CTFR 18/780,913 CTFR 78725 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. This action is in response to the amendment and remarks filed March 6, 2026. Election/Restrictions 08-25-01 AIA Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 16-26 in the reply filed on November 21, 2025 is acknowledged. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed March 6, 2026 with respect to the rejection(s) of the claims as amended have been fully considered and are not persuasive. As detailed below, column 168 lines 19-39 of SHELTON, IV et al. states that the disclosed cable drive system can be utilized to implement any suitable function of the end effector . Although the previous rejection acknowledges two sets of cables provided to implement firing functions of the end effector, the cited excerpt of SHELTON, IV et al. provides additional potential functions that can be driven by a set of cables, such as: clamping and unclamping of the end effector jaws; rotation of the end effector; and/or pivoting of the end effector relative to the elongated shaft supporting the end effector. Thus, Examiner has (again) relied on the disclosure of SHELTON, IV et al. . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 16-21 and 36-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHELTON, IV et al. (US 11,369,443) . In reference to claims 16 and 38, SHELTON, IV et al. discloses a method for operating a surgical instrument, the method comprising: positioning an end effector 70330 in a desired position with respect to a shaft 70302 to which the end effecter 70330 is operably coupled ( figures 131, 132 & 138-140 ); conducting a procedure ( e.g. firing/stapling, clamping, rotating, etc…; column 36 lines 54-61, column 168 lines 19-39, column and column 213 lines 29-36 ) with the end effector that causes tensions ( column 171 lines 19-31, 57- column 172 line 17 ) to be exerted on greater than two articulation cables 10033 ( column 168 lines 19-39) ; obtaining ( figure 16 ), by a controller 620 in communication with a plurality of motors 606a, 606b, 10111 and sensors 630, tensions exerted on the plurality of articulation cables ( column 172 lines 36-58 ); and the controller 620 operating and controlling ( column 53 lines 30-27; column 54 line 66- column 55 line 18 ) at least one of the motors 606a, 606b, 10111 in response to the tensions exceeding a first predetermined threshold ( column 172 lines 51-58 ) to reduce the tensions to below the first predetermined threshold and maintain the end effector at a desired pose ( column 52 line 63- column 53 line 10 ). Regarding claims 17 and 39, column 53 lines 1-4 of SHELTON, IV et al. discloses operating the at least one motors 606a, 606b independently to articulate the end effector with respect to the shaft to a desired pose. With respect to claim 18, figures 16-18, and 166 of SHELTON, IV et al. discloses clamping tissue 7044 between a first jaw and a second jaw of the end effector ( see Diagram I below ), and actuating a knife ( figure 19; “I-beam” column 54 line 66- column 55 line 11 ) that is configured for selective actuation along a firing stroke relative to the first and second jaws ( column 64 lines 26-32 ). PNG media_image1.png 539 654 media_image1.png Greyscale Diagram I In reference to claim 19, column 52 line 54- column 53 line 10 of SHELTON, IV et al. discloses operating a plurality of motors simultaneously; and controlling the operation of a firing motor while the articulation motor is inactive for the purpose of maintaining the desired pose of the end effector. Regarding claim 20, column 171 lines 19-44 and column 172 lines 18-32 of SHELTON, IV et al. discloses obtaining tensions exerted on the plurality of articulation cables; operating at least one motor of the plurality of motors until the tension of each articulation cable is below the first predetermined tensions threshold ( column 172 lines 36-48 ); and controlling the articulation motor in an inactive state to substantially maintain the desired poste of the end effector ( column 53 lines 1-7 ). With respect to claim 21, column 172 lines 18-40 of SHELTON, IV et al. further discloses calculating an offset of at least on for the motors in response to the first predetermined tension threshold being exceeded and operating the at least one motor at the calculated offset. In reference to claims 36 and 37, column 169 line 60- column 170 line 5 of SHELTON, IV et al. discloses each drive system for a respective function of the end effector comprises an input drive member (single motor or two motors to reduce torque) to drive a single spool about which a cable 10033 is wound. Considering column 168 lines 29-39 of SHELTON, IV et al. further discloses that a drive system may be provided for at least four functions (i.e. clamping/unclamping, firing, rotation & pivoting ) of the end effector, Examiner has found SHELTON, IV et al. to anticipated the invention as claimed. Regarding claim 40, column 53 lines 7-11 of SHELTONG, IV et al. further discloses controlling ( indexing- stepper motor: column 121 lines 56-63 ) multiple motors of the drive system in unison while maintaining a desired pose (position) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 22, 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHELTON, IV et al. (US 11,369,443) In reference to claim 22, column 172 lines 18-40 of SHELTON, IV et al. further discloses calculating an offset of at least on for the motors in response to the first predetermined tension threshold being exceeded and operating the at least one motor at the calculated offset. SHELTON, IV et al. does not specifically reference a process of determining a second predetermined tension as claimed. However, column 172 lines 36-48 of SHELTON, IV et states the any slack (i.e. absence of tension) in the plurality of articulation cables is assessed continuously throughout a surgical procedure of the surgical instrument. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have modified the process of SHELTON, IV et al. to include a second predetermined tensions of equal to or less than the first predetermined tensions for the purpose of having a first predetermined tension corresponding to a first of the plurality of articulation cables and a second predetermined tensions corresponding to a second of the plurality of articulation cables since the plurality of articulation cables are actuated independently by a plurality of motors to implement a plurality of functions (e.g. articulation of end effector relative to shaft & articulation of I-beam relative to end effector jaws) Regarding claim 25, column 172 lines 18-40 of SHELTON, IV et al. further discloses calculating an offset of at least on for the motors in response to the first predetermined tension threshold being exceeded and operating the at least one motor at the calculated offset. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have further modified the process of SHELTON, IV et al. to include operating at least one motor based on the second predetermined tension threshold being exceeded since the plurality of articulation cables are actuated independently by a plurality of motors to implement a plurality of functions (e.g. articulation of end effector relative to shaft & articulation of I-beam relative to end effector jaws) and column 173 lines 2-15 of SHELTON, IV et al. suggest such a modification would avoid improper use of the surgical instrument when proper tension is no longer obtainable. With respect to claim 26, column 170 line 54- column 171 line 5 and column 172 line 59- column 173 line 9 of SHELTON, IV et al. discloses obtaining the tensions exerted on the plurality of articulation cables 10030 and sensing torque of the plurality of motors extrapolating the tensions . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 23 and 24 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 of claims 23 and 24: Upon examination, the art considered as a whole, alone or in combination, neither anticipated nor renders obvious the claimed method of operation of the at least one motor including indexing each motor of the plurality of motors in unison/ in coordination and by an amount determined to maintain the desired pose of the end effector for the purpose of reducing force spikes during a surgical procedure. Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 GLORIA R WEEKS whose telephone number is (571)272-4473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-2pm & 5pm-7pm EST. 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, Shelley Self can be reached at 571-272-4524. 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. Other helpful telephone numbers are listed for applicant's benefit: Allowed Files & Publication (888) 786-0101 Assignment Branch (800) 972-6382 Certificates of Correction (703) 305-8309 Fee Questions (571) 272-6400 Inventor Assistance Center (800) PTO-9199 Petitions/special Programs (571) 272-3282 Information Help line 1-800-786-9199 /GLORIA R WEEKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731 May 31, 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/780,913 Page 2 Art Unit: 3731 Application/Control Number: 18/780,913 Page 3 Art Unit: 3731 Application/Control Number: 18/780,913 Page 4 Art Unit: 3731 Application/Control Number: 18/780,913 Page 5 Art Unit: 3731 Application/Control Number: 18/780,913 Page 6 Art Unit: 3731 Application/Control Number: 18/780,913 Page 7 Art Unit: 3731 Application/Control Number: 18/780,913 Page 8 Art Unit: 3731 Application/Control Number: 18/780,913 Page 9 Art Unit: 3731
Prosecution Insights