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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 2 (claims 10-25) in the reply filed on 2/16/25 is acknowledged.
Regarding new claims 26-29, in view of the amendments the shared technical feature has been updated to include a device body housing, a first drivetrain assembly, a second drivetrain assembly, a first shoulder assembly, a second assembly, a first arm and a second arm (as recited in claim 26), but they still fail to make a contribution over the prior art as seen in the rejections below. Therefore, these claims are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/16/2026. Claims 10-25 are pending examination.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 10-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0405412 to Farritor et al.
[Claim 10] Farritor discloses a robotic surgical device (Abstract; system 1, Figs. 1A-B, 2 and 3) comprising:
(a) an elongate device body (device 10, Figs. 2 and 3), the body comprising:
(i) a first drivetrain assembly (elements shown attached to shoulder 16A shown in Fig. 15) comprising:
(A) a first pitch drivetrain (a first set of motor 130, gear 132, shaft
134, gear 131, Fig. 19) comprising:
(I) a first pitch actuator (motor 130, Fig. 19);
(II) a first pitch motor gear (gear 132, Fig. 19) rotatably coupled to the first pitch actuator (gear 132 rotatable to motor 130, Fig. 19) via a first pitch motor driveshaft (gear 132 rotates with shaft 134, Fig. 19); and
(III) a first pitch driven gear (gear 131, Fig. 19) rotatably coupled to the first pitch motor gear (gear 131 rotatably coupled to gear 132, Fig. 19),
wherein the first pitch driven gear rotates around an axis (gear 131 rotates about an axis, Fig. 19) that is substantially perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the first pitch actuator (gear 131 rotates about an axis perpendicular to a horizontal
length of motor 130, Fig. 19); and
(B) a first roll drivetrain assembly (a first set of motor 116, gear 117,
bearing 120, output shaft 124, Figs. 15 and 16) comprising:
(I) a first roll actuator (a motor 116, Figs 15 and 16) disposed proximal of the first pitch actuator (motor 116 proximal to motor 130, Fig. 15);
(II) a first roll motor gear rotatably coupled to the first roll actuator (gear 117, Figs. 15 and 16);
(III) a first roll driveshaft rotatably coupled to the first roll motor gear (bearing 120, Fig. 16), wherein the first roll driveshaft is disposed radially adjacent to the first pitch actuator (bearing 120 radially adjacent motor 130, Figs. 15 and 16); and
(IV) a first shoulder driveshaft rotatably coupled to the first roll driveshaft (output shaft 124, Figs. 15 and 16), wherein the first shoulder driveshaft is rotationally constrained to a first shoulder assembly (output shaft 124 is constrained by housing of shoulder 14A or 16A, Fig. 16), the first shoulder driveshaft comprising a first lumen defined therethrough (As shown in Figs. 15-16, driveshaft 124 either includes a lumen therethrough, i.e. is hollow, or at the very least is surrounded by a lumen, i.e. unmarked portion that surrounds driveshaft 124 and connects body 10A to shoulders 14A/16A),
wherein the first pitch motor driveshaft is rotatably disposed through the first lumen (As best seen in Figs. 17 and 19, shaft 134 passes through either the inner lumen of 124 or the outer/surrounding lumen of 124. The examiner takes the position that in Fig. 17, the element 134 on the right is mislabeled and should be 124, due to the difference in diameter/width. Similarly, in Fig. 19, driveshaft 124 is shown as a tube surrounding 134, but is merely unmarked. These are the only possibilities when considering Figs. 15-19 and Pars 0180-181); and
(ii) a second drivetrain assembly (elements shown attached to shoulder 14A shown in Fig. 15) comprising:
(A) a second pitch drivetrain (a second set of motor 130, gear 132, shaft 134, gear 131, Fig. 19) comprising:
(I) a second pitch actuator (motor 130, Fig. 19);
(II) a second pitch motor gear (gear 132, Fig. 19) rotatably coupled to the second pitch actuator (gear 132 rotatable to 14amotor 130, Fig. 19) via a second pitch motor driveshaft (gear 132 rotates with shaft 134, Fig. 19); and
(III) a second pitch driven gear (gear 131, Fig. 19) rotatably coupled to the second pitch motor gear (gear 131 rotatably coupled to gear 132, Fig. 19),
wherein the second pitch driven gear rotates around an axis (gear 131 rotates about an axis, Fig. 19) that is substantially perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the second pitch actuator (gear 131 rotates about an axis perpendicular to a horizontal length of motor 130, Fig. 19); and
(B) a second roll drivetrain assembly (a second set of motor 116, gear 117, bearing 120, output shaft 124, Figs. 15 and 16) comprising:
(I) a second roll actuator (a motor 116, Figs. 15 and 16) disposed proximal of the second pitch actuator (motor 116 proximal to motor 130, Fig. 15);
(II) a second roll motor gear rotatably coupled to the second roll actuator (gear 117, Figs. 15 and 16);
(III) a second roll driveshaft rotatably coupled to the second roll motor gear (bearing 120, Fig. 16), wherein the second roll driveshaft is disposed radially adjacent to the second pitch actuator (bearing 120 radially adjacent motor 130, Figs.
15 and 16); and
(IV) a second shoulder driveshaft rotatably coupled to the second roll driveshaft (output shaft 124, Figs. 15 and 16), wherein the second shoulder driveshaft is rotationally constrained to a second shoulder assembly (output shaft 124 is constrained by housing of shoulder 14A or 16A, Fig. 16), the second shoulder driveshaft comprising a second lumen defined therethrough (As shown in Figs. 15-16, driveshaft 124 either includes a lumen therethrough, i.e. is hollow, or at the very least is surrounded by a lumen, i.e. unmarked portion that surrounds driveshaft 124 and connects body 10A to shoulders 14A/16A),
wherein the second pitch motor driveshaft is rotatably disposed through the second lumen (As best seen in Figs. 17 and 19, shaft 134 passes through either the inner lumen of 124 or the outer/surrounding lumen of 124. The examiner takes the position that in Fig. 17, the element 134 on the right is mislabeled and should be 124, due to the difference in diameter/width. Similarly, in Fig. 19, driveshaft 124 is shown as a tube surrounding 134, but is merely unmarked. These are the only possibilities when considering Figs. 15-19 and Pars 0180-181); and
(b) a first arm operably coupled to the first shoulder assembly (first arm 14, Figs. 2 and 3); and
(c) a second arm operably coupled to the second shoulder assembly (arm 16, Figs. 2 and 3).
Farritor fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first pitch driven gear is rotatably disposed within the first shoulder assembly; and wherein the second pitch driven gear is rotatably disposed within the second shoulder assembly. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to place the first pitch driven gear rotatably within the first shoulder assembly and the second pitch driven gear rotatably within the second shoulder assembly as this is a mere/obvious since rearrangement of parts; MPEP 2144.04. The proposed modification results in an expanded/enlarged shoulder assembly/housing that accommodates both the pitch driven gears and the elements of the shoulder assembly that are already/currently located there. It is emphasized that there is no criticality or unexpected result to the location/placement of these pitch driven gears, therefore it would be obvious to place them anywhere within the robotic surgical device where it can properly function, including in the shoulder assembly, if so desired, as a matter of routine engineering and design choices which are within the routine skill and knowledge of a POSITA.
[Claims 11 and 12] Farritor discloses wherein the elongate device body (device 10, Figs. 1-3) further comprises:
(a) a distal section having a distal section width (section of device 10 at distal end 10B has a width, Fig. 3) and a distal section depth (section of device 10 at distal end 10B has a depth, Fig. 3); and
(b) a proximal section (section of device 10 where port 10E emerges, Fig. 3) having a proximal section diameter that is greater than a distal section diameter (body of device 10 is relatively rounded, proximal section is wider than distal section, Fig. 3. See also Fig. 1B, which clearly shows the proximal end of body 10 having a diameter that is greater than the distal portion, i.e. where the surgeon is grabbing the device body 10A).
Farritor fails to explicitly disclose wherein the distal section width ranges from about 28 mm to about 30 mm (or about 29 mm), and wherein the distal section depth ranges from about 22 mm to about 24 mm (or about 23 mm). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the priority date to provide a distal section width of about 28 mm to about 30 mm and a distal section depth of about 22 mm to about 24 mm, since where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art; MPEP 2144.05. It’s clear from Fig. 10B and Pars 0145-147, that there are multiple considerations for the width of the distal section, as this distal section is inserted into the body and held by the user/surgeon. Therefore, a width is clearly chosen to be small enough to fit into a small incision in the body, access a particular anatomical target within the body and be comfortably held/grasped by a surgeon’s hand. Additionally or alternatively, MPEP 2144.04 states “the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to choose the width of this distal section with all these considerations in mind, i.e. size of incision in the body, particular anatomy being targeted/treated, and the comfortability and hand size of a surgeon holding/grasping the device, which are all within the routine skill and knowledge of a POSITA. It is emphasized that there are no unexpected results or criticality to the claimed widths.
If applicant disagrees, see alternative 103 rejection below.
[Claim 13] Farritor discloses wherein the proximal section comprises a camera port (camera 12 passes through port 10E, Figs. 1A and 3; Par 0193).
[Claims 14 and 15] Farritor discloses wherein each of the first and second arms has an arm width ( arms 14 and 16 have a width, Fig. 3) and an arm depth (arms 14 and 16 have a depth, Fig. 3). The reference fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first and second arm widths range from about 13 mm to about 15 mm (or about 14 mm), and wherein the first and second arm depths range from about 20 mm to about 26 mm (or about 23 mm). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide first and second arm widths ranging from about 13 mm to about 15 mm, and first and second arm depths ranging from about 20 mm to about 26 mm, since where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, specifically in order to ensure that the robotic surgical device is sized to access/treat a particular patient anatomy. Additionally or alternatively, MPEP 2144.04 states “the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to choose the desired widths of the arms based on numerous considerations including the type of surgery, size of the incision within the body, anatomy being treated, etc., which are all within the routine skill and knowledge of a POSITA. It is emphasized that there are no unexpected results or criticality to the claimed widths.
If applicant disagrees, see alternative 103 rejection below.
[Claim 16] Farritor teaches wherein each of the first and second arms comprises an upper arm (upper arms 14B and 16B, Fig. IA) comprising:
(a) a rotation drivetrain (motor gearhead 162, worm shaft 164, worm gear 166 and worm wheel 168 all shown within upper arm 16B, Fig. 23) comprising:
(i) a rotation actuator (motor gearhead 162, Fig. 23);
(ii) a rotation motor gear (worm gear 166, Fig. 23) rotatably coupled to the rotation actuator via a rotation motor driveshaft (worm gear 166 rotatably coupled to motor gearhead 162 via worm shaft 164, Fig. 23); and
(iii) a rotation driven gear rotatably coupled to the rotation motor gear (worm wheel 168 rotatably coupled to worm gear 166, Fig. 23), wherein the rotation driven gear rotates around an axis that is substantially perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of the rotation actuator (worm wheel 168 rotates perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of motor gearhead 162, Fig. 23); and
(b) a roll drivetrain assembly (motor 154, and gears 156,158, and 160, Fig. 23) comprising:
(A) a roll actuator disposed adjacent to the rotation actuator (motor 154 is adjacent to motor gearhead 162, Fig. 23);
(B) at least one roll gear rotatably coupled to the roll actuator (gear set 156 coupled to motor 154, Fig. 23); and
(C) an elbow driveshaft rotatably coupled to the at least one roll gear (elbow driveshaft comprised of curved concave region 172 and output shaft 170, Figs. 22 and 23; output shaft 170 rotatably coupled to gear 156 through other surrounding components, Fig. 23; shaft 170 is for joint 4 at elbow joint 106, Figs. 14 and 23; Par 0187), wherein the elbow driveshaft is rotationally constrained to the elbow assembly (shaft 170 for rotation at elbow joint 106, Figs. 14 and 23; Par 0187), the elbow driveshaft comprising a lumen defined therethrough (region 172 allows passage through it, Par 0187; Fig. 22),
wherein the rotation motor driveshaft is rotatably disposed through the lumen (worm gear 166 shown in region 172, Fig. 22), and
wherein the rotation driven gear is rotatably disposed within the elbow assembly (worm wheel 168 rotates within region 172, Fig. 2).
[Claim 17] Farritor discloses wherein the upper arm further comprises a upper arm housing (exterior of arms 14B and 16B, Fig. IA) and a proximal attachment structure disposed at a proximal end of the upper arm housing (right shoulder joints 14D and 16D, Fig. IA), wherein the proximal attachment structure is configured to be coupleable to one of the first and second shoulder assemblies (right shoulder joints 14D and 16D attach to shoulders 14A and 16A, Fig. IA), wherein the rotation and roll drivetrains are disposed within the upper arm housing (motor gearhead 162, worm shaft 164, worm gear 166 and worm wheel 168, motor 154, and gears 156,158, and 160 all shown within upper arm 16B, Fig. 23).
[Claim 18] Farritor teaches wherein each of the first and second arms comprises a forearm (forearms 14C and 16C, Fig. 1A) rotatably coupled to the upper arm (forearms 14C and 16C rotate at coupling with upper arms 14B and 16B respectively, Fig. 14) and an end effector operably coupled to the forearm (tool 18 and end effector 20, Fig. IA).
[Claim 19] See rejection/explanation for claims 10 and 11 above.
[Claims 20-24] For claims 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24, see the rejections/explanations for claims 11, 13, 14, 16 and 18, respectively, above.
[Claim 25] Farritor discloses the device body housing (10A) comprises a sterilizable material (the examiner takes the position that any material is sterilizable, i.e. capable of being sterilized, as there are many ways to sterilize different materials. If applicant disagrees, see further explanation below) and at least one sealed bearing (seal 10E; Pars 0151 and 0193; or disposable/permanent sleeves; Pars 0144 and 0166) configured to inhibit progress of fluids into the first and second drivetrain assemblies (either or both of the seal or sleeves are capable of providing the claimed function; see MPEP 2114).
Regarding the “sterilizable material”, as discussed above the examiner contends that any surgical device that is inserted into the body is made of a sterilizable material; see Fig. 10B. It is emphasized that “sterilizable” does not necessarily mean sterilization in an autoclave, i.e. moist heat, but could also be done with dry heat, chemicals or radiation/light. If applicant disagrees, the examiner takes official notice that it is well-understood, conventional and routine to use a sterilizable material for a surgical instrument that is inserted into the body (Fig. 1B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to choose/try a sterilizable material for the device body housing, as such a material is pervasive throughout the robotic surgical field. MPEP 2144.07 states “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297”
Claims 11, 12, 14, 15, 20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farritor as applied to claims 10 or 19 above, and further in view of US 2013/0345717 to Markvicka et al.
Farritor is discussed above, but fails to explicitly teach a specific width for the device body and arms. However, in the same field of endeavor, Markvicka discloses that similar robotic surgical device should have a “minimal profile such that the device can be easily inserted through smaller incisions” (Abstract). Therefore, while Markvicka is silent to specific dimensions/widths of the device body and arms, this teaching provides a POSITA with explicit motivation to minimize the size/width of a surgical robot, and specifically the device body and arms which are inserted into the body, as routine optimization of a result effective variable; MPEP 2144.05.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The concept of making the profile/width of surgical robots minimally-sized is well-known in the art:
US 2020/0205846 to Baker et al. (Par 0146)
US 2014/0303434 to Farritor (Par 0110)
US 2006/0167440 to Cooper et al. (Pars 0007-8)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lynsey C Eiseman whose telephone number is (571)270-7035. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday and alternating Fridays 7 to 4 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, David Hamaoui can be reached at 571-270-5625. 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.
/LYNSEY C Eiseman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights