Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/767,753

METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR SURGICAL TABLE STABILIZATION

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jul 09, 2024
Examiner
ROANE, AARON F
Art Unit
3792
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Lem Surgical AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
632 granted / 868 resolved
+2.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
903
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
43.2%
+3.2% vs TC avg
§102
26.7%
-13.3% vs TC avg
§112
18.5%
-21.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 868 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 § 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 1-10 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 "the table support element table" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In order to provide an initial examination and search the examiner interprets the phrase “the table support element table” as -- the table support element.-- 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. Claims 1-3, 7-14, 21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Timm et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0405432). Regarding claim 1, Timm et al. disclose a method for performing robotic surgery on a patient (“P,” see figure 4) lying on a surgical table (“Table Top,” see figure 4), said method comprising: positioning a robotic surgical cart (“cart,” see [0051] and figure 4) adjacent to the surgical table; elevating a table support element (642 “coupling member,” see [0057] and figure 6B, and alternate/equivalent counterparts in other embodiments) disposed on the robotic surgical cart to engage and to apply a controlled upward force to a structure on an underside of the surgical table to stabilize the surgical table (see [0057]); and performing a surgical procedure (“surgical procedure,” see [0031]-[0035] for example) on the patient using one or more tools (each of the two, three, four, or more robotic arms has distal end portion 137 (also referred to herein as “operating end”) can include or have coupled thereto a medical instrument or tool 115,” see [0033], and [0035] for example) moved by at least one surgical robotic arm located on the mobile surgical robotic cart while said surgical table remains stabilized by the table support element. Regarding claim 2, Timm et al. disclose the claimed invention including positioning the robotic surgical cart beneath the surgical table, wherein the table support element is elevated from an upper surface of the robotic surgical cart to engage the underside of the surgical table (see [0057]). Regarding claim 3, Timm et al. disclose the claimed invention including positioning the robotic surgical cart adjacent to the surgical table, wherein the table support element is extended laterally from the robotic surgical cart and then elevated to engage the underside of the surgical table (see [0057] and figures 1A-20C). Regarding claim 7, Timm et al. disclose the claimed invention including the table support element comprises a bar (the long bar-like portion of 642, see figure 6B) that extends laterally across the robotic surgical cart. Regarding claim 8, Timm et al. disclose the claimed invention including the table support element comprises a plate (the long bar-like portion of 642, see figure 6) having an upper surface that is generally parallel to an upper surface of the robotic surgical cart. Regarding claim 9, Timm et al. disclose the claimed invention including repositioning the surgical table during the robotic surgery, wherein a robotic surgical controller (for example “lever or button,” see [0086]) adjusts a position of the table support element to maintain the controlled upward force in a desired range. Regarding claim 10, Timm et al. disclose the claimed invention including adjusting the position of the table support element comprises controlling a table support element driver with a robotic surgery controller disposed om the mobile surgical robotic cart (see [0086]). Regarding claim 11, Timm et al. disclose a robotic surgical system configured to perform robotic surgery on a patient lying on a surgical table, said robotic surgical system comprising: a mobile cart (“cart,” see [0051] and figure 4); a first surgical robotic arm (a first of the two, three, four or more robotic arms 130/330, see [0035]) disposed on the chassis and configured to hold a first surgical tool; a table support element (642 “coupling member,” see [0057] and figure 6B, and alternate/equivalent counterparts in other embodiments); and a surgical robotic controller (“lever or button,” see [0086]), wherein said surgical robotic controller is configured to (a) kinematically position the first robotic arms in a surgical robotic coordinate space and (b) elevate the table support element to engage and to apply a controlled upward force to a structure on an underside of the surgical table to stabilize the surgical table (see [0086] and figures 1A-20C). Regarding claim 12, Timm et al. disclose the claimed invention including the table support element is located on an upper surface of the mobile cart and configured to apply the controlled upward force to the structure on the underside of the surgical table when the mobile cart chassis is positioned beneath the surgical table (see figures 1A-20C). Regarding claim 13, Timm et al. disclose the claimed invention including the table support element is located in a recessed region on the upper surface of the mobile cart (see figures 7A-20C). Regarding claim 14, Timm et al. disclose the claimed invention including the table support element is configured to extend laterally from the mobile cart and to engage the underside of the surgical table when the mobile cart is positioned adjacent to the surgical table (see figures 6B-20C). Regarding claim 21, Timm et al. disclose the claimed invention including at least a second surgical robotic arm disposed on the mobile cart and configured to hold a second surgical tool (see [0033] and [0035]). Regarding claim 23, Timm et al. disclose a method for performing robotic surgery on a patient (“P,” see figure 4) lying on a surgical table (“Table Top,” see figure 4), said method comprising: positioning a mobile surgical robotic chassis (“cart,” see [0051] and figure 4) beneath the surgical table (see figure 4); pressing an element (642 “coupling member,” see [0057] and figure 6B, and alternate/equivalent counterparts in other embodiments) on the chassis upwardly against a bottom of the bed to stabilize the surgical table; and performing a surgical procedure (“surgical procedure,” see [0031]-[0035] for example) on the patient using one or more tools (each of the two, three, four, or more robotic arms has distal end portion 137 (also referred to herein as “operating end”) can include or have coupled thereto a medical instrument or tool 115,” see [0033], and [0035] for example) moved by surgical robotic arms located on the mobile surgical robotic chassis while said mobile surgical robotic chassis remains stabilized by the element. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-6, 15-20, and 22 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: if the objected to claims 4-6, 15-20 and 22 are amended with their independent claims and any intervening claims those claims would distinguish over the prior art. Additionally, the prior art does not anticipate or provide a properly motivated combination making obvious the presently claimed invention as defined by said amended claims in their entirety. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON F ROANE whose telephone number is (571)272-4771. The examiner can normally be reached generally Mon-Fri 8am-9pm. 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. /AARON F ROANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 09, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599454
MECHANISMS AND METHODS TO CONTROL MOVEMENT OF A HEAD OF A MEDICAL SYSTEM RELATIVE TO AN ANATOMICAL SITE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599778
Precise Targeting of Beneficial Effects of Coherent Energy Using Nanoparticles
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12575852
TISSUE TREATMENT PROBE WITH BENT OPTICAL FIBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564391
SURGICAL ROBOT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12551304
CO-MANIPULATION SURGICAL SYSTEM FOR USE WITH SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS FOR PERFORMING SURGERY ACCORDING TO STORED SURGEON'S PREFERENCES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+10.0%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 868 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month