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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 2 in the reply filed on July 13, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that none of the claims recite an artificial intelligence algorithm or machine learning algorithm. The examiner agrees with applicant’s arguments and the restriction requirement mailed on June 16, 2026 is hereby withdrawn.
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 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.
Claims 1, 8, 12, 21, 22 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boutoussov et al. (US PG Pub 2018/0085188) in view of Williams et al. (JP 2018020309 A).
Regarding claim 1, Boutoussov et al. disclose: a laser system (100) comprising: a processor (controller comprising a processor) (Figs. 1 and 3, [0025], [0030]-[0032]); a user interface (graphical user interface is part of the controller) coupled to the processor (Figs. 1 and 3, [0025], [0030]-[0032]); and memory (36) coupled to the processor, the memory configured to store instructions that, when executed by the processor (Figs. 1 and 3, [0025], [0030]-[0032]), cause the processor to: receive a range for at least one setting of a first laser of the laser system that the first laser can operate within (laser pulse peak power, laser pulse repetition rate, laser pulse duration, laser average output power) ([0037], [0038]).
Boutoussov et al. do not disclose: determine a proposed updated value of the at least one setting; determine whether the proposed updated value is within the received range; provide, via the user interface, (i) an indication of the proposed updated value and (ii) an option for a user to accept or reject the proposed updated value for the at least one setting; and responsive to an acceptance of the proposed updated value or no rejection of the proposed updated value by the user within a predetermined duration, adjust the at least one setting based on the proposed updated value.
Williams et al. disclose: once the computing device has determined that parameter values should be adjusted and the amounts to adjust these values, such information is displayed on the computing device at block 416. This allows the operator of the add-on manufacturing device 104 to see this information (eg, on the display) to accept, reject, or make changes to the recommended correction adjustments of the recommended parameter values. Decisions can be made. When the user provides user input (eg, approval) to apply a correction adjustment to the parameter value at user control 310, computing device 102 receives the user input (eg, approval) at block 418. In block 420, the computing device 102 transmits a correction parameter value to the additive manufacturing device 104 using a control signal from the computing device 102 to the additive manufacturing device 104. In block 422, the computing device 102 updates the parameter value of the additive manufacturing device 104…a process for processing the captured image frame described in block 414 of FIG. 4 to measure and modify the dimensions of the deposited material. As described above with reference to FIG. 4, the camera is calibrated so that dimension measurement can be accurately performed using an image captured by the camera (page 8, second to fourth paragraph of translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Boutoussov by adding a detector, modifying the processor to determine a proposed updated value of the at least one setting, display an option for a user to accept or reject the proposed update and updating the parameter when the user accepts the update in order to improve operation of the laser system.
PNG
media_image1.png
554
652
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Boutoussov et al.
Regarding claim 8, Boutoussov as modified disclose: wherein the at least one setting includes an amount of energy emitted by the first laser, wherein the at least one setting includes one or more of an intensity of laser light or laser radiation of the first laser, a wavelength of the first laser, a pulse width of the first laser, or a duty cycle of the first laser (laser pulse peak power, laser pulse repetition rate, laser pulse duration, laser average output power) (Boutoussov, [0037], [0038]).
Regarding claim 12, Boutoussov as modified disclose: wherein the acceptance of the proposed updated value of is initiated through a voice command or an activation of an actuation member that includes a button or switch on a handpiece connected to the laser system, or a foot switch connected to the laser system (button on GUI) (see the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 21, Boutoussov et al. disclose: a processor (controller comprising a processor) (Figs. 1 and 3, [0025], [0030]-[0032]); a user interface (graphical user interface is part of the controller) coupled to the processor (Figs. 1 and 3, [0025], [0030]-[0032]); and memory (36) coupled to the processor , the memory configured to store instructions that, when executed by the processor (Figs. 1 and 3, [0025], [0030]-[0032]), cause the processor to: receive a first range for at least one setting of a first laser of the laser system that the first laser can automatically adjust within; receive a second range for at least one setting of a second laser of the laser system that the second laser can automatically adjust within (energy source 102 can include a plurality of laser sources each emitting at a different wavelength, settings include laser pulse peak power, laser pulse repetition rate, laser pulse duration, laser average output power) (Fig. 1, [0025], [0037], [0038]).
Boutoussov et al. do not disclose: determine at least one of a proposed updated value for the at least one setting of the first laser or a second proposed updated value for the at least one setting of the second laser; determine whether the proposed updated value for the at least one setting of the first laser is within the first range; determine whether the second proposed updated value for the at least one setting of the second laser is within the second range; provide, via the user interface, (i) an indication of the at least one of the proposed updated value for the at least one setting of the first laser or the second proposed updated value for the at least one setting of the second laser and (ii) an option to accept or reject the at least one of the proposed updated value for the at least one setting of the first laser or the second proposed updated value for the at least one setting of the second laser; and responsive to an acceptance of at least one of the proposed updated value or the second proposed updated value, adjust at least one of the at least one setting of the first laser or the at least one setting of the second laser.
Williams et al. disclose: once the computing device has determined that parameter values should be adjusted and the amounts to adjust these values, such information is displayed on the computing device at block 416. This allows the operator of the add-on manufacturing device 104 to see this information (eg, on the display) to accept, reject, or make changes to the recommended correction adjustments of the recommended parameter values. Decisions can be made. When the user provides user input (eg, approval) to apply a correction adjustment to the parameter value at user control 310, computing device 102 receives the user input (eg, approval) at block 418. In block 420, the computing device 102 transmits a correction parameter value to the additive manufacturing device 104 using a control signal from the computing device 102 to the additive manufacturing device 104. In block 422, the computing device 102 updates the parameter value of the additive manufacturing device 104…a process for processing the captured image frame described in block 414 of FIG. 4 to measure and modify the dimensions of the deposited material. As described above with reference to FIG. 4, the camera is calibrated so that dimension measurement can be accurately performed using an image captured by the camera (page 8, second to fourth paragraph of translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Boutoussov by adding a detector, modifying the processor to determine a proposed updated value of the at least one setting for the first and second laser, display an option for a user to accept or reject the proposed update and updating the parameter when the user accepts the update in order to improve operation of the laser system.
Regarding claim 22, Boutoussov as modified disclose: wherein responsive to no rejection of the at least one of the proposed updated value or the second proposed updated value by the user within a predetermined period of time, the instructions cause the processor to: adjust at least one of the at least one setting of the first laser or the at least one setting of the second laser (computer updates parameter without user approval) (Williams, page 8, second to fourth paragraph of translation).
Regarding claim 23, Boutoussov as modified do not disclose: wherein responsive to no rejection of the at least one of the proposed updated value or the second proposed updated value by the user within a predetermined period of time, the instructions cause the processor to: cancel adjustment of at least one of the at least one setting of the first laser or the at least one setting of the second laser.
The examiner takes official notice that canceling adjustment of at least one setting when no response was received within a time limit was well known in the art before the time of filing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Boutoussov as modified by canceling adjustment of at least one setting when no response was received within a time limit in order to prevent an update to a setting that was not approved by the user.
Claims 2-4 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boutoussov et al. (US PG Pub 2018/0085188) in view of Williams et al. (JP 2018020309 A) and Cannon et al. (US PG Pub 2008/0123702).
Regarding claim 2, Boutoussov as modified do not disclose: wherein the instructions cause the processor to: temporarily disable the first laser after receiving an acceptance or no rejection of the proposed updated value by the user.
Cannon et al. disclose: during the bias calibration, designated by the active low state of the Bias S_H (bias sample and hold signal 212), the operating current source 206 is not coupled to the laser diode 122 ([0074]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Boutoussov as modified by disabling the first laser when updating a setting value in order to prevent the laser from emitting an undesired output power or pulse repetition rate.
Regarding claim 3, Boutoussov as modified do not disclose: wherein the instructions cause the processor to: temporarily disable emission of the first laser during indicating the proposed updated value until at least one of adjustment of the at least one setting based on the proposed updated value or user rejection of the proposed updated value.
Cannon et al. disclose: during the bias calibration, designated by the active low state of the Bias S_H (bias sample and hold signal 212), the operating current source 206 is not coupled to the laser diode 122 ([0074]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Boutoussov as modified by disabling the first laser when updating a setting value in order to prevent the laser from emitting an undesired output power or pulse repetition rate.
Regarding claim 4, Boutoussov as modified disclose: wherein the instructions cause the processor to: determine a characteristic of a target at a first time; determine a change in the characteristic of the target at a second time; and determine the proposed updated value of the at least one setting based on the change in the characteristic of the target at the second time (device as modified would have processor determine parameter values to be adjusted to further improve the characteristics of the target) (Williams, page 8, second to fourth paragraph).
Regarding claim 19, Boutoussov et al. disclose: a computer implemented method for automatic adjustment of a laser system, the method comprising: determining, using a computer implemented processor (controller comprising a processor) (Figs. 1 and 3, [0025], [0030]-[0032]), a range for at least one setting of a laser included in the laser system (laser pulse peak power, laser pulse repetition rate, laser pulse duration, laser average output power) ([0037], [0038]); providing an indication on a user interface (graphical user interface is part of the controller) of an updated value of the at least one setting (Figs. 1 and 3, [0025], [0030]-[0032]).
Boutoussov et al. do not disclose: determining, using the computer implemented processor, a need to adjust the at least one setting; verifying, using the computer implemented processor, whether the updated value is within the range; disabling, via controller circuitry of a computer, emission of the laser; adjusting, via the controller circuitry, the at least one setting of the laser to the updated value of the at least one setting while the laser is disabled; and resuming emission of the laser after adjustment of the at least one setting of the laser.
Williams et al. disclose: once the computing device has determined that parameter values should be adjusted and the amounts to adjust these values, such information is displayed on the computing device at block 416. This allows the operator of the add-on manufacturing device 104 to see this information (eg, on the display) to accept, reject, or make changes to the recommended correction adjustments of the recommended parameter values. Decisions can be made. When the user provides user input (eg, approval) to apply a correction adjustment to the parameter value at user control 310, computing device 102 receives the user input (eg, approval) at block 418. In block 420, the computing device 102 transmits a correction parameter value to the additive manufacturing device 104 using a control signal from the computing device 102 to the additive manufacturing device 104. In block 422, the computing device 102 updates the parameter value of the additive manufacturing device 104…a process for processing the captured image frame described in block 414 of FIG. 4 to measure and modify the dimensions of the deposited material. As described above with reference to FIG. 4, the camera is calibrated so that dimension measurement can be accurately performed using an image captured by the camera (page 8, second to fourth paragraph of translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Boutoussov by adding a detector, modifying the processor to determine a proposed updated value of the at least one setting, display an option for a user to accept or reject the proposed update and updating the parameter when the user accepts the update in order to improve operation of the laser system.
Boutoussov as modified do not disclose: disabling, via controller circuitry of a computer, emission of the laser; adjusting, via the controller circuitry, the at least one setting of the laser to the updated value of the at least one setting while the laser is disabled; and resuming emission of the laser after adjustment of the at least one setting of the laser.
Cannon et al. disclose: during the bias calibration, designated by the active low state of the Bias S_H (bias sample and hold signal 212), the operating current source 206 is not coupled to the laser diode 122; resuming emission of the laser after adjustment of the at least one setting of the laser ([0074], [0075]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Boutoussov as modified by disabling the first laser when updating a setting value and resuming emission of the laser after adjustment in order to prevent the laser from emitting an undesired output power or pulse repetition rate. The device as modified disclose: adjusting, via the controller circuitry, the at least one setting of the laser to the updated value of the at least one setting while the laser is disabled.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boutoussov et al. (US PG Pub 2018/0085188) in view of Williams et al. (JP 2018020309 A) and Uusimaa et al. (US PG Pub 2019/0223953).
Regarding claim 5, Boutoussov as modified do not disclose: wherein the instructions cause the processor to: determine the proposed updated value of the at least one setting based on at least one of a distance of a laser fiber from a target or a position of the laser fiber within a portion of anatomy that at least one of a scope or a laser fiber connected to the laser system is within.
Uusimaa et al. disclose: The system 100 comprises a processor (such as the processor 104, as shown in FIG. 1) coupled to the biomedical laser 102. The system 200 further comprises at least one measuring instrument 202, a location sensing unit 204, an identity recognition unit 206, and an accessory recognition unit 208 communicably coupled to the processor 104. The system 200 also comprises a database 210 communicably coupled to the processor 104 ([0079], [0091]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Boutoussov as modified by coupling a location sensing unit to the processor in order to adjust at least one setting of the laser based on the location of the laser.
Regarding claim 6, Boutoussov as modified do not disclose: wherein the instructions cause the processor to: determine the proposed updated value of the at least one setting based on an environmental condition measured by a sensor coupled to the processor.
Uusimaa et al. disclose: ambient temperature around the biomedical laser can be obtained using a temperature sensor ([0079], [0091]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Boutoussov as modified by coupling an ambient temperature sensor to the processor in order to adjust at least one setting of the laser based on the ambient temperature.
Regarding claim 7, Boutoussov as modified disclose: wherein the sensor includes one or more of a temperature sensor, a pressure sensor, or an accelerometer (see the rejection of claim 6).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boutoussov et al. (US PG Pub 2018/0085188) in view of Williams et al. (JP 2018020309 A) and Lagenfeld et al. (US PG Pub 2017/0014998).
Regarding claim 9, Boutoussov as modified do not disclose: a feedback mechanism provides an additional indication, wherein the additional indication provides a warning to the user, and wherein the feedback mechanism includes one or more of a haptic feedback mechanism, an illumination feedback mechanism, or an audible feedback mechanism.
Lagenfeld et al. disclose: processor 792 may determine if feedback should be generated by the user interface for the user. If threshold indicator 815 indicates that the load is above a predetermined amount, processor 832 may generate feedback signal 831 which can cause a warning or the like to be generated and conveyed to the user via a display of user interface 12A. Alternatively, processor 832 may generate haptic feedback for the user and may inhibit a user input structure included in user interface 12A from movement until threshold indicator 815 indicates the load is below the threshold ([0362]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Boutoussov as modified by adding a haptic feedback mechanism to the laser device in order to warn the user about a setting that is above a threshold.
Regarding claim 10, Boutoussov as modified disclose: wherein the warning to the user warns the user that at least one of: the at least one setting of the first laser is within a threshold amount of an upper limit of the range or the proposed updated value has been determined (see the rejection of claim 9).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boutoussov et al. (US PG Pub 2018/0085188) in view of Williams et al. (JP 2018020309 A), Lagenfeld et al. (US PG Pub 2017/0014998) and Shelton et al. (US PG Pub 2021/0038064).
Regarding claim 11, Boutoussov as modified do not disclose: wherein the illumination feedback mechanism includes changing a characteristic of a user-visible targeting illumination beam emitted toward a target.
Shelton et al. disclose: changing a characteristic of a user-visible targeting illumination beam emitted toward a target [0028]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Boutoussov as modified by changing a characteristic of a user-visible targeting illumination beam emitted toward a target based on feedback in order to improve illumination of the target.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-18, 20 and 24 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.
Claim 13 is allowable as the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “…wherein at least one of the range or a limit of the range is determined based on at least one of a portion of anatomy that at least one of a scope or a laser fiber connected to the laser system is within, a type of laser fiber included in the laser system, or a type of medical procedure for which the laser system is being used.”
Claim 16 is allowable as the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “…wherein the laser system includes a second laser of a different type than the first laser, and wherein the instructions cause the processor to: receive a second range for at least one setting of the second laser that the second laser can operate within; determine a second proposed updated value of the at least one setting of the second laser; determine whether the second proposed updated value is within the received second range; provide, via the user interface, (iii) an indication of the second proposed updated value and (iv) an option to accept or reject the second proposed updated value for the at least one setting one setting of the second laser; responsive to an acceptance of the second proposed updated value of the at least one setting of the second laser, adjust the at least one setting of the second laser based on the second proposed updated value of the at least one setting of the second laser; select one of the first laser or the second laser based on at least one of an environmental condition measured by a sensor coupled to the processor, a portion of anatomy at least one of a laser fiber or a scope connected to the laser system is within, or a type of medical procedure for which the laser system is being used; and selectively switch to the other of the first laser or the second laser based on a change in the environmental condition, a change in the portion of anatomy, or a change in the medical procedure.”
Claim 20 is allowable as the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “…wherein determining the need to adjust the at least one setting is based on at least one of a characteristic of a target, a change in the characteristic of the target, a distance of a laser fiber from the target, a position of the laser fiber, or an environmental condition measured by a sensor coupled to the laser system, and wherein an upper limit of the range is determined based on at least one of a portion of anatomy a scope connected to the laser system is within, a type of laser fiber included in the laser system, or a medical procedure for which the laser system is being used.”
Claim 24 is allowable as the prior art fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed limitations including “…herein the proposed updated value for the at least one setting of the first laser is within the first range, wherein the second proposed updated value for the at least one setting of the second laser is within the second range, and wherein the instructions cause the processor to: select one of the first laser or the second laser based on at least one of an environmental condition measured by a sensor coupled to the processor, a portion of anatomy a scope connected to the laser system is within, or a medical procedure for which the laser system is being used; and selectively switch to the other of the first laser or the second laser based on a change in the environmental condition, a change in the portion of anatomy, or a change in the medical procedure.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lee et al. (US PG Pub 2012/0053577) disclose: the present invention relates to comprehensive systems, devices and methods for delivering energy to tissue for a wide variety of applications, including medical procedures (e.g., tissue ablation, resection, cautery, vascular thrombosis, treatment of cardiac arrhythmias and dysrhythmias, electrosurgery, tissue harvest, etc.). In certain embodiments, systems, devices, and methods are provided for treating a tissue region (e.g., a tumor) through application of energy. In certain embodiments, systems and devices of the present invention find use in combination with other medical devices (e.g., surgical devices, surgical tools; e.g., hemostats, blades, scalpels). In certain embodiments, more than one energy delivery system or device of the present invention may be employed simultaneously or sequentially (e.g., for cutting and coagulation procedures (Abstract). Xuan et al. (US PG Pub 2015/0230864) disclose: embodiments of a surgical laser system comprise a laser source, a laser fiber, a photodetector and a controller. The laser source is configured to generate laser energy. The laser fiber is optically coupled to the laser source and is configured to discharge the laser energy generated by the laser source. The photodetector is configured to generate an output signal that is indicative of an intensity level of electromagnetic energy feedback that is produced in response to the discharge of the laser energy. The controller is configured to control the laser source based on the output signal (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XINNING(TOM) NIU whose telephone number is (571)270-1437. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30am-6:00pm.
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, Minsun Harvey can be reached at 571-272-1835. 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.
/XINNING(Tom) NIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights