DETAILED ACTION
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 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.
Response to Arguments
Examiner acknowledges the receipt of the Applicant’s Amendment dated March 31, 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Applicant's arguments with respect to Claim 1 have been considered and are persuasive. Upon further search and consideration, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed below in view of the new grounds of rejection over Ogawa et al. (U.S. Publication 2016/0128790).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogawa et al. (U.S. Publication 2013/0035697, hereinafter “Ogawa”) and in further views of Park (U.S. Publication 2014/0336669) and Ogawa et al. (U.S. Publication 2016/0128790).
As to Claim 1, Ogawa discloses a master-slave system (1) in [0031] and Fig. 1 comprising:
a first manipulator (19) in plurality as described in [0051]-[0052] supporting a first end effector (50) in [0051], whereby the first end effector has multiple degrees of freedom of movement;
a second manipulator (19) in plurality as described in [0051]-[0052] supporting a second end effector (50) in [0051];
an input device (2) in [0031]-[0033] configured to receive from a hand of an operator “Op” in [0031] and as shown in Fig. 1 a first master movement command to effect a desired slave movement of the first end effector as described in [0060-[0061] and a second master movement command to effect a desired slave movement of the second end effector as described in [0060]-[0061], wherein the input device comprises a first input (6) in [0036] for receiving the first master movement command;
a processor (40) in [0032] configured to determine a desired slave movement of the first and the second end effectors in response to the first and second master movement commands received from the input device respectively as shown in Fig. 7,
wherein the processor is operable in a plurality of modes comprising: an engaged mode, wherein the input device is operatively coupled with the second end effector; a disengaged mode, wherein the input device is operatively decoupled from the second end effector; an operational mode, wherein the first input is operably coupled with the first end effector; and a selection mode, wherein the first input is operably decoupled from the first end effector as shown in Fig. 17.
However, Ogawa does not disclose concurrently receiving first and second master commands to effect desired slave movement in first and second end effectors. As to Claims 1-20. Park teaches in the related field of master slave control means in endoscopy wherein multiple end effectors (210, 230) in [0057]-[0058] shown in Fig. 1 and multiple manipulators (111, 113) in [0057] and (400) in [0061]-[0062] shown in Fig. 1 are usable at one time depending on desired method as described in [0077]-[0088]. Park additionally teaches in [0077] that the number of surgical tools and robot arms that are used at one time may be determined depending on a diagnosis method, a surgery method, and a spatial limitation of a surgery room. In order to expedite prosecution, Ogawa is additionally applied as secondary teachings in the analogous field of endoscopy, wherein that multiple slave arms (6L, 6R, 6C) in [0052]-[0055] are concurrently moved by multiple master arms (11L, 11R) in [0052]-[0055]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide the manipulators and input devices in plurality of Ogawa to have concurrent control as taught by Park and Ogawa such that various control configurations can be provided and selectable (Ogawa, [0048]-[0051]) in order to fulfill the same function of sensing control signals with predictable results.
As to Claim 2, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the input device comprises a body for being held by the operator, the body being configured to be gripped in normal use by a single hand of the operator as shown in Fig. 1.
As to Claim 3, Ogawa discloses the system of Claim 2, wherein the input device further comprises one or more of: a drive mechanism (7, 8) in [0036] coupled to the first input, the drive mechanism being configured to apply a force to the first input for providing force feedback to the operator; and a position sensor as described in [0035] and [0041] configured to sense the position of the first input relative to the body for determining that a command is being received at the first input from the operator.
However Ogawa does not specifically disclose a force sensor and a capacitive sensor. Park teaches in the related field of master slave control means in endoscopy wherein a position sensor (217) in [0087] is provided with a force sensor (231) in [0089]-[0091] and [0093] and capacitive sensor (410) in [0094]-[0095] in accordance with sensing control signals. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide the position sensors of Ogawa with additional force and capacitive sensors as taught by Park in order to fulfill the same function of sensing control signals with predictable results.
As to Claim 4, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to operate in the disengaged mode in response to a signal received from a clutch input as shown in Figs. 7 and 10.
As to Claim 5, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 1, wherein when the processor enters the disengaged mode the processor is further configured to concurrently operate in the disengaged mode and the selection mode as shown in Fig. 17.
As to Claims 6-10, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 1, wherein when the processor is in the selection mode the first input is further configured to select a third end effector (50) in [0051], further comprising a second input device (31) in [0055] and Fig. 6 configured to concurrently receive from a hand of an operator a third master movement command to effect a desired slave movement of a third end effector and a fourth master movement command to effect a desired slave movement of the first end effector, wherein the second input device comprises a second input (33) in [0056] and Fig. 6 for receiving the fourth master movement command; and
wherein the processor is configured to selectively associate at least one of the degrees of freedom of the first end effector with the first input and to effect movement of the at least one of the degrees of freedom of the first end effector in response to receiving the first master movement command at the first input as shown in Fig. 7, and wherein the processor is configured to selectively associate at least one other of the degrees of freedom of the first end effector with the second input and to effect movement of the at least one other of the degrees of freedom of the first end effector in response to receiving the fourth master movement command at the second input as shown in Figs. 7 and 10.
As to Claim 11, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 1, wherein when the processor enters the disengaged mode the processor is further configured to concurrently operate in the disengaged mode and the selection mode as shown in Fig. 17.
As to Claim 12, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to effect movement of one or more of: the first end effector in accordance with the determined desired slave movement of the first end effector; and the second end effector in accordance with the determined desired slave movement of the second end effector as shown in Figs. 7 and 10.
As to Claim 13, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the first end effector comprises an image capture device (15) in [0043] for capturing an image of a worksite.
As to Claim 14, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 13, wherein the image capture device is an endoscope as described in [0043].
As to Claim 15, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 14, further comprising a display (20) in [0033] and Fig. 1 for displaying the captured image.
As to Claim 16, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 13, further comprising a display (20) in [0033] and Fig. 1 for displaying the captured image.
As to Claim 17, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to determine the desired slave movement of the first end effector according to movement of the first input with respect to an operator selected frame of reference as shown in Figs. 7 and 10.
As to Claim 18, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 17, wherein the operator selected frame of reference is fixed to the input device as shown in Figs. 7 and 10.
As to Claim 19, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 17, wherein the first end effector comprises an image capture device for capturing an image of a worksite, wherein the system further comprises a display (20) in [0033] and Fig. 1 for displaying the captured image, and wherein the operator selected frame of reference is fixed to the display.
As to Claim 20, Ogawa discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to continuously update a mapping between an input device frame of reference and a second end effector frame of reference and to continuously update a mapping between a first input frame of reference and a first end effector frame of reference such that movements of the first and second end effectors as displayed on the display correspond to the movements of the first input and the input device respectively as shown in Figs. 7 and 10.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM B CHOU whose telephone number is (571) 270-3367. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9 am - 6 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, Michael Carey can be reached on (571) 270-7235. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WILLIAM CHOU/
Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/MICHAEL J CAREY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights