DETAILED ACTION
This is responsive to the amendment filed 14 May 2026.
Claims 1-15 and 20 are currently pending and considered below.
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.
Claims 5, 7, 12-15 and 20 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 5, in lines 2-4, recites the limitation “perform the first operation after entering the nudge-mode by receiving a command from at least one user interface the movement magnitude is proportional to the focal distance and inversely proportional to the zoom level”. It is unclear what Applicant is trying to cover with this limitation. The limitation will be interpreted as ‘perform the first operation after entering the nudge-mode by receiving a command from at least one user interface, wherein the movement magnitude is proportional to the focal distance and inversely proportional to the zoom level’.
Claim 7, in line 2, recites the limitation “the second operation” which lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim.
Claim 12, in lines 3-5, recites the limitation “perform the first operation after entering the nudge-mode by receiving a command from at least one user interface the movement magnitude is proportional to the focal distance and inversely proportional to the zoom level”. It is unclear what Applicant is trying to cover with this limitation. The limitation will be interpreted as ‘perform the first operation after entering the nudge-mode by receiving a command from at least one user interface, wherein the movement magnitude is proportional to the focal distance and inversely proportional to the zoom level’.
Claim 13, in lines 5-7, recites the limitation “further comprising mitigating unintended movement from voice recognition false positives by prohibiting movement of the end effector if the end effector is tilted relative to a base frame at an angle greater than a predefined threshold”. It is unclear if the limitation modifies providing the voice-control feature or the external display device.
Claim 14, in lines 3-5, recites the limitation “configuring the voice-control feature to perform the second operation after entering the nudge-mode by receiving a command from at least one user interface comprising a button of a foot pedal the predefined threshold comprises an angle in a range of approximately 0 degrees to approximately 10 degrees”. It is unclear what Applicant is trying to cover with this limitation. The limitation will be interpreted as ‘configuring the voice-control feature to perform the second operation after entering the nudge-mode by receiving a command from at least one user interface comprising a button of a foot pedal, wherein the predefined threshold comprises an angle in a range of approximately 0 degrees to approximately 10 degrees’.
Claim 15, in lines 4-5, recites the limitation “a the voice-control feature” which is believed to be a typographical error for ‘[[a]] the voice-control feature’.
Claim 15, in lines 5-6, recites the limitation “configured to receive at least one voice command via at least one user interface the microphone to enter a nudge mode specifying at least one direction”. It is unclear what Applicant is trying to cover with this limitations. The metes and bounds are undefined.
Claim 15, in lines 5-6, recites the limitation “operable with the scope, in at least one direction the at least one direction, and the at least one direction comprising at least one of …”. It is unclear what Applicant is trying to cover with this limitations. The metes and bounds are undefined.
Claim 20, in lines 2-3, recites the limitation “wherein providing the voice-control feature comprises configuring the voice-control feature to perform the first operation after entering the nudge[[-]]mode is initiated by receiving the command from the at least one user interface”. However, there was no prior recitation of “providing the voice-control feature comprises configuring the voice-control feature to perform the first operation after entering the nudge[[-]]mode”.
Claim 20, in line 3, recites the limitation “the first operation” which lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim.
Claim 20, in lines 4-6, recites the limitation “receiving the command from the at least one user interface of: a voice command received via the microphone, a command received via a touchscreen, and a command received via a quick menu overlay on the external display device”. It is unclear how commands (e.g. voice) may be at least one user interface.
Claim 20, in lines 6-7, recites the limitation “comprising at least one of: a voice control input, a touchscreen, and a quick menu overlay on an external display device”. It is unclear what this limitation is modifying.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4, 6 and 8-11 are allowed.
Claims 5, 7, 12-14 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: please see pages 8-12 of Applicant’s arguments filed 14 May 2026.
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 SAMUEL G NEWAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1058. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm EST.
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, Daniel Washburn can be reached at 571-272-5551. 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.
/SAMUEL G NEWAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2657
Prosecution Insights