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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 November 10, 2025 has been entered.
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, 7, 9, 11-14, 18-19, 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phee et al. (US PGPUB 2015/0230697 – “Phee”) in view of Duval et al. (US PGPUB 2008/0065110 – “Duval”), Swayze et al. (US PGPUB 2018/0049795 – “Swayze”), and Bakos et al. (US PGPUB 2010/0010299 – “Bakos”).
Regarding Claim 1, Phee discloses:
A robotic device (Phee FIG. 1B, system 10) comprising:
an articulatable elongate member (Phee FIG. 1B, endoscope probe 100) comprising; i) a bending section connected to a rigid distal end (Examiner-annotated Phee FIG. 2 shown below, distal flexible body 110 of endoscope probe 100 connected to a rigid distal end)
PNG
media_image1.png
510
760
media_image1.png
Greyscale
ii) a flexible shaft connecting the bending section (Phee FIG. 2, flexible shaft portion of primary endoscope probe 100 shown Phee FIG. 1) to a handle portion (Phee FIG. 1, handle/mechanism 40 attached to proximal end 102 of primary endoscope probe 100), wherein the bending section of the articulatable elongate member is articulatable by a plurality of pull wires (Phee FIG. 2, control cables 120c anchored at distal end of probe body 110) all of which having a distal end anchored to the rigid distal end (Phee FIG. 2, control cables 120c anchored at distal end of probe body 110) and a proximal end connected to the handle portion and wherein the handle portion steers the rigid distal end via the plurality of pull wires (Phee paragraph [0118], “primary endoscope probe body 110 carries a number of flexible cables 120 that are controllable or accessible beyond, near, or at the proximal end 102 of the primary endoscope probe 100, and which can be selectively or selectably tensioned or relaxed);
an imaging instrument (Phee FIG. 3A, small scope 200 with camera 222) removably coupled to the articulatable elongate member via a first working channel internal to the articulatable elongate member (Phee FIG. 3A and 6A, first scope channel 140), wherein the imaging instrument comprises a bending section (Phee FIG. 3E, bending controllable region 230b of small scope 200) and a camera (Phee FIG. 3A, camera module 222 at distal end 204 of small scope 200) embedded at a distal portion of the imaging instrument, wherein the imaging instrument is deployable and wherein the bending section of the imaging instrument is articulated by one or more pull wires to independently steer the camera relative to the articulatable elongate member thereby allowing a field of view of the camera to be controlled relative to the articulatable elongate member (Phee FIG. 3E, showing control wires 234a/b controlling distal end of small scope 200);
PNG
media_image2.png
458
662
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a first steerable instrument (Examiner-annotated Phee FIG. 6A shown above, first robotic surgical tool 400; Phee paragraph [0111], “a robot arm 400 is further drivable, manipulable, or positionable by way of tendons or tendon elements disposed within corresponding sheaths or sheath elements, where such tendon-sheath elements are carried by the disposable actuation assembly 300”) removably coupled to the articulatable elongate member via a second working channel internal to the articulatable elongate member (Phee FIG. 6A, first lumen tool channel 130; Phee paragraph [0125], “tool channels 130a,b through which surgical tools and corresponding tool control and sensing elements, such as robot arms 400, end effectors, corresponding tendon-sheath drive elements, and any required electrical elements/connections, can be easily and reliably removably inserted (e.g., inserted and selectively withdrawn)”), wherein the first steerable instrument comprises a bending section located at a base of a first end effector (Phee FIG. 6A, bending section attached to first end effector/second robotic surgical tool); and
a second steerable instrument (Phee FIG. 6A, second robotic surgical tool 400 Phee paragraph [0111], “a robot arm 400 is further drivable, manipulable, or positionable by way of tendons or tendon elements disposed within corresponding sheaths or sheath elements, where such tendon-sheath elements are carried by the disposable actuation assembly 300”) removably coupled to the articulatable elongate member via a third working channel internal to the articulatable elongate member (Phee FIG. 6A, second lumen tool channel 130; Phee paragraph [0125], “tool channels 130a,b through which surgical tools and corresponding tool control and sensing elements, such as robot arms 400, end effectors, corresponding tendon-sheath drive elements, and any required electrical elements/connections, can be easily and reliably removably inserted (e.g., inserted and selectively withdrawn)”), wherein the second steerable instrument comprises a bending section located at a base of a second end effector (Phee FIG. 6A, bending section attached to second end effector), such that the first instrument and the second instrument are controlled to divert away from the rigid distal end as they exiting the exiting ports of the second working channel and the third working channel and are steered back in the field of view of the camera by articulating the bending section of the first steerable instrument and the bending section of the second steerable instrument to form a triangulation configuration, wherein an operation of the first end effector of the first steerable instrument and the second end effector of the second steerable instrument is captured in the field of view of the camera of the imaging instrument without blocking a view of the camera of the imaging instrument (Phee FIG. 6A, showing first robotic surgical tool 400, second robotic surgical tool, and small scope 200 (having a camera 222) forming a triangle when exiting the end of the endoscope probe 100).
Phee does not explicitly disclose wherein an exit port of the second working channel and an exit port of the third working channel are formed on substantially opposite sides of the rigid distal end.
PNG
media_image3.png
788
574
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Duval teaches wherein an exit port of the second working channel and an exit port of the third working channel are formed on substantially opposite sides of the rigid distal end
(Examiner-annotated Duval FIG. 12A shown above, exit ports 1222a and 1222b on opposite sides of distal end of side-exit instrument assembly 1220).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Duval’s opposing side exit ports with the device disclosed by Phee. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a robotic device having lateral yaw/pitch control of endoscopic surgical tools (see paragraph [0176] of Duval).
Phee in view of Duval do not explicitly teach wherein the handle portion is releasably coupled to a first driving mechanism mounted to a first robotic arm to steer the rigid distal end via the plurality of pull wires.
Swayze teaches wherein the handle portion is releasably coupled to a first driving mechanism mounted to a first robotic arm to steer the rigid distal end via the plurality of pull wires (Swayze FIGs. 11A-B, handle 530, end effector 512, tool driver 530; Swayze paragraph [0077], “tool driver 510, end effector 512, and handle 530 can be attached to robotic arm 560”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Swayze’s robotic arm with the robotic device taught by Phee in view of Duval. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a robotic system that is capable of interchanging tools according the needs of the user.
Phee in view of Duval and Swayze do not explicitly teach wherein the bending section comprises a tube formed with cut pattern to achieve an articulation.
Bakos teaches wherein the bending section comprises a tube formed with cut pattern to achieve an articulation (Bakos FIG. 11A, steerable segment 46 with a pattern of slits 140).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Bakos cut pattern slit with the bending section taught by Phee in the robotic device taught by Phee in view of Duval and Swayze. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of an endoscope’s bending section having restricted directional movement (see Bakos paragraph [0078]) in order to provide restricted movement of the bending section.
Regarding Claim 7, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 1, as described above.
Phee further discloses wherein the imaging instrument comprises an illuminating device embedded at the distal portion of the imaging instrument (Phee FIG. 3A, illumination sources 224 at distal end 204 of small scope 200).
Regarding Claim 9, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 1, as described above.
Phee further discloses wherein the camera is controlled to roll about a longitudinal axis of the articulatable elongate member or a longitudinal axis of the imaging instrument (Phee FIG. 3D, showing distal end 204 of small scope 200, which includes the camera module 222 shown in Phee FIG. 3A, rolling about the longitudinal axis of small scope 200).
Regarding Claim 11, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 1, as described above.
Phee further discloses wherein the imaging instrument and the first steerable instrument are withdrawn into the first working channel and the second working channel when the robotic device is in a first mode (Phee paragraph [0107], “Surgical devices or instruments relevant to a surgical procedure under consideration can be inserted into and through, and withdrawn or removed from, the channels within the primary endoscope probe 100 by way of such endoscopist interface openings.”).
Regarding Claim 12, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 11, as described above.
Phee further discloses wherein the imaging instrument and the first steerable instrument are extended out of the rigid distal end of the articulatable elongate member when the robotic device is in a second mode (Phee FIG. 6A, showing small scope 200 and first robotic surgical tool both extended out of the distal end of endoscope probe 100).
Regarding Claim 13, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 1, as described above.
Phee further discloses wherein the imaging instrument is steerable via the first driving mechanism (Phee paragraph [0174, “actuatable elements (e.g., cables 234 and vertebrae 236) within an imaging endoscope 200 can be coupled to the actuation controller 700”).
Regarding Claim 14, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 1, as described above.
Swayze further teaches wherein the first driving mechanism is mounted to a first robotic support system (Swayze FIGs. 11A-B, handle 530, end effector 512, tool driver 530; Swayze paragraph [0077], “tool driver 510, end effector 512, and handle 530 can be attached to robotic arm 560”).
Regarding Claim 18, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 1, as described above.
Phee further discloses wherein the proximal end of the articulatable elongate member is removably coupled to the first driving mechanism (Phee FIG. 1B, quick release structure 500,600; Phee paragraph [0155], “quick release structure 500, 600 is configured for communicating or transferring actuation forces generated by the actuation controller 700 to the disposable actuation assembly 300, which further communicates or transfers such forces to an endoscopy instrument or tool which is disposed/disposable at and/or beyond the distal end 104 of the primary endoscope probe 100…Such quick release structures 500, 600 can also be configured for communicating forces exerted upon portions of robot arms 400 and/or end effectors by tissues or objects to the actuation controller's force sensing elements, such as by way of communicating or transferring particular distortion forces to actuation-side tendon elements.”).
Regarding Claim 19, Phee discloses:
A method for a robotic device (Phee paragraph [0101], “Embodiments in accordance with the present disclosure are directed to a robotically driven master-slave endoscopy system and associated robotic endoscopy processes or procedures involving one or more of the following…a flexible or substantially flexible endoscope guide tube or probe configured for selective/selectable stiffening or shape/position locking at or along one or more portions, positions, or segments of its length, while in some embodiments maintaining or providing substantial flexibility at or along other portions, positions, or segments of its length…a flexible or substantially flexible primary, larger, multi-purpose, or general-purpose endoscope probe configured for carrying or supporting each of (i) a secondary, adjunctive, smaller, or special purpose flexible or substantially flexible endoscope probe, probe module, or probe member, portions of which can be controlled independently of the primary endoscope probe (e.g., on a selective basis), and (ii) a set of robotic/robot arms…a number of flexible or substantially flexible disposable actuation assemblies, at least some of which (i) carry tendon-sheath actuation elements; and (ii) are configured for insertion into and through the primary endoscope probe such that an endoscopy instrument or tool (e.g., a surgical instrument corresponding to an (end) effector carried by a robot arm) can extend beyond a distal end of the primary endoscope probe and be manipulated or driven by way of such tendon- sheath actuation elements…tendon-sheath driven robot arms that can include one or more types of joints, and which can be configured for carrying or coupling to various types of end effectors (e.g., grippers, pincers, hooks, forceps, knives, electrosurgery devices, needles, etc. . . . ) that facilitate particular types of surgical interventions…a quick connect/disconnect or quick release interface configured for mechanically and/or electrically releasably coupling (e.g., selectively coupling and decoupling) a disposable actuation assembly and an actuation controller; and…an actuation controller configured for (i) manipulating robot arms and end effectors in response to signals generated by a surgeon interface such as a master controller or control console; (ii) sensing force signals corresponding to or correlated with the movement or positioning of one or more robot arms and/or end effectors and communicating such force signals or correlates thereof (e.g., haptic feedback signals correlated with sensed forces) to the surgeon interface; and possibly (iii) controlling or selectively controlling the operation of the secondary endoscope probe, probe module, or probe member.”) comprising:
providing an articulatable elongate member (Phee FIG. 1B, endoscope probe 100) comprising a plurality of working channels internal to the articulable elongate member (Phee FIG. 6A, first scope channel and first lumen tool channel 130), wherein the articulatable elongate member comprises i) a bending section (Phee FIG. 2, distal flexible body 110 of endoscope probe 100) connected to a rigid distal end (Examiner-annotated Phee FIG. 2 shown above, distal flexible body 110 of endoscope probe 100 connected to a rigid distal end), ii) a flexible shaft connecting the bending section (Phee FIG. 2, flexible shaft portion of primary endoscope probe 100 shown Phee FIG. 1) to a handle portion (Phee FIG. 1, handle/mechanism 40 attached to proximal end 102 of primary endoscope probe 100), and wherein the bending section of the articulatable elongate member is articulatable a plurality of pull wires (Phee FIG. 2, control cables 120c anchored at distal end of probe body 110) all of which having a distal end anchored to the rigid distal end (Phee FIG. 2, control cables 120c anchored at distal end of probe body 110) and a proximal end connected to the handle portion (Phee paragraph [0118], “primary endoscope probe body 110 carries a number of flexible cables 120 that are controllable or accessible beyond, near, or at the proximal end 102 of the primary endoscope probe 100, and which can be selectively or selectably tensioned or relaxed”,;
coupling an imaging instrument (Phee FIG. 3A, small scope 200 with camera 222) to the articulatable elongate member via a first working channel of the plurality of working channels (Phee FIG. 3A and 6A, first scope channel 140). wherein the imaging instrument comprises a bending section (Phee FIG. 3E, bending controllable region 230b of small scope 200) and a camera (Phee FIG. 3A, camera module 222 at distal end 204 of small scope 200) embedded at a distal portion of the imaging instrument, wherein the imaging instrument is deployable and wherein the bending section of the imaging instrument is articulated by one or more pull wires to independently steer the camera relative to the articulatable elongate member thereby allowing a field of view of the camera to be controlled relative to the articulatable elongate member (Phee FIG. 3E, showing control wires 234a/b controlling distal end of small scope 200);
coupling a first steerable instrument (Examiner-annotated Phee FIG. 6A shown above, first robotic surgical tool 400; Phee paragraph [0111], “a robot arm 400 is further drivable, manipulable, or positionable by way of tendons or tendon elements disposed within corresponding sheaths or sheath elements, where such tendon-sheath elements are carried by the disposable actuation assembly 300”) to the articulatable elongate member via a second working channel working channel internal to the articulatable elongate member (Phee FIG. 6A, first lumen tool channel 130; Phee paragraph [0125], “tool channels 130a,b through which surgical tools and corresponding tool control and sensing elements, such as robot arms 400, end effectors, corresponding tendon-sheath drive elements, and any required electrical elements/connections, can be easily and reliably removably inserted (e.g., inserted and selectively withdrawn)”), wherein the first steerable instrument comprises a bending section located at a base of a first end effector (Phee FIG. 6A, bending section attached to first end effector/second robotic surgical tool);
coupling a second steerable instrument (Phee FIG. 6A, second robotic surgical tool 400 Phee paragraph [0111], “a robot arm 400 is further drivable, manipulable, or positionable by way of tendons or tendon elements disposed within corresponding sheaths or sheath elements, where such tendon-sheath elements are carried by the disposable actuation assembly 300”) to the articulatable elongate member via a third working channel of the plurality of working channels (Phee FIG. 6A, second lumen tool channel 130; Phee paragraph [0125], “tool channels 130a,b through which surgical tools and corresponding tool control and sensing elements, such as robot arms 400, end effectors, corresponding tendon-sheath drive elements, and any required electrical elements/connections, can be easily and reliably removably inserted (e.g., inserted and selectively withdrawn)”), wherein the second steerable instrument comprises a bending section located at a base of a second end effector (Phee FIG. 6A, bending section attached to second end effector);
controlling the first instrument and the second instrument to exit the exiting ports of the second working channel and the third working channel and divert away from the rigid distal end, and steering the first instrument and the second instrument back in the field of view of the camera to form a triangulation configuration (Phee FIG. 6A, showing first robotic surgical tool 400, second robotic surgical tool, and small scope 200 (having a camera 222) form a triangle when exiting the end of the endoscope probe 100); and
capturing an operation of the first end effector of the first steerable instrument and the second end effector of the second steerable instrument in the field of view of the camera of the imaging instrument without blocking a view of the camera of the imaging instrument (Phee paragraph [0042], the imaging endoscope can capture images of an environment at or very near to which the distal end of the primary endoscope probe resides. The captured images can provide accurate visual information with regard to the positioning of the distal end of the primary endoscope probe relative to its external environment, and/or the positioning and operation of portions of one or more actuation assemblies (e.g., including a set of robot arms and end effectors) at or very near the distal end of the primary endoscope probe.”; (Phee FIG. 6A, showing first robotic surgical tool 400, second robotic surgical tool, and small scope 200 (having a camera 222) forming a triangle such that the view of the camera is not blocked).
Phee does not explicitly disclose wherein an exit port of the second working channel and an exit port of the third working channel are formed on substantially opposite sides of the rigid distal end.
Duval teaches wherein an exit port of the second working channel and an exit port of the third working channel are formed on substantially opposite sides of the rigid distal end
(Examiner-annotated Duval FIG. 12A shown above, exit ports 1222a and 1222b on opposite sides of distal end of side-exit instrument assembly 1220).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Duval’s opposing side exit ports with the device disclosed by Phee. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a robotic device having lateral yaw/pitch control of endoscopic surgical tools (see paragraph [0176] of Duval).
Phee in view of Duval do not explicitly teach wherein the handle portion is releasably coupled to a first driving mechanism mounted to a first robotic arm to steer the rigid distal end via the plurality of pull wires.
Swayze teaches wherein the handle portion is releasably coupled to a first driving mechanism mounted to a first robotic arm to steer the rigid distal end via the plurality of pull wires (Swayze FIGs. 11A-B, handle 530, end effector 512, tool driver 530; Swayze paragraph [0077], “tool driver 510, end effector 512, and handle 530 can be attached to robotic arm 560”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Swayze’s robotic arm with the robotic device taught by Phee in view of Duval. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a robotic system that is capable of interchanging tools according the needs of the user.
Phee in view of Duval and Swayze do not explicitly teach wherein the bending section comprises a tube formed with cut pattern to achieve an articulation.
Bakos teaches wherein the bending section comprises a tube formed with cut pattern to achieve an articulation (Bakos FIG. 11A, steerable segment 46 with a pattern of slits 140).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Bakos cut pattern slit with the bending section taught by Phee in the robotic device taught by Phee in view of Duval and Swayze. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of an endoscope’s bending section having restricted directional movement (see Bakos paragraph [0078]) in order to provide restricted movement of the bending section.
Regarding Claim 21, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 1, as described above.
Phee further discloses wherein the operation of the first steerable instrument and the second steerable instrument captured in the field of view of the camera is not blocked by the first steerable instrument or the second steerable instrument (Phee FIG. 6A, showing the field of view of camera 222 unobstructed by the first robotic surgical tool 400 and the second robotic surgical tool 400).
Regarding Claim 22, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 1, as described above.
Phee further discloses wherein the rigid distal end is composed of a rigid component (Phee FIG. 6A, showing end cap having a rigidity capable of supporting the small scope 200 and the first and second robotic surgical tools 400).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phee et al. (US PGPUB 2015/0230697 – “Phee”) in view of Duval et al. (US PGPUB 2008/0065110 – “Duval”), Swayze et al. (US PGPUB 2018/0049795 – “Swayze”), Bakos et al. (US PGPUB 2010/0010299 – “Bakos”), and Finkman et al. (US PGPUB 2013/0253270 – “Finkman”).
Regarding Claim 8, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 1, as described above.
Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos do not explicitly teach wherein the imaging instrument comprises one or more nozzles for clearing a view of the camera.
Finkman teaches wherein the imaging instrument (Finkman FIG. 1, insertion tube 23) comprises one or more nozzles (Finkman FIG. 1, nozzle 40 at distal end of fluid working channel 38; Finkman paragraph [0027], “nozzle contains a narrowed segment adjacent to the distal end, which causes the irrigation fluid to exit the working channel”) for clearing a view of the camera.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Finkman’s fluid nozzle with the robotic device by Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a robotic device that has fluid source for irrigation any region of interest, including other instruments, treatment sites, etc.
Claims 15-17 and 23-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phee et al. (US PGPUB 2015/0230697 – “Phee”) in view of Duval et al. (US PGPUB 2008/0065110 – “Duval”), Swayze et al. (US PGPUB 2018/0049795 – “Swayze”), Bakos et al. (US PGPUB 2010/0010299 – “Bakos”), and Romo et al. (US PGPUB 2016/0184032 – “Romo”).
Regarding Claim 15, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 14, as described above.
Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos do not explicitly teach wherein the first steerable instrument is articulated via a second driving mechanism.
Romo teaches wherein the first steerable instrument (Romo FIG. 2A, leader 212) is articulated via a second driving mechanism (Romo FIG. 2A, tool base 208; Romo paragraph [0120], “Tool base 208 has flexible endoscope leader 212 operatively connected thereto.”). See also Romo FIG. 9, in which a sheath base 904 controls movement of a sheath 901, and a leader base 908 control movement of a leader 905. (Romo paragraph [0147], “Robotic catheter 900 may be arranged around nested longitudinally-aligned tubular bodies, referred to as a “sheath” and a “leader”. The sheath 901, the tubular tool with the larger outer diameter, may be comprised of a proximal sheath section 902, a distal sheath section 903, and a central sheath lumen (not shown). Through signals received in the sheath base 904, the distal sheath portion 903 may be articulated in the operator's desired direction. Nested within the sheath 901 may be a leader 905 with a smaller outer diameter. The leader 905 may comprise a proximal leader section 906 and a distal leader section 907, and a central working channel. Similar to sheath base 904, leader base 908 controls articulation of the distal leader section 907 based on control signals communicated to leader base 908, often from the IDMs (e.g., 117 from FIG. 1)”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Romo’s tool base/driving mechanism with the robotic device disclosed by Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a robotic device capable of steering/driving an endoscopic sheath/cannula.
Regarding Claim 16, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, Bakos, and Romo teach the features of Claim 15, as described above.
Romo further teaches wherein the second driving mechanism (Romo FIG. 2A, tool base 208) is mounted to a second robotic support system (Romo FIG. 2A, second arm 204).
Regarding Claim 17, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, Bakos, and Romo teach the features of Claim 16, as described above.
Romo further teaches wherein the first robotic support system and the second robotic support system are removably coupled (Romo FIG. 2B, control console 203; Romo paragraph [0123], “control console 203 with a user interface is provided to control sheath 210, endoscope leader 212, and the associated arms 202 and 204 and tool bases 206 and 208 (see FIG. 2A)”; Romo FIG. 2A, showing arm 202 and arm 204 removably coupled by flexible endoscope leader 212, which a person having skill in the art would recognize as begin capable of being connected/disconnected between arm 202 and arm 204 by respective tool bases 206 and 208).
Regarding Claim 23, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 16, as described above.
PNG
media_image4.png
522
694
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos do not explicitly teach wherein the first robotic support system is mounted to a first mobile cart and the second robotic support system is mounted to a second mobile cart, and wherein the first robotic support system and second robotic system are removably coupled.
Romo teaches wherein the first robotic support system is mounted to a first mobile cart (Examiner-annotated Romo FIG. 2A shown above, first cart) and the second robotic support system is mounted to a second mobile cart (Romo FIG. 2A, second cart), and wherein the first robotic support system and second robotic system are removably coupled (Romo FIG. 2A, showing arm 202 and arm 204 removably coupled by flexible endoscope leader 212, which a person having skill in the art would recognize as both the arms 202/204 and their respective first and second carts begin capable of being connected/disconnected by the respective tool bases 206 and 208).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize Romo’s carts in the method taught by Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a method in which robotic components are secured and yet mobile.
Regarding Claim 24, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 19, as described above.
Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos do not explicitly teach wherein the first driving mechanism is mounted to a first robotic support system.
Romo teaches wherein the first driving mechanism (Romo FIG. 2A, tool base 206 controlling endoscope sheath 210; Romo paragraph [0120], “Tool base 206 has controllable endoscope sheath 210 operatively connected thereto.”) is mounted to a first robotic support system (Romo FIG. 2A, arm 202).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize Romo’s robotic support system with method taught by Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a robotic device capable of steering/driving an endoscopic sheath/cannula.
Regarding Claim 25, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos teach the features of Claim 19, as described above.
Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos do not explicitly teach wherein the first steerable instrument is articulated via a second driving mechanism.
Romo teaches wherein the first steerable instrument (Romo FIG. 2A, leader 212) is articulated via a second driving mechanism (Romo FIG. 2A, tool base 208; Romo paragraph [0120], “Tool base 208 has flexible endoscope leader 212 operatively connected thereto.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Romo’s robotic support system with the robotic device used in the method taught by Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, and Bakos. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a robotic device capable of steering/driving an endoscopic sheath/cannula.
Regarding Claim 26, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, Bakos, and Romo teach the features of Claim 25, as described above.
Romo further teaches wherein the second driving mechanism (Romo FIG. 2A, tool base 208) is mounted to a second robotic support system (Romo FIG. 2A, second arm 204).
Regarding Claim 27, Phee in view of Duval, Swayze, Bakos, and Romo teach the features of Claim 26, as described above.
Romo further teaches wherein the first robotic support system is mounted to a first mobile cart (Romo FIG. 2A, first cart) and the second robotic support system is mounted to a second mobile cart (Romo FIG. 2A, second cart), and wherein the first robotic support system and second robotic system are removably coupled (Romo FIG. 2A, showing arm 202 and arm 204 removably coupled by flexible endoscope leader 212, which a person having skill in the art would recognize as both the arms 202/204 and their respective first and second carts begin capable of being connected/disconnected by the respective tool bases 206 and 208).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 8, filed November 10, 2025, with respect to the objections to Claims 19 and 25 have been fully considered and are persuasive, in view of the present amendments. The objection of Claims 19 and 25 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 of Claims 1, 7-9, 11-19, and 21-27 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIM BOICE whose telephone number is (571)272-6565. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm 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, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached at (571)272-4963. 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.
JIM BOICE
Examiner
Art Unit 3795
/JAMES EDWARD BOICE/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/ANH TUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
11/29/2025