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 § 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.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cohen et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0289225) hereinafter referred to as Cohen.
Regarding claim 23, Cohen teaches an apparatus for use with a surgical-arm motor-control unit (¶[0480], surgical arms, 2800) that comprises an array of clamping-hammers (¶[0492] clamping hammers 2852, 2854) aligned along an arm-receiving volume (¶¶[0485-0486], recess), each clamping-hammer being closable to a respective closed state so as to contact a surgical arm seated in the arm-receiving volume and to apply a pressure thereto (¶[0493] “contact and/or apply pressure to the surgical arm”), the apparatus comprising:
a. an elongate element shaped to be seated in the arm-receiving volume (¶[0233], ¶¶[0485-0486], Figs. 28A-B); and
b. an array of force-measuring elements (¶[0460]), wherein for at least one of the clamping-hammers, when the apparatus is seated in the arm-receiving volume and the clamping-hammer is in its respective closed state, the clamping-hammer contacts a respective force-measuring element and applies a pressure thereto (¶¶[0494-0495]).
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8, 10-12, and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cohen et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0289225) hereinafter referred to as Cohen; in view of Header (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0086680) hereinafter referred to as Header.
Regarding claim 1, Cohen teaches a surgical apparatus comprising a motor-control unit for controlling one or more surgical arms (¶[0480], surgical arms, 2800), the motor-control unit comprising, for each one of the one or more surgical arms:
i. an arm-receiving volume shaped to receive a portion of a respective one of the one or more surgical arms (¶¶[0485-0486], recess), and
ii. an array of clamping-hammers (¶[0492] clamping hammers 2852, 2854) aligned with the arm-receiving volume and configured for applying pressure to said portion of the surgical arm to thereby secure said portion in said volume (¶[0493], Fig. 28A), each clamping-hammer comprising:
a. a clamping member configured for displacement with respect to said
volume at least between a distal position spaced from said arm-receiving
volume and a proximal position adjacent to said arm-receiving volume (¶[0493] clamping hammers move with respective movement of the flap);
and
b. a pressure member fitted to the clamping member and configured for coming in contact with a respective contact area of said portion of the surgical arm (¶[0493] “contact and/or apply pressure to the surgical arm”), wherein said pressure member is configured to displace with respect to the clamping member, thereby allowing regulation of the pressure applied to said respective contact area.
Cohen does not teach the pressure member is configured to displace with respect to the clamping member, thereby allowing regulation of the pressure applied to said respective contact area.
Attention is drawn to the Header reference, which teaches a clamping hammer comprising a pressure member configured to displace with respect to the clamping member, thereby allowing regulation of the pressure applied to said respective contact area (Figs. 3-5, element 28, adjustment screws elements 18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the modular robotic arm device of Cohen to include adjustable pressure members, as taught by Header, because adjustment allows for even clamping pressure without damage to the material being clamped (Header, ¶[0005]).
Regarding claim 2, Cohen as modified teaches the surgical apparatus of claim 1.
Cohen further teaches additionally comprising a closure flap in communication with one or more clamping members, wherein pivoting the closure flap to a closed position is effective to place the one or more clamping members in respective proximal positions (¶[0493] flap).
Regarding claim 3, Cohen as modified teaches the surgical apparatus of claim 2.
Header further teaches wherein (i) each clamping hammer further comprises a regulating member fitted to the clamping member and configured to regulate the displacing of a respective pressure member (Figs. 3-5, element 18 “adjustment screw”), and (ii) when the one or more clamping members are in respective proximal positions and the closure flap is in the closed position, regulating members respective of the one or more clamping members are exposed (this appears to be taught in combination with Cohen, where in Cohen ¶¶[0494-0495] the flap is closed or open and the members of Header would necessarily be exposed in the open configuration).
Regarding claim 4, Cohen as modified teaches the surgical apparatus of claim 3.
Header further teaches wherein the displacing of a pressure member is regulable by reorientation of the respective regulating member (Figs. 3-5 rotation of adjustment screws element 18 reorients the screw body by rotating with respect to the overall device).
Regarding claim 8, Cohen as modified teaches the surgical apparatus of claim 1.
Cohen further teaches wherein the array of clamping-hammers includes at least three clamping-hammers (¶[0492] elements 2852, 2854, ¶[0494] element 2856).
Cohen does not teach that the clamping-hammers are jointly regulable to apply substantially equal pressures to said portion of the surgical arm at respective contact areas.
Attention is drawn to the Header reference, which teaches the clamping-hammers are jointly regulable to apply substantially equal pressures to said portion of the surgical arm at respective contact areas (Figs. 3-5, element 28, adjustment screws elements 18, a user may adjust these in tandem to achieve even clamping pressure ¶[0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the modular robotic arm device of Cohen to include adjustable pressure members, as taught by Header, because adjustment allows for even clamping pressure without damage to the material being clamped (Header, ¶[0005]).
Regarding claim 10, Cohen as modified teaches the surgical apparatus of Claim 1.
Cohen further teaches wherein the regulation of the pressure applied to a respective contact area is effective to regulate a force of engagement of a surgical-arm gear of the respective surgical arm with a corresponding motor gear disposed within the arm-receiving volume (¶¶[0489-0491] engagement between gears).
Regarding claim 11, and 20-22, the claims are directed to substantially the same subject matter as claim 4, 9-10 and are rejected under substantially the same portions of Cohen and Header.
Regarding claim 12, Cohen as modified teaches the motor-control unit of claim 11.
Cohen further teaches wherein each clamping-hammer of the array of clamping-hammers comprises:
i. a base member anchored to the motor-control unit (¶¶[0492-0493], Fig. 28A),
ii. a clamping member pivotably attached to the base member (¶¶[0492-0493], Fig. 28A rotation with flap).
Cohen does not explicitly teach a lever member pivotably attached to each of the base member and the clamping member, and biased, when in a closed state, to transfer a clamping force to the clamping member, the clamping force being effective, when the respective surgical arm is seated in the arm-receiving volume, to cause an arm-contacting portion of the clamping member to contact the surgical arm and to apply a pressure thereto.
Attention is drawn to the Header reference, which teaches a lever member (Figs. 3-5 longitudinal arm of element 28) pivotably attached to each of a base member (Figs. 3-5, cylindrical portion element 34 in hinge element 30) and a clamping member (Figs. 3-5 short clamping/contacting portion of element 28), and biased, when in a closed state, to transfer a clamping force to the clamping member, the clamping force being effective, when the respective surgical arm is seated in the arm-receiving volume, to cause an arm-contacting portion of the clamping member to contact the surgical arm and to apply a pressure thereto (Figs. 3-5, element 28, adjustment screws elements 18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the modular robotic arm device of Cohen to include adjustable pressure members, as taught by Header, because adjustment allows for even clamping pressure without damage to the material being clamped (Header, ¶[0005]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 28-29, 32, 34-36 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Closest prior art of record, Cohen, teaches a clamping hammer arrangement and adjusting pressure based on receiving information about a pressure from a force-measuring element (the flap must be closed as detected by a microswitch or the user must adjust the pressure by closing the flap), but does not teach any calibration device. Header, also of record, does not teach a surgical arm or calibration apparatus. This feature is not taught or anticipated in the prior art, and not considered obvious over the teachings of Cohen and Header.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 7, and 19 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Closest prior art of record, Cohen, teaches reorientation of a pressure-regulating portion to apply adjustable pressure via a clamping hammer arrangement, but does not teach that the reorientation is performed by an instrumented calibration apparatus, nor an apparatus that is seated in an arm-receiving volume. Header, also of record, does not teach a surgical arm or calibration apparatus for reorienting the pressure-regulating portion to apply adjustable pressure. This feature is not taught or anticipated in the prior art, and not considered obvious over the teachings of Cohen and Header.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMANDA L STEINBERG whose telephone number is (303)297-4783. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-4.
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.
/AMANDA L STEINBERG/Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights