burst regulator 172, which each control their respective DC and AC amplifiers 174, 175 to drive the DC and AC coils 150, 151 respectively." [0191]); and
maneuvering the miniature device (Shachar: “propulsion capsule”, abstract [0038] [0063]) along the path (Shachar: “guides the capsule from the actual position to desired position”, [0038]).
Regarding claim 23, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 22. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches the method further comprising determining a maximum acceptable deviation from the route for one or more portions thereof (Shachar: Examiner interprets predetermined deviation can be defined by obstacle and path planning algorithm. "Obstacle Detection and Avoidance-An algorithm for seeking out a target when it detects contact with an obstacle outside of the targeting manifold and directs the navigation artificial intelligence (Al) to select a different path to Desired Position (DP)." [0041], "Path Planning-The analysis of the acquired mapping geometry of the GI track to optimize the path to Desired Position (DP)." [0042]).
Regarding claim 24, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 22. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches the start point is the present position (Shachar: “actual position (AP)”, [0110]) of the miniature device (Shachar: “propulsion capsule”, abstract [0038] [0063]), and the end point is a target location (Shachar: “Desired Position (DP)”, [0020]) (Shachar: " ... guided capsule, providing the work to move and propel a medical tool(s) such as capsule endoscope from actual position (AP) to desired position (DP) while negotiating such translational as well as rotational forces ... " [0110], ''This energy produces the work of transporting the permanent magnet from AP location to the DP.” [0113]).
Regarding claim 25, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 24. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches said target location (Shachar: “Desired Position (DP)”, [0020]) is determined based on maneuvering instructions (Shachar: [0092]) provided by a user (Shachar: “surgeon/operator” [0092]) (Shachar: “which is manipulated by the surgeon/operator, which delivers tactile feedback to the surgeon in the appropriate axis or axes if the actual tip encounters an obstacle, and which allows the surgeon to guide actual surgical tool such as capsule through the patient's body.” [0092]).
Regarding claim 26, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 24. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches said target location (Shachar: “Desired Position (DP)”, [0020]) is a predetermined location within the patient (Shachar: “which is manipulated by the surgeon/operator, which delivers tactile feedback to the surgeon in the appropriate axis or axes if the actual tip encounters an obstacle, and which allows the surgeon to guide actual surgical tool such as capsule through the patient's body.” [0092]).
Regarding claim 27, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 22. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches determining how to operate components of the system comprises selecting the strength of the magnetic field produced thereby (Shachar: "In response to externally generated and regulated static (DC) or quasi-static (quasi-DC) magnetic and pulsed electromagnetic fields the capsule will levitate, move, and orient in a controlled manner." [0064], ''The capsule 100 is located by the position detection system 165 which interfaces with the DC regulator 173 which in turn interfaces with the AC pulse-burst regulator 172, which each control their respective DC and AC amplifiers 174, 175 to drive the DC and AC coils 150, 151 respectively." [0191]).
Regarding claim 28, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 22. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches the system (Shachar: Figures 1 – 1D, [0132] – [0136]), the coils (Shachar: “magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C) and first pivot axis (Park: since the coil unit 120 rotates in three dimension then vertical axis z is one of the pivot axis, fig. 3, "Preferably, the movable arm 133 has an arc shape with a proper radius of curvature that makes the second coil unit 120 rotate three-dimensionally on the center of the second coil unit 120 which coincides with the center of the first coil unit and is a virtual rotation axis.” [0068]) but does not teach determining how to operate components comprises selecting a pivot angle of each of said coils about its respective first pivot axis.
However, Park discloses “an operation control system of a capsule type endoscope and a capsule type endoscope system” (abstract) and teaches determining how to operate components comprises selecting a pivot angle of each of said coils about its respective first pivot axis ([0064] - [0067]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Shachar and Park to incorporate determining how to operate components comprises selecting a pivot angle of each of said coils about its respective first pivot axis, as taught by Park, for the benefit of controlling the direction of the gradient magnetic field (Park: [0080]).
Regarding claim 29, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 22. The modified invention of Shachar and Park does not teach determining how to operate components of the system comprises selecting a pivot angle of each of said coils about an axis perpendicular to its respective first pivot axis.
However, Park discloses “an operation control system of a capsule type endoscope and a capsule type endoscope system” (abstract) and teaches determining how to operate components of the system comprises selecting a pivot angle of each of said coils about an axis perpendicular to its respective first pivot axis ([0064] - [0067]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Shachar and Park to incorporate determining how to operate components of the system comprises selecting a pivot angle of each of said coils about an axis perpendicular to its respective first pivot axis, as taught by Park, for the benefit of controlling the direction of the gradient magnetic field (Park: [0080]).
Regarding claim 30, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 22. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches the system (Shachar: Figures 1 – 1D, [0132] – [0136]), the coils (Shachar: “magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C) and first pivot axis (Park: since the coil unit 120 rotates in three dimension then vertical axis z is one of the pivot axis, fig. 3, "Preferably, the movable arm 133 has an arc shape with a proper radius of curvature that makes the second coil unit 120 rotate three-dimensionally on the center of the second coil unit 120 which coincides with the center of the first coil unit and is a virtual rotation axis.” [0068]) but does not teach determining how to operate components of the system comprises selecting movement of the platform in one or more directions relative to coils.
However, Park discloses “an operation control system of a capsule type endoscope and a capsule type endoscope system” (abstract) and teaches determining how to operate components of the system comprises selecting movement of the platform in one or more directions relative to coils ([0064] - [0067]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Shachar and Park to incorporate determining how to operate components of the system comprises selecting movement of the platform in one or more directions relative to coils, as taught by Park, for the benefit of controlling the direction of the gradient magnetic field (Park: [0080]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shachar and Park, as applied in claim 12, in view of Ritter et al (US 6241671 B1, hereinafter “Ritter”).
Regarding claim 14, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 12. The modified invention of Shachar and Park does not teach said electromagnets comprise a superconducting material.
However, Ritter discloses a “system of navigating a magnetic medical device within that part of a patient located within an operating region of the system” (abstract) and teaches said electromagnets comprise a superconducting material (“more preferably superconducting electromagnet coils”, column 8, lines 32 - 34). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Shachar and Park such that said electromagnets comprise a superconducting material, as taught by Ritter, for the benefit of withstanding high current strength (Ritter: column 11, lines 50 - 51).
Claims 19 - 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shachar and Park, as applied in claim 12, in view of Ritter et al (US 20120330089 A1, hereinafter Ritter 089’).
Regarding claims 19 - 21, Shachar and Park teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Shachar and Park teaches the coils (Shachar: “magnetic assembly 152” [0186], Figures 1 – 1C) but does not teach the internal diameter does not exceed about 75 cm, about 60 cm and about 50 cm.
However, Ritter 089’ discloses a “system of navigating a magnetic medical device within that part of a patient located within an operating region of the system” (abstract) and teaches “the coil […] has […] a 19.010 inch inner diameter” (Examiner interprets 19.010 inches is equivalent to 48.2854 centimeter and reads on “the internal diameter does not exceed about 75 cm, about 60 cm and about 50 cm”.) . It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Shachar and Park by making the internal diameter does not exceed about 75 cm, about 60 cm and about 50 cm as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A). Lastly, applicant appears to have placed no criticality on the claimed values.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
河野 宏尚 et al (JP 4542560 B2, see attached) discloses “a capsule medical device guidance system suitable for propelling and guiding a capsule medical device inserted into a body cavity.” (page 1, paragraph 3).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIE T TRAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4677. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday from 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Alexander Valvis can be reached at (571) 272-4233. 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.
/JULIE THI TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3791 /ALEX M VALVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791