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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The large number of references cited in the Information Disclosure Statements have been afforded a cursory review, similar to what would be expected of a classification search of the prior art. Should there be any references of particular relevance to the instant application claims, applicant is respectfully requested to identify such references for further review by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosa et al (2013/0267950) in view of the teaching of Durant et al (2012/0316573).
Regarding claim 1, Rosa et al provide a surgical system comprising a robotic surgical system (para. [0021], for example) including at least one motor (102) and at least one foot pedal (105 – para. [0038]) and a controller (101) in communication with the foot pedal and configured to control the at least one motor based on actuation of the foot pedal (para. [0031-0039], for example). The surgical instrument includes a pair of jaw members (1a and 1b – Figure 1) movable to grasp tissue and to seal the tissue (para. [0042], for example). There is a knife blade (11) configured to extend between the jaws to cut grasped tissue when the jaws are closed (para. [0028-0030], for example). There is a drive assembly (103 – Figure 2) configured to receive the input provided at the motor to cause the jaw members to deliver energy to seal tissue and to extend the knife through the jaw members after a determination that the tissue has been sealed (para. [0035] and [0063-0070], for example). Rosa et al provide different inputs from the footpedal to control actuation of the jaws, the cutting element and the delivery of energy as disclosed in the above cited paragraphs. Rosa et al also disclose various different actuation profiles (e.g. multiple actuations of a single pedal, or multiple different pedals actuated separately as in para. [0053-0055]), but fail to expressly disclose a second actuation of the at least one foot pedal after a predetermined time period as part of the actuation profile.
Regarding the limitation “a second actuation of the at least one foot pedal within a predetermined period of time following the first actuation”, the examiner maintains that Rosa et al fairly teach a variety of actuation options, including multiple foot pedals or multiple actuation of a single foot pedal, and the use of a time period between successive depressions would be within the purview of the skilled artisan to control the various different functions being performed by the Rosa et al system. To further support this assertion, attention is directed to the Durant et al reference which discloses a similar surgical system including a surgical device having an end effector and a knife blade to grasp and cut tissue, and means to provide RF energy to seal tissue. Durant et al provide a foot pedal actuator to control the various functions of the surgical system similar to the Rosa et al system. In particular, Durant et al specifically teach that it is known to provide a foot pedal actuator with various different actuation modalities, including detecting a predetermined time period between foot pedal depressions to operatively control the surgical system. See, for example, paragraphs [0074-0079] of Durant et al.
To have provided the Rosa et al system with a foot pedal operation protocol that includes multiple actuations of a foot pedal within a predetermined time period to control operation of the various different functions would have been an obvious consideration for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention since Durant et al fairly teach such a foot pedal operation protocol in an analogous surgical system.
Regarding claims 2-8, both Rosa et al and Durant et al disclose various different protocols for actuating the foot pedal to control the various different functions of the device, including single and multiple taps of a single foot pedal, continuous depression of a foot pedal, and use of multiple foot pedals. The specific order or type of actuation is deemed to be within the purview of the skilled artisan, as is the predetermined time period between activations. Regarding claim 9, Rosa et al disclose the use of multiple foot pedals (105a, 105b, 105c) or a single foot pedal to control various different operating functions. Regarding claim 10, see Rosa et al at paragraphs [0024-0030] which discusses identifying the position of the jaw members based on the positioning of the rod drive rod (i.e. reciprocating element). Regarding claim 11, Rosa discloses several different types of controllers to operate the various functions, including foot pedals, push buttons and hand-held actuator (para. [0035] and [0041], for example). Regarding claim 12, Rosa et al provide an electrosurgical energy source for delivery of energy to the paw members (para. [0024], for example). Regarding claim 13, the system includes means to determine that tissue is sealed (para. [0050], for example) and to provide an indication that tissue is sealed (i.e. energy is removed upon sensing tissue fusion). See, also, paragraph [0058] which discusses providing indications for the completion of various different functions, including tissue fusing.
Regarding claim 14, Rosa et al disclose all the structure for the surgical instrument as addressed with respect to claim 1 above, and further disclose all the associated steps with operating the device in accordance with method steps of claim 14. Again, while Rosa et al disclose various different ways to actuate the device, including the use of one or more foot pedals, but fails to expressly disclose a second actuation of the at least one foot pedal within a predetermined time period as part of the actuation profile.
Again, the examiner maintains that Rosa et al fairly teach a variety of actuation options, including multiple foot pedals or multiple actuation of a single foot pedal, and the use of a time period between successive depressions would be within the purview of the skilled artisan to control the various different functions being performed by the Rosa et al system. To further support this assertion, attention is directed to the Durant et al reference which discloses a similar surgical system including a surgical device having an end effector and a knife blade to grasp and cut tissue, and means to provide RF energy to seal tissue. Durant et al provide a foot pedal actuator to control the various functions of the surgical system similar to the Rosa et al system. In particular, Durant et al specifically teach that it is known to provide a foot pedal actuator with various different actuation modalities, including detecting a predetermined time period between foot pedal depressions to operatively control the surgical system. See, for example, paragraphs [0074-0079] of Durant et al.
To have provided the Rosa et al system with a foot pedal operation protocol that includes multiple actuations of a foot pedal within a predetermined time period to control operation of the various different functions would have been an obvious consideration for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention since Durant et al fairly teach such a foot pedal operation protocol in an analogous surgical system.
Regarding claims 15-19, the examiner again maintains that the specific operation of the foot pedals to control the various functions of the Rosa et al system would be an obvious consideration for one of ordinary skill in the art, including the specific timing requirements to control the actuation of the various functions. Regarding claim 20, Rosa et al disclose monitoring the position of the drive rod to determine functions such as the opening/closing of the jaws and actuation of the knife as addressed with respect to claim 10 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Miller et al (10,426,467) and Manzo et al (2012/0310254) disclose other robotic surgical systems that include an actuator to operate a tissue grasping/sealing/cutting device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL PEFFLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4770. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 am-5 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, Linda Dvorak can be reached at (571) 272-4764. 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.
/MICHAEL F PEFFLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/M.F.P/January 21, 2026