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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 24 March 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 6, 8, 28, 32, 36, 51, and 54 have been newly amended. Claims 4, 5, 29, 30, 52, and 53 have been newly canceled. No claims have been newly added. Claims 1-3, 6, 8-13, 27-28, 32, 36-37, 51, and 54 remain pending in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 28, and 51 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 11 and 37 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 11, Applicant claims: “obtaining information about medical task to be performed with the manipulator device….” The examiner recommends amending this limitation to recite: “obtaining information about the medical task to be performed with the manipulator device…,” or the like.
Claim 37 contains language similar to that of claim 11, and is similarly objected to.
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.
Claims 2, 32, and 54 are 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.
Regarding claim 2, Applicant claims: “wherein selecting the first assignment comprises selecting from the plurality of assignments based on the historical data of the plurality of manipulator arms.” The examiner notes, however, that this limitation is already present in newly amended claim 1 (“and wherein selecting the first assignment comprises selecting from the plurality of assignments based on historical data of the plurality of manipulator arms by determining an amount of previous use of the first manipulator arm based on the historical data…”), and as such, is not further limiting.
The examiner notes that although claims 3 and 9 are dependent on claim 2, they do technically further limit the claim on which they depend, and as such are not being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d). The examiner recommends Applicant cancel claim 2, and amend claims 3 and 9 to depend on claim 1.
Regarding claim 32, Applicant claims: “determining, based on the historical data, the second assignment of the second manipulator arm, such that a less used manipulator arm of the first and second manipulator arms is paired with a more demanding assignment of the first and second assignments.” The examiner notes, however, that this limitation appears to already be present in newly amended claim 28 (“selecting, based on the historical data, a second assignment of the second manipulator arm of the plurality of manipulator arms, such that a less used manipulator arm of the first and second manipulator arms is paired with a more demanding assignment of the first and second assignments.”), and as such, is not further limiting.
Claim 54 contains limitations similar to those of claim 32, and is similarly not further limiting due to newly amended claim 51 containing limitations similar to those of claim 28.
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
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3,6,8-13,27-28,30,32,36-37,51 and 54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asano (US 20170165837 A1), hereafter Asano, in view of Kuffner (US 20150185729 A1), hereafter Kuffner.
Regarding claim 1, Asano discloses a manipulator device management system, comprising:
A manipulator device comprising a plurality of manipulator arms (0042, Patient-side system 1 includes: positioner 7; platform 5 attached at a tip portion of positioner 7; patient-side manipulator arms (hereinafter, simply referred to as “arms 3” (movable parts)) detachably attached to platform 5; endoscope assembly 41, attached to a tip portion of one arm 3A among arms 3; instruments 42, detachably attached to tip portions of other arms 3B among arms 3 … Patient-side system 1 according to this embodiment includes four arms 3 in total, including one camera arm 3A and three instrument arms 3B.); and
A control system comprising one or more processors and a memory (0112, controller 6 includes arm management unit (management device) 603 that manages arms 3 attached to platform 5. Reader-writers 93 are electrically connected to arm management unit 603.), the memory comprising programmed instructions adapted to cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
Selecting, for a first manipulator arm of the plurality of manipulator arms, a first assignment from a plurality of assignments available to the first manipulator arm (0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 (i.e. attachment port 55) at which that arm 3 should be attached.), wherein the first assignment corresponds to a medical task to be performed by a manipulator arm (0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 (i.e. attachment port 55) at which that arm 3 should be attached.), the medical task designating a location for the first manipulator arm with respect to a patient or a first pose of the first manipulator arm with respect to the patient (0045, controller 6 firstly positions platform 5 by actuating positioner 7 such that platform 5 and operating table 111 or patient P have a predetermined positional relation with each other. Controller 6 then positions endoscope assembly 41 and instruments 42 by actuating arms 3 such that sleeves (cannula sleeves) 110 held on the body of patient P, endoscope assembly 41 and instruments 42 have predetermined initial positional relations with each other.),
Causing the first manipulator arm to adopt the first assignment (0120, arm management unit 603 manages arms 3 to be attached to platform 5 such that arms 3 are attached at the appropriate positions on platform 5 and appropriate arms 3 are attached to attachment ports 55.), wherein the first assignment is available to at least two manipulator arms of the plurality of manipulator arms (0101, Bases 80 of arms 3 are freely attachable to and detachable from platform 5. In other words, whole arms 3 can be easily detached from and attached to patient-side system 1. In this embodiment, four arms 3 are attachable to and detachable from platform 5. Examiner's note: because the arms are able to be placed at any position on the platform 5, the examiner asserts that the "assignment," i.e., the position and task, is available for any of the arms 3), and wherein historical data of the plurality of manipulator arms includes an amount of previous use of the first manipulator arm (0125, Storage device 604 of controller 6 includes a usage-count-limit storage unit that stores usage count limits associated with the pieces of individual identification information. Based on the individual identification information acquired from each IC tag 91, arm management unit 603 reads the corresponding usage count limit from storage device 604 and compares the usage count limit and the acquired usage count information.), and
Selecting a second assignment of a second manipulator arm of the plurality of manipulator arms (0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 (i.e. attachment port 55) at which that arm 3 should be attached.).
Asano fails to explicitly disclose, however, wherein selecting the first assignment comprises selecting from the plurality of assignments based on historical data of the plurality of manipulator arms by determining an amount of previous use of the first manipulator arm based on the historical data, and wherein the second assignment of the second manipulator arm of the plurality of manipulator arms is based on the historical data, such that a less used manipulator arm of the first and second manipulator arms is paired with a more demanding assignment of the first and second assignment.
Kuffner, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach selecting an assignment for a robotic device of a plurality of robotic devices from a plurality of assignments based on historical data, such that a less used robotic device of the plurality of robotic devices is paired with a more demanding assignment of the plurality of assignments (0081, the method 500 includes the computing system optimizing an allocation of the plurality of tasks to one or more robotic devices of the plurality of robotic devices based on the information associated with respective health levels for the plurality of robotic devices. In the instance in which a first task is associated with a first amount of precision that is greater than a second amount of precision associated with a second task, the computing system may allocate the first task to a first robotic device having a first health level that is greater than a second health level of a second robotic device. For example, the first robotic device may be newer or younger than the second robotic device and the first task may accordingly be allocated to the first robotic device. In some examples, the second task may be allocated to the second robotic device.)
Asano and Kuffner are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., robotic control systems, and they are both reasonably pertinent to solving the problem of optimizing task allocation based on usage statistics of a plurality of robotic devices. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the usage-based task allocation of Kuffner in order to provide a means of ensuring a manipulator arm is capable of performing its allocated task. The motivation to combine is to ensure that the allocated tasks are performed as effectively and safely as possible.
Claims 28 and 51 are similar in scope to claim 1, and are similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the management system of claim 1, and Asano further teaches wherein selecting the first assignment comprises selecting from the plurality of assignments of the plurality of manipulator arms (0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 (i.e. attachment port 55) at which that arm 3 should be attached.).
Asano fails to explicitly teach, however, wherein the first assignment is selected based on the historical data of the plurality of manipulator arms.
Kuffner, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach selecting an assignment for a robotic device from a plurality of assignments based on historical data (0081, the method 500 includes the computing system optimizing an allocation of the plurality of tasks to one or more robotic devices of the plurality of robotic devices based on the information associated with respective health levels for the plurality of robotic devices. In the instance in which a first task is associated with a first amount of precision that is greater than a second amount of precision associated with a second task, the computing system may allocate the first task to a first robotic device having a first health level that is greater than a second health level of a second robotic device. For example, the first robotic device may be newer or younger than the second robotic device and the first task may accordingly be allocated to the first robotic device. In some examples, the second task may be allocated to the second robotic device.)
Asano and Kuffner are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., robotic control systems, and they are both reasonably pertinent to solving the problem of optimizing task allocation based on usage statistics of a plurality of robotic devices. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the usage-based task allocation of Kuffner in order to provide a means of ensuring a manipulator arm is capable of performing its allocated task. The motivation to combine is to ensure that the allocated tasks are performed as effectively and safely as possible.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the management system of claim 2, and Asano further teaches wherein the historical data comprises usage data of the plurality of manipulator arms (0116, controller 6 transmits usage count information of each arm 3 to data center 201, controller 6 transmits the usage time of the lamp in endoscope assembly 41 and the usage time of forceps as instrument 42 to data center 201).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the management system of claim 1, and Asano further teaches wherein the operations further comprise: identifying the less used manipulator arm by using the historical data (0125, storage device 604 of controller 6 includes a usage-count-limit storage unit that stores usage count limits associated with the pieces of individual identification information, arm management unit 603 reads the corresponding usage count limit from storage device 604 and compares the usage count limit and the acquired usage count information, arm management unit 603 manages the usage count of each arm 3 in this manner so as to prevent the arm from being used over the usage count limit) to determine at least one parameter selected from the group of:
A duration of use of the first manipulator arm (0116, controller 6 transmits the usage time of the lamp in endoscope assembly 41 and the usage time of forceps as instrument 42 to data center 201);
A number of uses of the first manipulator arm (0116, controller 6 transmits usage count information of each arm 3 to data center 201);
A wear amount of the first manipulator arm;
Previous medical tasks performed by the first manipulator arm; and
Previous instruments driven by the first manipulator arm.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the management system of claim 1, and Asano further teaches wherein the operations further comprise: identifying the less used manipulator arm by using the historical data to determine an amount of use of a component of the first manipulator arm (0116, controller 6 transmits usage count information of each arm 3 to data center 201, controller 6 transmits the usage time of the lamp in endoscope assembly 41 and the usage time of forceps as instrument 42 to data center 201).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the management system of claim 2, and Asano further teaches wherein the historical data comprises performance test data of the plurality of manipulator arms (0141, data analysis unit can perform a data analysis for prevention of abnormalities, failures, and the like in surgery system, 0155, when the different between monitoring-target data 222 on a component and a normal value exceeds a predetermined threshold, data analysis unit 212 can determine that as a sign of a future abnormality or failure of arm 3 or positioner 7, Examiner's note: the examiner is interpreting the "normal value" as being equivalent to the claimed "performance test data," as both correspond to nominal, known previous data of the arm or positioner).
Claim 36 is similar in scope to claim 9, and is similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the management system of claim 1, and Asano further teaches wherein the operations further comprise:
Obtaining information about instrument types to be used with the manipulator device (0115, IC tags 91 may store information on expendable parts of endoscope assembly 41 and instruments 42 attached to arms 3, 0117, surgery information set in advance in controller 6, surgery information includes the combination of arms 3 to be used in the surgery, 0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 at which that arm should be attached); and
Determining the plurality of assignments based on the information (0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 at which that arm should be attached).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the management system of claim 1, and Asano further teaches wherein the operations further comprise:
Obtaining information about medical task to be performed with the manipulator device (0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 at which that arm should be attached); and
Determining the plurality of assignments based on the information (0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 at which that arm should be attached).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the management system of claim 1, and Asano further teaches wherein causing the first manipulator arm to adopt the first assignment comprises providing an instruction to a user of the manipulator device management system to configure the first manipulator in accordance with the first assignment (0118, arm management unit 603 determines whether or not the combination of the pieces of individual identification information acquires from reader-writers 93 matches the one set as the above-mentioned surgery information, if the combination does not match the one set, the arm management unit 603 outputs a warning via alarm 605 to alert the operator 0, arm management unit manages arms 3 to be attached to platform 5 in this manner so as to attach proper arms 3).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the management system of claim 1, and Asano further teaches wherein causing the first manipulator arm to adopt the first assignment comprises: commanding the manipulator device to configure the first manipulator arm in accordance with the first assignment (0185, For example, based on the surgical method to be implemented by the surgery robot, data analysis unit 212 generates configuration information suitable for that surgical method. Information on the surgical method is notified to data analysis unit 212, for example, via manipulation apparatus 2 of the surgery robot. The information on the surgical method includes, for example, information on the positions of the sleeves (cannula sleeves) to be placed in the body of the patient and information on the positions of the patient and the bed relative to each other. Data analysis unit 212 can also generate the configuration information based on features of the doctor who is to use the surgery robot (e.g. the standing height, the sitting height, etc.). Data analysis unit 212 may generate the configuration information based on the combination of the surgical method and the features of the doctor or other information. 0186, In the configuration information, the configurations of arms 3 and the configuration of positioner 7 are set per system ID 220, for example. 0187, The configuration of arm 3 is set per individual identification information 230 of arm. The configuration of arm 3 includes, for example, attachment port ID 233 and motion command value 240 for each component ID 221.).
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the management system of claim 11, and Asano further teaches wherein the operations further comprise:
Designating, based on the historical data and the information about the medical task, one or more manipulator arms of the plurality of manipulator arms not to be used in the medical task (0118, arm management unit 603 determines whether or not the combination of the pieces of individual identification information acquires from reader-writers 93 matches the one set as the above-mentioned surgery information, if the combination does not match the one set, the arm management unit 603 outputs a warning via alarm 605 to alert the operator 0, arm management unit manages arms 3 to be attached to platform 5 in this manner so as to attach proper arms 3, 0125, storage device 604 of controller 6 includes a usage-count-limit storage unit that stores usage count limits associated with the pieces of individual identification information, arm management unit 603 reads the corresponding usage count limit from storage device 604 and compares the usage count limit and the acquired usage count information, arm management unit 603 manages the usage count of each arm 3 in this manner so as to prevent the arm from being used over the usage count limit, Examiner's note: in the case that the combination of detected arms does not match the set one, and an incorrect arm is present, a warning to the operator would be generated to remove the incorrect arm, i.e., to not use that arm in the procedure).
Regarding claim 32, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the method of claim 28, and Asano further teaches it further comprising:
Determining a second assignment of a second manipulator arm of the plurality of manipulator arms (0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 (i.e. attachment port 55) at which that arm 3 should be attached.).
Asano fails to explicitly teach, however, wherein the second assignment of the second manipulator arm of the plurality of manipulator arms is based on the historical data, such that a less used manipulator arm of the first and second manipulator arms is paired with a more demanding assignment of the first and second assignment.
Kuffner, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach determining an assignment for a robotic device of a plurality of robotic devices from a plurality of assignments based on historical data, such that a less used robotic device of the plurality of robotic devices is paired with a more demanding assignment of the plurality of assignments (0081, the method 500 includes the computing system optimizing an allocation of the plurality of tasks to one or more robotic devices of the plurality of robotic devices based on the information associated with respective health levels for the plurality of robotic devices. In the instance in which a first task is associated with a first amount of precision that is greater than a second amount of precision associated with a second task, the computing system may allocate the first task to a first robotic device having a first health level that is greater than a second health level of a second robotic device. For example, the first robotic device may be newer or younger than the second robotic device and the first task may accordingly be allocated to the first robotic device. In some examples, the second task may be allocated to the second robotic device.)
Asano and Kuffner are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., robotic control systems, and they are both reasonably pertinent to solving the problem of optimizing task allocation based on usage statistics of a plurality of robotic devices. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the usage-based task allocation of Kuffner in order to provide a means of ensuring a manipulator arm is capable of performing its allocated task. The motivation to combine is to ensure that the allocated tasks are performed as effectively and safely as possible.
Claim 54 is similar in scope to claim 32, and is similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 37, the combination of Asano and Kuffner teaches the method of claim 28, and Asano teaches it further comprising:
Obtaining information about instrument types to be used with the manipulator device (0115, IC tags 91 may store information on expendable parts of endoscope assembly 41 and instruments 42 attached to arms 3, 0117, surgery information set in advance in controller 6, surgery information includes the combination of arms 3 to be used in the surgery, 0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 at which that arm should be attached) or about medical task to be performed with the manipulator device (0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 at which that arm should be attached); and
Determining the plurality of assignments based on the information (0119, surgery information may contain information on the combination of the individual identification information of each arm 3 to be used in the surgery and the position on platform 5 at which that arm should be attached).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
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 BLAKE A WOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-6830. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM Eastern.
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, Thomas Worden can be reached at (571) 272-4876. 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.
/BLAKE A WOOD/ Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights