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 .
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “camera module” and “transmission component” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 1-7 and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Inglis et al. Pub. No.: US 2019/0142262 A1 (Hereinafter “Inglis”).
Regarding Claim 1, Inglis discloses a medical visualization system comprising a video processing apparatus, an endoscope and a transmission component (see par. [0002]),
the endoscope comprising a camera module adapted to generate image data indicative of a view from the endoscope, a handle, and a device coupling part (see figs.2, 4, pars. [0061], [0062] and [0064]: camera 55, display screen 22, handle side 69 and attachment hub 60),
the video processing apparatus comprising a housing and a processor adapted to receive the image data and/or data representative of the image data and cause a display to display a live representation of the image data (see fig.6 and par. [0073]: the acquired images may be provided to the processor 70 of the laryngoscope 12 to cause display of the endoscope images at the display screen 22),
the transmission component comprising a component coupling part adapted to couple with the device coupling part and including a component processor adapted to receive the image data from the camera module and preprocess the image data to provide data representative of the image data, the transmission component being adapted to transmit the data representative of the image data to the video processing apparatus (see par. [0073]: When the laryngoscope 12 detects coupling of the endoscope via the endoscope attachment hub 60 (block 106), the laryng
oscope 12 may operate in a multifunctional operating mode. In this mode, the coupled endoscope introducer 50 acquires endoscope images and relays them to the laryngoscope 12 (block 108). The endoscope images may be received via electrical communication between the endoscope electrical connector 94 and the laryngoscope electrical connector 82. For example, the acquired images may be provided to the processor 70 of the laryngoscope 12 to cause display of the endoscope images at the display screen 22 (block 110). In an embodiment, images from the endoscope camera 55 may be transmitted to the laryngoscope wirelessly, e.g. to the communications circuitry 80.).
Regarding Claim 2, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Inglis further discloses wherein the component coupling part comprises one or more physical activatable input mechanisms, wherein activation of the one or more physical activatable input mechanisms causes the transmission component to transmit one or more input mechanism signals to the video processing apparatus indicative of activation of the one or more physical activatable input mechanisms (see fig.31 and par.[0098]), wherein the handle of the endoscope comprises one or more communicator elements adapted to activate the one or more physical activatable input mechanisms upon being manipulated by a user(see fig.31 and par.[0098]), wherein a first communicator element of the one or more communicator elements extends from a first side to a second side of a wall of the handle (see par.[0073]), wherein the first side is arranged exteriorly of the handle and the second side is arranged interiorly of the handle, and wherein the second side is adapted to contact a first physical activatable input mechanism of the one or more physical activatable input mechanism when the component coupling part is coupled with the device coupling part handle (see par.[0073]).
Regarding Claim 3, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Inglis further discloses wherein the component coupling part comprises one or more physical activatable input mechanisms, and wherein activation of the one or more physical activatable input mechanisms causes the transmission component to transmit one or more input mechanism signals to the video processing apparatus indicative of activation of the one or more physical activatable input mechanisms (see pars.[0083]-[0084]).
Regarding Claim 4, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 3. Inglis further discloses wherein the handle of the endoscope comprises one or more communicator elements adapted to activate the one or more physical activatable input mechanisms upon being manipulated by a user (see pars. [0095] and [0101]).
Regarding Claim 5, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 4. Inglis further discloses wherein a first communicator element of the one or more communicator elements extends from a first side to a second side, wherein the first side is arranged exteriorly of the handle and the second side is arranged interiorly of the handle, and wherein the second side is adapted to contact a first physical activatable input mechanism of the one or more physical activatable input mechanism when the component coupling part is coupled with the device coupling part (see pars. [0095] and [0101]).
Regarding Claim 6, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Inglis further discloses wherein the transmission component comprises a device cable extending from a first cable end to a second cable end, wherein the component coupling part is provided at the second cable end (see fig. 19 and par. [0082]).
Regarding Claim 7, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 6. Inglis further discloses wherein the device cable comprises a stiffened portion extending from the second cable end towards the first cable end (see par. [0082]).
Regarding Claim 9, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Inglis further discloses wherein the component coupling part has a primary coupling element being elongated and extending along a coupling part axis, and wherein the device coupling part has a secondary coupling element forming a cavity adapted to receive the primary coupling element (see par.[0064]).
Regarding Claim 10, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 9. Inglis further discloses wherein the device coupling part comprises a twist lock adapted to engage by rotation of the handle with a protruding element of the component coupling part when the primary coupling element is fully received by the secondary coupling element (see pars. [0084]-[0085]).
Regarding Claim 11, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 10. Inglis further discloses wherein the stiffened portion comprises a lock sensor configured to transmit a lock signal to the component processor, the lock signal indicating a completed physical connection between the device coupling part and the component coupling part when the primary coupling element is fully received by the secondary coupling element (see par. [0085]).
Regarding Claim 12, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Inglis further discloses a cable reel adapted to reel in at least a portion of the device cable (see par. [0094]).
Regarding Claim 13, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 12. Inglis further discloses wherein the cable reel comprises a cable reel housing enclosing the portion of the device cable when reeled in (see par.[0094]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inglis et al. Pub. No.: US 2019/0142262 A1 (Hereinafter “Inglis”) in view of Tata et al. Pub. No. US 2021/0052140 A1 (Hereinafter “Tata”).
Regarding Claim 8, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 7.
Inglis fails to disclose:
wherein the stiffened portion has a length of between 20-150 mm.
In analogous art, Tata teaches:
wherein the stiffened portion has a length of between 20-150 mm (see par. [0047]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Inglis with the teaching as taught by Tata in order to actively controlled to bend or turn the distal tip in a desired direction, to obtain a desired view or to navigate through anatomy.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inglis et al. Pub. No.: US 2019/0142262 A1 (Hereinafter “Inglis”) in view of AMMON et al. Pub. No. US 2015/0216418 A1 (Hereinafter “Ammon”).
Regarding Claim 14, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 13.
Inglis fails to disclose:
wherein the cable reel comprises a UV light emitter accommodated in the cable reel housing.
In analogous art, Ammon teaches:
wherein the cable reel comprises a UV light emitter accommodated in the cable reel housing (see par.[0050]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Inglis with the teaching as taught by Ammon in order to provide a system that provide qualitative assessments and quantitative diagnostics of the root canal as well as other intra-oral areas of the tooth and mouth.
Claims 15-16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inglis et al. Pub. No.: US 2019/0142262 A1 (Hereinafter “Inglis”) in view of Kotseroglou et al. Pub. No. US 2024/0090922 A1 (Hereinafter “Kotseroglou”).
Regarding Claim 15, Inglis discloses the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
Inglis fails to disclose:
a support bracket having a distal support bracket part and a proximal support bracket part, and wherein the distal support bracket part includes a coupling part retainer adapted to retain the component coupling part of the transmission component.
In analogous art, Kotseroglou teaches:
a support bracket having a distal support bracket part and a proximal support bracket part, and wherein the distal support bracket part includes a coupling part retainer adapted to retain the component coupling part of the transmission component (see pars.[0064] and [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Inglis with the teaching as taught by Kotseroglou in order to improve efficiency, accuracy and minimal invasiveness of endoscopic diagnosis and surgery by providing real-time correction of rotational orientation of the video signal from the imaging sensor.
Regarding Claim 16, Inglis in view of Kotseroglou disclose the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 15. Kotseroglou further discloses wherein the proximal support bracket part is adapted to be coupled to the housing of the video processing apparatus, such that the support bracket follows rotation of the housing around a first axis and does not follow rotation of the housing around a second axis perpendicular to the first axis (see par.[0067]).
Regarding Claim 20, Inglis in view of Kotseroglou disclose the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 15. Kotseroglou further discloses wherein the support bracket comprises the cable reel, the cable reel being driven by an actuator, and wherein the actuator is activated to reel in the portion of the device cable based on a first control input, wherein the coupling part retainer comprises a switch subjective to receipt of the component coupling part and the switch triggers the first control input, and wherein the first control input is triggered by the component coupling part being received by the coupling part retainer (see pars. [0151] and [0154]).
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inglis et al. Pub. No.: US 2019/0142262 A1 (Hereinafter “Inglis”) in view of Kotseroglou et al. Pub. No. US 2024/0090922 A1 (Hereinafter “Kotseroglou”), further in view of Gardner Pub. No. US 2018/0242833 A1 (Hereinafter “Gardner”).
Regarding Claim 17, Inglis in view of Kotseroglou disclose the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 15.
Inglis in view of Kotseroglou fail to disclose:
wherein the coupling part retainer is adapted to receive the component coupling part by linear movement of the component coupling part along a third axis, and/or wherein the component coupling part is adapted to engage with the coupling part retainer by linear movement of the component coupling part along the third axis.
In analogous art, Gardner teaches:
wherein the coupling part retainer is adapted to receive the component coupling part by linear movement of the component coupling part along a third axis, and/or wherein the component coupling part is adapted to engage with the coupling part retainer by linear movement of the component coupling part along the third axis (see par.[0141]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Inglis in view of Kotseroglou with the teaching as taught by Gardner in order to provide an even greater opportunity for visualizing the vocal cords due to the ability to fully manipulate the angle and position of the camera sensor and optics.
Regarding Claim 18, Inglis in view of Kotseroglou disclose the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 17. Gardner further discloses
wherein the component coupling part has a primary coupling element being elongated and extending along a coupling part axis, wherein the coupling part axis is non-parallel with the third axis when the component coupling part is received by the coupling part retainer axis (see par.[0141]).
Regarding Claim 19, Inglis in view of Kotseroglou disclose the medical visualization system as discussed in the rejection of claim 17. Gardner further discloses wherein the component coupling part has a primary coupling element being elongated and extending along a coupling part axis, wherein the coupling part axis is perpendicular to the third axis when the component coupling part is received by the coupling part retainer (see par.[0141]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alazar Tilahun whose telephone number is (571)270-5712. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday, From 9:00 AM-6:00 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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
/ALAZAR TILAHUN/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2424
/A.T/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424