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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2 June 2026 has been entered.
Claims 1 – 3, 5, 7 – 15, 17 – 18 and 20 are pending in the instant application. The Examiner acknowledges the amendments to claims 1, 8, 10, 14 and 20 as well as the cancellation of claims 6 and 19.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, lines 8 - 9, “a connection signal periodically output” should read --a connection signal that is periodically outputted--.
Claim 8, line 12, “a plurality of controllers each controller coupled” should read -- a plurality of controllers, wherein each controller of the plurality of controllers is coupled--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The subject matter of claim 12 is included in claim 8. Thus, claim 12 does not further limit claim 8. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 – 3, 7 – 10, 12 – 15, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Messerly et al (US 20190201040 A1, hereinafter “Messerly”) in view of Malis et al (US 5318563 A, hereinafter “Malis”) in further view of Tani et al (US 8660690 B2, hereinafter “Tani”).
Regarding claim 1, Messerly teaches a surgical robotic system (“robotic system 110”, [0228] – [0229], Figure 2) comprising:
at least one movable cart including a robotic arm having a surgical instrument (“patient side cart 120”, [0229], Figure 2); and
a control tower including a power supply system having a plurality of power supplies (“surgical system 102”, [0228] – [0230], Figure 3; cables are disclosed in Fig. 2; Examiner interprets there are several power supplies in Figure 2.), the power supply system including:
a first power supply (“an energy device 241”, [0281], Figures 9 and 20) of the plurality of power supplies coupled to the at least one movable cart via a cable (“surgical system 102”, [0228] – [0230], Figure 3; cables are disclosed in Figure 2) and configured to output a voltage signal to power the at least one movable cart and at least one status signal (Figure 21; "presence", "sensors" are providing status signals, [0380] - [0383]);
a cable state detection circuit configured to detect a connection signal ("the main processor 3214 is configured to sense the presence of ultrasonic drive circuitry and/or RF; and drive circuitry to enable appropriate software and user interface functionality." [0468]),
wherein the connection signal is indicative of a connection status of the cable ("the main processor 3214 is configured to sense the presence of ultrasonic drive circuitry and/or RF; and drive circuitry to enable appropriate software and user interface functionality." [0468]);
a controller ([0318], [0468]) coupled to the cable state detection circuit and the first power supply,
the controller configured to control the first power supply based on the connection status of the cable and the at least one status signal (“the main processor 3214 is configured to sense the presence of ultrasonic drive circuitry and/or RF drive circuitry to enable appropriate software and user interface functionality.” [0468]), and
to terminate the voltage signal of the first power supply (Messerly: in particular "the combination logic circuit may implement a deenergization sequence”, [0554]); and
a plurality of isolation barriers (Messerly: “isolation transformers 916, 928, 922”, [0381], Figure 21),
wherein a first isolation barrier of the plurality of isolation barriers galvanically isolates the first power supply from the controller (Messerly: “isolation transformers 916, 928, 922”, [0381], Figure 21).
Messerly does not explicitly teach isolating the first power supply from the other power supplies of the plurality of power supplies such that an output of the first power supply is floating relative to the other power supplies.
However, Malis discloses “an electrosurgical cutter/coagulator system” (column 1, line 6) and teaches isolating a first power supply from other power supplies of a plurality of power supplies such that an output of the first power supply is floating relative to the other power supplies (“A trio of floating or isolated power supplies 320 (FIG. 15a)” column 19, lines 45 - 48, Figure 15a).
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 Messerly to isolate the first power supply from the other power supplies of the plurality of power supplies such that an output of the first power supply is floating relative to the other power supplies, as taught by Malis, for the benefit of provid[ing] safety to patients regarding power usage of medical devices.
The modified invention of Messerly and Malis does not teach a connection signal periodically output by the at least one component while the at least one component is connected to the control via a connector of the cable and to terminate the voltage signal of the first power supply in response to an interruption of the connection signal.
However, Tani discloses a “robot control system has a portable operating device TP and a robot control device RC” (abstract) and teaches a connection signal periodically output by the at least one component while the at least one component is connected to the control via a connector of the cable (“The connection monitoring section 12 monitors whether the portable operating device TP and the robot control device RC are electrically connected to each other through the charging device CU.” Column 5 lines 54 – 57; “The connection monitoring section 12 constantly monitors whether electric connection between the portable operating device TP and the robot control device RC is established.” column 6 lines 62 - 64) and to terminate the voltage signal of the first power supply in response to an interruption of the connection signal (“When the robot R is in automatic operation and it is detected that an electric connection between the portable operating device TP and the robot control device RC is not established, the charging amount of the portable operating device TP is prevented from falling short by automatically disconnecting the power source of the portable operating device TP.” Column 8 lines 6 - 12).
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 Messerly and Malis to incorporate a connection signal periodically output by the at least one component while the at least one component is connected to the control via a connector of the cable and to terminate the voltage signal of the first power supply in response to an interruption of the connection signal, as taught by Tani, for the benefit of providing electrical safety when in use for the patient and healthcare professional.
Regarding claim 2, Messerly, Malis and Tani teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Messerly, Malis and Tani teaches the first power supply includes a power supply connector (Messerly: cables are disclosed in Fig. 2) and a communication connector (Messerly: cables are disclosed in Fig. 2), each of which is coupled to the controller (Messerly: [0380] - [0383], Figures 2 and 21).
Regarding claim 3, Messerly, Malis and Tani teaches all limitations of claim 2. Messerly teaches the power supply system includes a power supply isolator coupled to the power supply connector and a communication isolator coupled to the communication connector (Messerly: “power transformer 908”, [0380], Figure 21).
Regarding claim 7, Messerly, Malis and Tani teach all limitations of claim 1. The modified invention of Messerly, Malis and Tani teaches the controller is further configured to terminate the voltage signal of the first power supply in response to the at least one status signal being outside a predetermined parameter (in particular "Sensors are provided that measure, at the end effector, a clamping force value (existing within a known range) and, based upon the received clamping force value, the processor 3302 varies the motional voltage VM." [0477]).
Regarding claim 8, Messerly teaches a surgical robotic system (“a computer-implemented interactive surgical system 100”, [0228] Figures 1 and 2) comprising:
a plurality of movable carts (Figures 1 and 2) each including a robotic arm (“patient side cart 120”, [0229], Figure 2) having a surgical instrument (Figures 1 and 2); and
a control tower including a power supply system (“surgical system 102”, [0228] – [0230], Figure 3; cables are disclosed in Fig. 2; Examiner interprets there are several power supplies in Figure 2.) including:
a plurality of power supplies each of which is coupled via a corresponding cable to one movable cart of the plurality of movable carts ([0228] – [0230], Figure 3; cables are disclosed in Fig. 2; Examiner interprets there are several power supplies, each with a corresponding cable in Figure 2.) and is configured to output a voltage signal to power the one movable cart and at least one status signal (Figure 21; "presence", "sensors" are providing status signals, [0380] - [0383]);
a cable state detection circuit each of which is configured to detect a connection signal indicative of a connection status of the cable ("the main processor 3214 is configured to sense the presence of ultrasonic drive circuitry and/or RF; and drive circuitry to enable appropriate software and user interface functionality." [0468])
a plurality of controllers ([0318], [0468]) each controller coupled to a corresponding cable state detection circuit of the plurality of cable state detection circuits and a corresponding power supply of the plurality of power supplies (“the main processor 3214 is configured to sense the presence of ultrasonic drive circuitry and/or RF drive circuitry to enable appropriate software and user interface functionality.” [0468]),
each controller configured to control the corresponding power supply based on the connection status of the corresponding cable and the at least one status signal (“the main processor 3214 is configured to sense the presence of ultrasonic drive circuitry and/or RF drive circuitry to enable appropriate software and user interface functionality.” [0468]), and
to terminate the voltage signal of the corresponding power supply (Messerly: in particular "the combination logic circuit may implement a deenergization sequence”, [0554]); and
a plurality of isolation barriers galvanically (Messerly: “isolation transformers 916, 928, 922”, [0381], Figure 21).
Messerly does not explicitly teach a plurality of cable state detection circuits and an output of the first power supply is floating relative to the other power supplies.
Additionally, although the reference did not disclose a plurality of cable state detection circuits each of which is coupled via a corresponding cable, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
The modified invention of Messerly does not explicitly teach isolating each of the power supplies from each other and from each of the controllers such that an output of the first power supply is floating relative to the other power supplies.
However, Malis discloses “an electrosurgical cutter/coagulator system” (column 1, line 6) and teaches isolating each of the power supplies from each other and from each of the controllers such that an output of the first power supply is floating relative to the other power supplies (“A trio of floating or isolated power supplies 320 (FIG. 15a)” column 19, lines 45 - 48, Figure 15a).
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 Messerly such that isolating each of the power supplies from each other and from each of the controllers such that an output of the first power supply is floating relative to the other power supplies, as taught by Malis, for the benefit of provid[ing] safety to patients regarding power usage of medical devices.
The modified invention of Messerly and Malis does not teach a connection signal periodically output by the at least one component while the at least one component is connected to the control via a connector of the cable and to terminate the voltage signal of the first power supply in response to an interruption of the connection signal.
However, Tani discloses a “robot control system has a portable operating device TP and a robot control device RC” (abstract) and teaches a connection signal periodically output by the at least one component while the at least one component is connected to the control via a connector of the cable (“The connection monitoring section 12 monitors whether the portable operating device TP and the robot control device RC are electrically connected to each other through the charging device CU.” Column 5 lines 54 – 57; “The connection monitoring section 12 constantly monitors whether electric connection between the portable operating device TP and the robot control device RC is established.” column 6 lines 62 - 64) and to terminate the voltage signal of the first power supply in response to an interruption of the connection signal (“When the robot R is in automatic operation and it is detected that an electric connection between the portable operating device TP and the robot control device RC is not established, the charging amount of the portable operating device TP is prevented from falling short by automatically disconnecting the power source of the portable operating device TP.” Column 8 lines 6 - 12).
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 Messerly and Malis to incorporate each connection signal is periodically output by a corresponding movable cart of the plurality of movable carts while the corresponding movable cart is connected to the control tower via a corresponding connector of the corresponding cable and to terminate the voltage signal of the first power supply in response to an interruption of the connection signal, as taught by Tani, for the benefit of providing electrical safety when in use for the patient and healthcare professional.
Regarding claim 9, Messerly, Malis and Tani teach all limitations of claim 8. The modified invention of Messerly, Malis and Tani teaches each of the power supplies includes a power supply connector (Messerly: cables are disclosed in Fig. 2) and a communication connector (Messerly: cables are disclosed in Fig. 2), each of which is coupled to the corresponding controller (Messerly: [0380] - [0383], Figures 2 and 21).
Regarding claim 10, Messerly, Malis and Tani teach all limitations of claim 9. The modified invention of Messerly, Malis and Tani teaches each of the isolation barriers includes a power supply isolator coupled to the power supply connector and a communication isolator coupled to the communication connector (Messerly: “power transformer 908”, [0380], Figure 21).
Regarding claim 12, Messerly, Malis and Tani teach all limitations of claim 8. The modified invention of Messerly, Malis and Tani teaches each of the controllers is configured to terminate the voltage signal of the corresponding power supply in response to termination of the connection signal (Messerly: in particular "the combination logic circuit may implement a deenergization sequence”, [0554]).
Regarding claim 13, Messerly, Malis and Tani teach all limitations of claim 8. The modified invention of Messerly, Malis and Tani teaches each of the controllers is configured to terminate the voltage signal of the corresponding power supply in response to the at least one status signal being outside a predetermined parameter (in particular "Sensors are provided that measure, at the end effector, a clamping force value (existing within a known range) and, based upon the received clamping force value, the processor 3302 varies the motional voltage VM." [0477]).
Regarding claim 14, Messerly teaches a method for controlling a surgical robotic system, the method comprising:
outputting a voltage signal from a power supply to power the movable cart including a robotic arm having a surgical instrument (“The main processor 3214 also may provide RF drive”, [0468]);
transmitting a connection signal indicative of a connection status of a cable connecting a movable cart to the power supply ("the main processor 3214 is configured to sense the presence of ultrasonic drive circuitry and/or RF drive circuitry to enable appropriate software and user interface functionality.", [0468]);
transmitting at least one status signal from the first power supply (“the main processor 3214 is configured to sense the presence of ultrasonic drive circuitry and/or RF drive circuitry to enable appropriate software and user interface functionality.”, [0468]);
controlling, at a controller, the power supply based on the connection status of the cable and the at least one status signal (“the main processor 3214 is configured to sense the presence of ultrasonic drive circuitry and/or RF drive circuitry to enable appropriate software and user interface functionality.”, [0468]);
galvanically isolating the first power supply from the controller and from the other power supplies of the plurality of power supplies via an isolation barrier (Messerly: “isolation transformers 916, 928, 922”, [0381], Figure 21), and
terminating the voltage signal of the first power supply (Messerly: in particular "the combination logic circuit may implement a deenergization sequence”, [0554]).
Messerly does not explicitly teach isolating the first power supply from the controller and from the other power supplies of the plurality of power supplies via an isolation barrier such that an output of the first power supply is floating relative to the other power supplies.
However, Malis discloses “an electrosurgical cutter/coagulator system” (column 1, line 6) and teaches isolating the first power supply from the controller and from the other power supplies of the plurality of power supplies via an isolation barrier such that an output of the first power supply is floating relative to the other power supplies (“A trio of floating or isolated power supplies 320 (FIG. 15a)” column 19, lines 45 - 48, Figure 15a).
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 Messerly such that isolating the first power supply from the controller and from the other power supplies of the plurality of power supplies via an isolation barrier such that an output of the first power supply is floating relative to the other power supplies, as taught by Malis, for the benefit of provid[ing] safety to patients regarding power usage of medical devices.
The modified invention of Messerly and Malis does not teach a connection signal periodically output by the at least one component while the at least one component is connected to the control via a connector of the cable and to terminate the voltage signal of the first power supply in response to an interruption of the connection signal.
However, Tani discloses a “robot control system has a portable operating device TP and a robot control device RC” (abstract) and teaches a connection signal periodically output by the at least one component while the at least one component is connected to the control via a connector of the cable (“The connection monitoring section 12 monitors whether the portable operating device TP and the robot control device RC are electrically connected to each other through the charging device CU.” Column 5 lines 54 – 57; “The connection monitoring section 12 constantly monitors whether electric connection between the portable operating device TP and the robot control device RC is established.” column 6 lines 62 - 64) and to terminate the voltage signal of the first power supply in response to an interruption of the connection signal (“When the robot R is in automatic operation and it is detected that an electric connection between the portable operating device TP and the robot control device RC is not established, the charging amount of the portable operating device TP is prevented from falling short by automatically disconnecting the power source of the portable operating device TP.” Column 8 lines 6 - 12).
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 Messerly and Malis to incorporate a connection signal periodically output by the at least one component while the at least one component is connected to the control via a connector of the cable and to terminate the voltage signal of the first power supply in response to an interruption of the connection signal, as taught by Tani, for the benefit of providing electrical safety when in use for the patient and healthcare professional.
Regarding claim 15, Messerly, Malis and Tani teach all limitations of claim 14. The modified invention of Messerly, Malis and Tani teaches the method comprising coupling the first power supply to the controller through a power supply connector and a communication connector (Messerly: [0380] - [0383], Figures 2 and 21).
Regarding claim 17, Messerly, Malis and Tani teach all limitations of claim 14. The modified invention of Messerly, Malis and Tani teaches galvanically isolating further includes coupling a power supply isolator to the power supply connector and a communication isolator to the communication connector (Messerly: “isolation transformers 916, 928, 922”, [0381], Figure 21).
Regarding claim 20, Messerly, Malis and Tani teach all limitations of claim 14. The modified invention of Messerly, Malis and Tani teaches the method further comprising terminating the voltage signal of the first power supply in response to the at least one status signal being outside a predetermined parameter (in particular "Sensors are provided that measure, at the end effector, a clamping force value (existing within a known range) and, based upon the received clamping force value, the processor 3302 varies the motional voltage VM." [0477]).
Claims 5, 11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Messerly, Malis and Tani, as applied in claims 1, 8, and 14, in view of Leimbach et al (EP 2923661 A2, hereinafter “Leimbach”).
Regarding claims 5, 11 and 18, Messerly, Malis and Tani teach all limitations of claims 1, 8 and 14. The modified invention of Messerly, Malis and Tani teaches the cable state detection circuit but does not teach a debouncer.
However, Leimbach discloses an invention relates to surgical instruments (abstract) and teaches a debouncer (“a switch debouncer circuit which utilizes a capacitor to filter out any quick changes of signal response”, [0212]). 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 and method of Messerly, Malis and Tani to incorporate a debouncer, as taught by Leimbach, for the benefit of eliminating unwanted quick on/off cycles.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, pages 6 – 8, filed 2 June 2026 with respect to claim(s) 1 – 3, 5, 7 – 15, 17 – 18 and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. See rejections above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sartor (US8004121B2) discloses a “connection cable is disclosed for controlling a voltage-controlled generator such as an electrosurgery generator from a controlling device such as a robotic surgery system” (abstract).
Naylor et al (US 7902810 B2) discloses a “cable detection system” (abstract) and teaches a connection signal periodically output by the at least one component while the at least one component is connected to the control via a connector of the cable (“detector further enables a determination of whether the cable is connected” abstract; Figures 1a - 1c; “The system 14 further includes a controller 24 for automatically initiating generation of the input electrical AC signal 17 for coupling to the first lead 110, and for turning off the input electrical AC signal 17 after determination by the detector 42 of whether the cable 2 is connected to the cable connector 12” column 3 lines 64 – 67 – column 4 lines 1 – 2; column 1, lines 18 - 39).
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
Prosecution Insights