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
Applicant should note that the large number of references in the attached information disclosure statement have been considered by the examiner in the same manner as other documents in Office search files are considered by the examiner while conducting a search of the prior art in a proper field of search. See MPEP 609.05(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dell (US 20170202628 A1; 7/20/2017).
Regarding claim 1, Dell teaches a surgical robotic system (Fig. 2; Fig. 5-6) comprising:
a surgical robotic arm including a surgical device and an instrument drive unit configured to actuate the surgical device (Fig. 2; Fig. 5-6);
a surgeon console configured to receive user input to control at least one of the surgical robotic arm or the surgical device (Fig. 2; Fig. 5-6); and
a control tower coupled to the surgical robotic arm and the surgeon console (Fig. 2; Fig. 5-6), the control tower including:
a storage device (Fig. 3); and
a controller (Fig. 3) configured to:
store a plurality of checkpoints on the storage device, each checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints including image data of a surgical site and position data corresponding to a prior position of the surgical robotic arm during a surgical procedure (Fig. 7; [0064]-[0065]; [0067]; [0081]; [0085]);
output a graphical user interface (GUI) on a display screen, the GUI configured to display the image data of at least one checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints and to receive user input selecting the at least one checkpoint ([0067]; [0084]); and
control the surgical robotic arm to move the surgical robotic arm to the prior position based on the selected at least one checkpoint (Fig. 7; [0064]; [0085]).
Regarding claim 2, Dell teaches wherein the controller is further configured to store the at least one checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints in response to activation of the surgical device ([0080]).
Regarding claim 3, Dell teaches wherein the controller is further configured to store the at least one checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints in response to a user command ([0064]-[0066]).
Regarding claim 4, Dell teaches wherein the controller is further configured to store the at least one checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints based on an elapsed time of the surgical procedure ([0065] “dynamically save”; [0085] “automatically save”; it is inherent that in order to automatically save there is a time resolution, i.e. time interval between the automatic saves).
Regarding claim 7, Dell teaches wherein the surgical device is a surgical robotic instrument (Fig. 2; Fig. 5-6; [0058] “end effector such as a laser based ablation system”; [0068] “robotic arm”).
Regarding claim 15, Dell teaches a method for restoring positional state of a surgical robotic system (Fig. 2; Fig. 5-7), the method comprising:
storing a plurality of checkpoints on a storage device, each checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints including image data of a surgical site and position data corresponding to a prior position of a surgical robotic arm during a surgical procedure (Fig. 7; [0064]-[0065]; [0067]; [0081]; [0085]);
outputting a graphical user interface (GUI) configured to display on a display screen the image data of at least one checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints ([0067]; [0084]);
receiving user input through the GUI selecting the at least one checkpoint (Fig. 7; [0064]; [0085]); and
controlling the surgical robotic arm to move the surgical robotic arm to the prior position based on the selected at least one checkpoint (Fig. 7; [0064]; [0085]).
Regarding claim 16, Dell teaches storing the at least one checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints in response to activation of a surgical device held by the surgical robotic arm (Fig. 2; Fig. 5-6; [0058] “end effector such as a laser based ablation system”; [0068] “robotic arm”; [0080]).
Regarding claim 17, Dell teaches storing the at least one checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints in response to a user command ([0064]-[0066]).
Regarding claim 18, Dell teaches storing the at least one checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints based on an elapsed time of the surgical procedure ([0065] “dynamically save”; [0085] “automatically save”; it is inherent that in order to automatically save there is a time resolution, i.e. time interval between the automatic saves).
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) 5-6, 8-9, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dell as applied to claim(s) 1, 15 above, in view of Hufford (US 20220104887 A1; 4/7/2022).
Regarding claim 5, Dell does not teach wherein the controller is further configured to detect a phase of the surgical procedure. However, Hufford teaches in the same field of endeavor (Fig. 1; [0009]) wherein the controller is further configured to detect a phase of the surgical procedure (Fig. 2; Fig. 5; Abstract; [0021]-[0022]; [0025]-[0026]; claim 1). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Dell to include this feature as taught by Hufford because this enables better surgical outcomes ([0001]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Dell and Hufford teaches wherein the controller is further configured to store the at least one checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints based on the detected phase of the surgical procedure (Dell [0064]-[0065]; [0067]; [0081]; [0084]; [0085]; Hufford Fig. 2; Fig. 5; Abstract; [0021]-[0022]; [0025]-[0026]; claim 1).
Regarding claim 8, Dell does not explicitly teach wherein the surgical device is a laparoscopic camera. However, Dell does teach camera that is used in access port for minimally invasive surgery ([0004]; [0028] “imaging devices that are insertable into a subject or patient for imaging internal tissues…through the access port”) which would be understood in the art to be a laparoscopic camera. However, to avoid doubt and for the sake of clarity of the record, Hufford teaches in the same field of endeavor (Fig. 1; [0009]) wherein the surgical device is a laparoscopic camera ([0010] “laparoscopic camera”). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Dell to include this feature as taught by Hufford because this is a suitable camera to use for capturing body images ([0010]); MPEP 2144.07 art recognized suitability for an intended purpose.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Dell and Hufford teaches wherein the at least one checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints includes the position data corresponding to the laparoscopic camera being outside a patient (Dell [0063] “positions may be used before and/or after a surgical procedure”; Hufford [0010]; claim 1; the initiation of surgery, “before a surgical procedure” would entail the camera being outside of patient prior to inserting into patient, conversely, the completion of surgery, “after surgical procedure” entails removing the laparoscopic camera and thus would also correspond to the camera being outside of patient.).
Regarding claim 19, Dell does not teach detecting a phase of the surgical procedure. However, Hufford teaches in the same field of endeavor (Fig. 1; [0009]) detecting a phase of the surgical procedure (Fig. 2; Fig. 5; Abstract; [0021]-[0022]; [0025]-[0026]; claim 1). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Dell to include this feature as taught by Hufford because this enables better surgical outcomes ([0001]).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Dell and Hufford teaches storing the at least one checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints based on the detected phase of the surgical procedure (Dell [0064]-[0065]; [0067]; [0081]; [0084]; [0085]; Hufford Fig. 2; Fig. 5; Abstract; [0021]-[0022]; [0025]-[0026]; claim 1).
Claim(s) 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dell (US 20170202628 A1; 7/20/2017) in view of Hufford (US 20220104887 A1; 4/7/2022).
Regarding claim 10, Dell teaches a method for restoring a positional state of a surgical robotic system (Fig. 2; Fig. 5-7), the method comprising:
storing on a storage device a plurality of checkpoints including image data of a surgical site and position data corresponding to a prior position during a surgical procedure (Fig. 7; [0064]-[0065]; [0067]; [0081]; [0085]).
Dell does not explicitly teach a laparoscopic camera held by a surgical robotic arm. However, Dell does teach camera that is used in access port for minimally invasive surgery held by robotic arm ([0004]; [0028] “imaging devices that are insertable into a subject or patient for imaging internal tissues…through the access port”; [0068] “robotic arm”) which would be understood in the art to be a laparoscopic camera. However, to avoid doubt and for the sake of clarity of the record, Hufford teaches in the same field of endeavor (Fig. 1; [0009]) a laparoscopic camera held by a surgical robotic arm (Fig. 1; [0009]; [0010] “laparoscopic camera”). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Dell to include this feature as taught by Hufford because this is a suitable camera to use for capturing body images ([0010]); MPEP 2144.07 art recognized suitability for an intended purpose.
The combination of Dell and Hufford teaches wherein a first checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints corresponds to a position of the laparoscopic camera being outside a patient and a second checkpoint of the plurality of checkpoints corresponds to a position of the laparoscopic camera being inside patient (Dell [0063] “positions may be used before and/or after a surgical procedure”; Hufford [0010]; claim 1; the initiation of surgery, “before a surgical procedure” would entail the camera being outside of patient prior to inserting into patient, conversely, the completion of surgery, “after surgical procedure” entails removing the laparoscopic camera and thus would also correspond to the camera being outside of patient.);
outputting a graphical user interface (GUI) configured to display on a display screen the image data of the plurality of checkpoints (Dell [0067]; [0084]; Hufford Fig. 2; claim 1);
receiving a first user input through the GUI selecting at least one of the first checkpoint or the second checkpoint (Dell [0064]; [0067]; [0084]-[0085]); and
controlling the surgical robotic arm to move the surgical robotic arm to the prior position based on selection of at least one of the first checkpoint or the second checkpoint (Dell Fig. 7; [0064]; [0085]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Dell and Hufford teaches storing at least one of the first checkpoint or the second checkpoint in response to activation of the laparoscopic camera (Dell [0080]; Hufford [0010]; [0019]-[0020]).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Dell and Hufford teaches storing at least one of the first checkpoint or the second checkpoint in response to a user command (Dell [0064]-[0066]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Dell and Hufford teaches storing at least one of the first checkpoint or the second checkpoint based on an elapsed time of the surgical procedure (Dell [0065] “dynamically save”; [0085] “automatically save”; it is inherent that in order to automatically save there is a time resolution, i.e. time interval between the automatic saves).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Dell and Hufford does not teach detecting a phase of the surgical procedure.
However, Hufford teaches in the same field of endeavor (Fig. 1; [0009]) detecting a phase of the surgical procedure (Fig. 2; Fig. 5; Abstract; [0021]-[0022]; [0025]-[0026]; claim 1). Thus it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Dell and Hufford to include this feature as taught by Hufford because this enables better surgical outcomes ([0001]).
The combination of Dell and Hufford teaches storing at least one of the first checkpoint or the second checkpoint based on the detected phase of the surgical procedure (Dell [0064]-[0065]; [0067]; [0081]; [0084]; [0085]; Hufford Fig. 2; Fig. 5; Abstract; [0021]-[0022]; [0025]-[0026]; claim 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Peine (US 20250195166 A1) teaches “determining a phase or a task of a surgical procedure” ([0019]) and “control algorithm may additionally, or alternatively, dynamically select or change the type, frequency, or amount and rate of data logging based on the surgical phase or task detected.” ([0058]; claim 17); this is relevant to claims 5 and 14.
Ramirez Luna (US 20190327394 A1) teaches waypoints that in which “a specific visualization site position, direction, and/or orientation can be saved, and then returned to later in the procedure” ([0399]-[0400]).
Hauck (US 20070198008 A1) teaches waypoints that enable device to enter and return in reverse the same way within body ([0014]; [0116]; [0119]).
Moller (US 20230099522 A1) teaches reference pose can be saved ([0129]; [0200]-[0202]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jonathan T Kuo whose telephone number is (408)918-7534. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10 a.m. - 6 p.m. PT.
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, Niketa Patel can be reached at 571-272-4156. 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.
/JONATHAN T KUO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792