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 .
Response for Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I (Figures 1-9) in the reply filed on 7/6/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-5, 7-9 and 12-14 read on the elected invention.
Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/6/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitation of “a separate sterile cover arranged between the medical fastening adapter and the fastening section, the separate sterile cover connected to at least the first counter-coupling structure, the second counter-coupling structure, and the third counter-coupling structure as well as the first coupling structure, the second coupling structure, and the third coupling structure” in claim 12 and also, the limitation of “a sterile cover, the sterile cover being arranged between the at least one fastening section and the at least one medical fastening adapter, so that the at least one fastening section is positionable in a non-sterile area, and the at least one fastening adapter is positionable in a sterile area” in claim 14 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schuele (US Pub No. 2013/0081636).
Regarding claim 1, Schuele discloses (Figures 4-12) a medical fastening adapter (200) for detachable fastening to a fastening section of a medical robot [Fully capable in doing this since Schuele discloses all of the structural elements in the same arrangement as claimed. Also, the examiner wants to note that the fastening section of the medical robot is not positively recited in the claim and is only functionally recited], the medical fastening adapter comprising: a support structure (202) with an instrument interface (208) (Figure 4); at least a first coupling structure (214), a second coupling structure (back 212 as shown in Figure 4), and a third coupling structure (front 212 as shown in Figure 4) that are each designed for a positive connection to the fastening section robot [Fully capable in doing this since Schuele discloses all of the structural elements in the same arrangement as claimed]; and an adjusting element (204) adapted to adjust positions of the first coupling structure, the second coupling structure, and the third coupling structure relative to each other in such a way that, in a first relative positioning, the medical fastening adapter is couplable to the fastening section (Paragraphs 0025-0029) (similar to Figure 9 where the first, second and third coupling structures are just coupled to a section without the first coupling structure 214 being moved to tighten the adaptor), and in a second relative positioning, the medical fastening adapter is fixed to the fastening section (Paragraphs 0025-0029) (similar to Figure 10 where the first, second and third coupling structures are fixed to a section by having the first coupling structure 214 to be moved to tighten the adaptor), a position of the medical fastening adapter relative to the fastening section being determined by the first coupling structure, the second coupling structure, and the third coupling structure (Paragraphs 0025-0029).
Regarding claim 2, wherein the first coupling structure, the second coupling structure, and the third coupling structure lie in one plane (top surface of each of the first coupling structure, the second coupling structure, and the third coupling structure lie in one plane that runs along the length of the adaptor as shown in Figure 4) and each have a convex surface (see annotated figure below), wherein at least the convex surface of the first coupling structure faces the convex surface of the second coupling structure and/or the third coupling structure (Figure 4), and the convex surface of the first coupling structure is displaceable in translation via the adjusting element in order to change a relative distance (Figure 9-10) (Paragraphs 0025-0029).
Regarding claim 3, wherein the second coupling structure and the third coupling structure are rigidly arranged on the support structure (Figure 4), and the adjusting element is designed as a rotatable screw gear with a rotary handle for manual actuation (clearly shown in Figure 4) (Paragraphs 0025-0029), which by rotation adjusts a position of the convex surface of the first coupling structure relative to the support structure and thus also relative to the second coupling structure and the third coupling structure (Paragraphs 0025-0029).
PNG
media_image1.png
491
695
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 of this title, 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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schuele (US Pub No. 2013/0081636) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Roberson (US Pub No. 2018/0161060).
Regarding claim 4, Schuele discloses the invention above except for wherein the rotatable screw gear has a torque limiter rigidly connected to the rotary handle and which, when a limit torque is exceeded, transmits only the limit torque and also provides an operator with haptic and/or acoustic feedback.
Roberson, in the analogous art of rotating surgical devices, teaches (Figures 24-26B) a surgical instrument (812) that includes a torque limiter (810) rigidly connected to the rotary handle (816) and which, when a limit torque is exceeded, transmits only the limit torque and also provides an operator with haptic and/or acoustic feedback (Paragraph 0115). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rotatable screw gear of Schuele to have included a torque limiter rigidly connected to the rotary handle and which, when a limit torque is exceeded, transmits only the limit torque and also provides an operator with haptic and/or acoustic feedback as taught by Roberson, in order to inhibit overtightening of the rotatable screw gear (Roberson, Paragraph 0115).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schuele (US Pub No. 2013/0081636) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dacus (US Pub No. 2023/0128714).
Regarding claim 7, Schuele discloses the invention above except for wherein the medical fastening adapter comprises a plastic.
Dacus, in the analogous art of adaptors or clamps used in surgery, teaches (Figures 1-7) a clamp (12) that is made of plastic (Paragraph 0035). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the medical fastening adapter of Schuele to comprise plastic as taught by Dacus, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schuele (US Pub No. 2013/0081636) in view of Schmitt (US Pub No. 2023/0355456).
Regarding claim 14, Schuele discloses at least one medical fastening adaptor to claim 1 (see rejection for claim 1 above) including at least one fastening section (118) (Figures 9-10).
Schuele fails to disclose a sterile cover, the sterile cover being arranged between the at least one fastening section and the at least one medical fastening adapter, so that the at least one fastening section is positionable in a non-sterile area, and the at least one fastening adapter is positionable in a sterile area.
Schmitt, in the same field of endeavor, teaches (Figures 1-8) a robotic system that includes a sterile cover (sterile drape as disclosed in Paragraph 0108) that provides separation being a sterile field and non-sterile field (Paragraph 0108). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Schuele to have included a sterile cover as taught by Schmitt, in order to provide separation being a sterile field and non-sterile field to reduce the risk of bacteria, viruses, and other pathogens entering the surgical area (Schmitt, Paragraph 0108). [Schuele modified by Schmitt as a whole would result in the sterile cover to be arranged between the at least one fastening section and the at least one medical fastening adapter, so that the at least one fastening section is positionable in a non-sterile area, and the at least one fastening adapter is positionable in a sterile area]
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 9, 12 and 13 are allowed.
Claims 5 is 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter in the dependent claims:
The prior art of record fails to disclose or render obvious the combination of features as claimed. In particular, the prior art of record fails to disclose the support structure of the medical fastening adapter has a guide stop forming a projection which is formed in a region of the first coupling structure and projects in a same direction as the first coupling structure and is parallel to a plane of the first coupling structure, the second coupling structure, and the third coupling structure in order to geometrically align the medical fastening adapter with respect to the fastening section via the guide stop in the first relative positioning (claim 5) and also, a fastening section on the medical robot, the fastening section comprising at least a first counter-coupling structure, a second counter-coupling structure, and a third counter-coupling structure that interact positively and complementarily with the first coupling structure, the second coupling structure, and the third coupling structure, respectively (claim 8).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAJID JAMIALAHMADI whose telephone number is (571) 270-0172. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7am-5pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Darwin Erezo can be reached on (571) 272-4695. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MAJID JAMIALAHMADI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
