DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Applicant’s election without traverse of group II, claims 13-24 in the reply filed on 4/16/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/16/26.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 13, 18-20, 22, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Sly et al. (US 2015/0109193 A1) (hereafter “Sly”).
Regarding claims 13, 22, and 24, Sly discloses (see para [0018], figure 1)a method for operating a reprocessing device (automated processing machine 128) for a surgical instrument, the method comprising: recognizing at least one or more non-contact operating gesture patterns (see abstract; para [0014], [0023], [0028]) of a reprocessing device operator for the reprocessing device (128) using a sensor (camera); and based on an output of the sensor to a controller, operating the reprocessing device (see para [0050], [0063]) with the controller based on upon the recognition, wherein the gesture recognition is used to start or stop operation of the reprocessor (see para [0038]).
Regarding claims 18-20, Sly discloses that the gestures sensed include position of the operators arms or location of the operators eyes without instruments being held by operator since the instruments are located in the reprocessor (see figure 1; para [0028], [0038], [0069]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sly as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Jaskola (DE 10 2016216459 A1 – English Translation).
Sly is set forth above with regards to claim 13 but does not appear to disclose a sensor that comprises a gesture pattern detection sensor.
Jaskola discloses a medical workstation that comprises a doppler radar for detecting gestures of the operator (see English translation – “As a motion detector, for example, a sensor can be used which uses electromagnetic waves, which operates on the basis of ultrasound or passively detects a person based on their infrared radiation. Likewise, combinations of one or more of these techniques are provided. A passive infrared sensor is a type often used in motion detectors. It reacts optimally to angle changes, ie when a person moves past the sensor. A Doppler radar, ie motion detection based on electromagnetic waves, responds optimally as the person's distance to the sensor changes. HF sensor technology also penetrates glass, wood or lightweight walls and responds to movement, independent of heat radiation. A motion detector is therefore an electronic sensor that detects movements in its environment. This environment is the "area of user space" in which the presence of a person is detected, in other words, the coverage area of the presence detector.
Therefore, 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 system of Sly and utilize a doppler radar sensor for detecting gestures as taught by Jaskola since Sly discloses that any type of motion sensor can be used to detect gestures (see para [0036]-[0037]).
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 14-17 and 23 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 14, the prior art, alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest wherein: the recognizing comprises using an artificial intelligence module, and the artificial intelligence module is configured to recognize at least one or several operating gesture patterns of the reprocessing device operator, in the claimed environment.
Claims 15-17 are allowable for at least the reasons set forth above with regards to claim 14 due to claim dependency.
Regarding claim 23, the prior art, alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest wherein the controller is configured to one or more of: open a door of the reprocessing device upon the at least one recognition of the at least one non-contact gesture of the reprocessing device operator detected by the sensor; and close the door of the reprocessing device upon the at least one recognition of the at least one non-contact gesture of the reprocessing device operator detected by the sensor, in the claimed environment.
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN E CONLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-8414. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8:30am-4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mike Marcheschi can be reached on 571-272-1374. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/SEAN E CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Prosecution Insights