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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 16 April 2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 20 April 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Claim 1 has been amended. No claims have been newly added nor canceled. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 9, 12-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark (US 20220211452 A1), hereafter Clark, in view of Wenderow (US 20110152882 A1), hereafter Wenderow.
Regarding claim 1, Clark discloses a robotic interventional device control system comprising:
A robotic drive system (0073, Catheter-based procedure system 10 includes, among other elements, a bedside unit 20 and a control station 26. Bedside unit 20 includes a robotic drive 24 and a positioning system 22 that are located adjacent to a patient 12. Patient 12 is supported on a patient table 18. The positioning system 22 is used to position and support the robotic drive 24. The positioning system 22 may be, for example, a robotic arm, an articulated arm, a holder, etc.);
An interventional device assembly comprising a plurality of interventional devices configured to couple to the robotic drive system (0074, Generally, the robotic drive 24 may be equipped with the appropriate percutaneous interventional devices and accessories 48 (shown in FIG. 2) (e.g., guidewires, various types of catheters including balloon catheters, stent delivery systems, stent retrievers, embolization coils, liquid embolics, aspiration pumps, device to deliver contrast media, medicine, hemostasis valve adapters, syringes, stopcocks, inflation device, etc.) to allow the user or operator 11 to perform a catheter-based medical procedure via a robotic system by operating various controls such as the controls and inputs located at the control station 26.), each of the plurality of interventional devices associated with an identifier (0128, According to some embodiments, the robotic system is configured so that the input controls instructing motion of the wire-based EMD are mapped to the device module holding the wire-based EMD. The identity of the device module holding the wire-based EMD may be detected with sensors in response to loading the EMD into the device module. Detection may employ contact or non-contact sensors, such as mechanical, electrical or visual sensors, or by a user input prompted by the system);
A plurality of sensors, one or more of the plurality of sensors being configured to identify one of the plurality of interventional devices based on the identifier when the one of the plurality of interventional devices is coupled to the robotic drive system (0128, According to some embodiments, the robotic system is configured so that the input controls instructing motion of the wire-based EMD are mapped to the device module holding the wire-based EMD. The identity of the device module holding the wire-based EMD may be detected with sensors in response to loading the EMD into the device module. Detection may employ contact or non-contact sensors, such as mechanical, electrical or visual sensors, or by a user input prompted by the system.), and one or more of the plurality of sensors configured to detect a position of one of the plurality of interventional devices (0160, FIGS. 20 and 21 illustrate embodiments of a GUI 400 configure to provide position information for a robotic drive 24 with three device modules 32, which are denoted with the labels “C1,” “C2,” and “C3” … The position of each icon 404, 406, 408 corresponds to the position of the corresponding device module 32 on the robotic drive 24. 0164, GUI 400 may also include numeric readout of device module position, which could be in reference to its absolute position along the full range of the system, or its remaining travel distance in either direction. Examiner's note: although the position sensor is not explicitly recited, the examiner asserts that there must be some position sensor, given that position data is given numerically in reference to its absolute position);
One or more hardware processors configured to receive interventional device identity data and position data from the plurality of sensors and, based on the interventional device identity data and position data, generate a user interface comprising an instrument window (0160, In some embodiments, the control station 26 can include a user interface configured to provide a user with feedback and information regarding the state of the catheter-based procedure system 10. For example, the display 30 can provide a graphical user interface (GUI) that illustrates the positions and travel limits of the device modules 32 of a robotic drive 24. FIGS. 20 and 21 illustrate embodiments of a GUI 400 configure to provide position information for a robotic drive 24 with three device modules 32, which are denoted with the labels “C1,” “C2,” and “C3.” The three devices modules 32 are each represented by an icon 404, 406, 408 that is arranged linearly within a boundary region 412 that represents the total length of the robotic drive 24. To help the user to determine which icon 404, 406, 408 corresponds to each of the device modules 32, each of the icons can include a text label 416 that denotes which devices module 32 the icon 404, 406, 408 represents. Additionally, the icons 404, 406, 408 can be vividly colored or have different fill patterns to help a user to differentiate between each of the icons 404, 406, 408. The position of each icon 404, 406, 408 corresponds to the position of the corresponding device module 32 on the robotic drive 24.), the instrument window comprising,
A plurality of interventional device representations, each of the plurality of interventional device representations representing one of the plurality of interventional devices (0160, FIGS. 20 and 21 illustrate embodiments of a GUI 400 configure to provide position information for a robotic drive 24 with three device modules 32, which are denoted with the labels “C1,” “C2,” and “C3.” The three devices modules 32 are each represented by an icon 404, 406, 408 that is arranged linearly within a boundary region 412 that represents the total length of the robotic drive 24.); and
A plurality of interventional device markers, each of the plurality of interventional device markers being associated with one of the plurality of interventional device representations (0160, FIGS. 20 and 21 illustrate embodiments of a GUI 400 configure to provide position information for a robotic drive 24 with three device modules 32, which are denoted with the labels “C1,” “C2,” and “C3.” The three devices modules 32 are each represented by an icon 404, 406, 408 that is arranged linearly within a boundary region 412 that represents the total length of the robotic drive 24.), wherein each of the plurality of interventional device markers is configured to change in appearance to provide an indication that its corresponding interventional device hub has reached a driving limit (0163, In some embodiments, the GUI 400 can be configured to display additional graphics or text when a device module 32 reaches a travel limit. The additional graphics or text may indicate where the limit [is], what is defining the travel limit, and how the user can control the robotic drive 24 to continue moving the device module 32. Further, the GUI 400 may highlight or otherwise point out the "contact point" between device modules 23 on the graphical illustration of their positions.); and
A display configured to display the user interface (0160, In some embodiments, the control station 26 can include a user interface configured to provide a user with feedback and information regarding the state of the catheter-based procedure system 10. For example, the display 30 can provide a graphical user interface (GUI) that illustrates the positions and travel limits of the device modules 32 of a robotic drive 24.);
Wherein the plurality of interventional device representations move within the instrument window in correlation with movements of the corresponding interventional devices (0160, The position of each icon 404, 406, 408 corresponds to the position of the corresponding device module 32 on the robotic drive 24. See also at least Figs. 20-23).
Clark fails to explicitly disclose, however, wherein the plurality of interventional device markers are configured to indicate a type of the interventional device represented by the one of the plurality of interventional device representations.
Wenderow, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein the plurality of interventional device markers are configured to indicate a type of the interventional device represented by the one of the plurality of interventional device representations (0089, Indicator 304 also includes a percutaneous devices icon 308 that provides an indication of the types of percutaneous devices that bedside system is equipped with. For example, as shown, devices icon 308 indicates that bedside system 12 is equipped with a guide wire and a stent-equipped working catheter. In other embodiments, devices icon 308 may show different and/or more detailed information (e.g., make, model, size, type, etc.) of the devices that bedside system 12 is equipped with.).
Clark and Wenderow are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., robotic surgical systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the device type identification of Wenderow in order to provide further information regarding the interventional devices to an operator. The motivation to combine is to ensure that the operator is aware of the types of devices being operated.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 1, and Clark further teaches wherein the user interface further comprises a window configured to display fluoroscopy imagery from a vasculature of a patient (0081-0082, Catheter-based procedure system 10 also includes an imaging system 14 … In one embodiment imaging system 14 is a fluoroscopy system including a C-arm having an X-ray source 13 and a detector 15, also known as an image intensifier. Imaging system 14 may be configured to take X-ray images of the appropriate area of patient 12 during a procedure … the image or images may be displayed on display 30. For example, images may be displayed on display 30 to allow the user or operator 11 to accurately move a guide catheter or guidewire into the proper position.).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 1, and Clark further teaches wherein the user interface further comprises a window configured to display one or more messages indicative of an operational status of the robotic interventional device system (0163, GUI 400 may communicate the device presence or absence, the cassette presence or absence, and notifications such as encoder mismatch, encoder issues, transducer issues, and any other notifications.).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 1, and Clark further teaches wherein the user interface comprises a window configured to display a live feed (0082, Imaging system 14 may also be configured to take one or more X-ray images (e.g., real time images) during a catheter-based medical procedure to assist the suer or operator 11 of control station 26 to properly position a guidewire, guide catheter, microcatheter, stent retriever, coil, stent, balloon, etc. during the procedure. The image or images may be displayed on display 30.).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 1, and Clark further teaches wherein each of the plurality of interventional device markers are configured to transition from a first configuration to a second configuration when the plurality of interventional devices are moving axially along a drive table (0160, Figs. 20 and 21, illustrate embodiments of a GUI 400 configure to provide position information for a robotic drive 24 with three device modules 32, which are denoted with the labels “C1,” “C2,” and “C3.” Fig. 20, elements C1, C2, and C3 in a first position, Fig. 21, elements C1, C2, and C3 in a second position.).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 6, and Clark further teaches wherein in the first configuration, each of the plurality of interventional device markers are in a first position, and wherein in the second configuration, each of the plurality of interventional device markers are in a second position (0160, Figs. 20 and 21, illustrate embodiments of a GUI 400 configure to provide position information for a robotic drive 24 with three device modules 32, which are denoted with the labels “C1,” “C2,” and “C3.” Fig. 20, elements C1, C2, and C3 in a first position, Fig. 21, elements C1, C2, and C3 in a second position.).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 7, and Clark further teaches wherein the plurality of interventional device markers are configured to be in the first configuration when the plurality of interventional devices are not moving axially along the drive table (0160, Figs. 20 and 21, illustrate embodiments of a GUI 400 configure to provide position information for a robotic drive 24 with three device modules 32, which are denoted with the labels “C1,” “C2,” and “C3.” Fig. 20, elements C1, C2, and C3 in a first position, Fig. 21, elements C1, C2, and C3 in a second position. Examiner's note: if the interventional device is not being moved, it wouldn't move relative to the first position).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 1, and Clark teaches it further comprising a controller having one or more controls configured to cause movement of at least one of the plurality of interventional devices responsive to a user input (0090 As previously discussed, embodiments of a control station 26 can include a variety of different input systems for controlling the bedside unit 20. Input systems can include a variety of different input controls (for example, buttons, scroll wheels, joysticks, etc.) that can be manipulated by a user to control the robotic drive 24. These input controls can be arranged in different layouts or patterns on the input system so that a user can easily reach each of them without taking their hands off of the controls. This may be useful, for example, so that the user can simultaneously and independently control the movement of multiple different EMDs or device modules 32. Additionally, embodiments of an input system can be configured to operate in a variety of different control modes. In each control mode, different functions can be assigned to each of the input controls based on, amongst other factors, the procedure being performed, which device or devices are being controlled, user preferences, or any other factors. The input system can be configured to switch between different control modes to reassign functions to at least one of the input controls in response to the user or the control computing system 34.).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 12, and Clark further teaches wherein the one or more controls comprise:
A first control linked to a first interventional device such that movement of the first control causes a responsive movement of the first interventional device (0136, With the guidewire setting the path, the diagnostic and guide catheters are selected by activating devices 1 and 2, using the left thumb to depress 140E and 140F in series. Control 170 may then be depressed to advance the diagnostic and guide catheters along the guidewire to the base of the arch.); and
A second control linked to a second interventional device such that the second control causes a responsive movement of the second interventional device (0136, Using the input system 100, the guidewire is selected as the active device and the analog trigger 172, a linear position control manipulated by the user's index finger, is used to instruct the system to advance the guidewire at a speed corresponding to the amount that the trigger is pulled.).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 13, and Clark further teaches wherein the first interventional device is a guide catheter (0136, With the guidewire setting the path, the diagnostic and guide catheters are selected by activating devices 1 and 2, using the left thumb to depress 140E and 140F in series. Control 170 may then be depressed to advance the diagnostic and guide catheters along the guidewire to the base of the arch.) and the second interventional device is a guidewire (0136, Using the input system 100, the guidewire is selected as the active device and the analog trigger 172, a linear position control manipulated by the user's index finger, is used to instruct the system to advance the guidewire at a speed corresponding to the amount that the trigger is pulled.).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 13, and Clark further teaches wherein the controller further comprises an interventional device actuator, wherein actuation of the interventional device actuator causes the first interventional device to be linked to the second control such that movement of the second control causes a responsive movement of the first interventional device (0138, Once the guidewire has moved several inches up into the internal carotid artery, the diagnostic catheter and guide catheter can follow. This may be done by selecting both the diagnostic catheter and guide catheter as the active devices by pressing device selection control buttons 140E and 140F in series, and manipulating, with the left index finger, analog trigger 170 to instruct drive modules 1 and 2 to linearly move their respective EMDs simultaneously.).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 12, and Clark further teaches wherein the one or more controls comprise a first control operatable in a first drive mode and a second drive mode, wherein movement of the first control is configured to cause a responsive movement of a first subset of the plurality of interventional devices in the first drive mode and operation of the first control is configured to cause a responsive movement of a second subset of the plurality of interventional devices in the second drive mode (0130, The controls coupled to the left side of the input system 100 control a selected catheter. Button array 142 includes buttons 140E, 140F and 140G, and pressing one of the buttons (typically with the left thumb) selects a device module 1, 2 or 3 respectively such that manipulation of the controls on the left side of the input system 100 results in the sending of instructions to the selected device module. The input system 100 may allow multiple catheters to be selected by pressing the selection buttons 140E, 140F and 140G in series.).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 1, and Clark further teaches wherein the driving limit is a condition in which further movement of the corresponding interventional device hub would result in a collision with another interventional device hub or exceed a physical boundary of a support table (0162, In the illustrated embodiments, the distal travel limit for each device module 32 is defined by the position of the device module 32 in front of it (in the distal direction) or by the distal end of the robotic drive. Thus, the range bar 420 of the first device module 32 is attached to the left side of the boundary region 412, while the range bars 422, 424 of the second and third device modules 32 (represented by the middle icon 406 and rightmost icon 408, respectively) are attached to the right side (proximal end) of the adjacent device module 32 in the distal direction. The proximal travel limit for each device module 32 is defined by a system-implemented limit (which may be defined by the user or by the system) as well as the position of the device module 32 behind it (in the proximal direction), or by a limit defined by the user or by the system.).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 1, and Clark further teaches wherein the driving limit is a condition in which further movement of the corresponding interventional device hub would result in a collision with another interventional device hub or exceed a physical boundary of a support table (0163, As illustrated in FIG. 21, the maximum travel range of a device module (in this case, the range bar 424 of the third device module 32) may be illustrated as extending outside of the boundary region 412. Although the proximal travel limit of the third device module in this case is the proximal end of the robotic drive 24, this may be useful in order to show that the maximum travel range of the third device module 32 is longer than the distance between the proximal end of the second device module 32 and the proximal end of the robotic drive.).
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark in view of Wenderow, and further in view of Duindam (US 20200054399 A1), hereafter Duindam.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the instrument window is positioned on a central portion of the user interface.
Duindam, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein the instrument window is positioned on a central portion of the user interface (Figs. 5B-5D, reduced anatomical model 522 in central portion of the user interface).
Clark, Wenderow, and Duindam are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical robotic systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the central placement of the instrument window of Duindam in order to provide a means of effectively displaying instrument information. The motivation to combine is to ensure that an operator is readily able to view information relevant to the surgical instruments.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 7, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the first position is closer to a central longitudinal axis of the plurality of interventional device representations than the second position.
Duindam, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein the first position is closer to a central longitudinal axis of the plurality of interventional device representations than the second position (0084, compact views 520 include a reduced anatomical model 522, which displays an elongated representation of the planned route to the target location, Fig. 5B, reduced anatomical model 522 showing interventional device at a first position, Fig. 5C, reduced anatomical model 522 showing interventional device at a second position).
Clark, Wenderow, and Duindam are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical robotic systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the marker position of Duindam in order to provide a means of effectively displaying instrument information. The motivation to combine is to ensure that an operator is readily able to view information relevant to the surgical instruments.
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark in view of Wenderow, and further in view of Stepanauskas (US 20220047344 A1).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach it further comprising:
A plurality of hub adapters, wherein each of the plurality of interventional device hubs is configured to be coupled to one of the plurality of hub adapters; and
A support table, wherein the plurality of hub adapters are configured to move along the support table to drive the interventional device assembly.
Stepanauskas, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach:
A plurality of hub adapters, wherein each of the plurality of interventional device hubs is configured to be coupled to one of the plurality of hub adapters (0054-0055, control computing system 34 is in communication with bedside unit 20, which includes a robotic drive 24, and may provide control signals to the bedside unit 20 to control the operation of the motors and drive mechanisms used to drive the percutaneous intervention devices, robotic drive 24 includes multiple device modules 32 coupled to a linear rail 60, each device module 32 is coupled to the rail 60 via a state 62 slidably mounted on the rail 60, each device module 32 includes a drive module 68 and a cassette 66 mounted on and coupled to the drive module, the cassette is sterile and is configured to house and support an elongated medical device); and
A support table, wherein the plurality of hub adapters are configured to move along the support table to drive the interventional device assembly (0054-0055, control computing system 34 is in communication with bedside unit 20, which includes a robotic drive 24, and may provide control signals to the bedside unit 20 to control the operation of the motors and drive mechanisms used to drive the percutaneous intervention devices, robotic drive 24 includes multiple device modules 32 coupled to a linear rail 60, each device module 32 is coupled to the rail 60 via a state 62 slidably mounted on the rail 60, each device module 32 includes a drive module 68 and a cassette 66 mounted on and coupled to the drive module, the cassette is sterile and is configured to house and support an elongated medical device).
Clark, Wenderow, and Stepanauskas are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., robotic surgical systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the device hub and table of Stepanauskas in order to provide a more effective means of actuating a plurality of interventional devices. The motivation to combine is to ensure that the interventional devices can be actuated properly for the particular medical procedure.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Clark, Wenderow, and Stepanauskas teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 10, and Clark further teaches wherein the plurality of interventional device representations are arranged based on an arrangement of the drive unit (0160, For example, the display 30 can provide a graphical user interface (GUI) that illustrates the positions and travel limits of the device modules 32 of a robotic drive 24. FIGS. 20 and 21 illustrate embodiments of a GUI 400 configure to provide position information for a robotic drive 24 with three device modules 32, which are denoted with the labels “C1,” “C2,” and “C3.” The three devices modules 32 are each represented by an icon 404, 406, 408 that is arranged linearly within a boundary region 412 that represents the total length of the robotic drive 24. To help the user to determine which icon 404, 406, 408 corresponds to each of the device modules 32, each of the icons can include a text label 416 that denotes which devices module 32 the icon 404, 406, 408 represents. Additionally, the icons 404, 406, 408 can be vividly colored or have different fill patterns to help a user to differentiate between each of the icons 404, 406, 408. The position of each icon 404, 406, 408 corresponds to the position of the corresponding device module 32 on the robotic drive 24.).
Clark fails to explicitly teach, however, wherein the drive units are a plurality of hub adapters on the support table.
Stepanauskas, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein the drive units are a plurality of hub adapters on the support table (0054-0055, control computing system 34 is in communication with bedside unit 20, which includes a robotic drive 24, and may provide control signals to the bedside unit 20 to control the operation of the motors and drive mechanisms used to drive the percutaneous intervention devices, robotic drive 24 includes multiple device modules 32 coupled to a linear rail 60, each device module 32 is coupled to the rail 60 via a state 62 slidably mounted on the rail 60, each device module 32 includes a drive module 68 and a cassette 66 mounted on and coupled to the drive module, the cassette is sterile and is configured to house and support an elongated medical device).
Clark, Wenderow, and Stepanauskas are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., robotic surgical systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the device hub and table of Stepanauskas in order to provide a more effective means of actuating a plurality of interventional devices. The motivation to combine is to ensure that the interventional devices can be actuated properly for the particular medical procedure.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clark in view of Wenderow, and further in view of Wenderow (US 9320479 B2), hereafter Wenderow '479.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Clark and Wenderow teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 16, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the first subset of the plurality of interventional devices comprises a guide catheter, a procedure catheter, and an access catheter.
Wenderow '479, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein the first subset of the plurality of interventional devices comprises a guide catheter, a procedure catheter, and an access catheter (Col. 4, Line 55 - Col. 5, Line 3, guide wire control 32 is a joystick configured to advance, retract, or rotate a guide wire, working catheter control 25 is a joystick configured to advance, retract, or rotate a working catheter, and guide catheter control 29 is a joystick configured to advance, retract, or rotate a guide catheter).
Clark, Wenderow, and Wenderow ‘479 are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical robotic systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the specific guide catheter and working catheter control of Wenderow ‘479 in order to provide further means of controlling interventional devices. The motivation to combine is to ensure that the proper interventional devices are able to be controlled properly.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Clark, Wenderow, and Wenderow ‘479 teaches the robotic interventional device control system of claim 17, and Wenderow ‘479 further teaches wherein the second subset of the plurality of interventional devices comprises the guide catheter and the procedure catheter (Col. 4, Line 55 - Col. 5, Line 3, guide wire control 32 is a joystick configured to advance, retract, or rotate a guide wire, working catheter control 25 is a joystick configured to advance, retract, or rotate a working catheter, and guide catheter control 29 is a joystick configured to advance, retract, or rotate a guide catheter).
Clark, Wenderow, and Wenderow ‘479 are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical robotic systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the specific guide catheter and working catheter control of Wenderow ‘479 in order to provide further means of controlling interventional devices. The motivation to combine is to ensure that the proper interventional devices are able to be controlled properly.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLAKE A WOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-6830. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM Eastern.
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, Thomas Worden can be reached at (571) 272-4876. 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.
/BLAKE A WOOD/Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights