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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 2, 4, 5 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 3, 6, 7, 14, and 18 have been amended. Claims 1, 3, and 6-18 are pending and examined below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 6-12, and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20140297130 A1 (“Griffiths ‘130”) in view of US 20140316654 A1 (“Griffiths ‘654”).
As per Claim 1, Griffiths’130 discloses a patient cart for a robot surgical system, comprising:
a mobile base, comprising:
a frame adapted and configured to support a medical robot (¶ 41—"a patient side cart 110 with multiple, independently moveable manipulator arms 140 that each support an actuation interface assembly 146”; ¶ 42—“A patient side cart 110 may include a plurality of wheels 149 mounted or otherwise attached to the cart 110, such as to a base 148 of the cart 110”);
one or more motive devices operatively connected to the frame (¶ 51—“one or more front wheels 410, 412 and one or more rear wheels 420”; ¶ 52—“ one or more wheels of a patient side cart 400 may be driven”;
one or more motors connected to the motive devices to drive the motive devices to move the frame (¶ 52—“motors 411, 413 may be provided to respectively drive wheels 410, 412”); and
a drive control interface connected to the frame and configured to sense a user input and to operate the one or more motors to move the one or more motive devices as a function of the user input (¶ 8—“The steering interface may be configured to detect a force applied by a user to the steering interface indicating a desired movement”; ¶ 65—“ Control system 540 may be configured to receive signal(s) (which may be first conditioned and processed by signal conditioner 520) from a steering interface 510 indicating a desired movement for a patient side cart”).
Griffiths ‘654 teaches additional limitations not expressly disclosed by Griffiths ‘130 including namely wherein the drive control interface includes a housing defining a handle recess and one or more grip actuators disposed within the handle recess, the one or more grip actuators being configured to be actuated by a user (¶ 51—“handlebar may have a rounded transverse cross-section and be sized so as to provide a comfortable, yet firm, grip”; ¶ 53—“outer shell being located at least in a region of a left portion 302 of the steering interface and a right portion 304 of the steering interface”; ¶ 70—“sensor block 330, which may be mounted within a steering interface”). Examiner notes that the space within the handlebar shell can be interpreted to be the handle recess. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Griffiths ‘130 to include the limitations as taught by Griffiths ‘654 to provide a patient side cart with controls to drive and move the patient side cart that are not complex but are instead relatively easy to use (Griffiths ‘654: ¶ 5).
As per Claim 3, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses wherein the drive control interface includes two grip actuators (¶ 60—“the steering interface 510 includes a first sensor 512 and a second sensor 514 that detect forces along the X and Y directions”; ¶ 94—“ a steering interface may include one or more "dead man" switches”).
As per Claim 6, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses wherein the drive control interface includes a drive control module operatively connected to one or more grip actuators to receive one or more state signals from the one or more grip actuators indicative of a position of the one or more grip actuators (¶ 58—“control system may be configured to receive signal(s) or input(s) from a steering interface 430 of a patient side cart 400 and, based upon the received input(s)”).
As per Claim 7, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses wherein the drive control module is configured to allow operation of the one or more motors in a drive mode if the one or more grip actuators are partially pressed (¶ 99—“When the "dead man" switch is depressed by application of a first amount of force, the cart functions normally and the brakes of the cart are not engaged”).
As per Claim 8, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses wherein the drive control module is configured to prevent operation of the one or more motors if the one or more grip actuators are pressed to or beyond a stop threshold (¶ 99—“When the "dead man" switch is depressed by application of a second amount of force greater than the first amount of force, the cart may be deactivated”).
As per Claim 9, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses wherein the stop threshold is complete actuation of the one or more grip actuators (¶ 99—“When the "dead man" switch is depressed by application of a second amount of force greater than the first amount of force, the cart may be deactivated”).
As per Claim 10, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses wherein the drive control interface includes a force sensor configured to sense a force and directionality of a user input (¶ 60—“the steering interface 510 includes a first sensor 512 and a second sensor 514 that detect forces along the X and Y directions…the sensors 512 and 514 can be load cells”).
As per Claim 11, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses wherein the drive control module is operatively connected to the force sensor to receive a sensed force, wherein in the drive mode, the drive control module is configured to operate the one or more motors as a function of the sensed force such that the one or more motors cause motion in a direction of the sensed force (¶ 8—“The control module may receive as input a signal from the steering interface corresponding to the force applied by the user…output a desired movement signal corresponding to the signal received”; ¶ 65—“issue one or more command outputs to cause the patient side cart to move in the desired manner.”).
As per Claim 12, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses wherein the drive control module is configured to operate the one or more motors at a speed proportional to the sensed force (¶ 76—“control modules 610, 612 may include maps, algorithms, look-up tables, or other functions used in the art to correspond a force input to a steering interface to a desired movement of a patient side cart, such as a desired velocity and/or desired acceleration”).
As per Claim 14, Griffiths ‘130 discloses a method for driving a patient cart of a robotic surgical system, comprising:
partially depressing one or more grip actuators on a drive control interface to initiate a drive mode (¶ 99—“When the "dead man" switch is depressed by application of a first amount of force, the cart functions normally”); and
applying force on a patient cart handle in a desired direction of motion thereby causing one or more motors to drive the patient cart in the desired direction of motion (¶ 56—“a user may push the steering interface 430 in the fore direction (relative to the front wheels 410, 412 and the rear wheels 420) along direction X in FIG. 3 or may pull the steering interface 430 backwards in the aft direction along direction X in FIG. 3 to indicate a desire to move a patient side cart 400 either forward or backward.”).
Griffiths ‘654 teaches additional limitations not expressly disclosed by Griffiths ‘130, including namely that the grip actuators are disposed within a handle recess of a drive control interface (¶ 51—“handlebar may have a rounded transverse cross-section and be sized so as to provide a comfortable, yet firm, grip”; ¶ 53—“outer shell being located at least in a region of a left portion 302 of the steering interface and a right portion 304 of the steering interface”; ¶ 70—“sensor block 330, which may be mounted within a steering interface”). Examiner notes that the space within the handlebar shell can be interpreted to be the handle recess. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Griffiths ‘130 to include the limitations as taught by Griffiths ‘654 to provide a patient side cart with controls to drive and move the patient side cart that are not complex but are instead relatively easy to use (Griffiths ‘654: ¶ 5).
As per Claim 15, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses wherein applying force includes pushing the patient cart handle in a forward direction while partially depressing the one or more grip actuators to move the patient cart forward (¶ 56—“a user may push the steering interface 430 in the fore direction (relative to the front wheels 410, 412 and the rear wheels 420) along direction X in FIG. 3 or may pull the steering interface 430 backwards in the aft direction along direction X in FIG. 3 to indicate a desire to move a patient side cart 400 either forward or backward.”; ¶ 99—“When the "dead man" switch is depressed by application of a first amount of force, the cart functions normally”).
As per Claim 16, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses wherein applying force includes pulling on the patient cart handle in a rearward direction while partially depressing the one or more grip actuators to move the patient cart backward (¶ 56—“a user may push the steering interface 430 in the fore direction (relative to the front wheels 410, 412 and the rear wheels 420) along direction X in FIG. 3 or may pull the steering interface 430 backwards in the aft direction along direction X in FIG. 3 to indicate a desire to move a patient side cart 400 either forward or backward.”; ¶ 99—“When the "dead man" switch is depressed by application of a first amount of force, the cart functions normally”).
As per Claim 17, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses wherein applying force includes pushing or pulling on the patient cart handle in a lateral direction while partially depressing the one or more grip actuators to steer the patient cart (¶ 57—“a user may apply a force having at least a component in the Y direction of FIG. 3 to indicate a desire to a turn the patient side cart either to the left or right”).
As per Claim 18, Griffiths ‘130 further discloses either fully depressing or releasing the one or more grip actuators to stop motion of the patient cart (¶ 99—“When the "dead man" switch is depressed by application of a second amount of force greater than the first amount of force, the cart may be deactivated”).
Claims 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Griffiths ‘130 in view of Griffiths ‘654 and further in view of US 20200138544 A1 (“Bono”).
Bono teaches additional limitations not expressly disclosed by Griffiths ‘130, including namely a battery and can be operatively connected to the one or more motors to provide motive energy to the one or more motors to allow motion of the patient cart without an external power supply (¶ 16—“a power supply 16, which may be a battery or other storage device…The wheels 32 are driven by a drive motor”; Claim 1—“at least one motor carried by the truck and operably associated with a respective said wheel assembly and connected to the power supply”; ¶ 16—“power supply 16 may be mounted to the truck”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Griffiths ‘130 to include the limitations as taught by Bono to provide for relative ease in the setup of a surgical procedure and control over the robot during the actual operation (Bono: ¶ 4).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BASIL T JOS whose telephone number is (571)270-5915. The examiner can normally be reached 11:00 - 8:00 PM.
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, THOMAS WORDEN can be reached at (571) 272-4876. 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.
/Basil T. Jos/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658
