DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Species C in the reply filed on 08/24/2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant asserts that all claims read on the elected species, the Examiner respectfully agrees. Group I and II lack unity of invention because all the features of claim 1 are known in the prior art, as can be seen from the rejection below.
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 10/28/2024. Claims 1-2, 4-10, 14-21 and 27-29 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Claim 29 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/24/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on 01/13/2025, 09/17/2025, 03/17/2026 and 09/18/2026 were filed and are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the Information Disclosure Statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 5, 9, 10 and 21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5 line 2 reads “platform comprising”, --platform comprises-- is suggested.
Claim 9 line 8 reads “the first axis perpendicular”, --wherein the first axis is perpendicular-- is suggested.
Claim 10 line 6 reads “arm parallel”, --arm being parallel-- is suggested.
Claim 21 line 2 reads “wherein table”, --wherein the table-- is suggested.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 5-7, 16, 20 and 28 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 5 lines 7-8 recite the limitation “a laterally extending side of the platform”. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to “a pair of laterally extending sides” recited in line 3, or if this limitation requires an additional side.
Claim 6 lines 7-8 recite the limitation “a longitudinally extending side of the platform”. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to “a pair of opposite longitudinally extending sides” recited in claim 5, or if this limitation requires an additional side.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “one of the end portions of the platform”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “a control system operably coupled to drive the first and second manipulators to position the proximal arms in the nested configuration”. First, it is unclear what is required by the claim. More specifically, is the system of claim 1 a control system, or is the system of claim 1 further comprising a control system. Second, it is unclear what the control system is operably coupled to.
Claim 28 line 6 recites the limitation “one of the end portions of the platform”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 28 line 7 recites the limitation “the laterally and longitudinally extending sides of the platform”. 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-7, 10, 14-21 and 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Eyre (US 20190216550 A1) in view of Bar (WO 2022195460 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Eyre discloses a teleoperable manipulator system (see Fig. 15A and 16; 1500A), comprising: a table assembly (1301, 1302, 1303) comprising a platform (1301) configured to support a body; a rail (1307A) coupled to the table assembly, wherein the rail comprises lateral and longitudinal dimensions (Y axis, X axis); and first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B) comprising respective proximal arms (see annotated Fig. 15A below, proximal arms A) coupled to the rail and respective distal portions (see annotated Fig. 15A below, distal portions B) coupled to the proximal arms and configured to support an instrument mounted thereon (see paragraph [0262], wherein “The distal end of the first robotic arm 1402A includes an instrument drive mechanism 1406A. The instrument drive mechanism 1406A can be configured to attach to one or more robotic medical instruments or tools”), wherein the proximal arms of the first and second manipulators are translatable relative to the rail along the longitudinal dimension of the rail (see paragraph [0268], wherein “The first robotic arm 1402A can be configured to translate back and forth along the rail 1307A of the first adjustable arm support 1305A. That is, the first robotic arm 1402A can be configured to translate along the fourth axis 1329A”) and are rotatable relative to the rail about one or more axes (see annotated Fig. 15A below, wherein proximal arms A are rotatable about the Z direction at joint C and rotatable about the X direction at joint D), and wherein the proximal arms of the first and second manipulators are positionable in a nested configuration (see annotated Fig. 16 below; configuration of 1402A, 1402B) relative to one another in which the proximal arms of the first and second manipulators: are oriented parallel to the longitudinal dimension of the rail or angled laterally inwardly from the rail, and at least partially overlap one another in a vertical direction (Z axis), the vertical direction being perpendicular to a first plane (XY plane) containing the lateral and the longitudinal dimensions of the rail (see paragraph [0246], wherein “The second joint 1315 can be configured to allow the adjustable arm support 1305 to rotate around a second axis 1325”; and see annotated Fig. 16 below, wherein the proximal arms 1402A, 1402B are shown in a nested configuration wherein the proximal arms of the manipulators are oriented parallel to the X axis of the rail and overlap one another in the vertical direction, i.e., Z axis, which is perpendicular to the XY plane).
Regarding claim 2, Eyre discloses the proximal arms (A) of the first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B) are positionable in the nested configuration (configuration of annotated Fig. 16 below) relative to one another while in a deployed state (see Fig. 15A and 16, wherein the manipulators are inherently capable to being positioned relative to one another while in a deployed state).
Regarding claim 4, Eyre discloses in the nested configuration (configuration of annotated Fig. 16 below) the proximal arms (A) of the first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B) are parallel to the first plane (XY plane) containing the lateral and longitudinal dimensions (Y axis, X axis) of the rail (1307A).
Regarding claim 5, Eyre discloses the platform (1301) comprising a pair of opposite longitudinally extending sides (see annotated Fig. 15A below; E, F) and a pair of laterally extending sides (see annotated Fig. 15A below; G, H) connecting the longitudinally extending sides at opposite end portions of the platform (see Fig. 15A; left and right portions of 1301 in the figure), and wherein in the nested configuration (configuration of annotated Fig. 16 below) and in a deployed state of the first and second manipulators (a state in which the manipulators are not stowed), the respective distal portions (B) of the first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B) are positioned beyond one of the end portions of the platform and adjacent to a laterally extending side of the platform (see Fig. 15A and annotated Fig. 16 below, wherein rail 1307A is translatable along axis 1329A, such that the distal portions B of manipulators 1402A, 1402B can be positioned beyond one of the left and right end portions of 1301).
Regarding claim 6, Eyre discloses in the nested configuration (configuration of annotated Fig. 16 below) no portion of the first or second manipulators (1402A, 1402B) protrudes laterally outwardly beyond a longitudinally extending side of the platform (see annotated Fig. 15A and 16 below, wherein no portion of 1402A, 1402B protrudes laterally outwardly beyond the longitudinally extending side E of the platform 1301).
Regarding claim 7, Eyre discloses the respective proximal arms (B) of the first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B), when both are oriented parallel to the first plane (XY plane), are positioned at different heights relative to the rail (see annotated Fig. 16 below, wherein proximal arms B of the manipulators 1402A, 1402B are parallel to the XY plane and are positioned at different heights in the Z axis relative to the rail 1307A).
Regarding claim 10, Eyre discloses the first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B) further comprise respective coupling portions (see annotated Fig. 15A below; I) that rotatably couple the proximal arms (A) to the rail (1307A), and wherein the coupling portion of the first manipulator allows the proximal arm of the first manipulator to rotate around a first axis (see annotated Fig. 15A below; vertical axis of I) and around a second axis (see annotated Fig. 15A below; horizontal axis of I), wherein, in a state of the proximal arm parallel to the first plane (XY plane), the first axis is perpendicular to the first plane and the second axis is parallel to the first plane (see annotated Fig. 15A below, wherein the vertical axis of I is perpendicular to the XY plane and the horizontal axis of I is parallel to the XY plane).
Regarding claim 14, Eyre discloses in the nested configuration (configuration of annotated Fig. 16 below) and in a deployed state (a state in which the manipulators are not stowed), the distal portions of the first and second manipulators (see annotated Fig. 15A below; B) are positioned higher than the respective proximal arms (A) of the first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B).
Regarding claim 15, Eyre discloses the distal portions (B) of the first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B) comprise instrument holders (see paragraph [0262], wherein “The distal end of the first robotic arm 1402A includes an instrument drive mechanism 1406A. The instrument drive mechanism 1406A can be configured to attach to one or more robotic medical instruments or tools”), and in the nested configuration (configuration of annotated Fig. 16 below) the instrument holders of the first and second manipulators are positioned higher than the platform (see annotated Fig. 16 below, wherein instrument holders 1406A provided on B are positioned higher than 1301).
Regarding claim 16, Eyre discloses in the nested configuration (configuration of annotated Fig. 16 below) the proximal arms (B) are positioned adjacent one another at one of the end portions of the platform (1301; see Fig. 15A, wherein 1307A can be moved along axis 1329B such that proximal arms B of manipulators 1402A and 1402B can be positioned at one of the end portions of the platform).
Regarding claim 17, Eyre discloses the platform (see Fig. 2A; 201A; see paragraph [0241], wherein the table 1301 may be similar to the tables described above) comprises an assembly of a plurality of sections (210, 212, 214, 216, 218) movable relative to one another to change a configuration of the platform between a plurality of configurations (see Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 18, Eyre discloses the plurality of sections (210, 212, 214, 216, 218) comprise a first end section (216, 214), one or more middle sections (212), and a second end section (210) consecutively positioned along a longitudinal dimension of the platform (longitudinal dimension of 201A), and wherein each of the first and second end sections are independently pivotable relative to the one or more middle sections (see Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 19, Eyre discloses first carriages (see annotated Fig. 15A below, J) movably coupling the proximal arms (A) of the first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B), respectively, to the rail (1307A) such that the proximal arms are translatable relative to the rail along the longitudinal dimension of the rail (see Fig. 15A).
Regarding claim 20, Eyre discloses a control system (see paragraph [0190], robotic arm control system) operably coupled to drive the first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B) to position the proximal arms (B) in the nested configuration (configuration of annotated Fig. 16 below).
Regarding claim 21, Eyre discloses table assembly (1301, 1302, 1303) comprises a support column (1302) supporting the platform assembly, wherein the platform (1301) is tiltable relative to the support column (see Fig. 2M and 14C); and wherein the rail (1307A) is configured to tilt along with the platform relative to the support column (see Fig. 14A and 16, wherein 1307A can be tiled along the X and Y axis).
Regarding claim 27, Eyre discloses the rail (1307A) comprises a first end (see Fig. 16; left end of 1307 in the figure), a second end (right end of 1307), and a straight portion (straight portion of 1307) extending linearly between the first end and the second end; and wherein in the nested configuration (configuration of annotated Fig. 16 below) the first carriages (J) are positioned on the straight portion of the rail and the proximal arms (B) are oriented parallel to the first plane (XY plane).
Regarding claim 28, Eyre discloses the first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B) are positionable between a stowed position (any position when not in use, such as the position shown in annotated Fig 16 below) and a plurality of deployed positions (any position where 1402A, 1402B are in use), wherein in the stowed position, the first carriages are positioned on the straight portion of the rail, and the first and second manipulators are in the nested configuration and both are positioned under one of the end portions of the platform and do not protrude beyond the laterally and longitudinally extending sides of the platform (see Fig. 18B and annotated Fig. 16 below, wherein arms 1402A, 1402B can be in the position shown in annotated Fig. 16 and the rail 1307 can be in the position shown in Fig. 18B, such that the limitations above are satisfied).
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.
Claim 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eyre (US 20190216550 A1) in view of Bar (WO 2022195460 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Eyre discloses the first and second manipulators (1402A, 1402B) further comprise respective coupling portions (see annotated Fig. 15A below, coupling portions I) that rotatably couple the proximal arms (B) to the rail (1307A). Eyre fails to disclose the coupling portion of the first manipulator has a longer height dimension than the coupling portion of the second manipulator. However, Bar teaches the coupling portion (see annotated Fig. 6 below; coupling portion A, B) of the first manipulator (602) has a longer height dimension than the coupling portion (see annotated Fig. 6 below; coupling portion C, D) of the second manipulator (see annotated Fig 6 below; E). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify Eyre with the coupling portion of the first manipulator to have a longer height dimension than the coupling portion of the second manipulator, as taught by Bar, to allow the arms to positioned close to each other which saves space in an operating room and not having the arms interfere with surgeon workflow (see page 3 lines 16-22); and to allow for relatively short and light robotic arms which are more accurate than larger arms of the systems known in the art (see page 3 lines 26-28).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of claim 8 elsewhere above would necessarily result in the following limitations: the coupling portion (Bar; A, B) of the first manipulator (Bar; 602) comprises a first part (Bar; A) coupled to the rail (Eyre; 1307A) and a second part (Bar; B) coupled to the first part and to the proximal arm of the first manipulator (Bar; 602), wherein the second part is rotatable relative to the first part about a second axis (Bar; axis of B) parallel to the first plane (Bar; plane parallel with the patient bed), and wherein the proximal arm of the first manipulator is rotatable relative to the second part about a first axis (Bar; axis of A), the first axis perpendicular to the first plane (Bar; Fig. 6).
PNG
media_image1.png
576
788
media_image1.png
Greyscale
1 - Eyre (US 20190216550 A1) Fig. 15A Annotated
PNG
media_image2.png
614
634
media_image2.png
Greyscale
2 - Eyre (US 20190216550 A1) Fig. 16 Annotated
PNG
media_image3.png
550
578
media_image3.png
Greyscale
3 - Bar (WO 2022195460 A1) Fig. 6 Annotated
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
US 20100286712 A1, US 20190216576 A1, US 20210137635 A1, US 20190328599 A1 and US 20190314100 A1 disclose surgical tables with attached robot arms.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH BROWN whose telephone number is (313)446-6568. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs: 8:00am - 5:00pm 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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at 571-357-2384. 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.
/JOSEPH BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights