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
Applicants’ election of claims 1-9, without traverse, is acknowledged and made final. Claims 10 is withdrawn from further consideration.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/10/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-8, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "determine whether or not the endoscope follows movement of the first treatment tool by comparing the difference in orientation with a threshold value" in lines 16-17. It is unclear how comparing the difference in orientation of the treatment tools helps in determining whether the endoscope follows movement of the first treatment tool because orientation and movement of the endoscope has not been considered. Further, it is unclear regarding what happens in determining when the first treatment tool does not move and only the second treatment tool moves.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5, recites the limitation “wherein the controller is further configured to: calculate a first position of the first treatment tool, calculate a second position of the second treatment tool, calculate a difference in position between the first position and the second position, and determine whether or not the endoscope follows the movement of the first treatment tool by comparing the difference in orientation with the threshold value and the difference in position with a further threshold value.”
Here, it is unclear regarding how comparing the difference in position between the treatment tools helps in determining whether or not the endoscope follows movement of the first treatment tool because position of the endoscope has not been determined/considered. Further, it is unclear regarding what happens in determining when the first treatment tool does not move and only the second treatment tool moves.
Claim 4, recites “wherein the second treatment tool is the first treatment tool”. When the second treatment tool becomes the first treatment tool, it would be unclear regarding how the “difference” would be calculated in claim 1. Thus, for the assumption (consideration) of claim 4, claim 1 becomes unclear which makes claim 4 unclear.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-8 are rejected for being dependent on a rejected base claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue (US 20200113419) in view of Jensen (US 20020169440).
Regarding claim 1, Inoue discloses endoscope system comprising:
an endoscope (endoscope 3; FIG. 1);
a robot arm (motorized arm 5; FIG. 1) that is configured to move the endoscope; and
a controller (control unit 6; Para [0019]-[0021]) that is configured to control the endoscope and the robot arm, wherein the controller is configured to:
receive an image acquired by the endoscope (FIG. 5),
calculate a first orientation of a first treatment tool in a first image (treatment-tool 4 coordinate calculation; FIG. 5; para [0040]), which is the image received at a given point in time,
calculate a second orientation of a second treatment tool in a second image (treatment-tool 4 coordinate calculation; FIG. 5; para [0040]), which is the image received a predetermined time before the first image,
calculate a difference in orientation between the first orientation and the second orientation, determine whether or not the endoscope follows movement of the first treatment tool by comparing the difference in orientation with a threshold value (Based on a calculated distance, judgment unit 11 determines that a corresponding treatment tool 4 is a follow-target treatment tool 4 (judgment step S7). FIG. 5; Para [0041]).
Inoue does not expressly disclose, in response to determining that the endoscope follows the movement of the first treatment tool, generate a command for the robot arm for making the endoscope follow the first treatment tool.
Jensen is directed to emote center positioner used to support an instrument (abstract) and teaches in response to determining that the endoscope follows the movement of the first treatment tool, generate a command for the robot arm for making the endoscope follow the first treatment tool (Telerobotic manipulation of laparoscopic surgical instruments (laparoscopes and various working tools) are provided in which the positions of the working end of the tools are under servo control; Tools under servo control follow surgeons’ hand as the surgeon manipulates the input control device. Para [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue to have/include control method for following movement of endoscopes (or endoscope controlling hand) in accordance with the teaching of Jensen so that controlling movement of the instruments or tools become convenient as the movement is controlled by the robot to follow the movement of a hand (or a tool controlled by the hand).
Regarding claim 2, Inoue as modified, teaches wherein the controller is further configured to, in response to determining that the endoscope does not follow the movement of the first treatment tool, generate a command for the robot arm for making the endoscope stop following the first treatment tool (Jensen: Since Tools under servo control follow surgeons’ hand as the surgeon manipulates the input control device, Para [0015], if it is determined that the hand operated endoscope is found to stop, robot arm will also stop.).
Regarding claim 3, Inoue discloses wherein the given point in time is a present time (Since the medical system can work for a continuous time, this can be used for present time; Para [0038]-[0040]).
Regarding claim 4, Inoue discloses wherein the second treatment tool is the first treatment tool (As seen from FIG. 1, one treatment tool can be considered for the process and process can follow the steps for one tool. Also see rejection under 112(b) above).
Regarding claim 5, Inoue discloses wherein the controller is further configured to: calculate a first position of the first treatment tool (treatment-tool 4 coordinate calculation; FIG. 5; para [0040]), calculate a second position of the second treatment tool (treatment-tool 4 coordinate calculation; FIG. 5; para [0040]), calculate a difference in position between the first position and the second position (Based on a calculated distance, judgment unit 11 determines that a corresponding treatment tool 4 is a follow-target treatment tool 4 (judgment step S7). FIG. 5; Para [0041]), and determine whether or not the endoscope follows the movement of the first treatment tool by comparing the difference in orientation with the threshold value and the difference in position with a further threshold value (Based on a calculated distance, judgment unit 11 determines that a corresponding treatment tool 4 is a follow-target treatment tool 4 (judgment step S7). FIG. 5; Para [0041]; When determining a follow target, a threshold distance is used to compare values.).
Regarding claim 6, Inoue discloses wherein the second treatment tool is the first treatment tool (As seen from FIG. 1, one treatment tool can be considered for the process and process can follow the steps for one tool. Also see rejection under 112(b) above).
Regarding claim 7, Inoue discloses wherein the first orientation is an angle formed between a reference axis in the image and the first treatment tool (The axis and tool coordinate is determined from the image, FIG. 5).
Regarding claim 8, Inoue discloses wherein the first orientation is a vector in a longitudinal direction of the first treatment tool in the image (FIG. 3C; A longitudinal direction of the tool, FIGS. 3C, 3D can be used as orientation of the tool).
Regarding claim 9, Inoue discloses an endoscope system comprising:
an endoscope (endoscope 3; FIG. 1);
a robot arm (motorized arm 5; FIG. 1) that is configured to move the endoscope; and
a controller (control unit 6; Para [0019]-[0021]) that is configured to control the endoscope and the robot arm, wherein the controller is configured to:
receive an image acquired by the endoscope (FIG. 5), calculate an orientation of a treatment tool in an image (treatment-tool 4 coordinate calculation; FIG. 5; para [0040]), obtain a position of a pivot point of the treatment tool (Note the positions P, Q in FIG. 3D), calculate a position of a proximal end of the treatment tool (treatment-tool 4 coordinate calculation; FIG. 5; para [0040]), calculate a first vector parallel to a first line passing through the position of the proximal end of the treatment tool and a given position on the treatment tool (FIG. 3D; Positions P, Q may be considered as a pivot point; Pivot point is not defined; Note the vector defined between P and distal end of the tool. ), calculate a second vector parallel to a second line passing through the position of the pivot point and the given position (FIG. 3D; Positions P, Q may be considered as a pivot point; Pivot point is not defined; Note the vector defined between Q and distal end of the tool.), move the endoscope to follow the movement of the treatment tool in a case in which an angle between the first vector and the second vector is equal to or less than a predetermined threshold value (The follow up is based on the distance and angle (which would provide a vector), FIGS. 3D, 5; Judgment unit 11 determines that a corresponding treatment tool 4 is a follow-target treatment tool 4 (judgment step S7). FIG. 5; Para [0041).
Inoue does not expressly disclose, in response to determining that the endoscope follows the movement of the treatment tool, generate a command for the robot arm for making the endoscope follow the treatment tool.
Jensen is directed to emote center positioner used to support an instrument (abstract) and teaches in response to determining that the endoscope follows the movement of the first treatment tool, generate a command for the robot arm for making the endoscope follow the first treatment tool (Telerobotic manipulation of laparoscopic surgical instruments (laparoscopes and various working tools) are provided in which the positions of the working end of the tools are under servo control; Tools under servo control follow surgeons’ hand as the surgeon manipulates the input control device. Para [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue to have/include control method for following movement of endoscopes (or endoscope controlling hand) in accordance with the teaching of Jensen so that controlling movement of the instruments or tools become convenient as the movement is controlled by the robot to follow the movement of hand (or a tool controlled by the hand).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO – 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHANKAR R GHIMIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-0515. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached on 571-272-4963. 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.
/SHANKAR RAJ GHIMIRE/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/ANH TUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795 3/25/26
Prosecution Insights