Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 01, 2026
Application No. 18/775,043

DRIVE AND ARTICULATION MECHANISMS FOR SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS FOR USE IN ROBOTIC SURGICAL SYSTEMS

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Jul 17, 2024
Priority
Jan 22, 2020 — continuation of 11/331,113 +1 more
Examiner
LABRANCHE, BROOKE N
Art Unit
3771
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Covidien L.P.
OA Round
2 (Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allowance Rate
343 granted / 472 resolved
+2.7% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
74 currently pending
Career history
544
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
44.7%
+4.7% vs TC avg
§102
31.1%
-8.9% vs TC avg
§112
20.3%
-19.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 472 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 to Amendment The amendments filed on 06/29/2026 have been entered. Claims 21-35 and 41-45 remain pending in the application. Claim Objections Claim 42 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 12 of claim 42, “456” should be removed. Appropriate correction is required. 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) 21, 25, 28, 35, and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rockrohr (US 2018/0028271). Regarding claim 21, Rockrohr discloses a surgical instrument (10, FIG 1C), comprising: an end effector (20) including a first jaw member (22) and a second jaw member (24), the first jaw member movable relative to the second jaw member between an open position and a closed position to grasp tissue therebetween ([0060] disclose opening and closing the jaw members. [0002 and 0004] discloses grasping tissue with the end effector); and a jaw drive sub-assembly (One of 300, FIG 2-9) configured to transition the end effector between the open position and the closed position ([0060] “Longitudinal translation of drive member 380 is configured to drive a function of end effector 20. For example, distal translation of a particular drive member 380 may be configured to approximate jaw members 22 and/or 24 with respect to the other, and proximal translation of drive member 380 may be configured to move at least one jaw member 22 away from the other jaw member 24, for instance”), the jaw drive sub-assembly including: a drive rod (340) coupled to the first jaw member (coupled via assembly as shown in FIG 9, wherein 340 connects to 380 which attaches to the jaw members [0059] “drive member 380…configured to mechanically engage a portion of surgical instrument 10, e.g., end effector 20”); and a spring force assembly (Elements of 300 shown in FIG 8) releasably coupled to the drive rod (the elements are releasably coupled because they are slidable and rotatable relative to 340), the spring force assembly including: a proximal hub (360) coupled to the drive rod (FIG 9); a compression spring (370) coupled to the proximal hub (FIG 9, [0058] “a proximal portion 372 of biasing element 370 is configured for reception at least partially within retention pocket 364 of follower 360”); and a distal hub (350) disposed around a portion of the compression spring ([0053], FIG 9, “Retention pocket 354 includes a larger inner diameter than threaded aperture 352, and is configured to house at least a portion of biasing element 370”) and movable relative to the proximal hub (FIGs 5-7 show movement between 350 and 360, [0065-0066]), wherein the drive rod is disposed though at least a portion of the compression spring (FIG 9, [0058]). Regarding claim 25, Rockrohr discloses the proximal hub includes a retainer guide (363) and the distal hub includes a retainer guide (353), each of the retainer guide of the proximal hub and the retainer guide of the distal hub configured to operably couple to a guide bar (206, FIG 12) to inhibit rotation of the distal hub relative to the proximal hub ([0054-0055]). Regarding claim 28, Rockrohr discloses a gearbox assembly (200, FIG 1C-4) for use with a surgical instrument (10), the gearbox assembly comprising: an articulation sub-assembly (Two of 300) configured to articulate an end effector (20, [0060] discloses one of 300 is arranged to cause articulation of the end effector in one direction and another is used to articulate in the opposite direction); and a jaw drive sub-assembly (One of 300, FIG 2-9) configured to actuate the end effector ([0060] “Longitudinal translation of drive member 380 is configured to drive a function of end effector 20. For example, distal translation of a particular drive member 380 may be configured to approximate jaw members 22 and/or 24 with respect to the other, and proximal translation of drive member 380 may be configured to move at least one jaw member 22 away from the other jaw member 24, for instance”), the jaw drive sub-assembly including: a drive rod (340) coupled to the end effector (coupled via assembly as shown in FIG 9, wherein 340 connects to 380 which attaches to the jaw members [0059] “drive member 380…configured to mechanically engage a portion of surgical instrument 10, e.g., end effector 20”); and a spring force assembly (Elements of 300 shown in FIG 8) releasably coupled to the drive rod (the elements are releasably coupled because they are slidable and rotatable relative to 340), the spring force assembly including: a proximal hub (360) coupled to the drive rod (FIG 9); a compression spring (370) coupled to the proximal hub (FIG 9, [0058] “a proximal portion 372 of biasing element 370 is configured for reception at least partially within retention pocket 364 of follower 360”), wherein the drive rod is disposed though at least a portion of the compression spring (FIG 9, [0058]); and a distal hub (350) disposed around a portion of the compression spring ([0053], FIG 9, “Retention pocket 354 includes a larger inner diameter than threaded aperture 352, and is configured to house at least a portion of biasing element 370”) and movable relative to the proximal hub (FIGs 5-7 show movement between 350 and 360, [0065-0066]). Regarding claim 35, Rockrohr discloses the proximal hub includes a retainer guide (363) and the distal hub includes a retainer guide (353), each of the retainer guide of the proximal hub and the retainer guide of the distal hub configured to operably couple to a guide bar (206, FIG 12) to inhibit rotation of the distal hub relative to the proximal hub ([0054-0055]). Regarding claim 41, Rockrohr discloses the drive rod is coaxially disposed through at least a portion of the compression spring (FIG 9). Claim(s) 21, 22, 24, 28, 32, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kopp (US 2018/0008338). Regarding claim 21, Kopp discloses a surgical instrument (10, FIG 2), comprising: an end effector (200) including a first jaw member (202a, FIG 8A) and a second jaw member (202b), the first jaw member movable relative to the second jaw member between an open position (FIG 8a) and a closed position (FIG 8b) to grasp tissue therebetween ([0038 and 0061-0068]); and a jaw drive sub-assembly (100, FIG 3A-4) configured to transition the end effector between the open position and the closed position ([0038] “Instrument drive unit 20 transfers power and actuation forces from its motors (not shown) to actuation mechanism 100 of electrosurgical instrument 10 to ultimately drive movement of components of electrosurgical end effector 200, for example, a closing and opening of jaw members 202a, 202b (FIGS. 8A and 8B) of electrosurgical end effector 200”), the jaw drive sub-assembly including: a drive rod (122) coupled to the first jaw member ([0044], FIG 8A-8B); and a spring force assembly (Proximal elements shown in FIG 5) releasably coupled to the drive rod (the elements are releasably coupled because they are slidable and rotatable relative to 122), the spring force assembly including: a proximal hub (144/156) coupled to the drive rod (FIG 4); a compression spring (143) coupled to the proximal hub ([0046-0047]); and a distal hub (142) disposed around a portion of the compression spring (Radially outward thereof, FIG 4-5) and movable relative to the proximal hub (FIGs 4-5 show movement between 142 and 144), wherein the drive rod is disposed though at least a portion of the compression spring (FIG 4). Regarding claim 22, Kopp discloses the proximal hub defines an elongated hub stem and the compression spring is disposed around the elongated hub stem (FIG 6 shows there is a projection of 144 which is radially inward of 143. This piece is interpreted as the elongated hub stem). Regarding claim 24, Kopp discloses the jaw drive sub- assembly includes an input shaft (114) having an elongate threaded body portion ([0048-0049]) threadingly engaged with a threaded bore (150, FIG 4) of the distal hub such that rotation of the input shaft causes longitudinal translation of the distal hub ([0048-0050]). Regarding claim 28, Kopp discloses a gearbox assembly (20 and 100, FIG 2-4) for use with a surgical instrument (10, FIG 2), the gearbox assembly comprising: an articulation sub assembly configured to articulate an end effector (interpreted as actuation of the blade 218, [0055-0060]); and a jaw drive sub-assembly (100, FIG 3A-4) configured to actuate the end effector ([0038] “Instrument drive unit 20 transfers power and actuation forces from its motors (not shown) to actuation mechanism 100 of electrosurgical instrument 10 to ultimately drive movement of components of electrosurgical end effector 200, for example, a closing and opening of jaw members 202a, 202b (FIGS. 8A and 8B) of electrosurgical end effector 200”), the jaw drive sub-assembly including: a drive rod (122) coupled to the end effector ([0044], FIG 8A-8B); and a spring force assembly (Proximal elements shown in FIG 5) releasably coupled to the drive rod (the elements are releasably coupled because they are slidable and rotatable relative to 122), the spring force assembly including: a proximal hub (144/156) coupled to the drive rod (FIG 4); a compression spring (143) coupled to the proximal hub ([0046-0047]), wherein the drive rod is disposed though at least a portion of the compression spring (FIG 4); and a distal hub (142) disposed around a portion of the compression spring (Radially outward thereof, FIG 4-5) and movable relative to the proximal hub (FIGs 4-5 show movement between 142 and 144). Regarding claim 32, Kopp discloses the proximal hub defines an elongated hub stem and the compression spring is disposed around the elongated hub stem (FIG 6 shows there is a projection of 144 which is radially inward of 143. This piece is interpreted as the elongated hub stem). Regarding claim 34, Kopp discloses the jaw drive sub- assembly includes an input shaft (114) having an elongate threaded body portion ([0048-0049]) threadingly engaged with a threaded bore (150, FIG 4) of the distal hub such that rotation of the input shaft causes longitudinal translation of the distal hub ([0048-0050]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 23, 26, 27 ,29, 30, 31, and 33 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. Claims 42-45 allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding claim 42, the prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious “a lock plate slidingly coupled to the proximal hub and configured to releasably lock the drive rod to the proximal hub” in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BROOKE N LABRANCHE whose telephone number is (571)272-9775. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5. 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, Elizabeth Houston can be reached at 5712727134. 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. /BROOKE LABRANCHE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 17, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Jun 29, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 18, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12740799
DIRECTABLE TRACTION SYSTEMS AND METHODS
1y 9m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12727963
INTEGRATED RFID TAG IN A MANUAL INSTRUMENT
2y 11m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12727956
END TOOL FOR SURGICAL INSTRUMENT
1y 11m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12708397
REPLACEABLE SURGICAL SCISSOR BLADES FOR SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12702394
DEVICES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR TREATING THE LEFT ATRIAL APPENDAGE
5y 1m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+15.7%)
3y 0m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 472 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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