DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
This Action is in response to the Preliminary Amendment filed 09/10/2024.
The status of the Claims is as follows:
Claims 20, 21 and 23 have been cancelled;
Claims 4-6, 9, 11-15, 17, 18 and 22 have been amended;
Claims 1-9 and 22 are pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/24/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the Application on 09/10/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
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.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim limitations in this application that are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
Intervention instrument: endoscopic instrument (par 89)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 5, 6 and 12 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.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the position sensor" in line 4 of the Claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the position signal" in line 7 of the Claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the position sensor" in line 7 of the Claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the first trigger-releasing signal" in line 6 of the Claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the control keys" in line 4 of the Claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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)(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, 3-5, 9, 15-18 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (US 20200038121; Yang).
Regarding Claim 1 Yang discloses a control method of an intervention instrument, comprising steps of: acquiring a position of an end effector of the intervention instrument (par 58); and locking or unlocking the end effector according to a relationship between the position where the end effector is located and a pre-set position. (par 58, 138, Claim 52)
Regarding Claim 3 Yang discloses the invention as described above. Yang further discloses the step of acquiring a position of an end effector of the intervention instrument comprises: acquiring a swing angle of the end effector of the intervention instrument relative to a main body unit of the intervention instrument; and determining, according to the swing angle, the position of the end effector of the intervention instrument. (par 128 & 132)
Regarding Claim 4 Yang discloses the invention as described above. Yang further discloses the step of acquiring a position of an end effector of the intervention instrument comprises: acquiring operating data of a drive source (torque on differential drive par 132); and determining the position of the end effector according to the operating data, wherein the drive source is configured to drive the end effector of the intervention instrument to move relative to the main body unit. (par 60-63, 128, 132, 140)
Regarding Claim 5 Yang discloses the invention as described above. Yang further discloses the step of acquiring a position of an end effector of the intervention instrument comprises: acquiring a position signal representing the end effector output by the position sensor; and determining the position of the end effector according to the position signal. (par 58, 60-63, 128, 132, 138, 140)
Regarding Claim 9 Yang discloses the invention as described above. Yang further discloses after the step of locking the end effector, the control method of an intervention instrument further comprises a step of: unlocking the end effector in a situation that a pre-set unlocking condition is met. (par 139-141)
Regarding Claim 15 Yang discloses the invention as described above. Yang further discloses an intervention instrument, comprising: a main body unit (24); an end effector (26), wherein the end effector (26) is movable relative to the main body unit (24); a drive source, wherein the drive source is configured to drive the end effector of the intervention instrument to move relative to the main body unit (par 127-128); and a controller, wherein the controller is in communication connection with the drive source (par 134), and the controller is configured to implement the control method of an intervention instrument according to claim 1. (par 58, 138, Claim 52)
Regarding Claim 16 Yang discloses the invention as described above. Yang further discloses the controller is further configured to determine the position of the end effector according to operating data of the drive source; and configured to lock or unlock the end effector according to the relationship between the position where the end effector is located and the pre-set position. (par 58, 138, Claim 52)
Regarding Claim 17 Yang discloses the invention as described above. Yang further discloses the intervention instrument further comprises a position sensor (par 41-45), wherein the position sensor is mounted to the main body unit or the end effector (par 122-123); the position sensor is in communication connection with the controller, and the position sensor is configured to detect a position of the end effector relative to the main body unit; and the controller is configured to lock or unlock the end effector according to the relationship between the position where the end effector is located and the pre-set position. (par 58, 60-63, 128, 132, 138, 140)
Regarding Claim 18 Yang discloses the invention as described above. Yang further discloses the intervention instrument further comprises a control key in communication connection with the controller; and the controller is configured to control the drive source according to a signal of the control key. (par 56)
Regarding Claim 22 Yang discloses the invention as described above. Yang further discloses computer-readable storage medium, storing a computer program/instruction, wherein the computer program/instruction, when executed, implements the control method of an intervention instrument according to claim 1. (par 73, 134)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US 20200038121) in view of Koch et al. (US 20140249557; Koch).
Regarding Claim 2 Yang discloses the invention as described above. Yang further discloses the pre-set position and the step of locking or unlocking the end effector according to a relationship between the position where the end effector is located and a pre-set position comprises: locking the end effector in a situation that the end effector moves to the pre-set position, so that the end effector remains in the pre-set position. (par 58, 138)
However Yang does not expressly teach pre-set position comprises a pre-set pulling-out position of the end effector; and the step of locking or unlocking the end effector according to a relationship between the position where the end effector is located and a pre-set position comprises: locking the end effector in a situation that the end effector moves to the pre-set pulling-out position, so that the end effector remains in the pre-set pulling-out position.
Koch teaches a control method of an intervention instrument (par 15). Koch further teaches a pre-set position comprises a pre-set pulling-out position of the end effector; and the step of locking or unlocking the end effector according to a relationship between the position where the end effector is located and a pre-set position comprises: locking the end effector in a situation that the end effector moves to the pre-set pulling-out position, so that the end effector remains in the pre-set pulling-out position providing safe removal of the instrument for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the method. (par 317, 327, 328)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the pre-set position as taught by Yang to include the pre-set pulling-out position as taught by Koch since par 317, 327, 328 of Koch suggests that such a modification provides safe removal of the instrument for the purposes of improving the efficiency of the method.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US 20200038121) in view of Smith et al. (US 8034077; Smith).
Regarding Claim 10 Yang discloses the invention as described above. Yang further discloses the step of unlocking the end effector.
However, Yang does not expressly teach the step of unlocking the end effector in a situation that a pre-set unlocking condition is met comprises: unlocking the end effector in a situation that a first trigger signal is acquired, wherein the first trigger signal is triggered by a control key.
Smith teaches a control method of an intervention instrument (abstract). Smith further teaches the step of unlocking the end effector in a situation that a pre-set unlocking condition is met comprises: unlocking the end effector in a situation that a first trigger signal is acquired, wherein the first trigger signal is triggered by a control key providing manual control in addition to electronic control over the articulation lock for the purposes of improving the method. (Col 15 lines 28-45)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the step of unlocking the end effector as taught by yang to include unlocking the end effector in a situation that a first trigger signal is acquired, wherein the first trigger signal is triggered by a control key as taught by Smith since Col 15 lines 28-45 of Smith suggest that such a modification provides manual control in addition to electronic control over the articulation lock for the purposes of improving the method.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-8, 11-14, and 19 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:
Regarding Claim 6 the Prior Art does not teach the step of acquiring a position of an end effector of the intervention instrument comprises steps of: acquiring operating data of a drive source; and determining a first position of the end effector according to the operating data, wherein the drive source is configured to drive the end effector of the intervention instrument to move relative to the main body unit; acquiring the position signal representing the end effector output by the position sensor; and determining a second position of the end effector according to the position signal; and determining, in a situation that the first position and the second position are consistent, the first position or the second position as the position of the end effector; and determining, in a situation that the first position and the second position are inconsistent, the position of the end effector according to a pre-set rule.
Regarding Claim 7 the Prior Art does not teach the step of determining the position of the end effector according to a pre-set rule comprises: determining an intermediate position of the first position and the second position as the position of the end effector.
Regarding Claim 8 the Prior Art does not teach the step of locking the end effector comprises: locking the drive source so as to lock the end effector, wherein the drive source is configured to drive the end effector of the intervention instrument to move relative to the main body unit.
Regarding Claim 11 the Prior Art the step of unlocking the end effector in a situation that a pre-set unlocking condition is met comprises: unlocking the end effector in a situation that a second trigger signal is acquired, wherein the second trigger signal represents that under control of a control key, the end effector moves away from a pre-set pulling-out position.
Regarding Claim 12 the Prior Art does not teach the step of unlocking the end effector in a situation that a pre-set unlocking condition is met comprises: unlocking the end effector in a situation that a first trigger-releasing signal is acquired and a third trigger signal is acquired, wherein the first trigger-releasing signal represents that an action of one of the control keys 60 being triggered to execute controlling the end effector to move towards a pre-set pulling-out position is released, and the third trigger signal represents that another control key is triggered.
Regarding Claim 13 the Prior Art does not teach wherein the step of unlocking the end effector in a situation that a pre-set unlocking condition is met comprises: unlocking the end effector in a situation that a second trigger-releasing signal is acquired and a fourth trigger signal is acquired after first pre-set duration, wherein the second trigger-releasing signal represents that a control key is triggered by a set action to control the end effector to rotate in a single direction so as to be unlocked; and the fourth trigger signal represents that the control key is triggered again by the set action to control the end effector to rotate in a single direction.
Regarding Claim 14 the Prior Art does not teach the step of unlocking the end effector in a situation that a pre-set unlocking condition is met comprises: unlocking the end effector in a situation that duration of a trigger signal of a control key acquired is longer than or equal to second pre-set duration.
Regarding Claim 19 the Prior Art does not teach a plurality of control keys are provided; and at least one of the control keys is distributed on at least one side of the main body unit; or a plurality of the control keys are distributed on the same side of the main body unit, and among a plurality of the control keys located on the same side, at least one of the control keys is configured to control the end effector to rotate forward, and at least one of the control keys is configured to control the end effector to rotate reversely.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHINYERE J RUSHING-TUCKER whose telephone number is (571)270-5944. The examiner can normally be reached 4 pm - 11:59 pm Monday - Friday.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at 571-270-1926. 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.
/CHINYERE J RUSHING-TUCKER/Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights