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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending and are currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. Previous claim objections have been withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim 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.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a learning unit” in claims 6, 11, and 15; “ an image capture device” in claim 20.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
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) 1-5, 8, 12-14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moreau (US 2019/0328217), in view of Pivotto (US 2012/0184955).
Regarding claim 1, Moreau discloses a system for controlling a medical imaging scope (see figure 1) comprising: a camera head (see handle 12, figure 3b | contains electronic flex cable 250 and/or fiberoptic bundle…pivot control structure 100 [0220], figures 7) comprising a housing (see housing of 12, figure 3b); a display (base unit…display of images [0135] | graphical user interface…[0145]); a processing unit (electronic processor in a base unit [0135] | graphical user interface 454…video processing unit 456 [0366]; 454 and 456, figure 79), the processing unit having a memory unit (base unit may be programmed [0135] | stored in memory [0366]); an input device (37, figure 3b or 90, figure 7a) disposed on the medical imaging scope external to the camera head housing (see figure 3b), the input device selected from the group consisting of a joystick, a control pad, and a circular, single button (see 37, figure 3b or 90, figure 7a | a button 90…other types of buttons may be used [0159] | interpreted the “other buttons” can be circular), wherein the input device is positioned atop an input shaft (38, figure 47) the input shaft extending from the input device into the housing (best seen in figure 3b) and coupled to a magnet within the housing (embedded magnet…[0146]), the input device configured to be engaged in in a plurality of discrete patterns (depress the button using a pre-determined pattern or sequence…[0145]); and wherein the processing unit is further configured to associate each of the plurality of discrete patterns with a desired command of the plurality of commands (on or off a video recording…record a snapshot…processor associated with a graphical user interface [0145]), each of the plurality of commands being one of a plurality of camera functions ([0145]) and store each of the plurality of discrete patterns with the desired command of the plurality of commands in the memory unit so as to customize a control of the medical imaging scope (controlled…graphical user interface…[0145] | graphical user interface…memory [0366]). Moreau is silent regarding the processing unit configured to display a menu, the menu correlating to a plurality of commands.
Pivotto teaches a remotely controlled catheter insertion system (134, figure 2) with a remote control station ([0012]). The remote control station can comprise a joystick ([0012]). A programmable control system (820, figure 41) can output command signals to the position system (134, figure 41) based on training or programming ([0685]). A user can train the programmable control system to direct the positioning system to execute a series of translation and rotation movements by manipulation the control inputs on the controller ([0385]). The programmable control system stores the command inputs and combines the commands into a single programmed movement in response, such as in response to an operator selecting a number of pre-trained/programmed movements that should be accomplished in an indicated sequence ([0385]). Users may select from preset programs stored in the memory of the programmable control system, where the preset programs contain every control command to perform an operation automatically ([0431]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the system of Moreau with the programmable control system (820, figure 41) as taught by Pivotto. Doing so would allow for programming movement and commands prior to the procedure ([0385]; Pivotto) using the input device of Moreau. The modified system would have the processing unit configured to display a menu (programmed…sequence by a file name…[0385]; Pivotto), the menu correlating to a plurality of commands (sequence by a file name…[0385]).
Regarding claim 2, Moreau further discloses the plurality of commands includes: a camera image rotation (adjust other characteristics of the sensor or displayed image [0145] | the button may be programmed to control camera image rotation); a camera angle (adjust other characteristics of the sensor or displayed image [0145] | the button may be programmed to control camera angle); a switch of a light source (alter the brightness of the light elements [0145]); a camera zoom (digital magnification [0145]); a taking of a picture (record a snapshot [0145]); and a switch of a video view on the display (on or off a video recording…adjust other characteristics…[0145]).
Regarding claim 3, Pivotto further teaches a home input (single button…[0385]; Pivotto), the home input configured to display the menu on the display (file name…[0385] | interpreted the display of the file names to be the home/main menu).
Regarding claim 4, Pivotto further teaches the menu further includes a list of users (user may train…store the command inputs…[0385]; Pivotto), wherein each user in the list of users includes the plurality of commands (store the command inputs [0385]).
Regarding claim 5, Pivotto further teaches a select input (single input [0385]; Pivotto), the select input is configured to associate each of the plurality of discrete patterns with a desired command of the plurality of commands (programmed movements…single input…[0385]).
Regarding claim 8, Moreau further discloses the camera head further comprises a magnetometer positioned within the housing and configured to detect the position of the magnet (PCB-based Hall effect sensor…[0146]).
Regarding claim 12, Moreau discloses a method of customizing a plurality of commands ([0145]) of a camera head (see handle 12, figure 3b | contains electronic flex cable 250 and/or fiberoptic bundle…pivot control structure 100 [0220], figures 7), the method comprising: providing a processing unit (electronic processor in a base unit [0135] | graphical user interface…[0145]; graphical user interface 454…video processing unit 456 [0366]; 454 and 456, figure 79), the processing unit including a memory unit (base unit may be programmed [0135] | stored in memory [0366]); providing an input device (37, figure 3b or 90, figure 7a), the input device selected from the group consisting of a joystick, a control pad, and a circular, single button (see 37, figure 3b or 90, figure 7a | a button 90…other types of buttons may be used [0159] | interpreted the “other buttons” can be circular), wherein the input device is positioned atop an input shaft (38, figure 47), the input shaft extending from the input device through a housing (see housing of 12, figure 3b) of the camera head and coupled to a magnet within the housing (embedded magnet…[0146]), the input device disposed on the camera head (see figure 3b), and configured to be engaged in a plurality of distinct patterns (depress the button using a pre-determined pattern or sequence…[0145]); and engaging the input device in any number of the plurality of discrete patterns ([0145]) and actuating the processing unit to associate each of the plurality of discrete patterns with a desired command of the plurality of commands so as to customize a control of the camera head (on or off a video recording…record a snapshot…processor associated with a graphical user interface [0145]), wherein each of the plurality of commands is one of a plurality of camera functions ([0145]). Moreau is silent regarding the processing unit configured to display a menu, the menu storing a plurality of commands
Pivotto teaches a remotely controlled catheter insertion system (134, figure 2) with a remote control station ([0012]). The remote control station can comprise a joystick ([0012]). A programmable control system (820, figure 41) can output command signals to the position system (134, figure 41) based on training or programming ([0685]). A user can train the programmable control system to direct the positioning system to execute a series of translation and rotation movements by manipulation the control inputs on the controller ([0385]). The programmable control system stores the command inputs and combines the commands into a single programmed movement in response, such as in response to an operator selecting a number of pre-trained/programmed movements that should be accomplished in an indicated sequence ([0385]). Users may select from preset programs stored in the memory of the programmable control system, where the preset programs contain every control command to perform an operation automatically ([0431]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the method of Moreau to use the programmable control system (820, figure 41) as taught by Pivotto. Doing so would allow for programming movement and commands prior to the procedure ([0385]; Pivotto) using the input device of Moreau. The modified method would comprise the processing unit configured to display a menu (programmed…sequence by a file name…[0385]; Pivotto), the menu storing a plurality of commands (sequence by a file name…[0385]).
Regarding claim 13, Moreau further discloses the plurality of commands includes: rotating a camera image (adjust other characteristics of the sensor or displayed image [0145] | the button may be programmed to control camera image rotation); changing a camera angle (adjust other characteristics of the sensor or displayed image [0145] | the button may be programmed to control camera angle); switching a light source (alter the brightness of the light elements [0145]); changing a camera zoom (digital magnification [0145]); taking a picture (record a snapshot [0145]); and switching of a video view on a display (on or off a video recording…adjust other characteristics…[0145] | base unit…display of images [0135] | graphical user interface…[0145]).
Regarding claim 14, Pivotto further teaches the menu further includes a list of users (user may train…store the command inputs…[0385]; Pivotto), wherein each user in the list of users includes the plurality of commands (store the command inputs [0385]).
Regarding claim 20, Moreau discloses a system for selectively controlling and programing a medical imaging scope (see figure 1) comprising: a camera head having an image capture device (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a CCD or CMOS image sensor | camera at the distal end of the shaft [0154]); a camera control unit operatively connected to the camera head (endoscope PCB [0145]); a user interface operatively connected to the camera control unit (graphical user interface 454…video processing unit 456 [0366]; 454 and 456, figure 79); and an input device (37, figure 3b or 90, figure 7a) disposed on the medical imaging scope, the input device selected from the group consisting of a joystick, a control pad, and a circular, single button (see 37, figure 3b or 90, figure 7a | a button 90…other types of buttons may be used [0159] | interpreted the “other buttons” can be circular), wherein the input device is positioned atop an input shaft (38, figure 47), the input shaft extending from the input device into a housing of either the medical imaging scope (see handle 12, figure 3b) or a housing of the camera head and coupled to a magnet within the respective housing (embedded magnet…[0146]), the input device configured to be engaged in a plurality of distinct patterns (depress the button using a pre-determined pattern or sequence…[0145]); wherein the camera control unit further comprises a processing unit (on or off a video recording…record a snapshot…on board processing [0145]) having a memory unit (endoscope 10…memory chip [0135]); each of the plurality of commands being one of a plurality of camera functions ([0145]); and wherein the processing unit is further configured to associate each of the plurality of discrete patterns with a desired command of the plurality of commands and store each of the plurality of discrete patterns with the desired command of the plurality of commands in the memory unit so as to customize a control of the medical imaging scope (controlled…graphical user interface…[0145] | graphical user interface…memory [0366]). Moreau is silent regarding the processing unit configured to display a menu on the user interface that correlates to a plurality of commands.
Pivotto teaches a remotely controlled catheter insertion system (134, figure 2) with a remote control station ([0012]). The remote control station can comprise a joystick ([0012]). A programmable control system (820, figure 41) can output command signals to the position system (134, figure 41) based on training or programming ([0685]). A user can train the programmable control system to direct the positioning system to execute a series of translation and rotation movements by manipulation the control inputs on the controller ([0385]). The programmable control system stores the command inputs and combines the commands into a single programmed movement in response, such as in response to an operator selecting a number of pre-trained/programmed movements that should be accomplished in an indicated sequence ([0385]). Users may select from preset programs stored in the memory of the programmable control system, where the preset programs contain every control command to perform an operation automatically ([0431]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the system of Moreau with the programmable control system (820, figure 41) as taught by Pivotto. Doing so would allow for programming movement and commands prior to the procedure ([0385]; Pivotto) using the input device of Moreau. The modified system would have the processing unit configured to display a menu (programmed…sequence by a file name…[0385]; Pivotto) on the user interface that correlates to a plurality of commands (sequence by a file name…[0385]).
Claim(s) 6, 11, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moreau (US 2019/0328217) and Pivotto (US 2012/0184955) as applied to claims 5, 8, and 14 above, and further in view of Hashimoto (US 2022/0401166).
Regarding claim 6, Moreau and Pivotto disclose all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 5. They are silent regarding a learning unit, the learning unit configured to associate a deviation of one of the plurality of discrete patterns with the desired command of the plurality of commands.
Hashimoto teaches a surgical system with a neural network to improve the accuracy of output data with respect to input data ([0078]) for surgical operation of a robot (abstract). A recurrent neural network can have a network structure in consideration of the time-series information, which can improve the accuracy of the output data ([0080]).
It would have been obvious to modify the system of Moreau and Pivotto to have a recurrent neural network as taught by Hashimoto to improve output data (i.e., desired command) based on the time-series information (i.e., input data or discrete pattern). Doing so would improve the accuracy of the output data ([0080]). The modified system would have a learning unit (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a neural network | recurrent neural network [0080]; Hashimoto), the learning unit configured to associate a deviation of one of the plurality of discrete patterns (input data…[0080]) with the desired command of the plurality of commands (improve accuracy of the output data/desired command [0080]).
Regarding claim 11, Moreau and Pivotto disclose all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 8. They are silent regarding a learning unit, the learning unit storing each of the plurality of discrete patterns and processing a change of a magnetic field over a predetermined period of time so as to associate a deviation of each of the plurality of discrete patterns with the desired command of the plurality of commands.
Hashimoto teaches a surgical system with a neural network to improve the accuracy of output data with respect to input data ([0078]) for surgical operation of a robot (abstract). A recurrent neural network can have a network structure in consideration of the time-series information, which can improve the accuracy of the output data ([0080]).
It would have been obvious to modify the system of Moreau and Pivotto to have a recurrent neural network as taught by Hashimoto to improve output data (i.e., desired command) based on the time-series information (i.e., input data or discrete pattern). Doing so would improve the accuracy of the output data ([0080]). The modified system would have a learning unit (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a neural network | recurrent neural network [0080]; Hashimoto), the learning unit storing each of the plurality of discrete patterns (input data…[0080]; Hashimoto | stored in memory [0366]; Moreau) and processing a change of a magnetic field over a predetermined period of time (PCB-based Hall effect sensor…duration in that position [0146]; Moreau) so as to associate a deviation of each of the plurality of discrete patterns with the desired command of the plurality of commands (improve accuracy of the output data/desired command [0080]; Hashimoto)
Regarding claim 15, Moreau and Pivotto disclose all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 14. They are silent regarding providing a learning unit, the learning unit configured to associate a deviation of one of the plurality of discrete patterns with the desired command of the plurality of commands.
Hashimoto teaches a surgical system with a neural network to improve the accuracy of output data with respect to input data ([0078]) for surgical operation of a robot (abstract). A recurrent neural network can have a network structure in consideration of the time-series information, which can improve the accuracy of the output data ([0080]).
It would have been obvious to modify the method of Moreau and Pivotto to use a recurrent neural network as taught by Hashimoto to improve output data (i.e., desired command) based on the time-series information (i.e., input data or discrete pattern). Doing so would improve the accuracy of the output data ([0080]). The modified method would comprise providing a learning unit (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a neural network | recurrent neural network [0080]; Hashimoto), the learning unit configured to associate a deviation of one of the plurality of discrete patterns (input data…[0080]) with the desired command of the plurality of commands (improve accuracy of the output data/desired command [0080]).
Regarding claim 19, Moreau further discloses the deviation is a deviation of a magnetic field over a predetermined period of time detected by a magnetometer (PCB-based Hall effect sensor…duration in that position [0146]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 9-10, and 16-18 are 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.
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 PAMELA F WU whose telephone number is (571)272-9851. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8-4 PM.
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, Michael Carey can be reached at 571-270-7235. 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.
PAMELA F. WU
Examiner
Art Unit 3795
February 19, 2026
/RYAN N HENDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3795