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 .
Remarks
Since the 103 rejection below was not presented in the previously mailed non-final rejection, this action is being sent out as second non-final rejection to allow the applicant an opportunity to review and respond.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-15, 17-21, 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over multiple embodiments of CN106535808B to Robocath (on IDS).
Regarding claims 1, 3, 7 and 9. (currently amended) Robocath discloses a catheter robot module for translation and rotation of a flexible elongated medical element (Description robot 10, figs 9a-10), comprising: a casing, two pairs of movable pads (Description “first pair”, “second pair”, together as “two pairs”, referenced in figures as 24, 24’ and 24’’, 24’’): o said pads of a same pair at least partly facing each other figs 9a-10), o each pair of movable pads being adapted to separately or in combination: perform a translation of said flexible elongated medical element longitudinally with respect to said casing, by a first translation cycle: clamping said flexible elongated medical element between said pads, translating forth said pads synchronously longitudinally in the same direction with respect to said casing, with respect to a user set longitudinal translation direction, unclamping said flexible elongated medical element, translating back said pads synchronously longitudinally in the same reverse direction with respect to said casing, with respect to said user set longitudinal translation direction (Description, “in Figures 9a to 9f, an example of a translational drive mode is listed”), perform a rotation of said flexible elongated medical element around longitudinal axis with respect to said casing, by a second rotation cycle: clamping said flexible elongated medical element between said pads, performing a relative forth translation of said pads transversely in opposite directions with respect to said casing, with respect to a transversal translation direction corresponding to a set rotation direction, unclamping said flexible elongated medical element, performing a relative back translation of said pads transversely in opposite reverse directions with respect to said casing (description “a second operating mode in which the catheter and the guides of the catheter can rotate around themselves in the same direction, either clockwise or counterclockwise as the direction of rotation.”, claim 2), with respect to said transversal translation direction corresponding to said set rotation direction, a driver of said pairs of movable pads implemented so that: o in at least one mode where, in combination, said translation of said flexible elongated medical element is alternatively performed by said pairs of movable pads, both said pairs working in phase opposition (description, discussing various phases as desired, including “the first pair 33, it being understood that this pair 33' is in its opposite phase.”), and said rotation of said flexible elongated medical element is performed by at least one of said pairs of movable pads, conflict of synchronization between said translation and said rotation is managed at least: by varying travel extension of said forth translation in said first translation cycle for at least one of said pairs, and/or by varying travel extension and/or duration of said forth translation in said second rotation cycle for at least one of said pairs (description, controlling the pairs independently would allow for such modification, also see “the duration of said rotation is in the range of 0.05 seconds (s) to 0.2s, preferably about 0.1s, and the duration of said stop is in the range of 0.3s to 1s”), so as to always keep at least one pair of movable pads clamped on said flexible elongated medical element, during the whole duration of said translation of said flexible elongated medical element in said first translation cycle as well as during the whole duration of said rotation of said flexible elongated medical element in said second rotation cycle (Description “at least one pair can always be in the drive configuration”).
Regarding claims 2, 4, 8 and 10. (previously presented) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein: said driver of said pairs of movable pads is implemented so that: o in one or several or all modes where said translation of said flexible elongated medical element is performed: said translation of said flexible elongated medical element is alternatively performed by said pairs of movable pads, both said pairs working in phase opposition, said phase opposition being controlled at least: by varying duration of said translating back in said first translation cycle for at least one of said pairs, as to control and keep said phase opposition between both said pairs (Description “the first pair 33, it being understood that this pair 33' is in its opposite phase.”, “at least one pair can always be in the drive configuration”).
Regarding claim 5. (previously presented) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein said rotation of said flexible elongated medical element is alternatively performed by said pairs of movable pads (Description “rotational motion is described with reference to Figures 8a-8e”).
Regarding claim 6. (previously presented) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 5, wherein: said rotation of said flexible elongated medical element is alternatively performed by said pairs of movable pads, both said pairs working in phase opposition, said phase opposition being controlled, at least: o by varying duration of said translating back in said second rotation cycle for at least one of said pairs, so as to control and keep said phase opposition between both said pairs (Description “pairs 33 and 33’ [] in opposite phase”).
Regarding claim 11. (previously presented) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein: said driver of said pairs of movable pads is implemented so that: o said translation of said flexible elongated medical element is alternatively performed by said pairs of movable pads, both pairs working in phase opposition, said phase opposition being controlled mainly or only: by varying duration of said translating back, in said first translation cycle for at least one of said pairs, so as to control and keep said phase opposition between both said pairs (Description “controlling movement of the pair of drive members”, various modes discussing different controls of the members independently “the first and second drives 24 and 24' may be controlled individually, independent of each other, but the respective control signals are synchronized”).
Regarding claim 12. (previously presented) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein: said driver of said pairs of movable pads is implemented so that: o said rotation of said flexible elongated medical element is alternatively performed by said pairs of movable pads, o conflict of synchronization between said translation and said rotation is managed mainly or only: by varying travel extension of said forth translation, in said first translation cycle for at least one of said pairs, so as to always keep at least one pair of movable pads clamped on said flexible elongated medical element, during the whole duration of said translation of said flexible elongated medical element in said first cycle as well as during the whole duration of said rotation of said flexible elongated medical element in said second cycle (description, controlling the pairs independently would allow for such modification, also see “the duration of said rotation is in the range of 0.05 seconds (s) to 0.2s, preferably about 0.1s, and the duration of said stop is in the range of 0.3s to 1s”).
Regarding claim 13. (previously presented) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein said forth translation duration is always longer than said back translation duration (Description “the translation speed can be adjusted”; MPEP 2143 KSR).
Regarding claim 14. (previously presented) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein said varying travel extension of said forth translation in said first translation cycle for one of said pairs is performed by extending a predetermined standard forth translation travel range, reaching a value ranging from said predetermined standard forth translation travel range to a predetermined maximum forth translation travel range (description, controlling the pairs independently would allow for such modification, also see “the duration of said rotation is in the range of 0.05 seconds (s) to 0.2s, preferably about 0.1s, and the duration of said stop is in the range of 0.3s to 1s” – it is noted that the claim does not provide any details regarding the exact values of the predetermined maximum, standard, etc.)
. 15. (currently amended) The catheter robot module according to claim 14, wherein said predetermined maximum forth translation travel range is comprised between 110% and 150% of said predetermined standard forth translation travel range (description, controlling the pairs independently would allow for such modification, also see “the duration of said rotation is in the range of 0.05 seconds (s) to 0.2s, preferably about 0.1s, and the duration of said stop is in the range of 0.3s to 1s” – it is noted that the claim does not provide any details regarding the exact values of the predetermined maximum, standard, etc. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) ).
Regarding claim 17. (currently amended) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein there is some temporary overlapping between said flexible elongated medical element clamping by one of said pairs of movables pads and said flexible elongated medical element clamping by the other one of said pairs of movables pads (Description “at least one pair can always be in the drive configuration”), said temporary overlapping lasting preferably between 10% and 95% of the whole duration of said translation of said flexible elongated medical element ("[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
Regarding claim 18. (currently amended) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein said flexible elongated medical element unclamping is performed simultaneously to a portion of said forth translation travel extension, during the second half of said forth translation travel extension (Description “the second pair 33' receives a unclamping command, which is delayed by a certain delay (in general, related to the mechanical and electronic response time of the system)”), said portion ranging preferably from 5% to 20% of the full extent of said forth translation travel extension ("[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
Regarding claim 19. (currently amended) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein said flexible elongated medical element clamping is performed simultaneously to a portion of said forth translation travel extension, during the first half of said forth translation travel extension (Description “clamp the second pair”), said portion ranging preferably from 5% to 20% of the full extent of said forth translation travel extension ("[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955)).
Regarding claim 20. (previously presented) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein said flexible elongated medical element clamping starts after the end of said back translation travel extension and after the beginning of next said forth translation travel extension (Description, clamp the second pair; MPEP KSR “obvious to try”).
Regarding claim 21. (previously presented) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein said varying duration of said translating back in said first translation cycle for one of said pairs, so as to control and keep said phase opposition between both said pairs, is performed by reducing or extending duration with respect to a standard back translation duration (description, discussing various phases as desired, including “the first pair 33, it being understood that this pair 33' is in its opposite phase.”).
Regarding claim 27. (previously presented) Robocath discloses the catheter robot module according to claim 1, wherein: said user set longitudinal translation direction can be varied continuously by said user, and/or said user set rotation direction can be varied continuously by said user (description “movements are continuous”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16, 22-26, and 28-30 are 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANA SAHAND whose telephone number is (571)272-6842. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30 am -5:30 pm; F 9 am-3 pm.
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, Jennifer S McDonald can be reached at (571) 270- 3061. 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.
/SANA SAHAND/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights