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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/6/2026 concerning claims 10-12 and 34-35 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US Publication 2016/0275819 A1 to Hofstetter et al. (hereinafter Hofstetter).
Applicant's arguments filed 5/6/2026 concerning claims 20-22, 24, and 28 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states that independent claims 20 and 34 has been created to describe a tool-path enabled by the arrangement of the assembly, which applicant believes overcomes the intended use tag concerning the articulated arms (Remarks, filed 5/6/2026, pg. 13-14). Examiner respectfully disagrees with this argument. A path for a tool being present does not change the form of the assembly itself. The assembly, as currently stated, could still be used for practice with other medical devices and/or practice by hand by a medical professional. As currently claimed, the articulated arms are not part of the assembly and the amendments do not overcome the intended use tag. As such, claims 10-12, 20-22, 24, 28, and 34-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 5-6, 8-9, 15, and 29 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-2, 5-6, 8-9, 15, and 29 under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 has been withdrawn. New claim 33 is dependent on independent claim 1 and is allowable for that reason.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 5-6, 8-9, and 33 are allowed.
Claims 15 and 29 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Note: Currently as claimed, the surgical device comprising one or more articulated arms is considered to be intended use. Therefore, said limitations are not positively recited/claimed. However, Hofstetter would be capable of being utilized with a surgical device with one or more articulated arms as shown in US Publication No. 2017/0071688 A1 to Cohen et al. (hereinafter Cohen).
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 20-22, 24, and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Publication 2016/0275819 A1 to Hofstetter et al.
Concerning claim 20,
Hofstetter discloses an assembly for performing practice exercises with a surgical device that comprises one or more articulated arms, the assembly comprising:
a. a support platform defining a platform plane (element 112a, Figure 7-8);
b. first and second exercise-element carriers spaced apart from each other, each raised above the platform plane and comprising a distally- facing practice surface (element 118a-b) comprising a respective array of one or more practice-exercise elements selected from the group consisting of holes, loops, pegs and hooks, the first and second exercise-element carriers being arranged so that the respective practice surfaces face each other, the first exercise-element carrier having formed therethrough or thereunder an aperture framed at least along an upper edge of the aperture to create a passage therethrough or thereunder (Element 114, Figure 5, Figure 8-10, wherein the hinge allows for first practice surface to be at any angle relative to the second practice surface. As broadly claimed, any acute angle between the two planes satisfies the limitation of the two planes facing each other),
wherein the aperture and the respective exercise panels are arranged such that (i) a first three-dimensional tool path, having an origin from which the first practice surface is not visible, extending through the aperture in a first direction, and curving around to return in a second direction that is within ±30° of being opposite to the first direction, intersects the first practice surface (0090-0091, Figure 8, The practice-exercise elements described is lacking any clear distinguishing features. The tool path is considered to be a configuration of the practice surfaces and apertures of the apparatus which would allow for the intended use of surgical arm practice. The surgical arm apparatus is assumed to be stationary. Figure 8 in Hofstetter illustrates an apparatus with a first practice-exercise element accessible by a flexible surgical arm when the first practice surface is not in line of sight and additional practice-exercise elements accessible within the claimed angular range of the first practice-exercise element), and (ii) a second three-dimensional tool path having a common origin with the first three-dimensional tool path passes through the aperture, and intersects the second practice surface (0090-0091, Figure 8, The tool path is considered to be a configuration of the practice surfaces and apertures of the apparatus which would allow for the intended use of surgical arm practice. The surgical arm apparatus is assumed to be stationary. Figure 8 in Hofstetter illustrates an apparatus with a second practice surface accessible without passing through an aperture by a flexible surgical arm).
Concerning claim 21,
Hofstetter discloses the distally-disposed practice- exercise element of the proximal exercise-element carrier is accessible to the distal end effector of the articulated arm only when the articulated arm is in a retroflex position (0088, 0090, Figure 5, Figure 8, The practice-exercise elements described is lacking any clear distinguishing features. The surgical arm apparatus is assumed to be stationary. Figure 8 in Hofstetter illustrates an apparatus with practice-exercise elements accessible when the arm is in a retroflex position and practice-exercise elements accessible when the arm is not in a retroflex position).
Concerning claim 22,
Hofstetter discloses the respective practice surfaces of the proximal and distal exercise panels are oriented at respective angles between 45 degrees and 135 degrees relative to the platform plane (0090, Element 114, Figure 8, Hinge allows for practice element to be at any angle relative to the platform plane).
Concerning claim 24,
Hofstetter discloses the retroflex position is such that the articulated arm is flexed by at least 150 degrees from an unflexed orientation (0088, 0090, Figure 5, Figure 8, As broadly claimed, figure 5 and 8 in Hofstetter illustrates practice elements that are accessible to a surgical arm under various retroflex positions, including the configuration claimed above. The surgical arm apparatus is assumed to be stationary).
Concerning claim 28,
Hofstetter discloses the proximally-disposed practice-exercise element of the distal exercise-element carrier is accessible to the distal end effector of the articulated arm when the articulated arm is in an S-shaped position (0088, 0090, Figure 5, Figure 8, As broadly claimed, figure 5 and 8 in Hofstetter illustrates practice elements that are accessible to a surgical arm under various retroflex positions, including the configuration claimed above. The surgical arm apparatus is assumed to be stationary).
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.
Claim(s) 10-12 and 34-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Publication No. 2016/0275819 A1 to Hofstetter et al.
Concerning claim 34,
Hofstetter discloses an assembly for performing practice exercises with a surgical device that comprises one or more articulated arms (0074-0075), the assembly comprising:
b. an exercise-element carrier, the exercise-element carrier (Figure 5, Figure 8-10) comprising:
i. a first practice surface (element 118a) comprising an array of one or more practice- exercise elements selected from the group consisting of holes, loops, pegs and hooks (Figure 5, Figure 8-10), and
ii. an aperture through or under the exercise-element carrier, framed at least along an upper edge of the aperture to create a passage therethrough or thereunder (0090-0091, Figure 8-10),
wherein the aperture is located at a height relative to the first practice surface such that a first three-dimensional tool path having an origin from which the first practice surface is not visible, extending through the aperture in a first direction, and curving around to return in a second direction that is within ±30° of being opposite to the first direction, intersects the first practice surface (0090-0091, Figure 8, The practice-exercise elements described is lacking any clear distinguishing features. The tool path is considered to be a configuration of the practice surfaces and apertures of the apparatus which would allow for the intended use of surgical arm practice. The surgical arm apparatus is assumed to be stationary. Figure 8 in Hofstetter illustrates an apparatus with a first practice-exercise element accessible by a flexible surgical arm when the first practice surface is not in line of sight and additional practice-exercise elements accessible within the claimed angular range of the first practice-exercise element).
Hofstetter discloses, in a second embodiment, a. a support platform defining a platform plane (0099, element 146, Figure 14A-B);
b. an exercise-element carrier raised above the platform plane and set at, and/or pivotable to, an angle between 45° and 135° relative to the platform plane, the exercise-element carrier comprising (0099, element 112a-b, Figure 14A-B, wherein plane 112b is connected in an upright manner, meeting the angle limitation claimed).
It would have been obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the stand from the second embodiment of Hofstetter with the training apparatus from the first embodiment of Hofstetter as both concern hingedly connected training planes for laparoscopic procedures. Elevating the planes of the first embodiment of Hofstetter as done in the second embodiment of Hofstetter would allow for a more multidimensional practice apparatus, improving the quality of practice.
Concerning claim 10,
Hofstetter discloses the exercise-element carrier additionally comprises a second practice surface (0090, Element 118b, Figure 8) rotated from the first practice surface by at least 90° and not more than 180° (0090, Element 114, Figure 8, wherein the hinge allows for first practice surface to be at any angle relative to the second practice surface) the second practice surface comprising an array of one or more practice-exercise elements selected from the group consisting of holes, loops, pegs and hooks (Element 118a-b, Figure 8, Figure 9-10).
Concerning claim 11,
Hofstetter discloses the first and second practice surfaces are parallel and face in opposite directions (0090, Element 114, Figure 8, wherein the hinge allows for first practice surface to be at any angle relative to the second practice surface).
Concerning claim 12,
Hofstetter discloses the first and second practice surfaces are oriented at an acute angle to each other (0090, Element 114, Figure 8, wherein the hinge allows for first practice surface to be at any angle relative to the second practice surface).
Concerning claim 35,
Hofstetter discloses a second three-dimensional tool path having a common origin with the first three-dimensional tool path does not pass through the aperture, and intersects the second practice surface (0090-0091, Figure 8, The tool path is considered to be a configuration of the practice surfaces and apertures of the apparatus which would allow for the intended use of surgical arm practice. The surgical arm apparatus is assumed to be stationary. Figure 8 in Hofstetter illustrates an apparatus with a second practice surface accessible without passing through an aperture by a flexible surgical arm).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISHAYU SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-3179. The examiner can normally be reached Flex.
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, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. 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.
/I.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/DMITRY SUHOL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights