DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02/12/2024 are is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 1-2, 5-12, 15-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fredrickson et al. (US 2020/0198147 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Fredrickson teaches:
A surgical robotic system (Fig. 1; [0046] “a cart-based robotically-enabled system 10”) comprising:
a robotic arm (Fig. 1; [0046] “robotic arms 12”) including a plurality of joints (Fig. 2; [0061] “The robotic arms 12 may generally comprise robotic arm bases 21 and end effectors 22, separated by a series of linkages 23 that are connected by a series of joints 24”);
an access port (Fig. 23; [0131] “port 235”) disposed in a patient body wall (Fig. 23; [0131] “body wall 245”) through an incision point (Fig. 3; [0131] “The system 209 may further ... a point of intersection 250 between the port 235 and the body wall 245”) and decoupled from the robotic arm (Fig. 23 shows the access port is decoupled from the ADM 265);
an instrument (Fig. 21; [0120] “instrument 130”; [0131] “an instrument (not illustrated)”) coupled to the robotic arm ([0131] “The ADM 265 is attached to the distal end of a robotic arm (not illustrated) configured to control movement of the ADM 265 and an instrument (not illustrated) which can be inserted and retracted along the tool path 210.”) and configured to be inserted into the access port ([0129] “The processor may bring a portion of the robotic arm (e.g., an ADM formed at the distal end of the robotic arm) within a threshold distance of the port to allow the ADM to be docked to the port.”);
a surgeon console including a handle controller (Fig. 19; [0103] “controller 182”) configured to receive user input for moving the instrument and the robotic arm (Fig. 19; [0104] “In the illustrated embodiment, the controller 182 is configured to allow manipulation of two medical instruments, and includes two handles 184.”); and
a controller ([0133] “a processor and/or controller of the robotic system 209 ′ may provide instructions to the robotic arm to move the ADM 265”) configured to maintain a remote center of motion which aligns with the incision point while moving at least one of the instrument or the robotic arm (Figs. 24-25 show aligning the remote center of motion 220 with the intersection point 250 while docking the ADM with the port 235; [0134] “For example, the remote center of motion 220 may be substantially aligned or overlap with the intersection point 250. For example, the degree of alignment between the remote center of motion 220 and the insertion point 250 (or acceptable level of alignment) may be selected, e.g., by a user of the robotic system.”; [0135] “In some embodiments, the distance between the ADM 265 and the port 235 may be determined based on the distance between the remote center of motion 220 and the intersection point 250.”).
Regarding claim 2, Fredrickson further teaches:
an instrument drive unit coupled to the robotic arm and configured to actuate the instrument ([0086] “(i) an instrument driver (alternatively referred to as “instrument drive mechanism,” “instrument device manipulator,” or “advanced device manipulator (ADM)”) that incorporates electro-mechanical means for actuating the medical instrument”).
Regarding claim 5, Fredrickson further teaches:
an endoscope camera (Figs. 23-25; [0130] “image sensor 225 (e.g., a camera)”) coupled to the robotic arm (Figs. 23-25; [0130] “The exemplary method illustrated in FIGS. 23-25 may involve the use of an image sensor 225 (e.g., a camera) attached to an ADM 265.”), wherein the endoscope camera is configured to capture video of the access port ([0132] “As an initial step of the alignment method, the user may manually position the ADM 265 into the first position such that the fiducial 240 is within the field of view 230 of the image sensor 225. In another embodiment, the movement of the ADM 265 into the first position may be performed automatically by the robotic system 209.”) and the controller is further configured to determine a position of the access port based on the video ([0132] “ Once the fiducial 240 is within the field of view 230 of the image sensor 225, the system 209 may be able to use the images received from the image sensor 225 to determine the relative position between the ADM 265 and the port 235.”).
Regarding claim 6, Fredrickson further teaches:
wherein the access port includes a marker (Fig. 23; [0131’ “fiducial 240 on the port 235”) detectable by the endoscope camera ([0132] “As an initial step of the alignment method, the user may manually position the ADM 265 into the first position such that the fiducial 240 is within the field of view 230 of the image sensor 225. In another embodiment, the movement of the ADM 265 into the first position may be performed automatically by the robotic system 209”).
Regarding claim 7, Fredrickson further teaches:
at least one electromagnetic tracker disposed on at least one of the access port ([0126] As is described in detail below, the sensor can be used to detect and identify a fiducial that is associated with the port or access point. As used herein, a fiducial may refer to a marking or object that can be detected by the sensor and used by the system to determine the relative spatial position between the fiducial and the sensor.... In the EM sensor embodiments, the fiducial may include an EM emitter and/or reflector that radiates an EM signal detectable by the EM sensor.”); and
an electromagnetic emission detector ([0126] “EM sensor”) configured to monitor electromagnetic emission of the at least one electromagnetic tracker and to determine position of the at least one electromagnetic tracker based on the electromagnetic emission ([0126] As is described in detail below, the sensor can be used to detect and identify a fiducial that is associated with the port or access point. As used herein, a fiducial may refer to a marking or object that can be detected by the sensor and used by the system to determine the relative spatial position between the fiducial and the sensor.... In the EM sensor embodiments, the fiducial may include an EM emitter and/or reflector that radiates an EM signal detectable by the EM sensor. The processor may be configured to determine the orientation and position of the fiducial relative to the sensor based on a signal produced by the sensor”).
Regarding claim 8, Fredrickson further teaches:
wherein the controller is further configured to maintain the remote center of motion which aligns with the incision point while moving at least one of the instrument or the robotic arm (Figs. 24-25 show aligning the remote center of motion 220 with the intersection point 250 while docking the ADM with the port 235; [0134] “For example, the remote center of motion 220 may be substantially aligned or overlap with the intersection point 250. For example, the degree of alignment between the remote center of motion 220 and the insertion point 250 (or acceptable level of alignment) may be selected, e.g., by a user of the robotic system.”; [0135] “In some embodiments, the distance between the ADM 265 and the port 235 may be determined based on the distance between the remote center of motion 220 and the intersection point 250.”) based on the position of the at least one electromagnetic tracker (Figs. 23-24 and [0130]-[0135] disclose the process of docking the ADM with the port 235 by aligning the remote center of motion 220 with the intersection point 250 using images captured by camera; however, [0130] discloses the camera can be replaced with an EM sensor that detects EM signals from an electromagnetic tracker (disclosed in [0126]).).
Regarding claim 9, Fredrickson teaches:
A surgical robotic system (Fig. 1; [0046] “a cart-based robotically-enabled system 10”) comprising:
a robotic arm (Fig. 1; [0046] “robotic arms 12”) including a plurality of joints (Fig. 2; [0061] “The robotic arms 12 may generally comprise robotic arm bases 21 and end effectors 22, separated by a series of linkages 23 that are connected by a series of joints 24”);
an access port (Fig. 23; [0131] “port 235”) disposed in a patient body wall (Fig. 23; [0131] “body wall 245”) through an incision point (Fig. 3; [0131] “The system 209 may further ... a point of intersection 250 between the port 235 and the body wall 245”) and decoupled from the robotic arm (Fig. 23 shows the access port is decoupled from the ADM 265); and
a controller ([0133] “a processor and/or controller of the robotic system 209 ′ may provide instructions to the robotic arm to move the ADM 265”) configured to move the robotic arm to maintain a remote center of motion which aligns with the incision point (Figs. 24-25 show aligning the remote center of motion 220 with the intersection point 250 while docking the ADM with the port 235; [0134] “For example, the remote center of motion 220 may be substantially aligned or overlap with the intersection point 250. For example, the degree of alignment between the remote center of motion 220 and the insertion point 250 (or acceptable level of alignment) may be selected, e.g., by a user of the robotic system.”; [0135] “In some embodiments, the distance between the ADM 265 and the port 235 may be determined based on the distance between the remote center of motion 220 and the intersection point 250.”).
Regarding claim 10, Fredrickson further teaches:
an instrument (Fig. 21; [0120] “instrument 130”; [0131] “an instrument (not illustrated)”); and
an instrument drive unit coupled to the robotic arm and configured to actuate the instrument ([0086] “(i) an instrument driver (alternatively referred to as “instrument drive mechanism,” “instrument device manipulator,” or “advanced device manipulator (ADM)”) that incorporates electro-mechanical means for actuating the medical instrument”).
Regarding claim 11, Fredrickson further teaches:
a surgeon console including a handle controller (Fig. 19; [0103] “controller 182”) configured to receive user input for moving the instrument and the robotic arm (Fig. 19; [0104] “In the illustrated embodiment, the controller 182 is configured to allow manipulation of two medical instruments, and includes two handles 184.”).
Regarding claim 12, Fredrickson further teaches:
wherein the controller is further configured to maintain the remote center of motion while moving the instrument and the robotic arm (Figs. 24-25 show aligning the remote center of motion 220 with the intersection point 250 while docking the ADM with the port 235; [0134] “For example, the remote center of motion 220 may be substantially aligned or overlap with the intersection point 250. For example, the degree of alignment between the remote center of motion 220 and the insertion point 250 (or acceptable level of alignment) may be selected, e.g., by a user of the robotic system.”; [0135] “In some embodiments, the distance between the ADM 265 and the port 235 may be determined based on the distance between the remote center of motion 220 and the intersection point 250.”; [0120] “ FIG. 21 illustrates the movement of the ADM 125 from a first position 122A to a second position 122B while maintaining a remote center of motion 120.”; [0121]).
Regarding claim 15, Fredrickson further teaches:
an endoscope camera (Figs. 23-25; [0130] “image sensor 225 (e.g., a camera)”) coupled to the robotic arm (Figs. 23-25; [0130] “The exemplary method illustrated in FIGS. 23-25 may involve the use of an image sensor 225 (e.g., a camera) attached to an ADM 265.”), wherein the endoscope camera is configured to capture video of the access port ([0132] “As an initial step of the alignment method, the user may manually position the ADM 265 into the first position such that the fiducial 240 is within the field of view 230 of the image sensor 225. In another embodiment, the movement of the ADM 265 into the first position may be performed automatically by the robotic system 209.”) and the controller is further configured to determine a position of the access port based on the video ([0132] “ Once the fiducial 240 is within the field of view 230 of the image sensor 225, the system 209 may be able to use the images received from the image sensor 225 to determine the relative position between the ADM 265 and the port 235.”).
Regarding claim 16, Fredrickson further teaches:
wherein the access port includes a marker (Fig. 23; [0131’ “fiducial 240 on the port 235”) detectable by the endoscope camera ([0132] “As an initial step of the alignment method, the user may manually position the ADM 265 into the first position such that the fiducial 240 is within the field of view 230 of the image sensor 225. In another embodiment, the movement of the ADM 265 into the first position may be performed automatically by the robotic system 209”).
Regarding claim 17, Fredrickson teaches:
A method for controlling a surgical robotic system (Fig. 1; [0046] “a cart-based robotically-enabled system 10”), the method comprising:
receiving user input at a surgeon console including a handle controller (Fig. 19; [0103] “controller 182”) configured to receive the user input (Fig. 19; [0102] “an input device or controller for manipulating an instrument attached to a robotic arm. In some embodiments, the controller can be coupled (e.g., communicatively, electronically, electrically, wirelessly and/or mechanically) with an instrument such that manipulation of the controller causes a corresponding manipulation of the instrument e.g., via master slave control.”; [0104] “In the illustrated embodiment, the controller 182 is configured to allow manipulation of two medical instruments, and includes two handles 184.”);
moving at least one of an instrument or a robotic arm in response to the user input (Fig. 19; [0102] “an input device or controller for manipulating an instrument attached to a robotic arm. In some embodiments, the controller can be coupled (e.g., communicatively, electronically, electrically, wirelessly and/or mechanically) with an instrument such that manipulation of the controller causes a corresponding manipulation of the instrument e.g., via master slave control.”; [0104] “In the illustrated embodiment, the controller 182 is configured to allow manipulation of two medical instruments, and includes two handles 184.”),
wherein the instrument is inserted ([0136] “ In certain implementations, the ADM 265 may be part of an instrument based insertion architecture, and may be connected to an instrument, such as, e.g., the instrument 150 illustrated in FIG. 18. Accordingly, a handle (e.g., the handle 170) of the instrument can be coupled to the ADM 265, allowing the instrument to be inserted into the patient via the port 235 while the ADM 265 and handle remain in place.”) through an access port (Fig. 23; [0131] “port 235”) disposed in a patient body wall through an incision point (Fig. 3; [0131] “The system 209 may further ... a point of intersection 250 between the port 235 and the body wall 245”) and decoupled from the robotic arm (Fig. 23 shows the access port is decoupled from the ADM 265) and the robotic arm includes a plurality of joints (Fig. 2; [0061] “The robotic arms 12 may generally comprise robotic arm bases 21 and end effectors 22, separated by a series of linkages 23 that are connected by a series of joints 24”); and
maintaining a remote center of motion which aligns with the incision point while moving at least one of the instrument or the robotic arm (Figs. 24-25 show aligning the remote center of motion 220 with the intersection point 250 while docking the ADM with the port 235; [0120]-[0121]; [0134] “For example, the remote center of motion 220 may be substantially aligned or overlap with the intersection point 250. For example, the degree of alignment between the remote center of motion 220 and the insertion point 250 (or acceptable level of alignment) may be selected, e.g., by a user of the robotic system.”; [0135] “In some embodiments, the distance between the ADM 265 and the port 235 may be determined based on the distance between the remote center of motion 220 and the intersection point 250.”).
Regarding claim 19, Fredrickson further teaches:
capturing video of the access port ([0132] “As an initial step of the alignment method, the user may manually position the ADM 265 into the first position such that the fiducial 240 is within the field of view 230 of the image sensor 225. In another embodiment, the movement of the ADM 265 into the first position may be performed automatically by the robotic system 209.”) at an endoscope camera (Figs. 23-25; [0130] “image sensor 225 (e.g., a camera)”) coupled to the robotic arm (Figs. 23-25; [0130] “The exemplary method illustrated in FIGS. 23-25 may involve the use of an image sensor 225 (e.g., a camera) attached to an ADM 265.”); and determining a position of the access port based on the video ([0132] “ Once the fiducial 240 is within the field of view 230 of the image sensor 225, the system 209 may be able to use the images received from the image sensor 225 to determine the relative position between the ADM 265 and the port 235.”).
Regarding claim 20, Fredrickson further teaches:
monitoring electromagnetic emission of at least one electromagnetic tracker disposed on at least one of the access port ([0126] As is described in detail below, the sensor can be used to detect and identify a fiducial that is associated with the port or access point. As used herein, a fiducial may refer to a marking or object that can be detected by the sensor and used by the system to determine the relative spatial position between the fiducial and the sensor.... In the EM sensor embodiments, the fiducial may include an EM emitter and/or reflector that radiates an EM signal detectable by the EM sensor.”);
determining a position of the at least one electromagnetic tracker an electromagnetic emission detector ([0126] As is described in detail below, the sensor can be used to detect and identify a fiducial that is associated with the port or access point. As used herein, a fiducial may refer to a marking or object that can be detected by the sensor and used by the system to determine the relative spatial position between the fiducial and the sensor.... In the EM sensor embodiments, the fiducial may include an EM emitter and/or reflector that radiates an EM signal detectable by the EM sensor. The processor may be configured to determine the orientation and position of the fiducial relative to the sensor based on a signal produced by the sensor”); and
determining a position of at least one of the access port based on the position of the at least one electromagnetic tracker (Figs. 23-24 and [0132] discloses determining a position of the access port 235using images of the fiducial 240 captured by camera; however, [0130] discloses the camera can be replaced with an EM sensor that detects EM signals from an electromagnetic tracker as a fiducial (disclosed in [0126]).).
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 3-4, 13-14, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fredrickson et al. (US 2020/0198147 A1), in view of ALT et al. (US 2021/0023719 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Fredrickson does not specifically teach a camera configured to capture video of the robotic arm, wherein the controller is further configured to determine a position of at least one joint of the plurality of joints based on the video.
However, in the same field of endeavor, ALT teaches:
a camera configured to capture video of the robotic arm (Fig. 4; [0092] “one or several cameras 41 are mounted around the robot arm 1”), wherein the controller is further configured to determine a position of at least one joint of the plurality of joints based on the video ([0092] “The external camera 41 observes visual markers/features 34 for direct angle measurement mounted around the axis of at least one joint 11. Thus, rotational visual markers 34 are mounted on some or all joints 11 of the robot arm 1, which are also called “marked joints”. These markers consist of two parts, each of which is rigidly connected to one of the two links 15 connected by the joint 11. The relative orientation between these two parts, specifically the angle of rotation around the axis of joint 11, directly indicates the state of the joint 11. This allows for direct visual reading of the joint angle by the camera and a connected computing unit 5, much like a goniometer.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Fredrickson to include a camera to capture a video of the robotic arm, and determine a position of at least one joint of the plurality of joints based on the video, as taught by ALT. Such modification allows the system to calculate a pose and movement parameters of the joints in order to control the joints to perform a task.
Regarding claim 4, Fredrickson does not specifically teach wherein each joint of the plurality of joints includes a marker detectable by the camera.
However, ALT teaches:
wherein each joint of the plurality of joints includes a marker detectable by the camera (Fig. 4; [0092] ““The external camera 41 observes visual markers/features 34 for direct angle measurement mounted around the axis of at least one joint 11. Thus, rotational visual markers 34 are mounted on some or all joints 11 of the robot arm 1, which are also called “marked joints”.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Fredrickson, in view of ALT, to install a marker detectable by a camera on each joint of a plurality of joints, as taught by ALT. Such modification allows the system to calculate a pose and movement parameters of the joints in order to control the joints to perform a task.
Regarding claim 13, Fredrickson does not specifically teach a camera configured to capture video of the robotic arm, wherein the controller is further configured to determine a position of at least one joint of the plurality of joints based on the video.
However, ALT teaches:
a camera configured to capture video of the robotic arm (Fig. 4; [0092] “one or several cameras 41 are mounted around the robot arm 1”), wherein the controller is further configured to determine a position of at least one joint of the plurality of joints based on the video ([0092] “The external camera 41 observes visual markers/features 34 for direct angle measurement mounted around the axis of at least one joint 11. Thus, rotational visual markers 34 are mounted on some or all joints 11 of the robot arm 1, which are also called “marked joints”. These markers consist of two parts, each of which is rigidly connected to one of the two links 15 connected by the joint 11. The relative orientation between these two parts, specifically the angle of rotation around the axis of joint 11, directly indicates the state of the joint 11. This allows for direct visual reading of the joint angle by the camera and a connected computing unit 5, much like a goniometer.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Fredrickson to include a camera to capture a video of the robotic arm, and determine a position of at least one joint of the plurality of joints based on the video, as taught by ALT. Such modification allows the system to calculate a pose and movement parameters of the joints in order to control the joints to perform a task.
Regarding claim 14, Fredrickson does not specifically teach wherein each joint of the plurality of joints includes a marker detectable by the camera.
However, ALT teaches:
wherein each joint of the plurality of joints includes a marker detectable by the camera (Fig. 4; [0092] ““The external camera 41 observes visual markers/features 34 for direct angle measurement mounted around the axis of at least one joint 11. Thus, rotational visual markers 34 are mounted on some or all joints 11 of the robot arm 1, which are also called “marked joints”.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Fredrickson, in view of ALT, to install a marker detectable by a camera on each joint of a plurality of joints, as taught by ALT. Such modification allows the system to calculate a pose and movement parameters of the joints in order to control the joints to perform a task.
Regarding claim 18, Fredrickson does not specifically teach capturing video of the robotic arm at a video camera; and determining a position of at least one joint of the plurality of joints based on the video.
However, ALT teaches:
capturing video of the robotic arm at a video camera (Fig. 4; [0092] “one or several cameras 41 are mounted around the robot arm 1”); and determining a position of at least one joint of the plurality of joints based on the video ([0092] “The external camera 41 observes visual markers/features 34 for direct angle measurement mounted around the axis of at least one joint 11. Thus, rotational visual markers 34 are mounted on some or all joints 11 of the robot arm 1, which are also called “marked joints”. These markers consist of two parts, each of which is rigidly connected to one of the two links 15 connected by the joint 11. The relative orientation between these two parts, specifically the angle of rotation around the axis of joint 11, directly indicates the state of the joint 11. This allows for direct visual reading of the joint angle by the camera and a connected computing unit 5, much like a goniometer.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Fredrickson to capture a video of the robotic arm at a video camera, and determine a position of at least one joint of the plurality of joints based on the video, as taught by ALT. Such modification allows the system to calculate a pose and movement parameters of the joints in order to control the joints to perform a task.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhao et al. (US 2016/0206387 A1) teaches a robotic system configured to control robotic arms to perform surgery on a patient by aligning remote centers of the instrument with an access port.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NHI Q BUI whose telephone number is (571)272-3962. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:00am-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, KHOI TRAN can be reached at (571) 272-6919. 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.
/NHI Q BUI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3656