The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (i.e., claim 1-10) in the reply filed on May 11, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to non-elected inventions (i.e., Groups II and III), there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
The following claim limitations have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (any paragraphs cited come from PGPUB 2024/0407863, representative of the specification of the instant application):
Claim 9
An insertion mechanism… to effectuate selective movement of the catheter
This limitation utilizes the generic placeholder “mechanism”, transitional phrase “to” and functional language “effectuate selective movement of the catheter”. The preceding term “insertion” does not apply specific structure that performs the function.
The specification states the following in paragraph 36: “The catheter insertion mechanism includes one or more motors that are operably coupled to one or more drive gears or wheels… the catheter insertion mechanism may include a manual control knob, which when manipulated by the user, manually advances or retracts the catheter.” And in paragraph 59, “Turning to FIGS. 16 and 17, a catheter insertion mechanism is illustrated and generally identified by reference numeral 400.” Also see paragraph 60 which teaches that this may comprise four drive gears, or any number of drive gears.
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.
Claims 1, 7 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al. (US Patent Pub. No. 2021/0369366) alone.
Hwang discloses a control system (see Abstract), comprising: a controller (see Abstract, see numeral 500 throughout the disclosure), the controller including:
A display (see numeral 505 at least in Figure 3C); and
A handle (see numeral 509 in Figure 3C) detachably coupled to the display (see paragraph 63, which teaches that “The handheld monitor may have a joystick and/or a directional keypad to control the catheter tip during manual insertion mode. The joystick and/or directional keypad (e.g., a touchpad) is a control section which may be incorporated in the handheld monitor, or it can be provided as a separate device to be removably integrated with the handheld monitor”; see paragraph 65 which teaches that “the portable display controller 500 includes the display section 505 and the control section 502 separable from each other. In these examples, the display controller 500 includes various components similar to those of, for example, the Nintendo Switch console”), the handle including an input device (see paragraph 37, “The control section 502 may include manual controls such as a joystick 503 and a plurality of directional keypads 504”);
A motor assembly (see paragraph 38, “actuator system 310 includes a plurality of actuators or actuating motors (Motor 1 through M)”) wherein the display is detachably coupled to the motor assembly (see paragraph 36 which teaches “the control system 300 and/or handle 200 can be connected to the handheld portable display controller 500 via wireless or wired data communication, in a known manner”, and paragraph 56 teaches that “the handheld portable display controller 500 can be removably attached (physically connected) to the proximal end of handle 200” – therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that when directly/wired connection exists between the display and the control system 300, that this would similarly be a removable connection as with that of handle 200, since the overall concept is for the handheld nature of the portable display controller 500), the motor assembly including a drive motor in communication with the handle (see paragraph 38 which teaches actuator system 310 includes a plurality of actuators or actuating motors (Motor 1 through M)”); and
A catheter drive detachably coupled to the motor assembly (see endoscope handle 200, which paragraph 59 teaches “Specifically, as shown in FIG. 3C, … the endoscope handle 200 can then be connected to the robotic control system 300 via the console cable bundle 220”, which therefore teaches detachable connectivity between unit 300 and endoscope handle 200), wherein actuation of the drive motor effectuates movement of a catheter operatively coupled to the catheter drive (see paragraph 38, “The actuator system 310 includes a plurality of actuators or actuating motors (Motor 1 through M) equal to a plurality of control wires 110 necessary for actuating and steering the probe 100… each control wire 110 can be actively controlled to implement appropriate shaft guidance for navigating the probe 100 through intraluminal paths of a patient's anatomy”).
Regarding claim 7, Hwang teaches that “monitor receptacle 605 can be provided with magnetic contacts or spring loaded snap-on brackets configured to hold therein the portable display controller 500 in a secure, but removable manner” (see paragraph 71; see Figures 5, 6, and 7A).
Regarding claim 9, Hwang teaches that “When in robot mode, the insertion/retraction of the probe is accomplished by the support platform mechanically moving the handle 200 and the probe in a linear direction (e.g., up/down or forward/backward along the length of the support platform). This movement might be accomplished through known electromechanical controls using typical metal toothed gears, drive belts, magnets, telescopic links, or combinations thereof” (see paragraph 64).
Regarding claim 10, Hwang teaches that “in the robot mode, the robot control system controls the linear movement of the probe for robotic navigation from the first location to a second (target) location while the user can still control the orientation of the probe tip (if necessary). As noted above, controlling the probe tip can be effected by actuating control wires of the endoscope probe by a joystick controller or by a touch screen GUI in the display section of the portable display controller” (see paragraph 91). Therefore, this teaches the motor assembly and the catheter drive (which are taught in the rejection of claim 1 above) cooperate to effectuate roll and articulation of the catheter and the insertion mechanism effectuates insertion and retraction of the catheter. Also see the last sentence of paragraphs 47 and 72.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Gohara (JP 2017-221427).
Hwang is described above with respect to claim 1. While Hwang teaches that the handle is detachably coupled to the display, there is not a specific teaching of the display having a first coupler and the handle having a second coupler. It is noted, however, that Hwang states that “the portable display controller 500 includes the display section 505 and the control section 502 separable from each other. In these examples, the display controller 500 includes various components similar to those of, for example, the Nintendo Switch console” (see paragraph 65).
Regarding claims 2-3, Gohara teaches a new game system… an operation part for receiving a user operation, a display control part for performing the display” (see Abstract). It is clear from Figures 1-17 that this is the Nintendo Switch gaming system, to which Hwang teaches the display and various components may be similar. Gohara teaches that “The mechanism for detachably mounting the main body device 2 and the controller can adopt any configuration… For example, it may be configured to be fitted by fitting a convex portion provided on the main device side and a concave portion provided on the controller side, or a magnet is provided on the main device side or the controller side, and a magnetic body is provided on the other side” (see page 4 of the Machine Translation, in the paragraph beginning “As described above, the left rail member 15…”, emphasis added).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to provide a coupler on the display and a coupler on the removable control/handle portion of Hwang, as taught by Gohara, because Hwang explicitly states that these features can “includes various components similar to those of, for example, the Nintendo Switch console” (see paragraph 65), while Gohara teaches these couplers within the Nintendo Switch console.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Gohara as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of O’Leary et al. (US Patent Pub. No. 2022/0096923).
Hwang in combination with Gohara is described above with respect to claim 2. While Hwang teaches that the handle is detachably coupled to the display and Gohara teaches the use of magnet(s) for this coupling, there is not a specific teaching of multiple magnets in a zig-zag configuration.
In regard to this subject matter, it is initially noted that the specification of the instant application (see paragraph 45 of the PGPUB 2024/0407863) teaches that “It is envisioned that the magnets 224 may be disposed in a zig-zag or sinusoidal configuration along a length of the coupler 218 to provide stability and help align the handle 206 with the housing 210 of the display 204, although it is contemplated that any suitable configuration may be utilized without departing from the scope of the present disclosure.” Therefore, this illustrates that there is no criticality to the use of a zig-zag layout of magnets, so long as the coupling is stable and the handle is aligned with the housing of the display.
O’Leary teaches “Accessories that can improve a specific functionality of an electronic device, can readily attach to an electronic device, can be easy to use, and can have a small and efficient form factor” (see Abstract). In paragraph 11, O’Leary states that “A gaming accessory can include an attachment feature that can attach the gaming accessory to a surface of an electronic device. The attachment feature can include a magnet. The attachment feature can also or instead include multiple magnets. The attachment feature can also or instead include a magnet array. The magnet array can be arranged in a circular pattern.” “Depending on the particular configuration of magnets, various design choices can be used to increase the sensation of snappiness for a closed-loop magnetic alignment system. For example, reducing the amount of magnetic material in the devices in areas near the magnetic alignment components—e.g., by using less material or by increasing the distance between the magnetic alignment component and the other magnetic material—can reduce stray fields and increase the perceived “snapping” effect of the magnetic alignment components… As yet another example, the widths of the magnetized regions in the primary annular alignment component (and/or the relative strength of the magnetic field in each region) can be optimized based on the particular magnetic orientation pattern for the secondary annular alignment component” (see paragraph 201).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to utilize any one of various different magnet configurations in a device having controllers connected to a display, as taught by O’Leary, such as the device and system taught by Hwang with Gohara, depending on the desired outcomes of the design, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPC 70 (also see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Gohara as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Koizumi et al. (US Patent Pub. No. 2016/0361641).
Hwang in combination with Gohara is described above with respect to claim 2. While Hwang teaches that the handle is detachably coupled to the display, there is not a specific teaching of the display having an electrical connector therebetween, nor the handle having an energy storage device as claimed. It is noted, however, that Hwang states that “the portable display controller 500 includes the display section 505 and the control section 502 battery separable from each other. In these examples, the display controller 500 includes various components similar to those of, for example, the Nintendo Switch console” (see paragraph 65).
Koizumi teaches an “information processing system includes a main unit, a first controller device and a second controller device. The main unit includes a display. The first controller device is configured to be removably attached to the main unit” (see Abstract). It is clear from Figures 1-7 that this is the Nintendo Switch gaming system, to which Hwang teaches the display and various components may be similar. Koizumi teaches that “The main unit 2 includes a left-side terminal 17. The left-side terminal 17 allows the main unit 2 to communicate with the left controller 3 in wired communication. The left-side terminal 17 is located so as to be in contact with the terminal of the left controller 3 (a terminal 42 shown in FIG. 5) when the left controller 3 is attached to the main unit 2” (see paragraph 120), thereby reading on the limitations of claim 5. Additionally, Koizumi teaches “The left controller 3 includes a power supply section 108. In the present embodiment, the power supply section 108 includes a battery and a power control circuit” (see paragraph 263) and “The battery is also connected to the terminal 42. In the present embodiment, when the left controller 3 is attached to the main unit 2, the battery is charged with the power supply from the main unit 2 via the terminal 42” (see paragraph 264; also see paragraph 274 regarding the right controller; also see paragraph 346 for discussion of charging within a cradle and paragraph 349 regarding charging without a cradle), which reads on the limitations of claim 6.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to provide a battery within the handle that can be charged via an electrical connector with the display device in the system of Hwang, as such is taught by Koizumi, to ensure that the handle, when detached, has a power supply and can operate in a detached mode and can be effectively charged when re-attached, thereby reducing “the possibility that a user can no longer play because the battery of the controller has run out”, or in the case of Hwang, reducing the possibility that the handle runs out of power in the middle of a procedure.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Browning et al. (US Patent Pub. No. 2015/0277491).
Hwang is described above with respect to claim 7. While Hwang teaches that the display may dock in display receptacle 605 and have magnetic contacts … to hold therein the portable display controller 500 in a secure, but removable manner” (see paragraph 71), Hwang fails to teach that this includes a plurality of magnetics in both the dock and the display.
Browning teaches a magnetic attachment mechanism for an electronic device (see Title). Browning teaches a docking base 52 which is used for docking an electronic device, such as display device 40 (see Figure 3A). Paragraphs 78-79 discuss what is illustrated in Figures 4A-B, which includes first magnetic element 50a and second magnetic element 50b of display device 40/42 and third magnetic element 76a and fourth magnetic element 76b located in base 52. As shown in Figure 4B, “First magnetic element 50a and third magnetic element 76a exert an attractive magnetic force therebetween, and second magnetic element 50b and fourth magnetic element 76b exert an attractive magnetic force therebetween” (see paragraph 78).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use more than one magnet within the display and the dock in the system and methods of Hwang, as taught by Browning, in order to improve the coupling between the separate units as compared to utilizing a single magnetic in each, or some other configuration.
Conclusion
Additional prior art that is made of record as being considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, but not relied upon in the rejections above, can be found on the accompanying PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES KISH whose telephone number is (571)272-5554. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00a - 6p 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, Unsu Jung can be reached at (571) 272-8506. 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.
/JAMES KISH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights