DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/26/2026 has been entered.
As indicated by the amendment submitted with the request for continued examination: claims 1 and 4 have been amended and new claims 8 and 9 have been added. Claims 1-9 are presently pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Amended independent claim 1 recites, in pertinent part, “the plurality of output shafts is provided along a third pitch circle having a larger diameter than the first pitch circle and a smaller diameter than the second pitch circle”. However, the specification, as originally filed, discloses that “[a]s described above, there are a first pitch circle at which the driving wire W is provided and a second pitch circle which is obtained by offsetting the first pitch circle outside and at which the output shaft Ma is provided, and the tractor supporting shaft 21cs is provided along a third pitch circle which is obtained by offsetting the first pitch circle outside and offsetting the second pitch circle inside” (see par. [0257] of the published application). As is clear from the above disclosure, and several others throughout the specification, the plurality of output shafts are provided along a second pitch circle, and not a third pitch circle as now claimed. Applicant has not disclosed a configuration wherein the pitch circle of the output shaft is smaller than the pitch circle of the supporting shaft. Accordingly, claims 1-9 fail to comply with the written description requirement.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Amended claim 1 recites, in pertinent part, “ wherein the plurality of linear members is provided along the first pitch circle, and the plurality of output shafts is provided along a third pitch circle having a larger diameter than the first pitch circle and a smaller diameter than the second pitch circle” (emphasis added). Amended claim 1 recites the limitation "the first pitch circle" in the fifteenth line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, amended claim 1 recites the limitation "the third pitch circle" in the seventeenth line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Further, the claim recites “the third pitch circle”, but it is not clear which structure has the third pitch circle, as it lacks antecedent basis. Accordingly, the claims are rendered indefinite.
New dependent claim 9 recites, in pertinent part, “wherein each of the plurality of first connectors is connected to a corresponding one of the plurality of intermediate supporting shafts along a third pitch circle which is offset outside from the first pitch circle and is offset inside from the second pitch circle”. However, independent claim 1, from which claim 9 depends recites “the plurality of output shafts is provided along a third pitch circle having a larger diameter than the first pitch circle and a smaller diameter than the second pitch circle”. It is not clear if Applicant intends to claim two third pitch circles, or if the third pitch circle recited in claim 9 is the same third pitch circle recited in claim 1. Accordingly, the claims are rendered indefinite.
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 (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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Simaan et al. (US 2013/0090763 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Simaan discloses a continuum robot (par. [0025]; Fig. 1) comprising: a bendable body (180; Fig. 5) having a plurality of linear members (116b; Fig. 1; par. [0027]) a plurality of motors (196; Fig. 5; par. [0035]) respectively having a plurality of output shafts (threaded rods, for screw based actuation of 186, see par. [0035] and Fig. 5); a plurality of intermediate supporting shafts (see hollow shafts A in inserted Figure 1 below) of the plurality of motors (threaded rods of 196, for screw based actuation of 186, see par. [0035] and Fig. 5) to each other and configured to convert rotation of each of the plurality of output shafts (threaded rods, for screw based actuation of 186, see par. [0035] and Fig. 5) into rectilinear motion to cause each of the plurality of intermediate supporting shafts to rectilinearly move (par. [0034]-[0035]), wherein the plurality of linear members (116b) is provided along the first pitch circle (Fig. 1), and the plurality of output shafts (threaded rods of 196, for screw based actuation of 186, see par. [0035] and Fig. 5) is provided along a third pitch circle (interpreted as a second pitch circle, see above; Fig. 5 – pitch circle of the motors and output shafts is larger than the pitch circle of linear members in the bendable body 180) having a larger diameter than the first pitch circle and a smaller diameter than the second pitch circle (interpreted as third pitch circle of supporting shaft, see above; Fig. 5 – pitch circle of the shafts is smaller than the pitch circle of the motors and output shafts), wherein the plurality of second connectors (186; Fig. 5; par. [0034]-[0035]) linearly moves integrally with a corresponding one of the plurality of intermediate supporting shafts (see hollow shafts A in inserted Figure 1 below, which are structural components of 186 and thus integral to it) by rotation of the output shaft (par. [0035]) of a corresponding one of the plurality of motors, and wherein the rectilinear motion of each intermediate supporting shaft (see hollow shafts A in inserted Figure 1 below) is transmitted to a corresponding one of the plurality of linear members (116b) by a corresponding one of the plurality of first connectors (Fig. 5; 194/192 and unlabeled members connecting the supporting shafts to 194; par. [0034]-[0035]).
Regarding claim 2, Simaan discloses the continuum robot according to claim 1, further comprising: a first supporter (see B in inserted Figure 1 below) configured to support a respective one of the plurality of motors (196); and a second supporter (see C in inserted Figure 1 below) configured to support a coupler (see D in inserted Figure 1 below) including a respective one of the plurality of intermediate supporting shafts (see A in inserted Figure 1 below), a respective one of the plurality of first connectors (Fig. 5; 194/192 and unlabeled members connecting the supporting shafts to 194; par. [0034]-[0035]), and a respective one of the plurality of second connectors (186; Fig. 5; par. [0034]-[0035]), wherein the first supporter (see B in inserted Figure 1 below) and the second supporter (see C in inserted Figure 1 below) are coupled to each other via a supporting portion coupler (see E in inserted Figure 1 below) arranged inside the coupler (see D in inserted Figure 1 below).
Regarding claim 3, Simaan discloses the continuum robot according to claim 2, further comprising a positioning shaft (see F in inserted Figure 1 below) arranged inside the coupler (see D in inserted Figure 1 below), wherein the positioning shaft (see F in inserted Figure 1 below) is coupled to the supporting portion coupler (coupled via D, see inserted Figure 1 below).
Regarding claim 8, Simaan discloses the continuum robot according to claim 1, wherein on end of each of the plurality of output shafts (threaded rods of 196, for screw based actuation of 186, see par. [0035] and Fig. 5) is positioned between (in the Z-direction) the corresponding one of the second connectors (186) and the corresponding one of first connectors (194/192).
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.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Simaan, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Wang (US 2015/0352728 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Simaan discloses the continuum robot according to claim 1, but does not specifically disclose it further comprising a first bending portion and a second bending portion configured to bend a respective one of the plurality of linear members in such a way as to change a diameter of the first pitch circle, wherein a difference between radii before and after changing of a pitch circle is smaller than a distance in an axial direction of the pitch circle between the first bending portion and the second bending portion. Wang teaches an analogous continuum robot (Fig. 1; par. [0093]) comprising a first bending portion (Fig. 1 - bent portion of 8 connected to 9) and a second bending portion (Fig. 1 – bent portion of 8 connected to 7) configured to bend a respective one of the plurality of linear members (6; par. [0089] and [0093]; Fig. 1) in such a way as to change a diameter of the first pitch circle (Fig. 1), wherein a difference in radii before and after changing a pitch circle is smaller than a distance in an axial direction of the between circle between the first bending portion and the second bending portion (Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have included the first and second bending portions of Wang in the robot of Simaan when the pitch circle of the bendable body (180) is smaller than the pitch circle of 194, such that the linear members can smoothly transition to the bendable body without interfering with each other.
Regarding claim 7, Simaan in view of Wang disclose the continuum robot according to claim 6, further comprising a pipe-like bending guide (Wang: 8; Fig. 1; par. [0089] and [0092]) including the first bending portion (Fig. 1 - bent portion of 8 connected to 9) and the second bending portion (Fig. 1 - bent portion of 8 connected to 7), wherein a respective one of the plurality of linear members (116a; Wang: 6) is configured to be movable inside the bending guide (Wang: 8; par. [0089]).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Simaan, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Okumura et al. (WO 2018/204202 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Simaan discloses the continuum robot according to claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of first connectors (192/194) is connected to a corresponding to one of the plurality of intermediate supporting shafts (see hollow shafts A in inserted Figure 1 below) along a third pitch circle (Fig. 5 – pitch circle of the shafts is smaller than the pitch circle of the motors and output shafts), which is offset from the first pitch circle (Fig. 1) and is offset inside from the second pitch circle (Fig. 5 – pitch circle of the motors and output shafts is larger than the pitch circle of linear members in the bendable body 180). Although Simaan discloses that the plurality of first connectors (194/192) located in the actuation unit (184) are attached to the plurality of linear members (116b; par. [0027] and [0034]), it does not specifically disclose each of the plurality of first connectors detachably holds a corresponding one of the plurality if linear members along the first pitch circle by being switched between a state in which each of the plurality of linear members is fixed to a corresponding one of the plurality of first connections and a state in which fixing of the plurality of linear members is released. Okumura teaches an analogous robot (Figs. 1 and 11) wherein each of a plurality of analogous first connectors (28/28’; Fig. 1; par. [0046]-[0047]) and each of a plurality of analogous linear members (16/16’; par. [0045]-[0046]) are configured to be attachable to and detachable from each other by being switched between a state in which each of the plurality of first connectors (28/28’) and each of the plurality of linear members (16/16’) have been fixed to each other and a state in which fixing each of the plurality of first connectors (28/28’) and each of the plurality of linear members (16/16’) has been released (par. [0021] and [0062]). Okumura teaches that the analogous bendable body (12) having the plurality of linear members (16/16’) can be detached from the plurality of first connectors and actuation unit so that it can be easily and economically sterilized without the need to sterilize the remaining components of the robot (par. [0062]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have made the plurality of linear members detachable from and attachable to the plurality of first connectors so that the bendable body can be easily and economically sterilized without the need to sterilize the remaining components of the robot between uses, as taught by Okumura.
Inserted Figure 1: Figure 5 of Simaan et al.
PNG
media_image1.png
623
510
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant contends that Simaan does not disclose or suggest a configuration in which the second connector linearly moves integrally with an intermediate shaft by a rotation of an output shaft of a motor (see Remarks at pages 10-11). The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above, Simaan teaches that the plurality of second connectors (186; Fig. 5; par. [0034]-[0035]) linearly moves integrally with a corresponding one of the plurality of intermediate supporting shafts (see hollow shafts A in inserted Figure 1 below, which are structural components of 186 and are thus integral to it) by rotation of the output shaft of a motor (par. [0035]). Contrary to that contended by Applicant, the portion A of Fig. 5 of Simaan moves linearly with the actuation slider 186 as it is a structural component of the actuation slider 186.
Next, Applicant argues that Simaan does not disclose or suggest a configuration in which a rectilinear motor of the intermediate shaft is transmitted to a linear member by a first connector (see Remarks at page 10). The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above Simaan teaches a configuration wherein the rectilinear motion of each intermediate supporting shaft (see hollow shafts A in inserted Figure 1 below) is transmitted to a corresponding one of the plurality of linear members (116b) by a corresponding one of the plurality of first connectors (Fig. 5; 194/192 and unlabeled members connecting the supporting shafts to 194; par. [0034]-[0035]). Accordingly, Simaan teaches the newly added limitations above.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that Okumura does not disclose various features of amended claim 1 (see Remarks at page 12), the Examiner asserts that the rejection does not suggest that Okamura teaches any of the features listed by Applicant. Rather, Okamura’s teaching of detachable and attachable first connectors and linear members is used to modify the connection of the first connectors and linear members of Simaan, making them detachably connected, so that the bendable body can be easily and economically sterilized without the need to sterilize the remaining components of the robot between uses, as taught by Okumura. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYNAE E BOLER whose telephone number is (571)270-3620. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00-5:00.
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.
/RYNAE E BOLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/ANHTUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
6/22/26
Prosecution Insights