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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 3, 7, 11, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 28,31, 33-37, 39, 41, 44, 45, 48, 54,56,57, 59 60, 61, 62, 63, and 64 are pending, all of which are rejected.
Amendments to the claims have been recorded.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues are fully addressed with the new rejections made to the newly provided amendments. Additionally, Examiner has added additional comments within the [brackets] of how the art is interpreted and relates to the claimed limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 7, 11, 14, 15, 16, 18, 22, 23, 24, 28, 37, 39, 41, 44, 45, 48, 54, 60, 61, 62, 63, and 64 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Krinninger US20190388179.
1. Krinninger teaches a computer-assisted device comprising: (Fig. 5#1, para 11)
a kinematic chain (Fig.5 #28; para 92) comprising a plurality of links (Fig. 5 segments 10, 12, 14 … 22; and para 92) coupled by a plurality of joints, (Fig. 5; joints 11,13, …23 and para 91)
the kinematic chain (28) being configured to support an end effector (Fig.5 #202, and para 111); and
a control unit (Fig,5 #206; para 112) coupled to the kinematic chain (28);
wherein the control unit (206) is configured to:
determine location information (determination of location information is implicit from para 93; “contacting device 30, 32, 34, 38, 40, 42 are used to detect contact between an operator and the respective arm segments 10, 12, …22.” Each segment has its own dedicated sensor and hence by touching a dedicated sensor, the segments, i.e. the location on the holding arm, that is contacted is known to the control unite)) for a first operator interaction (para 95, 112 and 115) with the kinematic chain (28);
determine a current state of the computer-assisted device, (para 93; “the associated joint is released”. each contact device has an associated joint that is released upon contact. Meaning that the determination which joint is to be released in defined in the control unit as the control unit knows and can determine the current state of the device. Additionally, Each segment has its own dedicated sensor which can be poled by the control unit to determine a current state))
wherein the current state specifies one or more of:
a task state,
a setup state, 93; when the first arm segment 12 is gripped and the contact is made simultaneously with the two contact elements 32a, 32b, the first joint 13 is released [setup state by allowing the user to set up the arm pose] by the operating unit 28. In this way, it is possible for the operator to pivot holding arm 1, or arm segments 12-22, about axis.
a tool installation state,
or
an operating area state;
identify one or more joints of the plurality of joints to place into a floating state (para 93; “the associated joint [of the plurality of joints 15, 19 …]is released”. each contact device has an associated joint that is released upon contact. Meaning that the determination which joint is to be released in defined in the control unit)) based on a plurality of parameters (pressure of contract, para 96’ “pressure of contract between the operator and the respective contact element 30” i.e. a plurality of 30a and plurality of 30b …; Also para 19)(pressure of contract is a parameter of the contract between operator and respective contact element) comprising (1) the location information, (pressure of contact at a particular contact element implies the location information ) (2) the current state, (para 93, based on sensor; Also para 109 “by providing such an acceleration sensor in each arm segment, it is possible to determine the pose of holding arm 1 at any time”); and
(3) an indicia of whether a portion of the kinematic chain distal to a location of the first operator interaction is subject to a constraint to remain stationary when one or more joints of the plurality of joints are in floating state; and para 93; Contacting devices 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 42 [kinematic chain] are used to detect contact between an operator[location of the first operator interaction] and the respective arm segment 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22. When gripping an arm segment 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, the operator comes into contact with [portion] the two contact elements 30a, 30b-42a, 42b, and the associated joint is released [when joints of the plurality of joints are in floating state] only when [constraint] there is contact [no contact; remain stationary when the other joints are floating state] with both the contact elements 30a, 30b-42a, 42b of a contacting device 30-42. This means that, when the first arm segment 12 is gripped and the contact is made simultaneously with the two contact elements 32a, 32b, the first joint 13 is released by the operating unit 28. In this way, it is possible for the operator to pivot holding arm 1, or arm segments 12-22, about axis A.sub.1. When one or both of the two contact elements 32a, 32b is let go of, joint 13 is locked again, and pivoting about axis A.sub.1 is no longer possible. If only one of the two contact elements 32a, 32b is inadvertently touched, for example by an arm or elbow of the operator, joint 13 is not released and holding arm 1 remains in the locked state and keeps its pose.
place the one or more joints (para 93; joint associated with contacted contact element) into the floating state (para 93: joint is released) in response to identifying the one or more joints to place into the floating state. (para 93; “the associated joint [of the plurality of joints 15, 19 …]is released”.
3. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein the control unit is further configured to, when the current state of the computer-assisted device is an error state, float no joints of the plurality of joints. (para 44; The holding arm is preferably designed in such a way that it blocks poses in which a particular torque threshold of a joint would be exceeded [error] due to the weight of an assistance system. An operator cannot move the holding arm into such a pose, because brakes in the joints prevent the holding arm beforehand from being moved [not floating] into such a pose.) Also see para 40
7. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein:
the control unit is further configured to identify a type of interaction for the first operator interaction;(para 18; the contact elements are provided in the form of touch-sensitive sensors. [touch type] that it is sufficient if the operator's grip is substantially around the arm segment and thus comes into contact with the sensor or sensors.)
the plurality of (para 18; The sensors are preferably provided in the form of pressure-sensitive sensors [pressure type of interaction], capacitive sensors, heat-sensitive sensors and/or as optical sensors.)
different sets of the plurality of joints are identify as the one or more joints for different types of interaction. (para 93; joint associated with contacted contact element; para 18; The sensors are preferably provided in the form of pressure-sensitive sensors, capacitive sensors, heat-sensitive sensors and/or as optical sensors.)
11. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein:
the location information includes an indication of one or more contact locations associated with the first operator interaction;(para 70; it is possible to trace every single pose of the holding arm during an operation and thus to know the spatial location)
the control unit is further configured to determine a number of the one or more contact locations associated with the first operator interaction;(para 70; thus to know the spatial location, throughout the operation procedure,)
the plurality of parameters further comprise the number of the one or more contact locations; and (para 92; the operating unit 28 according to this embodiment has seven [plurality] contact areas)
different sets of the plurality of joints are identify as the one or more joints for different numbers of contact locations. (para 92; the operating unit 28 according to this embodiment has seven contact areas 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 42, with one contacting device 30, 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, 42 being arranged on each arm segment 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22.)
14. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein the plurality of (para 91; joints 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23 are all in the form of rotary joints each having one degree of freedom.)
15. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 14 and further teaches, wherein the constraint is imposed on the kinematic chain distally to a location of the first operator interaction. (para 40; it is possible to define a holding [imposed to moving] arm pose which can then be provided to the assistance system and/or to the external control unit via the first and/or second interface.)
16. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 14 and further teaches, wherein the constraint comprises: an external obstacle to the kinematic chain; (para 40; to the external control unit via the first and/or second interface.))
or a range-of-motion limit for a joint of the plurality of joints.
18. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 14 and further teaches, wherein the constraint comprises a software constraint to maintain a position or an orientation of a portion of the kinematic chain located distally to a location of the first operator interaction. (para 41-42; any movement of the table is blocked [by software] when an endoscope disposed at the distal interface is in situ.)
22. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein the control unit is further configured to: determine a direction of an asserted force associated with the first operator interaction based on a signal received from a sensor system, wherein the plurality of parameters further comprise the direction of the asserted force. (para 109; detect a movement [plurality of parameters] in a direction; sensor 98 disposed inside arm segment 18. A sensor is preferably disposed in each arm segment 10-22, and it should be understood that the sensors in arm segments 10, 12, 14, 16, 20 and 22 may be configured in the same way as sensor 98 in arm segment 18. Sensor 98 is preferably provided in the form of an acceleration sensor. By providing such an acceleration sensor in each arm segment, it is possible to determine the pose of holding arm 1 at any time. For that purpose, sensor 98 is coupled via line 98a to data bus 76, so that the data captured by sensor 98 are transmitted to the electronic control unit 74, which then determines the pose of holding arm 1 from all the sensor data from all the arm segments. By providing such a sensor 98, it is also possible to determine the absolute and relative position of an end effector or manipulator disposed at interface 8. If holding arm 1 is attached to an operating table, it is also possible to detect any movement of the operating table. If all the sensors in all the arm segments detect a movement in the same direction, this is an indication that the entire holding arm 1 has been moved while keeping its pose, for example by the operating table or a plate of the operating table having been rotated or displaced relative to a pillar of the operating table. Such movement can also be detected by use of sensors 98. External impulses, such as jolts against holding arm 1, can also be detected.)
23. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 22 and further teaches, wherein the plurality of parameters further comprise that each joint of the one or more joints has, at a time of the first operator interaction, a degree of freedom in a direction that includes a component of the direction of asserted force. (para 19; 27; 28 and 109 all teach this limitation. Para 19; the operating unit is designed to release the associated joint according to the intensity of contact. What is meant by intensity here is a pressure and/or force which is applied by the operator. It is possible in this way for the operator to control a degree of freedom with the force that he applies when gripping. It is thus conceivable and preferred that the associated joint is only partially released when the intensity of contact is low, so that the arm segment can be moved only slowly and against a resistance. Whenever the intensity is high and thus when the grip is strong, the joint is opened completely, so the arm segment can be moved with substantially no resistance. The joint can also be partially release by releasing it intermittently in different frequencies.)
24. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein: the location information indicates the first operator interaction is with a first link of the plurality of links; and to identify the one or more joints to place into the floating state, the control unit is configured to select at least one joint of the plurality of joints, the at least one joint being located proximally to the first link along the kinematic chain (para 19; the operating unit is designed to release [floating state] the associated joint according to the intensity of contact. What is meant by intensity here is a pressure and/or force which is applied by the operator. It is possible in this way for the operator to control a degree of freedom with the force that he applies when gripping. It is thus conceivable and preferred that the associated joint is only partially released when the intensity of contact is low, so that the arm segment can be moved only slowly and against a resistance. Whenever the intensity is high and thus when the grip is strong, the joint is opened completely, so the arm segment can be moved with substantially no resistance. The joint can also be partially release by releasing it intermittently in different frequencies.)
or being located closest to and proximal to a location of the first operator interaction.
28. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein the location information indicates a link of the plurality of links that is associated with the first operator interaction, and wherein the plurality of parameters further comprise a joint type of a joint of the plurality of joints, the joint being located adjacent to the link. (para 91; has seven arm segments 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, each coupled to one another by joints 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23 [joint type based on location to arm segments [links] and joints as defined in para 45 of applicants specifications] and para 92; the operating unit 28 being adapted to release the associated joint [location] upon contact between an operator and one of the seven arm segments.)
37. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 1.
39. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 3.
41. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 7.
44. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 11.
45. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 14.
48. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 22.
54. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 28.
60. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 1.
61. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 7.
62. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 28.
63. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 15.
64. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 15.
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 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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krinninger as applied to claim above, and further in view of Kamikawa US20190328480.
20. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 and further teaches, wherein the constraint comprises a software constraint to maintain both a position and an orientation of a portion of the kinematic chain located distally to a location of the first operator interaction, and wherein the control unit is further configured to: (para 41-42; any movement [position and orientation] of the table is blocked [by software] when an endoscope disposed at the distal interface is in situ.) it is unclear wither this limitation is part of the claim limitations a it appears to be a preamble.
Krinninger does not teach detect a motion of the one or more joints after placing the one or more joints in the floating state; determine a compensating motion of at least one joint of the plurality of joints in response to the motion of the one or more joints, wherein the compensating motion of the at least one joint combined with the motion of the one or more joints maintain the constraint; and actuate the at least one joint in accordance with the compensating motion.
However, Kamikawa teaches (para 78; The gravity compensation mechanism 540 imparts to the joint section 511d a torque in a direction that cancels out [the motion of the joint must be detected to cancel out] the load torque due to the self-weight of the arm section 510 acting on the joint section [no torque is needed if the joint is not in floating state as the joint would be locked to cancel out gravity] 511d. The gravity compensation mechanism 550 imparts to the joint section 511e a torque in a direction that cancels out the load torque due to the self-weight of the arm section 510 acting on the joint section 511e. In the following, a torque that is in a direction that cancels out the load torque and that is imparted by the gravity compensation mechanisms 540 and 550 for gravity compensation is also designated a compensating torque.)
Therefore, it was well known at the time the invention was filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to combine the teachings with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of force compensation of a robotic arm such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious.
Claims 31, 33, 34, 35, 36,56, 57, 59 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krinninger as applied to claim above, and further in view of Birkenbanch US 20070129846.
31. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 but does not teach, wherein: the control unit is further configured to determine second location information for a second operator interaction with the kinematic chain, and the plurality of parameters further comprise the second location information; and to identify the one or more joints of the plurality of joints to place into the floating state, the control unit is configured to select the one or more joints to comprise at least one joint of the plurality of joints, located in the kinematic chain between a first location of the first operator interaction and a second location of the second operator interaction.
However, Birkenbanch teaches (para 12, A robot arm is provided with movement inhibitors that act on the joints and restrict the functional working range of the robot arm to the possible range of movement of a human arm by inhibiting the freedom of movement of the joints. The base joint can work like a ball joint having the freedom of movement of a human shoulder joint, the middle joint can work like hinges having a similar freedom of movement to a human elbow, and the distal joint again can work like two orthogonal hinges having a similar freedom of movement to a human wrist (the elbow and wrist can be designed identically as flexing-rolling joints). In other words, the robot arm invention can be restricted in its freedom of movement, such that it moves like a human arm, e.g., the robot arm does not use its overall functionally possible range of movement.)
Therefore, it was well known at the time the invention was filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to combine the teachings with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of a robotic arm having distal end with functional movement of a human arm such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious.
33. Krinninger and Birkenbanch teaches all of the limitations of claim 31, and Birkenbanch further teaches, wherein to select the at least one joint, the control unit is configured to select a configurable number of joints adjacent to at least one of the first location and the second location. Birkenbanch (para 13; functionally or logically possible working range of the robot arm can be restricted to the possible range of movement of a human arm, whereby the limits on the range of motion of the robot arm mimic the limits of the range of motion of the human arm)
34. Krinninger and Birkenbanch teaches all of the limitations of claim 31, and Birkenbanch further teaches, wherein to select the at least one joint, the control unit is configured to select a first joint of the plurality of joints, the first joint being located distal to and adjacent to a more distal of the first and second locations. Birkenbanch (para 16; The robot arm can comprise position, angle and/or torque sensors on its joints, the sensors being connected to the movement inhibitors or their controls. The arm also can comprise at least seven joint connections, wherein at least three are grouped in the base joint, at least two in the middle joint, and at least two in the distal joint. The robot arm can comprise a tool or instrument adaptor at the distal functional end, in particular behind the distal joint.)
35. Krinninger teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 but does not teach, wherein: the control unit is further configured to determine second location information for a second operator interaction with the kinematic chain, and the plurality of Birkenbanch (para 17; The movement inhibitors on or in the joints can comprise brakes or drive means. Such drive means, for example, can be electric motors or also force transfer means such as belts or gear wheels. The brakes or drive means can establish haptic feedback such as a counter force or forces. An on-switch and/or off-switch for the movement inhibitors can be provided and can in particular comprise one of the following devices: [0018] a mechanical switch for at least one of the joints; [0019] a software-controlled switch for at least one of the joints; [0020] a wire-controlled or wirelessly controlled switch for at least one of the joints.)
Therefore, it was well known at the time the invention was filed for one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to combine the teachings with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of a robotic arm having distal end with functional movement of a human arm such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious.
36. Krinninger and Birkenbanch teaches all of the limitations of claim 35, and Birkenbanch further teaches, wherein the at least one joint comprises a joint adjacent to a first link associated with the first location, or adjacent to a second link associated with the second location. Birkenbanch (para 21; By providing an on- or off-switch for the movement inhibitors, in particular by providing a switch for the middle joint, one or more of the joint connections, for example, can be released, e.g., a movement restriction can be removed. However, because a switch on the joint is operated by the user (e.g., the switch may be pressed or otherwise activated/deactivated, which can apply to all the joints), the movement restriction may be disabled under the complete control of the user.)
56. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 31.
57. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 34.
59. is rejected using the same rejections as made to claim 35.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SIHAR A KARWAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2747. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 11am.-7pm.
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, Ramon Mercado can be reached on 571-270-5744. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/SIHAR A KARWAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3658