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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention, as follow:
Claim 1 recites in line 8: “a follower mechanism”. However, according at least to [0057] of specification of instant application, as reproduced herein below: “The follower mechanism is a connecting member that can be actuated by the operating actuation mechanism. In an implementation, the follower mechanism may be a cam mechanism or a linkage mechanism having a part that can be controlled by the operating actuation mechanism and a part that is cooperatively moveable with the clamping jaws. ………. In an embodiment, a specific structure of the movable member 170 is given as an example of the follower mechanism.” As best understood by Examiner, the movable member 170 shown in Figures 3-5 is defined to be just one example embodiment for the follower mechanism. However, the full scope and description of the “follower mechanism” also includes other example embodiments, such as “a cam mechanism or a linkage mechanism” as discussed above taken from [0057], which are beyond the express scope of the movable member 170 shown in figures. As a result, it would only be the embodiment of movable member 170 that is cooperatively moveable with the clamping jaw. Therefore, upon further review, it may be more appropriate to amend claim 1 to read: “wherein the follower mechanism being a movable member, and the movable member and the at least one clamping jaw are cooperatively movable”.
Claim 5 recites in lines 2-3 and 4-5 the following: “clamping claw”. However, upon diligent search of entire disclosure of instant application including drawings, no descriptions are found to support the “clamping claw”. It is unclear what is a “clamping claw”. None of the drawings and the specification show or describe such “clamping claw”. Adding to the confusion, it is unclear of the relationship between “clamping jaw 160” and “clamping claw” in claim 5. Furthermore, claim 5 in lines 4-5 recites in part: “a respective clamping jaw of the at least one clamping claw”, but nothing in the entire disclosure describes of the clamping jaw 160 to belong as any part of “clamping claw”. Correction is required to overcome rejection without introducing new matter.
Claim 9 recites in line 26: “movable part”. It is unclear what element or limitation of “movable part” is defined as being. Correction is required.
Claim 12 recites in lines 4-5 the following: “clamping claw”. However, upon diligent search of entire disclosure of instant application including drawings, no descriptions are found to support the “clamping claw”. It is unclear what “clamping claw” are defined as. None of the drawings and the specification show or describe such “clamping claw”. Adding to the confusion, it is unclear of the relationship between “clamping jaw 160” disclosed in figures of instant application, and “clamping claw” in claim 12. Correction is required to overcome rejection without introducing new matter.
Claim 18 recites in lines 3-5: “and wherein a variation trend of a slope of a plane tangent to the second limitation surface is the same as a variation trend of the slope of the plane tangent to the first limitation surface”. Meanwhile, [0086] of specification of instant application recites in part: “……..It is easy to understand that a variation trend of a slope of the second limitation surface 177 is the same as a variation trend of the slope of the first limitation surface 176, that is, the slope of the line formed by the intersection of the second limitation surface 177 and the horizontal plane relative to the longitudinal straight line on the horizontal plane gradually increases from the first end 174 to the second end 175. In other words, the first limitation surface 176 may be parallel to the second limitation surface 177”.
As best understood by Examiner, claim 18 in view of support from [0086] is alleged to be easy to understand as follow: “the slope of a line formed by the intersection of the second limitation surface 177 and the horizontal plane relative to the longitudinal straight line on the horizontal plane gradually increases from the first end 174 to the second end 175” or “the first limitation surface 176 is parallel to the second limitation surface 177”. However, it remains confusing concerning the following definitions: (a) what is mean by “variation trend of a slope”? please note that conventional variation trend of a slope has several different interpretations (b) what is the slope of a line formed by the intersection of the second limitation surface 177 and the horizontal plane relative to the longitudinal straight line on the horizontal plane? and where is drawing support that identify such line formed by the intersection of the second limitation surface 177 and the horizontal plane relative to the longitudinal straight line on the horizontal plane? where is longitudinal straight line being shown in figures? (c) how is “a variation trend of a slope of a plane tangent to the second limitation surface is the same as a variation trend of the slope of the plane tangent to the first limitation surface” recited in claim equal to the following: “the first limitation surface 176 may be parallel to the second limitation surface 177” as discussed in [0086] in specification. (d) How much is/are actual numerical values for “variation trend of a slope of a plane tangent to the second limitation surface” and “variation trend of the slope of the plane tangent to the first limitation surface” ? Clarifications and corrections are required without introducing new matter.
By virtue of dependency on claim 1, claims 2-8, are likewise also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
By virtue of dependency on claim 9, claims 10-19, are likewise also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
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 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 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) 1, 2, 5-8 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Scheib (US 20190053824A1, hereinafter referred to as “Scheib”).
Regarding claim 1, Scheib discloses a cannula adapter (Figs 7A and 7B, attachment device 600), comprising: an adapter body ([0055] lines 18-19: support (not depicted) ); a first guide member ([0055] lines 22-23: track (not depicted)) fixedly disposed in the adapter body ([0055] lines 17-25); at least one clamping jaw (Fig 7A, clamping component 630) disposed in the adapter body and limited by the first guide member ([0055] lines 22-25), wherein the at least one clamping jaw is configured to translate between a first position and a second position in a guiding direction of the first guide member (Figs 7A and 7B combined show that as peg 650 is rotated, clamping jaw (630) moves from first position of Fig 7A to second position in Fig 7B via direction 652); an operating actuation mechanism (Figs 7A and 7B, handle 642); and a follower mechanism (Figs 7A and 7B, peg 650) configured to be driven by the operating actuation mechanism to move (Figs 7A and 7B, driven by handle 642 to move); wherein the follower mechanism (650) and the at least one clamping jaw (630) are cooperatively movable (Fig 7A, movement direction 652), the at least one clamping jaw is in the first position when the follower mechanism is in a third position (Fig 7A, clamping jaw (630) is lifted at a position, when follower mechanism (650) is at position at front end of slot 632)), and the at least one clamping jaw is in the second position (Fig 7B, clamping jaw (630) is at direct contact position with attachment portion 686) when the follower mechanism is in a fourth position (Fig 7B, follower mechanism (650) at rear position of slot 632).
Regarding claim 2, Scheib discloses wherein an included angle between a moving direction of a respective clamping jaw of the at least one clamping jaw and a moving direction of the follower mechanism is in a range of 85° to 90° (Figs 7A and 7B, moving direction of clamping jaw (630) is vertical shown by direction 652, while moving direction of follower mechanism (650) is horizontal by sliding along slot 632, thus included angle thereof becomes perpendicular 90 degrees angle).
Regarding claim 5, Scheib discloses wherein the follower mechanism (Figs 7A and 7B, peg 650) includes a track surface (Figs 7A and 7B, surface inside slot 632), and one of a roller and a bearing (Fig 7A, peg 650 is a roller, since one is suffice) is connected between the at least one clamping claw (Fig 7B, clamping component 630) and the track surface (632) and is movable along the track surface (Figs 7A and 7B); and wherein the track surface has both a component in a translation direction of a respective clamping jaw of the at least one clamping claw (Fig 7A, direction 652) and a component in a moving direction of the follower mechanism (Figs 7A and 7B, horizontal direction).
Regarding claim 6, Scheib discloses wherein the translation direction of the respective clamping jaw is perpendicular to the moving direction of the follower mechanism (Figs 7A and 7B, moving direction of clamping jaw (630) is vertical shown by vertical direction 652, while moving direction of follower mechanism (650) is horizontal by sliding along slot 632, thus included angle thereof becomes a substantially perpendicular 90 degrees angle).
Regarding claim 7, Scheib discloses further comprising one of an elastic assembly connected to the at least one clamping jaw and configured to provide a force to the at least one clamping jaw towards the first position, and an elastic assembly connected to the follower mechanism and configured to provide a force to the follower mechanism towards the third position ([0059] lines 1-5, biasing element such as a spring, holding the clamp component 630 in the closed position, Fig 7A, clamping component 630; Figs 7A and 7B, peg 650 (follower mechanism)) is directly connected to locking component 640, thus see [0059] lines 1-5, and attachment device 600’ may have a spring (not depicted) that biases the locking component 640 it its locked over-center position).
Regarding claim 8, Scheib discloses further comprising a second guide member, wherein the second guide member is fixedly disposed with respect to the adapter body, the second guide member supports the follower mechanism, and the follower mechanism is movable in a guiding direction of the second guide member ([0055] lines 18-19: support (not depicted) combined with pivot pin 644 serve as second guide member, supporting peg 650 (follower mechanism) in Figs 7A and 7B, while movable in guiding direction horizontal along slot 632).
Regarding claim 20, Scheib discloses a surgical robot ([0002]: robotic surgical system, Fig 1, robotic surgical system 100), comprising a cannula adapter (Figs 7A and 7B, attachment device 600), wherein the cannula adapter (600) includes: an adapter body ([0055] lines 18-19: support (not depicted)); a first guide member ( [0055] lines 22-23: track (not depicted)) fixedly disposed in the adapter body ([0055] lines 17-25); at least one clamping jaw (Fig 7A, clamping component 630) disposed in the adapter body and limited by the first guide member ([0055] lines 22-25), wherein the at least one clamping jaw is configured to translate between a first position and a second position in a guiding direction of the first guide member (Figs 7A and 7B combined show that as peg 650 is rotated, clamping jaw (630) moves from first position of Fig 7A to second position in Fig 7B via direction 652); an operating actuation mechanism (Figs 7A and 7B, handle 642); and a follower mechanism (Figs 7A and 7B, peg 650) configured to be driven by the operating actuation mechanism to move (Figs 7A and 7B, driven by handle 642 to move); wherein the follower mechanism (650) and the at least one clamping jaw (630) are cooperatively movable (Fig 7A, movement direction 652), the at least one clamping jaw is in the first position when the follower mechanism is in a third position (Fig 7A, clamping jaw (630) is lifted at a position, when follower mechanism (650) is at position at front end of slot 632), and the at least one clamping jaw is in the second position (Fig 7B, clamping jaw (630) is at direct contact position with attachment portion 686) when the follower mechanism is in a fourth position (Fig 7B, follower mechanism (650) at rear position of slot 632).
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Beerschwinger (DE 10122311A1, hereinafter referred to as “Beerschwinger”).
Regarding claim 1, Beerschwinger discloses a cannula adapter (English translation copy page 1, first paragraph description section describe of medical instrument including cannula, instrument holder 9 and holders 14, 19), comprising: an adapter body (Fig 5.1, upper clamp holder 31); a first guide member fixedly disposed in the adapter body (see annotated figure A below); at least one clamping jaw disposed in the adapter body and limited by the first guide member (Figs 5.1 and 5.2, elongated part and recessed circular clamping edges of pliers attachment 32 limited by first guide member), wherein the at least one clamping jaw (32) is configured to translate between a first position and a second position in a guiding direction of the first guide member (see annotated figure A below alongside Fig 5.2, first (closed) position can be Fig 5.1 and second (opened) position is in Fig 5.2 for the clamping jaw (32)); an operating actuation mechanism (Fig 5.1, labelled portion of 32); and a follower mechanism configured to be driven by the operating actuation mechanism to move (see annotated figure A below); wherein the follower mechanism and the at least one clamping jaw are cooperatively movable (see annotated figure A below, and Figs 5.1 and 5.2 combined), the at least one clamping jaw is in the first position when the follower mechanism is in a third position (Fig 5.1), and the at least one clamping jaw is in the second position when the follower mechanism is in a fourth position (Fig 5.2, alternatively, Fig 5.3).
Annotated Figure A taken from Fig 5.1 of Beerschwinger
PNG
media_image1.png
525
960
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Beerschwinger discloses wherein two clamping jaws are provided (see annotated figure A above, one jaw for each 32), the two clamping jaws are configured to be driven concurrently by the operating actuation mechanism to translate (Figs 5.1 and 5.2, labelled portion of 32 (operating actuation mechanism) movement drives concurrently both jaws of 32), and translation directions of the two clamping jaws are on a same straight line (Fig 5.2).
Regarding claim 4, Beerschwinger discloses wherein two clamping jaws are provided (see annotated figure A above, one jaw for each 32), the two clamping jaws are configured to be driven concurrently by the operating actuation mechanism to translate (Figs 5.1 and 5.2, labelled portion of 32 (operating actuation mechanism) movement drives concurrently both jaws of 32), and an included angle between translation directions of the two clamping jaws is in a range of 170° to 180° (Fig 5.2, translation directions of the two clamping jaws are on a same straight line, thus forming included angle of straight line to be 180 degrees) .
Claim(s) 1-4 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu Fang (CN 112494142A, hereinafter referred to as “Liu Fang”).
Regarding claim 1, Liu Fang discloses a cannula adapter (Figs 4A, instrument holding device 100 for instrument 12), comprising: an adapter body (Fig 4A, housing 110); a first guide member (Figs 4C and 6C, block 140) fixedly disposed in the adapter body (Figs 4A and 6C); at least one clamping jaw disposed in the adapter body (Fig 4C, jaws (1311, 1321) disposed in housing 110) and limited by the first guide member (Figs 4C and 6C, limited by block 140, alternatively Fig 7, clamping jaws (231, 232) limited by block 240), wherein the at least one clamping jaw (1311 or 231) is configured to translate between a first position and a second position in a guiding direction of the first guide member (Fig 4C is at first position (opened position) for clamping jaw, Fig 6C is at second position (closed position) for clamping jaw); an operating actuation mechanism (Figs 4A and 5A, operating mechanism 120); and a follower mechanism (Fig 5A, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126 combined) configured to be driven by the operating actuation mechanism to move (Fig 5A, movement indicated by dashed line profile versus solid line profile); wherein the follower mechanism and the at least one clamping jaw are cooperatively movable (Figs 4A and 6A), the at least one clamping jaw is in the first position when the follower mechanism is in a third position (Fig 5A dashed line profile and Fig 6A), and the at least one clamping jaw is in the second position when the follower mechanism is in a fourth position (Fig 5A solid line profile and Fig 4A).
Regarding claim 2, Liu Fang discloses wherein an included angle between a moving direction of a respective clamping jaw of the at least one clamping jaw and a moving direction of the follower mechanism is in a range of 85° to 90° (see annotated figures B below).
Annotated Figures B taken from Liu Fang
PNG
media_image2.png
880
421
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
760
627
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Liu Fang discloses wherein two clamping jaws are provided (Figs 4A and 6A, clamping jaws (131 and 132)), the two clamping jaws are configured to be driven concurrently by the operating actuation mechanism to translate (Figs 4A and 5A, clamping jaws 131, 132 driven concurrently by depression by thumb to operating mechanism 120), and translation directions of the two clamping jaws are on a same straight line (see annotated figures B above).
Regarding claim 4, Liu Fang discloses wherein two clamping jaws are provided (Figs 4A and 6A, clamping jaws (131 and 132)), the two clamping jaws are configured to be driven concurrently by the operating actuation mechanism to translate (Figs 4A and 5A, clamping jaws 131, 132 driven concurrently by depression by thumb to operating mechanism 120), and an included angle between translation directions of the two clamping jaws is in a range of 170° to 180° (see annotated figures B above; note: included angle of opposite moving directions of clamp jaws 131, 132 form a straight line of 180 degrees).
Regarding claim 20, Liu Fang discloses a surgical robot (abstract line 2), comprising a cannula adapter (Figs 4A, instrument holding device 100 for instrument 12 ), wherein the cannula adapter (100) includes: an adapter body (Fig 4A, housing 110); a first guide member (Figs 4C and 6C, block 140) fixedly disposed in the adapter body (Figs 4A and 6C); at least one clamping jaw disposed in the adapter body (Fig 4C, jaws (1311, 1321) disposed in housing 110) and limited by the first guide member (Figs 4C and 6C, limited by block 140, alternatively Fig 7, clamping jaws (231, 232) limited by block 240), wherein the at least one clamping jaw (1311 or 231) is configured to translate between a first position and a second position in a guiding direction of the first guide member (Fig 4C is at first position (opened position) for clamping jaw, Fig 6C is at second position (closed position) for clamping jaw); an operating actuation mechanism (Figs 4A and 5A, operating mechanism 120); and a follower mechanism (Fig 5A, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126 combined) configured to be driven by the operating actuation mechanism to move (Fig 5A, movement indicated by dashed line profile versus solid line profile); wherein the follower mechanism and the at least one clamping jaw are cooperatively movable (Figs 4A and 6A), the at least one clamping jaw is in the first position when the follower mechanism is in a third position, and the at least one clamping jaw is in the second position when the follower mechanism is in a fourth position (Fig 5A solid line profile and Fig 4A).
Claim(s) 1, 3-4 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thompson (US 10456208B2, hereinafter referred to as “Thompson”).
Regarding Claim 1, Thompson discloses a cannula adapter (Figs 3 and 4, cannula mount 430, 530 and sterile adapter 420, 520, Fig 15, 720/730, Fig 17, 830), comprising: an adapter body (Fig 4, body 536, Fig 12, body 736); a first guide member (Figs 5 and 9, block 554 and cam surface 556) fixedly disposed in the adapter body (in body 536 in Fig 5); at least one clamping jaw (Figs 5 and 7, arm 550) disposed in the adapter body (Fig 5, 550 disposed in body 536) and limited by the first guide member (limited by 556 of 554 in Figs 9 and 11), wherein the at least one clamping jaw is configured to translate between a first position and a second position in a guiding direction of the first guide member (Fig 9, at first position of open (released) position, Fig 11, at second position of closed (latched) position); an operating actuation mechanism (Figs 4 and 7, handle 534); and a follower mechanism configured to be driven by the operating actuation mechanism to move (Fig 7, link 535 is the follower); wherein the follower mechanism and the at least one clamping jaw are cooperatively movable (Figs 7 and 8 and 10, follower is moved by rotations 537 and 543, col. 17, lines 25-47), the at least one clamping jaw is in the first position when the follower mechanism is in a third position (Figs 7 and 8, open released position for jaws 550 and follower 535), and the at least one clamping jaw is in the second position when the follower mechanism is in a fourth position (Figs 10 and 11, closed (latched) position).
Regarding Claim 3, Thompson discloses wherein two clamping jaws are provided (Fig 9, two clamping jaws (550 with 551)), the two clamping jaws (551) are configured to be driven concurrently by the operating actuation mechanism to translate (Figs 8, jaws driven concurrently by handle 534 in direction 537 and Fig 10, in direction 543 due to mirror symmetry of both sides), and translation directions of the two clamping jaws are on a same straight line (Figs 9 and 11, straight line can be drawn between ends of both 551, penetrating into recess 527).
Regarding claim 4, Thompson discloses wherein two clamping jaws are provided, the two clamping jaws are configured to be driven concurrently by the operating actuation mechanism to translate (Fig 8, two clamping jaws (551) are driven concurrently by handle 534 in direction 537 and Fig 10, in direction 543 due to mirror symmetry of both sides), and an included angle between translation directions of the two clamping jaws is in a range of 170° to 180°.(Figs 9 and 11, straight line can be drawn between ends of both 551, penetrating into recess 527).
Regarding Claim 20, Thompson discloses a surgical robot (Fig 1, 100), comprising a cannula adapter (Figs 3 and 4, cannula mount 430, 530 and sterile adapter 420, 520, Fig 15, 720/730, Fig 17, 830), wherein the cannula adapter includes: an adapter body (Fig 4, body 536, Fig 12, body 736); a first guide member (Figs 5 and 9, block 554 and cam surface 556) fixedly disposed in the adapter body (in body 536 in Fig 5); at least one clamping jaw (Figs 5 and 7, arm 550) disposed in the adapter body (Fig 5, 550 disposed in body 536) and limited by the first guide member (limited by 556 of 554 in Figs 9 and 11), wherein the at least one clamping jaw is configured to translate between a first position and a second position in a guiding direction of the first guide member (Fig 9, at first position of open (released) position, Fig 11, at second position of closed (latched) position); an operating actuation mechanism (Figs 4 and 7, handle 534); and a follower mechanism configured to be driven by the operating actuation mechanism to move (Fig 7, link 535 is the follower); wherein the follower mechanism and the at least one clamping jaw are cooperatively movable (Figs 7 and 8 and 10, follower is moved by rotations 537 and 543, col. 17, lines 25-47), the at least one clamping jaw is in the first position when the follower mechanism is in a third position (Figs 7 and 8, open released position for jaws 550 and follower 535), and the at least one clamping jaw is in the second position when the follower mechanism is in a fourth position (Figs 10 and 11, closed (latched) position).
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 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) 5, 9-11 and 13-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu Fang (CN 112494142A, hereinafter referred to as “Liu Fang”) in view of XU (US 20120068484A1, hereinafter referred to as “XU”).
Regarding claim 5, Liu Fang fails to disclose wherein the follower mechanism includes a track surface, and one of a roller and a bearing is connected between the at least one clamping claw and the track surface and is movable along the track surface; and wherein the track surface has both a component in a translation direction of a respective clamping jaw of the at least one clamping claw and a component in a moving direction of the follower mechanism.
However, XU teaches wherein the follower mechanism (Fig 2, member 12) includes a track surface (Fig 2, sliding groove 121), and one of a roller and a bearing (Fig 2, cylindrical pins 17) is connected between the at least one clamping claw and the track surface (Fig 1, member 17 connected clamping members 14, 15 and track surface 121) and is movable along the track surface (Fig 1, 17 slide along 121); and wherein the track surface has both a component in a translation direction of a respective clamping jaw of the at least one clamping claw and a component in a moving direction of the follower mechanism (Figs 1 and 3, note: movements in two directions X and Y alongside shape of 121 creates components in translation direction Y of jaws 14, 15, and movement direction Y of follower 12).
Regarding claim 9, Liu Fang discloses a cannula adapter (Figs 4A, instrument holding device 100 for instrument 12) comprising: an adapter body (Fig 4A, housing 110); a second guide member (Fig 4C, guide holes for accommodating elastic member 151 in mounting seat 152 of base 150), wherein the second guide member is fixedly connected to the adapter body (Fig 4C); a movable member (Figs 4C and 6C, block 140), wherein the movable member is limited by the second guide member and movable in a guiding direction of the second guide member (Fig 4C, block 140 limited by latch 153 in guide hole (second guide member) and movable in direction along guide hole), and the movable member (Figs 4C and 6C, block 140) has at least one biasing part (Fig 5B, block 140 has biasing part (145/146)), and wherein each of the at least one biasing part has a first limitation surface (Fig 5B, outer surface shown for 145/146); …………. and a handle (Fig 5A, handle 120), wherein the handle (120) includes: a hinge part (Fig 5A, pivot 123), wherein the handle is hinged to the adapter body (110) via the hinge part (Figs 5A, via pivot 123, see also Figs 4B and 6B), an operating part (Fig 5A, operating handle 121 and link 122) disposed outside the adapter body (110, see Fig 4B) and fixedly connected to the hinge part (123, see Fig 4B), and an execution part (Fig 5A, 126, Fig 6B) disposed in the adapter body and fixedly connected to the hinge part (Fig 6B, 126 connected to 123), wherein the execution part (126) is movably connected to the movable part (note: no movable part is defined in specification, see 35 USC 112 rejection discussed herein above); wherein the handle (120) is configured to pull the movable member (Figs 4C and 6C, block 140) to move along the guiding direction of the second guide member (Fig 4C, guide holes for accommodating elastic member 151 in mounting seat 152 of base 150) via the execution part so as to enable the at least one clamping jaw (131, 132) to move along the guiding direction of the first guide member through interaction between the respective biasing part and the biasing mate (Fig 5B, block 140 has biasing part (145/146)).
However, Liu Fang fails to disclose a first guide member, wherein the first guide member is fixedly connected to the adapter body, a projection of an extension direction of the first guide member and a projection of an extension direction of the second guide member on a same plane intersect each other and have an intersection angle in a range of 85° to 90°; at least one clamping jaw configured to clamp a cannula, wherein the at least one clamping jaw is limited by the first guide member and movable in a guiding direction of the first guide member, each of the at least one clamping jaw has a biasing mate matching with a respective biasing part of the at least one biasing part, and the first limitation surface limits a position of the biasing mate; an elastic assembly disposed in the adapter body and configured to provide a driving force to cause the at least one clamping jaw to move along the guiding direction of the first guide member to be in a clamping state;
However, XU teaches a first guide member, wherein the first guide member (Fig 2, 112) is fixedly connected to the adapter body (Fig 2, base 11), a projection of an extension direction of the first guide member and a projection of an extension direction of the second guide member on a same plane intersect each other and have an intersection angle in a range of 85° to 90° (Fig 3, extension direction of 112 is horizontal, while extension direction of 114 for second guide member is vertical, thus intersection angle is perpendicular, and 90 degrees); at least one clamping jaw (Fig 1, jaw 14, 15) configured to clamp a cannula (note: because this is interpreted as functional language without specific structural limitation being defined for the cannula, thus, slight adaptation can be added to configure the shape of the clamp rods 141, 142 to hold a cannula), wherein the at least one clamping jaw (14/15) is limited by the first guide member (112) and movable in a guiding direction of the first guide member (Fig 3, move along direction Y), each of the at least one clamping jaw has a biasing mate (Fig 2, member 16) matching with a respective biasing part of the at least one biasing part (Liu Fang: Fig 5B, block 140 has biasing part (145/146))), and the first limitation surface limits a position of the biasing mate (Liu Fang: Fig 5B, outer surface shown for 145/146) can limit position of member 16 of XU); an elastic assembly disposed in the adapter body and configured to provide a driving force to cause the at least one clamping jaw to move along the guiding direction of the first guide member to be in a clamping state; (Liu Fang: Fig 4C, elastic members 1313, 1323 disposed in body 110 to provide driving force to move clamping jaws 1311, 1321, along guiding direction of 112 of XU in clamping state of Fig 6A of Liu Fang).
Regarding claim 10, Liu Fang fails to sufficiently disclose wherein a projection of an extension direction of the first guide member and a projection of the second guide member on a same plane have an intersection angle in a range of 89° to 90° so as to enable the at least one clamping jaw to translate along the first guide member; and the elastic assembly is connected between the adapter body and the movable member and configured to provide a driving force to cause the movable member to move along the guiding direction of the second guide member, so as to enable the at least one clamping jaw to move along the guiding direction of the first guide member to be in the clamping state through the interaction between the respective biasing part and the biasing mate.
However, XU and Liu Fang combined teach wherein a projection of an extension direction of the first guide member and a projection of the second guide member on a same plane have an intersection angle in a range of 89° to 90° (XU: Fig 3, extension direction of first guide member 112 is horizontal, while extension direction of second guide member 114 is vertical, thus intersection angle is perpendicular, and 90 degrees ) so as to enable the at least one clamping jaw to translate along the first guide member (XU: Fig 2, clamping jaw 15, 16 can translate along horizontal direction of guide member 112); and the elastic assembly is connected between the adapter body and the movable member and configured to provide a driving force to cause the movable member to move along the guiding direction of the second guide member (Liu Fang: Fig 4C, elastic members 1313, 1323 connected between body 110 and (moveable member) block 140 (Figs 4C and 6C) to provide driving force to move block 140 move along vertical guide direction of second guide member 114 of XU), so as to enable the at least one clamping jaw to move along the guiding direction of the first guide member to be in the clamping state through the interaction between the respective biasing part and the biasing mate (Liu Fang: Fig 4C, elastic members 1313, 1323 disposed in body 110 to provide driving force to move clamping jaws 1311, 1321, along guiding direction of 112 of XU in clamping state of Fig 6A of Liu Fang).
Regarding claim 11, Liu Fang fails to disclose wherein each of the at least one clamping jaw includes a clamping part and a connecting part connected to each other, wherein the connecting part is movably connected to the first guide member, and the biasing part is disposed at the connecting part.
However, Liu Fang and XU combined teach wherein each of the at least one clamping jaw (XU: Fig 3, jaw 14, 15) includes a clamping part (Fig 3, part of 14, 15 near 112) and a connecting part connected to each other, wherein the connecting part is movably connected to the first guide member (XU: Fig 3, connecting part can be end of 14 near 121), and the biasing part is disposed at the connecting part (Liu Fang: Fig 5B, block 140 has biasing part (145/146))) can be disposed at connecting part (end of 14 near 121) of XU).
Regarding claim 13, Liu Fang fails to disclose wherein the connecting part defines a through hole, the first guide member has a cross-sectional shape adapted to the through hole, and the first guide member extends into the through hole.
However, XU teaches wherein the connecting part defines a through hole, the first guide member has a cross-sectional shape adapted to the through hole, and the first guide member extends into the through hole (Fig 2, sliding groove 112 is a through hole, member 16 extends into hole 112).
Regarding claim 14, Liu Fang fails to sufficiently disclose wherein the at least one clamping jaw is in the clamping state when the biasing mate is at a first end of the first limitation surface, and the clamping jaw is in an open state when the biasing mate is at a second end of the first limitation surface; and wherein a slope of a plane tangent to the first limitation surface at the second end relative to the second guide member is greater than a slope of a plane tangent to the first limitation surface at the first end relative to the second guide member.
However, Liu Fang and XU combined teach wherein the at least one clamping jaw is in the clamping state when the biasing mate is at a first end of the first limitation surface (Liu Fang: Fig 6C, Fig 5B, outer surface shown for 145/146 ; XU: biasing mate (16) in Fig 2), and the clamping jaw is in an open state when the biasing mate is at a second end of the first limitation surface (Liu Fang: Fig 4C, XU: Fig 2, biasing mate (16)); and wherein a slope of a plane tangent to the first limitation surface at the second end relative to the second guide member is greater than a slope of a plane tangent to the first limitation surface at the first end relative to the second guide member (Liu Fang: paragraph [0054] of the specification, FIG. 4C; the at least partial wedge-shaped part 141 has a side surface running along the first position to the second position, the side surface of the partial wedge-shaped part 141 having a gradually increasing slope with respect to the tangent plane in the direction of the pilot hole (see FIG. 4C); the slope of the cut plane with respect to the pilot hole direction of the first location is minimal (see FIG. 4C)).
Regarding claims 5, 9, 11, 13, 14, 18 and 19, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify and combine Liu Fang by XU based on the following rationale: referring to Liu Fang as shown in Figs 4C, 5B, 6C, and 7, notice the entire translational and rotational movement mechanism of the clamping jaws (1311, 1321) from open state to clamping state, and vice versa, is achieved via the progressively contoured abutting contact surface at surfaces 146, 145, 144 between the block 140 and support portions 1312, 1322b. Meanwhile, there are no additional structural elements taught in Liu Fang to improve upon the precision, repeatability and stability of the aforementioned range of translational movement of the jaw at support portions. Therefore, upon repeated use over time, it would be likely that such abutting surfaces might change in shape and cause deviations in movement due to wear and tear. On the other hand, XU introduces features of a follower mechanism (12) along with guide members and sliding grooves 112, 121 with precise sliding track, thus the members 16, 17 slidably moves confined inside the respective sliding grooves 112, 121 providing higher repeatability and stability of movement for the clamping jaws over extended usage time for XU. As a result, above advantages of XU over Liu Fang serves as teaching, suggestion, or motivation, in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and modify Liu Fang by XU and there would have been reasonable expectation of success because both prior art belongs to same analogous art, in the technical field of instrument clamping device for robotic arm.
Regarding claim 15, Liu Fang discloses wherein at least a part of the first limitation surface extends from the first end to the second end, and a slope of a plane tangent to the part of the first limitation surface relative to the second guide member increases gradually (paragraph [0054] of the specification, FIG. 4C; the at least partial wedge-shaped part 141 has a side surface running along the first position to the second position, the side surface of the partial wedge-shaped part 141 having a gradually increasing slope with respect to the tangent plane in the direction of the pilot hole (see FIG. 4C)).
Regarding claim 16, Liu Fang discloses wherein the slope of the plane tangent to the part of the first limitation surface at the first end relative to the second guide member is smallest (paragraph [0054] of the specification, FIG. 4C; the slope of the cut plane with respect to the pilot hole direction of the first location is minimal (see FIG. 4C)).
Regarding claim 17, Liu Fang discloses wherein the slope of the plane tangent to the first limitation surface at the first end is less than or equal to 0.3 (operation portion and the execution portion being at least partially odd or centrally symmetric with respect to the hinge portion, the extension directions of the operation portion and the execution portion both being tangential to the hinge portion; obtaining, after limited experimentation, a specific numerical range with a slope of less than or equal to 0.3 at the first end can be easily done by routine experimentation and the selection of this specific numerical range does not lead to unexpected technical effects for the present invention, as is routine in the art).
Regarding claim 18, Liu Fang and XU combined teach wherein the respective biasing part further has a second limitation surface, and a space for accommodating the biasing mate is defined by the second limitation surface and the first limitation surface
(Liu Fang: Fig 5B, block 140 has biasing part (145/146); Fig 5B, outer surface shown for 145/146) can limit position of member 16 of XU; meanwhile, sliding groove 112 of Xu has top and bottom limiting surfaces, with a groove/space for accommodating member 16); and wherein a variation trend of a slope of a plane tangent to the second limitation surface is the same as a variation trend of the slope of the plane tangent to the first limitation surface (due to rejection to claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) discussed herein above, examiner is unable to interpret the above claimed limitation).
Regarding claim 19, Liu Fang fails to disclose wherein the biasing mate is configured as a sliding member or a rolling member.
However, XU teaches wherein the biasing mate is configured as a sliding member or a rolling member ([0011] lines 6-9: connecting members 16 slidably received in sliding grooves 112, thus are sliding members).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu Fang (CN 112494142A, hereinafter referred to as “Liu Fang”) in view of XU (US 20120068484A1, hereinafter referred to as “XU”), and further in view of Thompson (US 20170086930A1, hereinafter referred to as “Thompson”).
Regarding claim 12, Liu Fang and XU fails to disclose or teach wherein the clamping part of each of the at least one clamping jaw has an end portion provided with a claw tip facing the cannula, the claw tip has an included angle in a range of 80° to 100°, and a center line of the included angle of the claw tip and a direction of a clamping force of a respective clamping claw of the at least one clamping claw are in a same straight line.
However, Thompson teaches wherein the clamping part (Fig 5, 551) of each of the at least one clamping jaw (Fig 5, 550) has an end portion provided with a claw tip (Fig 9, 527) facing the cannula (510, see Fig 9), the claw tip has an included angle in a range of 80° to 100° (Figs 5 and 9), and a center line of the included angle of the claw tip and a direction of a clamping force of a respective clamping claw of the at least one clamping claw are in a same straight line (Figs 9 and 11).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify and combine Liu Fang by Thompson in view of XU based on the following rationale: referring to Liu Fang as shown in Figs 4C, 5B, 6C, and 7, notice the entire translational and rotational movement mechanism of the clamping jaws (1311, 1321) to go from open state to clamping state, and vice versa, is achieved via the progressively contoured abutting contact surface at surfaces 146, 145, 144 between the block 140 and support portions 1312, 1322b. Meanwhile, there are no additional structural elements taught in Liu Fang to improve upon the precision, repeatability and stability of the aforementioned range of translational movement of the jaw at support portions. Therefore, upon repeated use over time, it would be likely that such surfaces might change in shape and cause deviations in movement due to wear and tear. On the other hand, XU introduces features of a follower mechanism (12) along with guide members and sliding grooves 112, 121 with precise sliding track, thus the members 16, 17 slidably moves confined inside the respective sliding grooves 112, 121 providing higher repeatability and stability of movement for the clamping jaws over extended usage time for XU. However, although it may be possible to modify the existing device structure and clamping jaw of Liu Fang to adopt follower mechanism (12) and sliding guides 16, 17 confined in grooves 112, 121 of XU, nevertheless, due to multiple structural differences, it would require a lot of work for designing new parts and added part cost. Meanwhile, the instrument clamping device structure for Thompson is much similar to Liu Fang than XU already, and thus easier to modify Liu Fang in view of Thompson. Furthermore, referring to Thompson, the separate and distinct sterile adapter 520 in Fig 5 as used in Figs 9 and 11, provides improved and lasting securement to the jaws 550, because the sterile adapter 520 being a separate and distinct replaceable component, can be easily replaced by a new one without wear and tear. As a result, above advantages of Thompson over Liu Fang in view of XU serves as teaching, suggestion, or motivation, in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine and modify Liu Fang by Thompson and there would have been reasonable expectation of success because both prior art belongs to same analogous art, in the technical field of instrument clamping device for robotic arm for surgical robot.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Meenink (US 9060795B2) discloses a surgical robot having a container holder for clamping surgical instruments. Beckman (US 20190125405A1) discloses a trocar support. Beckman (US 20180168689A1) disclose a trocar support. Anderson (US 8182469B2) discloses a surgical accessory clamp and robotic surgical system. Lee (CN209404947U) discloses a robot arm cannula adapter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DING Y TAN whose telephone number is (303)297-4271. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:00 am MT--5:00 pm MT. 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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached on 571-272-4797. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DING Y TAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3632
/TERRELL L MCKINNON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3632