The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
The following claim limitations have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (any paragraphs cited come from PGPUB 2024/0407866 representative of the specification of the instant application):
Claim 1
A linear member having flexibility…
This limitation utilizes the generic placeholder “member”, transitional phrase “having” and functional language “flexibility”. The preceding term “linear” does not apply specific structure that performs the function.
The specification states the following in paragraph 57: “The bendable-portion driving portion 13 includes multiple drive wires (or drive lines, linear members, or linear actuators) connected to the bendable portion 12.”
Therefore, the structure from the specification associated with this term is drive wires.
Driving unit configured to actuate…
This limitation utilizes the generic placeholder “unit”, transitional phrase “configured to” and functional language “actuate the linear member”. The preceding term “driving” does not apply specific structure that performs the function.
The specification states the following in paragraph 99: “The wire driving unit 300 includes multiple drive sources (motors).”
Therefore, the structure from the specification associated with this term is motor(s).
Bendable portion configured to be bent…
This limitation utilizes the generic placeholder “portion”, transitional phrase “configured to” and functional language “be bent by actuation of the linear member”. The preceding term “bendable” does not apply specific structure that performs the function.
The specification states the following in paragraph 65: “In the present embodiment, the bendable portion 12 is a flexible tube having a passage Ht through which a medical tool is inserted.”
Therefore, the structure from the specification associated with this term is a flexible tube having a passage.
Connection device configured to be connected…
This limitation utilizes the generic placeholder “device”, transitional phrase “configured to” and functional language “be connected”. The preceding term “connection” does not apply specific structure that performs the function.
The specification states the specific structure(s) that make up the connection device(s) in at least paragraphs 122-123.
Claim 3
A detection unit configured to detect…
This limitation utilizes the generic placeholder “unit”, transitional phrase “configured to” and functional language “detect an amount of relative movement between the connection device and the linear member”. The preceding term “detection” does not apply specific structure that performs the function.
The specification states the following in paragraph 159: “the sensors used in the operation of the connection device 21c are optical sensors. The sensors, however, may be pressure sensors configured to detect the contact between the first magnet 21ce and the first and second connection plates 21cc and 21cd when the connection device 21c returns to the original state.”
Therefore, the structure from the specification associated with this term is optical or pressure sensors.
Claim 9
An elastic member urging the linear member in a direction…
This limitation utilizes the generic placeholder “member”, and functional language “urging the linear member in a direction”. The preceding term “elastic” does not apply specific structure that performs the function. It is noted that there is no transition word/phrase, for there is not a requirement that there be a transition word/phrase.
The specification states the following in paragraph 163: “as illustrated in FIGS. 9A to 9H, the connection device 21c of the present embodiment includes a first pressure spring 21cj and a second pressure spring 21ck, both of which are elastic members.”
Therefore, the structure from the specification associated with this term is pressure spring(s).
Claim 10
A tension detection unit configured to detect tension…
This limitation utilizes the generic placeholder “unit”, transitional phrase “configured to” and functional language “detect tension”. The preceding term “tension detection” does not apply specific structure that performs the function.
The specification discusses a tension detection unit in paragraph 172, however there is no specific structure provided to the detection unit other than the word “a sensor (not illustrated)”.
Therefore, the is insufficient structure for performing this function in the specification. See the rejections under 35 USC 112(a) and 112(b) below.
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, “a tension detection nit configured to detect tension of the linear member” in claim 10 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 § 112
35 U.S.C. 112, First Paragraph
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In claim 10, the claim limitation “a tension detection unit” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. While paragraph 172 discusses a tension detection unit, there is no specific structure provided to the detection unit other than the word “a sensor (not illustrated)”.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
35 U.S.C. 112, Second Paragraph
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.
Claim 10 is 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.
In claim 10, the claim limitation “a tension detection unit” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. While paragraph 172 discusses a tension detection unit, there is no specific structure provided to the detection unit other than the word “a sensor (not illustrated)”.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Haubert (US Patent Pub. No. 2022/0040450).
Haubert teaches a magnetic connector for a steerable medical device (see Title). The system of Haubert includes a continuum robot (see paragraph 13, “FIG. 1A illustrates a general structure of a continuum robot system 1000”) comprising:
A linear member having flexibility (see drive wires 110 at least in Figure 1B);
A driving unit configured to actuate the linear member (see actuators 311 in Figure 1B, which are connected to the drive wires 110 via magnetic connectors 510);
A bendable portion configured to be bent by actuation of the linear member (see distal section 103 in Figure 1A); and
A connection device configured to be connected to the linear member and to transmit actuation power of the driving unit to the linear member (see magnetic connectors 510 in Figure 1B),
Wherein the connection device and the linear member are configured to be reconnected after the connection device and the linear member that have been connected are disconnected from each other (see paragraph 66, “after the steel catch members 513 and 516 have been separated as a result of the axial tension force, it will be appreciated that the magnetic coupling force provided by the magnet 515 allows a convenient means for reconnecting the steel catch members with only a small force (or a minor movement) because the magnetic attraction will pull back the catheter-side steel catch 513 towards the actuator-side steel catch 516”).
Regarding claim 2, it is noted that paragraph 68 teaches that “a sensor 304 can provide a force feedback signal 305 for each actuator 310 to sense when at least one drive wire 110 has been disengaged from its corresponding actuator 310. The controller 320 can be programed with appropriate algorithms to initiate reattachment between the actuator and the drive wire.”
Regarding claim 3, Haubert teaches a detection unit (see sensor 304), which is operatively coupled to the controller 320 (see paragraph 46, “The sensors 304 could also output a signal 305 corresponding to an amount of movement (a distance) of displacement for each actuated drive wire 110, at any given point in time during a procedure. The output signals 305 from the sensors 304 (strain sensor, position sensor, and/or magnetic field sensor) for each drive wire 110 are fed back to the controller 320 to control each actuator 310 and drive wire 110 individually with a feedback control loop 325”).
Regarding claim 4, Haubert teaches that “sensor 304 can provide a force feedback signal 305 for each actuator 310 to sense when at least one drive wire 110 has been disengaged from its corresponding actuator 310” (see paragraph 68).
Regarding claim 5, paragraph 81 discusses examples of how reconnection may occur, where it teaches (among other options) that “the controller would not be able to tell the difference between tensile or compressive breakaway. Therefore, one solution would be to have the reengage move both forward and backward until the force feedback shows a spike in force.”
Regarding claim 6, Figures 7A and 7B illustrate magnets 515 and 615 within the connection means, which shows the wire that extends through the catheter as 512 and the connection to the actuators as 517.
Regarding claim 7, the connection device includes a first magnet (see 515 in Figures 7A and 7B), a connection member (see everything between 517 and 512 in Figures 7A and 7B), a second magnet (see 615 in Figures 7A and 7B), and it is noted that the first magnet (i.e., 515) is in contact with the connection member (i.e., magnet 515 is part of the connection member, therefore in contact), the second magnet is in contact with the connection member (i.e., magnet 615 is part of the connection member, therefore in contact), and the second magnetic is joined to the linear member (i.e., second magnet 615 is magnetically joined to the linear member 512).
Regarding claim 8, Figure 7B illustrates a situation in which the contact force between the first magnet (i.e., 515) and the connection member.
Regarding claim 9, it is noted that paragraph 60 of Haubert teaches that “In the present case, the torque necessary to disconnect the actuator mechanism from the drive wires 110 can be applied manually by the user, or it can be applied automatically by a torque mechanism, such as a spring-loaded cam or pin configured to apply torque at certain amount of tension or pressure.” This teaches “an elastic member” in the form of a spring-loaded cam that urge the linear member in a direction of the linear member being connected to the connection device in order to cause the breakaway shown in Figures 7A and 7B.
Regarding claim 11, it is noted that paragraph 60 of Haubert teaches that “In the present case, the torque necessary to disconnect the actuator mechanism from the drive wires 110 can be applied manually by the user, or it can be applied automatically by a torque mechanism, such as a spring-loaded cam or pin configured to apply torque at certain amount of tension or pressure.” This teaches that the disconnection and connection can be made manually when it says “can be applied manually by the user”.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter within claim 10, for which no prior art rejection has been made:
The prior art fails to teach a continuum robot that utilizes a tension detection unit and an electromagnet, where the electromagnet disconnects a connection device from a linear member upon a predetermined amount of tension being detected by the tension detecting unit, as claimed.
JP 2013-252338 (cited in the IDS dated 2/13/26) teaches a magnet and an electromagnet used for connected two parts of a catheter-like device. The electromagnet is discussed as being engaged and disengaged by supplying electricity thereto for keeping the distal end connected and disconnected, respectively. However, there is no discussion of a tension detection unit, as the device of this reference is teaching a portion that may be disposed versus the wiring within a continuum robot or the like. As such, the electromagnet is not controlled based on a reading from a tension sensor.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES KISH whose telephone number is (571)272-5554. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00a - 6p 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, Unsu Jung can be reached at (571) 272-8506. 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.
/JAMES KISH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights