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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/14/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 17, 33 have been amended. Claims 2-8, 11-12, 18-24, 27-28, 31-32, 34-48, 51 have been canceled. Claims 52-56 are newly added. The rejections of claims under 35 USC §103 have been withdrawn in light of the amended claims.
Claims 1, 9, 10, 13, 14-17, 25-26, 29-30, 33, 49-50, and 52-56 are currently pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 05/14/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 17, and 33 under Fuimaono et al. (US 20180360342 A1) in view of Boddington et al. (US 20220265233 A1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection under 35 USC §103 has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Fuimaono, US 20180360342 A1, in view of Lang, US 20210137634 A1.
Notice to Applicants
Limitations appearing inside of {} are intended to indicate the limitations not taught by said prior art(s)/combinations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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, 10, 13, 14-17, 25-26, 29-30, 33, 49-50, and 52-56 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "distances" in line 14. It is unclear which distance of each of pixels recited in line 7 these distances refers to. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 17 and 33 are similarly rejected as analogous claim 1.
Claims 9, 10, 13, 14-16, 25-26, 29-30, 49-50, and 52-56 are rejected because they depend from a rejected claim.
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, 9, 13, 17, 25, 29, 33, 49, and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuimaono, US 20180360342 A1, in view of Lang, US 20210137634 A1.
Regarding claim 1, a method for augmenting images with positional information, the method comprising:
obtaining, from an imaging device, a two-dimensional 2D image of an anatomy associated with a 2Dcoordinate frame(Fuimaono, Fig 6 and ¶[0053]; operation 102, the 2-D fluoroscopic image data is provided to the image processor; which may include assigning a coordinate system to the fluoroscopic image);
identifying, {using a neural network}, a segment of the anatomy in the 2D image (Fuimaono, ¶[0073] and Fig 12A exhibit segmentation module 352; Fig 13A and ¶[0082]; 2-D segmentation);
{generating a level set indicating, for each pixel of a plurality of pixels in the 2D image, a distance from the pixel to a border of the segment of the anatomy}
obtaining, from a location sensor associated with an instrument disposed within the anatomy, first location sensor data indicating one or more first poses of the instrument in (Fuimaono, ¶[0067] magnetic position tracking of catheter; ¶[0068]; catheter is moved along the wall of the anatomical structure to record location points to generate 3D anatomical geometry; ¶[0070]; position sub-system 309 provides at least 3-D mapping data);
determining a {maximum} alignment between the one or more first poses of the instrument in the 3D coordinate frame with the segment of the anatomy in the 2D image (Fuimaono,; ¶[0053]; to spatially align the second image (i.e., ¶[0050]; 3-D image data as a second image) with the fluoroscopic image (i.e. ¶[0051]; 2D fluoroscopic image data)), {based on the distances from the pixels to the border},
determining a transform mapping a pose of the instrument in the 3D coordinate frame to the 2D coordinate frame based on the maximum alignment between the one or more first poses of the instrument in the 3D coordinate frame with the segment of the anatomy in the 2D image (Fuimaono ¶[0053]; 3D-2D image converter 43 to convert the 3-D image data into 2-D space to be compatible with the 2D fluoroscopic image (FIG. 7A); where ¶[0073] and Fig 12A-12B; the 3-D mapping data from the position sensor is integrated into the 3D image data);
obtaining, from the location sensor, second location sensor data indicating a second pose of the instrument in the 3D coordinate frame (Fuimaono, ¶[0084]; during the catheter mapping, increasingly more surface points are added to the mapping data in the course of time); and
mapping the second pose of the instrument to the 2D image based on the transform so that the 2D image indicates the second pose of the instrument in relation to the segment of the anatomy (Fuimaono, ¶[0072]; The ACL technology is responsive to movement of the electrodes of the catheters and therefore updates the image of the electrodes in real time to provide a dynamic visualization of the catheters and their electrodes correctly positioned, sized, and oriented to the displayed map area).
Fuimaono teaches identifying a segment of the anatomy in the 2D image, but does not explicitly teach this limitation using a neural network. Fuimaono does not explicitly disclose generating a level set indicating, for each pixel of a plurality of pixels in the 2D image, a distance from the pixel to a border of the segment of the anatomy. Fuimaono teaches an alignment between the one or more first poses of the instrument in the 3D coordinate frame with the segment of the anatomy in the 2D image, but does not explicitly disclose a maximum alignment… based on the distances from the pixels to the border.
However, Lang, a similar field of endeavor of performing an interventional vascular procedure with visual guidance using image registration with 3D to 2D image transformations, teaches identifying, using a neural network, a segment of the anatomy in the 2D image (Lang, ¶[0262]; image segmentation… any known algorithm in the art can be used for this purpose, for example artificial neural networks, deep learning techniques, or combinations thereof and the like.); and
generating a level set indicating, for each pixel of a plurality of pixels in the 2D image, a distance from the pixel to a border of the segment of the anatomy (Lang, ¶[0262]; Image segmentation using level set. Lang does not explicitly define level set, but it is understood as an algorithm that provides distances from the border. For example, El-Baz et al., US 20190237186 A1, teaches medical image segmentation using level-set and provides a definition of level set: “A level set function 0 may correspond to a distance map of signed minimal Euclidian distances from every point (x, y) of the plane to the boundary (negative for interior points and positive for exterior points)” ¶[0063]. Lang is interpreted as teaching the limitation.); and
a maximum alignment … based on the distances from the pixels to the border (Lang, ¶[0086] The terms “align” or “aligning” can include superimposing two corresponding features, e.g. surfaces, surface structures, volumes, shapes, landmarks, walls, edges, perimeters, outlines; [0320]; maximizing the accuracy of the registration; [1380]; Optimize the projection angle alpha such that the overlapping area (i.e., alignment) is maximized);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include segmenting anatomy by a neural network as taught by Lang to the invention of Fuimaono. The motivation to do so would be because in many embodiments image segmentation can be desirable, and such algorithms are available is part of open-source or commercial libraries.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include level set as taught by Lang to the invention of Fuimaono. The motivation to do so would be because he motivation to do so would be because level set provides segmentation with a deformable boundary, which is desirable in segmenting abdominal organs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include maximum alignment based on distances as taught by Lang to the invention of Fuimaono. The motivation to do so would be because to account for motion such as cardiac cycle or breathing cycle.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Fuimaono and Lang teaches the method of claim 1. Fuimaono further teaches wherein the segment of the anatomy is a kidney, and wherein determining the transform includes:
generating a kidney map based on the first location sensor data (Fuimaono ¶[0071]; the position sub-system 309 provides at least 3-D mapping data of a mapped anatomical region by which the anatomical region can be reconstructed in 3-D); and
registering the kidney map with the 2D image ¶[0063]; Operation 208, the image processor displays a composite image where the first (i.e. 2D fluoroscopic image data; ¶[0050]) and second images (i.e., 3D image data includes kidney map; ¶[0073]) are registered).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Fuimaono and Lang teach the method of claim 1. Fuimaono further teaches wherein determining the transform includes: generating a 3Drepresentation of the 2D image based in part on inserting the 2D image as a plane in an artificial 3D space (Fuimaono, ¶[0053]; the converter 43 can reconstruct the 3-D image data, originally acquired in an axial plane (FIG. 7B), in a coronal plane by creating the 3-D image data in 3-D space (FIG. 7C)).
Regarding claim 49, the combination of Fuimaono and Lang teaches the method of claim1. Fuimaono further teaches further comprising: mapping the one or more first poses of the instrument to historical indicators on the 2D image based on the transform so that each of the historical indicators represents a corresponding previous position and/or orientation of the instrument with respect to the segment of the anatomy; and
displaying an instrument indicator on the 2D image simultaneously with displaying the one or more historical indicators on the 2D image, the instrument indicator and the one or more historical indicators together representing a path of the instrument (Fuimaono, ¶[0073]; display monitor 34 to display generate a composite 3-D image including anatomical geometries from both the 3-D mapping data and the 3-D tomographic image data (i.e., methods of X-ray computer tomography, of magnetic resonance tomography or of 2D or 3D ultrasonic imaging can be used, ¶[0018]), including anatomical geometries not present or visible in the 3-D mapping data. By utilizing the aforementioned hybrid technology, the image processor 350 also incorporates movement of the electrodes of the catheters and therefore updates the image of the electrodes in real time to provide a dynamic visualization of the catheters and their electrodes correctly positioned, sized, and oriented to the displayed anatomical region).
Claim 17 is the system claim analogous to the method claim 1, and is similarly analyzed.
Claim 33 is the non-transitory CRM claim analogous to the method claim 1, and is similarly analyzed.
Claim 25 and Claim 29 are system claims corresponding to method claims 9 and 13, respectively, and are similarly analyzed.
Regarding claim 53, the combination of Fuimaono and Lang teaches method of claim 1. Fuimaono further teaches wherein determining the maximum alignment comprises: determining a plurality of coordinate points associated with the one or more first poses of the instrument in the 3D coordinate frame (Fuimaono, ¶[0067]; The controller 306 includes a position sub-system 309 that measures position (including location and orientation coordinates) of catheter 304 and generates 3-D mapping data. (Throughout this patent application, the term “location” refers to the spatial coordinates of the catheter); and
mapping the plurality of coordinate points to a plurality of pixels of the 2D image (Fuimaono, ¶[0052]; A sensed or target image (e.g., 3-D image) is to be spatially aligned with the reference image. A correspondence is established between a plurality of distinct points or “landmarks” in the reference and target images. By establishing the correspondence between the plurality of distinct points, a geometrical transformation can be determined to map the target image to the reference image to establish point-by-point correspondence.) {based at least in part on the distances indicated by the level set}. Fuimaono does not explicitly disclose mapping based at least in part on the distances indicated by the level set.
However, Lang teaches, mapping the plurality of coordinate points to a plurality of pixels of the 2D image based at least in part on the distances indicated by the level set (Lang, ¶[0314]; Live data, e.g. live data of the patient, the position and/or orientation of a physical instrument, the position and/or orientation of an implant component (i.e., within tissue/organ), can be acquired or registered, for example, using a spatial mapping process3D coordinate information or information on the distance from the sensor of one or more surface points on the one or more objects or environmental structures. The 3D surface points can then be connected to 3D surface meshes, resulting in a three-dimensional surface representation of the live data. The surface mesh can then be merged with the virtual data using any of the registration techniques described in the specification.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a mapping points based on level set distances as taught by lang to the invention of Fuimaono. The motivation to do so would be because level set provides segmentation with a deformable boundary, which is desirable in segmenting abdominal organs.
Claims 14-16, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuimaono in view of Lang, and further in view of Florent et al., US20180353240 A1, previously cited, hereinafter Florent.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Fuimaono and Lang discloses the method according to claim 1. The combination does not explicitly teach further comprising:
obtaining a non-contrasted image of the anatomy depicting the instrument disposed therein (Fuimaono teaches that contrast is “preferable” (¶[0076]), implying that a non-contrasted image is obtained, however, obtaining a non-contrasted image is not explicitly disclosed);
determining a shape of the instrument in the non-contrasted image; and mapping the identified segment of the anatomy to the non-contrasted image based at least in part on the shape of the instrument.
However, Florent discloses further comprising: obtaining a non-contrasted image of the anatomy depicting the instrument disposed therein (Florent ¶[0056] interventional image data set providing unit 2 can be adapted to provide the interventional image data set such that it comprises first interventional images showing the fenestrated stent (i.e., instrument disposed therein) without a contrast agent);
determining a shape of the instrument in the non-contrasted image (Florent [0013], the position providing unit may also be adapted to provide the shape of this [interventional instrument]); and
mapping the identified segment of the anatomy (Florent ¶[0022]; , a segmentation of at least a part of the vessel for determining its position) to the non-contrasted image based at least in part on the shape of the instrument (Florent, [0030] providing an interventional image data set showing an implanted object with an opening and a vessel with an opening by an interventional image data set providing unit, [0031] providing the position of the interventional instrument by a position providing unit in a frame of reference.
The position providing unit determines shape and position of interventional instrument, where position is based on the shape, as stated in ¶[0052] determining the three-dimensional shape of the interventional instrument 10 and three-dimensional position of this shape.)
Fuimaono and Florent are analogous are because they are from the same field of endeavor of defining a position and shape of an interventional instrument in medical imaging during an invasive procedure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include depicting the instrument on a non-contrasted image and determining the shape of the instrument as taught by Florent to the combined invention of Fuimaono and Lang. The motivation to do so would be because the instrument may appear clearly in a non-contrast image, and reduces exposure of kidneys to undesirable to contrast agents, and to provide navigational assistance by displaying position of the instrument.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Fuimaono, Lang and Florent disclose the method of claim 14. Fuimaono further discloses, further comprising:
obtaining, from the location sensor, third location sensor data indicating a third pose of the instrument in the 3D coordinate frame, the shape of the instrument being determined based at least in part on the third pose of the instrument (Fuimaono, ¶[0084]; during the catheter mapping, increasingly more surface points are added to the mapping data in the course of time).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Fuimaono, Lang and Florent disclose the method of claim 14. Florent further discloses further comprising identifying a segment of the instrument in the non-contrasted image the shape instrument being determined based at least in part on the identified segment of the instrument in the non-contrasted image (Florent, ¶[0071]; the catheter can also directly be detected in the respective image by using corresponding segmentation algorithms. As mentioned previously, ¶[0056] the image maybe without a contrast agent).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include identifying a segment and determining the instrument shape based on the segment as taught by Florent to the combined invention of Fuimaono and Lang. The motivation to do so would be to assist in determining the instrument used as well as providing position for generating display of the instrument within the anatomy.
Claim 30 is the system and non-transitory CRM claims, respectively, analogous to method claim 14, and are similarly analyzed.
Claims 10 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuimaono in view of Lang, and in further view of Walker, et. al., US 20210068911 A1, as cited in the IDS (filed on 12/16/2022), hereinafter Walker.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Fuimaono and Lang disclose the method of claim 1. The combination does not explicitly disclose determining an angle between the imaging device and the anatomy.
However, Walker teaches wherein determining the transform includes: determining an angle between the imaging device and the anatomy (Walker, ¶[0068]; the 2-D position of the probe is designated by the user in the fluoroscopy field of view (FOV) in images (i.e., 2D coordinates) obtained at two different C-arm roll angles); and aligning the 3D coordinate frame with the 2D coordinate frame based on the determined angle (Walker, ¶[0068]; EM coordinate system (i.e., 3D coordinates) is registered to the fluoroscopy coordinate system FF (i.e., 2D coordinates)).
Fuimaono and Walker are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of tracking and/or controlling the movement, location, position, orientation, or shape of one or more parts of a flexible medical instrument disposed within an anatomical structure during interventional procedures with another medical imaging modality. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include using the angle between the anatomy and imaging device data to align the 3D coordinates of the positional sensor with the 2D coordinate of the medical image, as taught by Walker to the combined invention of Fuimaono and Lang. The motivation to do so would be to sync the sensor location measurements with the selected fluoroscopy locations so that a user may manipulate one of the objects relative to the other objects.
Claims 26 is the system claim analogous to method claim 10, and is similarly analyzed.
Claim 50 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuimaono in view of Lang, and further in view of Ahmed et al., US 20230114385 A1, hereinafter Ahmed.
Regarding claim 50, the combination of Fuimaono and Lang teaches the method of claim 1. The combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the neural network is a convolutional neural network with a U-net architecture.
However, Ahmed discloses wherein the neural network is a convolutional neural network with a U-net architecture (Ahmed, ¶[0051]; transformed images undergo deformable registration and are applied to a U-net convolutional network for segmentation of images).
Fuimaono and Ahmed are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of real-time tracking and visualizing targeted internal organs during pre-operative planning and intraoperative stages of surgical operation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a segmentation using a U-net convolutional network as taught by Ahmed to the combined invention of Fuimaono and Lang. The motivation to do so would be because the U-net convolutional network has been used for biomedical image segmentation.
Claim 52 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuimaono in view of Lang, and further in view of El-Baz et al., et al., US 20190237186 A1.
Regarding claim 52, the combination of Fuimaono and Lang teaches the method of claim 1. Lang teaches generating a level set (¶[0262]), but does not explicitly disclose, wherein generating the level set comprises: assigning a zero value to the distance for any pixel of the plurality of pixels corresponding to the border of the segment of the anatomy assigning a negative value to the distance for any pixel of the plurality of pixels located outside the segment of the anatomy; and assigning a positive value to the distance for any pixel of the plurality of pixels located inside the segment of the anatomy.
However, El-Baz, a similar field of endeavor of anatomy segmentation using level set, teaches wherein generating the level set comprises: assigning a zero value to the distance for any pixel of the plurality of pixels corresponding to the border of the segment of the anatomy assigning a negative value to the distance for any pixel of the plurality of pixels located outside the segment of the anatomy; and assigning a positive value to the distance for any pixel of the plurality of pixels located inside the segment of the anatomy (A level set function 0 may correspond to a distance map of signed minimal Euclidian distances from every point (x, y) of the plane to the boundary (negative for interior points and positive for exterior points); El-Baz, ¶[0063]; and See Fig 18, shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
228
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a segmentation level set as taught by El-Baz to the combined invention of Fuimaono and Lang. The motivation to do so would be because El-Baz provides the definition and algorithms of a level set function used for segmentation in medical imaging.
Claim 54-55 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuimaono in view of Lang, and further in view of Laby et al., US 20210290310 A1.
Regarding claim 54, the combination of Fuimaono and Lang teaches the method of claim 1. The combination does not explicitly disclose wherein determining the maximum alignment comprises: projecting the one or more first poses of the instrument in the 3D coordinate frame onto the 2D image along an axis normal to a plane of the 2D image.
However, Laby, a similar field of endeavor of image registration with in situ robotic catheter in motion, teaches wherein determining the maximum alignment comprises: projecting the one or more first poses of the instrument in the 3D coordinate frame onto the 2D image along an axis normal to a plane of the 2D image (Laby, ¶[0196]; 3D model can be oriented (and optionally scaled) so that an orientation of the 2D acquired image of the catheter corresponds to a projection of the 3D model onto associated image plane 260, 260a, preferably along a normal to the image plane 264.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a projecting instrument post onto the image plane as taught by Laby to the combined invention of Fuimaono and Lang. The motivation to do so would be because the image data could provide beneficial image guidance for alignment of a virtual catheter relative tissues.
Regarding claim 55, the combination of Fuimaono, Lang and Laby teaches method of claim 54. Fuimaono further teaches wherein determining the maximum alignment further comprises:
determining an estimated position of the instrument inside the anatomy (Fuimaono, ¶[0067] magnetic position tracking of catheter; ¶[0068]; catheter is moved along the wall of the anatomical structure to record location points to generate 3D anatomical geometry; ¶[0070]; position sub-system 309 provides at least 3-D mapping data);
{identifying one or more transformations that restrict at least one of an in-plane rotation of the instrument, an out-of-plane rotation of the instrument, or a scaling of the instrument};
applying each of the one or more transformations to the projected one or more first poses (Fuimaono ¶[0053]; 3D-2D image converter 43 to convert the 3-D image data into 2-D space); and
updating the estimated position based on a result of applying each of the one or more transformations to the projected one or more first poses (Fuimaono, ¶[0072]; The ACL technology is responsive to movement of the electrodes of the catheters and therefore updates the image of the electrodes in real time to provide a dynamic visualization of the catheters and their electrodes correctly positioned, sized, and oriented to the displayed map area).
Fuimaono and Lang teach visualizing the rotation of the instrument (Fuimaono, ¶[0100]; visualization of the 3D mapping data contains the visualization of the position and orientation (i.e., rotation) of the mapping catheter) ; (Lang, ¶[0109]; display one or more of a virtual surgical tool… predetermined angle or orientation or rotation marker, predetermined axis, e.g. rotation axis, flexion axis, extension axis, predetermined axis of the virtual surgical tool, …, and/or one or more of a predetermined tissue change or alteration.). The combination does not explicitly disclose identifying one or more transformations that restrict at least one of an in-plane rotation of the instrument, an out-of-plane rotation of the instrument, or a scaling of the instrument.
Laby further teaches identifying one or more transformations that restrict at least one of an in-plane rotation of the instrument, an out-of-plane rotation of the instrument, or a scaling of the instrument (Laby, ¶[0188] the processor of the system may have a translation input mode and an orientation input mode (i.e., identify transformations). When the processor is in the orientation mode, the first component 174 of the input 172 (the portion extending along the axis 166 of the tool as shown in the image), will typically induce rotation of the tool in three-dimensional workspace 158 about a first rotational axis 178 that is parallel to the display plane 138 (i.e., in-plane) and perpendicular to the tool axis 166. In response to the second component 174 of the input, the processor can induce rotation of the tool and tool image about a second rotational axis 180 that is perpendicular to the tool axis 166 and also to the first rotational axis 178. Using vector notation, the first rotational axis V.sub.N can be calculated from the first and second components of the input).).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include identifying transforms that restrict at least one of an in-plane rotation of the instrument, an out-of-plane rotation of the instrument, as taught by Laby to the combined invention of Fuimaono and Lang. The motivation to do so would be to facilitate precise control over both the position and orientation of the tool in the workspace.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 56 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 Notice of References cited for full citations.
Swierczynski 2018 teaches level set segmentation and image registration in CT lung image application.
John, DE102012215001A1, teaches 2D-3D registration of a three-dimensional model of an instrument visible in a two-dimensional X-ray image recorded with an X-ray device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANDHANA PEDAPATI whose telephone number is (571)272-5325. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-6pm (ET).
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, Chan Park can be reached on 5712727409. 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.
/CHANDHANA PEDAPATI/Examiner, Art Unit 2669 /CHAN S PARK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2669
Prosecution Insights