The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
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 1 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirschenman et al. (WO 2009/120992) in view of Wang et al. (CN 109199588), in view of Wang’2 (US Patent Pub. No. 2011/0087238).
Kirschenman discloses an input device for a robotic medical system (see Abstract). Specifically, Kirschenman teaches an operating handle (see Figure 2) with a feedback of guidewire/catheter advancement resistance for a vascular intervention robot (see paragraphs 28 and 72) comprising a sliding guide rail (see numeral 154 identified as a translation rail, see Figure 4F), a fixing base plate (see numeral 104 identified as a control box upon/within which the device is housed, see Figures 2 and 4A), a connecting rod (see numeral 106 identified as a spline, see Figure 4A, C, D, or F), an operation rod (see numeral 102 identified as a handle in Figures throughout), a pressure sensing device (this is lacking in Kirschenman and will be discussed below), a rotary driving device (see numeral 122 (Figure 4D), paragraph 46), and a linear motor (see motor 162B, which “may be configured to receive position signals, and to return translation mechanism 126, and the associated spline 106, to a centered state” – paragraph 56; however, it is noted that this is not a linear motor which will be discussed further below),
wherein the rotary driving drive, the sliding guide rail, and a stator of the linear motor are arranged on the fixing base plate (see Figure 4A-D, illustrating all components housed within the control box 104; see paragraphs 46, 54 and 56);
the pressure sensing device and a rotor of the linear motor are connected with the sliding guide rail through a slider (see paragraph 54, “…translation body 152 configured to translate along a translation rail 154 in response to translation of handle 102”) and are configured to reciprocate along the sliding guide rail (see paragraph 54, “… translation body 152 may move laterally along the rail 154”; it is noted that a pressure sensor is deficient in Kirschenman and therefore is not taught as reciprocating via the slide, which will be addressed below); and
the connecting rod has a first end provided with the operation rod (see Figure 4F, illustrating connecting rod 106 attached to handle 102) and a second end connected with the rotor of the linear motor through a strain gauge (see Figure 4F which illustrates connecting rod 106 operatively connected with motor 162B via belt 150B, it is noted that there is no strain gauge in Kirschenman); and the connecting rod passes through the pressure sensing device and the rotary driving device in sequence (it is noted that a pressure sensor is deficient in Kirschenman, and this will therefore be discussed below).
However, Kirschenman fails to teach the following: a pressure sensing device; that motor 162B is not a linear motor; that a rotor of the linear motor and the pressure sensing device reciprocate along the sliding guide rail via the slider (although it is taught that the slider reciprocates); and a strain gauge connecting the rotor of motor 162B with the connecting rod 106.
Wang teaches vascular intervention by an electromagnetic damping force feedback operation handle (see Abstract). Specifically related to the lack of a pressure sensor in Kirschenman, Wang teaches that “the hands of the operator holding the operating rod 8 mounting one end of the force sensor 18 to operate, force sensor 18 measures pressure of the hand, and according to the magnitude of the pressure to control the far-end clamping wire elastic to keep transparency and hand holding remote mechanical clamping. a force sensor 18 for measuring operator for gripping degree of the operation rod 8, thereby controlling far-end clamping mechanism to the catheter, a guidewire clamping degree, realizing reverse force feedback, preventing catheter, guide wire slippage” (see page 6, last full paragraph). Additionally, Wang illustrates the use of a linear motor for translational movement of the connecting rod (see Figures 1 and 2 illustrating linear motor which move “operation rod 8”, for which the right-side of operation rod 8 comprises the pressure sensor handle 18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to utilize a linear motor and pressure sensors on a handle, as taught by Wang, within the system and methods of Kirschenman. The use of a linear motor versus the motor configuration taught by Kirschenman would have been obvious because the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results (KSR, 550 U.S. at 416, 82 USPQ2d at 1395). The incorporation of pressure sensors on the handle would have been obvious because this would provide for “realizing reverse force feedback, preventing catheter, guide wire slippage“ (see quote above from page 6 of Wang).
It is noted that the combination of Wang’s linear motor and pressure sensor within the handle (as shown in Figure 1 of Wang) into the system of Kirschenman would thereby result in the connecting rod 106 of Kirschenman to reciprocate within the slide of Kirschenman and to also cause reciprocation of the handle and pressure sensor, as well as the rotor of the linear motor, as Figure 1 of Wang illustrates these components attached to the connecting rod 8 in Wang. Additionally, it is noted that by combining Wang with Kirschenman, this teaches that the connecting rod 106 would pass through the pressure sensing device (i.e., begins with the pressure sensing device in the handle at the right-most side shown in Figures 4B-C) and the rotary device (see location of rotation mechanism 122 in Figures 4B-C) in sequence (i.e., as one moves from right to left in these figures, this is meets the claim language).
However, the combination of Kirschenman with Wang still fails to teach a strain gauge.
Wang’2 teaches controls for robotic arms (see Abstract). Of importance to the above combination, Wang’2 teaches a control input illustrated in Figure 8, in which a handle 132 is connected to a gripper shaft 152 that is coupled to a load cell 154. “The load cell 154 senses the amount of pressure being applied thereto and provides an input signal to the controller 46” (see paragraph 109). “The controller 46 of the system receives the feedback signal of the load cell 110 in the end effector and provides a corresponding command signal to the motor to move the lead screw 160 and apply a pressure on the gripper so that the surgeon receives feedback relating to the force being applied by the end effector” (see paragraph 110).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include a strain gauge, as taught by Wang’2, into the system and methods taught by Kirschenman as combined with Wang so that “the surgeon has a ‘feel’ for operating the end effector” (see last sentence in paragraph 110 of Wang’2).
Regarding claim 6, Wang’2 teaches a bearing 156 that is connected with the handle shaft and contacts the load cell 154, applying pressure thereto (see paragraph 109 and Figure 8).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Kirschenman teaches that “Translation mechanism 126, as generally illustrated in Fig. 4F, may be configured to detect and/or measure linear displacement of handle 102, in a direction such as corresponding to arrow D” (see paragraph 52). The use of a sensor for such measurements would be obvious, as exemplified by the teachings of paragraph 73 of Kirschenman, including those recited in claim 8. Furthermore, the combination of Kirschenman with Wang would make it obvious that a linear motor would be used in place of motor 162B of Kirschenman.
Claim 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirschenman in view of Wang and Wang’2 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sasaki (US Patent Pub. No. 2019/0290102).
Kirschenman in combination with Wang and Wang’2 is described above with respect to claim 1. It is noted that Wang teaches the use of a slip ring and a first sliding bearing (see Figure 1 and last paragraph on page 5 into page 6, which discusses a slip ring to prevent winding of wires). However, the type of pressure sensor taught by Wang on the handle is not explicitly taught as a film-type pressure sensor.
Sasaki teaches a medical observation apparatus including a medical imaging section configured to image an observation target and at least one grip detecting section installed on an outer circumference of the medical imaging section and configured to detect a grip of a user (see Abstract). Sasaki teaches that “It is sufficient if the grip detecting section 140 is a sensor capable of detecting direct gripping of the imaging device 106 by the surgeon OP and gripping via the medical sterilization cover 300 and may be, for example, a capacitive type sensor that detects capacitance of a contact surface by a contact of a finger of the surgeon OP. Further, the grip detecting section 140 is not limited to a capacitive type sensor but may be, for example, a resistive film type sensor or a pressure sensitive type sensor” (see paragraph 101).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to utilize a film-type pressure sensor, as taught by Sasaki, into the system and methods of Kirschenman as combined with Wang and Wang’2 because the teachings in Sasaki make it clear that there are multiple types of sensors well known in the art for detecting the grip of a user on a handle; accordingly, the use of either one to perform the method taught by Kirschenman as combined with Wang would amount to choosing from a finite number of pressure sensor types available in the art at the time of the invention, which has previously been held as unpatentable (KSR v. Teleflex).
Regarding claim 3, it is noted that Wang teaches a second sliding bearing (see Figure 1 and last paragraph on page 5 into page 6, as well as Abstract for discussion of multiple bearings).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to teach or suggest the particular structural configurations of the rotary driving device as recited in claims 4-5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES KISH whose telephone number is (571)272-5554. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00a - 6p 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, Unsu Jung can be reached at (571) 272-8506. 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.
/JAMES KISH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792