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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10 April 2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Rejection on 01 April 2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 9, 13, and 20 have been amended. Claims 11, 15, 17, and 19 have been newly canceled. Claims 21-24 have been newly added. Accordingly, claims 1-12, 12-14, 16, 18, and 20-24 remain pending in the present application. The previous objections to claims 1 and 13 have been withdrawn as a result of amendment. Additionally, the Specification has been amended in line with the examiner’s suggestions, and as such, the objection to the specification has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 13, and 20 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-10, 12-14, 16, 18, 20 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshie (US 20100160728 A1), hereafter Yoshie, in view of Levinson (US 20240315793 A1, having an effective filing date of at least 14 July 2021), hereafter Levinson.
Regarding claim 1, Yoshie discloses a medical system, comprising:
A user input device for controlling a medical instrument (0040, The treatment instrument system 1 of embodiment 1 according to the present invention, as shown in FIG. 1, includes: an instruction input section 2 which has a movable section and which is used by an operator, such as a surgeon, to perform an instruction input (or instruction operation); an instruction input section driving section 3 which electrically drives the instruction input section 2; a treatment section 4 in which there is formed an active medical apparatus having a movable section for performing treatment; a treatment section driving section 5 which electrically drives the treatment section 4 according to the instruction input by the instruction input section 2; and a control section 6 which performs drive control of the instruction input section driving section 3 and the treatment section driving section 5.), wherein the user input device is operable in:
An unassisted mode with a first set of parameters for operation of the user input device (0080, When the power source of the treatment instrument system 1 shown in FIG. 2 is turned on, the treatment instrument system 1 starts a control operation in (a control mode of) the predetermined control system, as shown in step S1. Specifically, the CPU 21 starts a control operation in the control mode based on the force reflecting type bilateral control system shown in FIG. 3, that is, in the force reflecting type bilateral control mode. 0077, In the force reflecting type bilateral control shown in FIG. 3, the position information Xm generated by the input instruction given to the instruction input section 2 is subtracted by the position information Xs of the treatment section 4, and the subtracted position information (Xm-Xs) is sent to the treatment section control section 5'. The treatment section control section 5' performs position control of the treatment section 4 on the basis of subtracted position information (Xm-Xs).); and
An assisted mode with a second parameters, distinct from the first set of parameters, for operation of the user input device (0089, Specifically, the CPU 21 stops the operation of both the power sections of the motors 14j' and 14j, or stops the operation of at least one of the power sections of the motors 14j' and 14j. Alternatively, in the case where the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system as shown in FIG. 3 is adopted in the control system before the determination, the CPU 21 may change the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system to, for example, a control mode of an unilateral control system, as a control mode at the specific time as shown in FIG. 5, that is, an unilateral control mode. 0092, In the control mode of the unilateral control system shown in FIG. 5, the instruction input section 2 is separated from the instruction input section control section 3'. The instruction input section 2 is not driven by the instruction input section driving section 3'. That is, in the control mode of the unilateral control system, the state of the control mode is set such that the instruction input section 2 is not driven even when force is made to act on the treatment section 4, so as to be fed back as the force information to the instruction input section control section 3'. 0093, In other words, in the control mode of the unilateral control system, only the position control of the treatment section 4 is performed by the input instruction given to the instruction input section 2, and feedback means of the force information is not provided.), the second set of parameters including a modification to one or more parameters of the first set of parameters (0092, In the control mode of the unilateral control system shown in FIG. 5, the instruction input section 2 is separated from the instruction input section control section 3'. The instruction input section 2 is not driven by the instruction input section driving section 3'. That is, in the control mode of the unilateral control system, the state of the control mode is set such that the instruction input section 2 is not driven even when force is made to act on the treatment section 4, so as to be fed back as the force information to the instruction input section control section 3');
A sensor coupled to the user input device for generating information related to the user input device (0053, to the rotary shaft of the motor 14i, there is attached, for example, a rotary encoder 15i serving as a position sensor for detecting an angle of rotation of the rotary shaft. 0059, to the CPU 21 which configures the control section 6, there are inputted, as position information, signals detected by encoders 15a' to 15c' which can detect the instruction input operation of the instruction input section 2 performed by the operator.);
A processor (0056, position information based on the signal detected by the encoder 15i is inputted into a CPU 21 which configures the control section 6.); and
Memory storing instructions for execution by the processor (0056, position information based on the signal detected by the encoder 15i is inputted into a CPU 21 which configures the control section 6. Examiner's note, there must be some kind of memory associated with the CPU in order for the CPU to process the information received), the stored instructions including instructions for:
While operating the user input device in the unassisted mode, identifying drift of the user input device based on the information from the sensor (0084-0088, Then as shown in step S4, the motor 14j' driven by the motor driver 16j' supplies the force to effect the rotation around the corresponding joint shaft 11j'. Further, as shown in step S5, the CPU 21 monitors the rotation angle of the joint shaft 11j' of the instruction input section 2 on the basis of the detection signal of the encoder 15j'. Then, as shown in step S6, the CPU 21 determines whether or not the direction of the force (driving force) to rotate the joint shaft 11j' coincides with the direction of movement (detected in the preceding step S4). When the directions are not coincident with each other, the CPU 21 returns to step S2. On the other hand, when determining that the directions are coincident with each other, the CPU 21 determines, in next step S7, whether or not the amount of movement (movement amount) exceeds a predetermined threshold value. In other words, the CPU 21 determines whether or not movement in the acting direction of the driving force driving the instruction input section 2 is generated in an amount exceeding the predetermined threshold value. When the movement amount does not exceed the threshold value, the CPU 21 returns to step 2. On the contrary, when the movement amount exceeds the threshold value, the CPU 21 suppresses, in step S8, the operation of the power section (driving section) in the control system, or changes the control mode to the other control mode so as to suppress the operation of the power section.); and
In accordance with identifying the drift, switching operation of the user input device from the unassisted mode to the assisted mode (0089, in the case where the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system as shown in FIG. 3 is adopted in the control system before the determination, the CPU 21 may change the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system to, for example, a control mode of an unilateral control system, as a control mode at the specific time as shown in FIG. 5, that is, an unilateral control mode.).
Yoshie fails to explicitly disclose, however, wherein the modification comprises one or more of:
Increasing a damping of the user input device;
Increasing a stiffness of the user input device;
Reducing a motion scaling between the user input device and the medical instrument so that motion of the user input device results in smaller tool tip motion of the medical instrument; or
Adjusting a brake control of a joint of the user input device by increasing friction within the joint;
Levinson, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein modifying a parameter includes adjusting a brake control of a joint of the user input device by increasing friction within the joint (0151, In some embodiments, as further detailed below, an input arm joint comprises a brake, and when entering pause mode, electrical supply to the brake is ceased, causing portions of the brake to cling to each other and thereby restrict or prevent movement of the joint. Optionally, disconnecting of electrical supply to the joint brakes is timed so that all joints of the input arm are locked altogether, and the input arm is maintained at the selected position, optionally being the last position set by the user. In some embodiments, the brake is an electromagnetic brake, which is optionally normally closed (locked to prevent movement).).
Yoshie and Levinson are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical device control systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the brake control of Levinson in order to provide a means of responding safely to a detected change in mode. The motivation to combine is to ensure that movement is prevented during a mode change, in order to increase the safety of the system overall.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, and Yoshie further teaches wherein the stored instructions further include instructions for, while operating the user input device in the assisted mode:
Tracking an amount of time the user input device is in the assisted mode (0095, Further, in this case, the determination result in step S7 or the information in step S8 is notified to the operator by the display section 22, and the like. Further, in next step S9, the CPU 21 is set in the state to wait for the elapse of the predetermined time on the basis of the timer started by the determination result.); and
In accordance with a determination that the amount of time meets a predetermined criterion, switching operation of the user input device from the assisted mode to the unassisted mode (0096, When the predetermined time elapses, the CPU 21 performs, as shown in step S10, processing to restore the control state to the initial state (in other words, to cancel the suppression) and returns to the processing in step S2.).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 2, and Yoshie further teaches wherein the predetermined criterion is a time threshold corresponding to a settling time of the user input device (0106, Further, such unintended operation is temporarily generated, and hence the operation state is returned to the normal operation state after the lapse of the predetermined time, so as to thereby enable the operator to continue the control operation in the normal state of good operability.).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, and Yoshie further teaches wherein the stored instructions further include instructions for, while operating the user input device in the assisted mode:
Monitoring user presence at the user input device (0094, when the control mode is changed to the control mode of the unilateral control system according to the determination result (that the movement amount exceeds the threshold value), then unintended movement of the instruction input section 2 and the treatment section 4 can be cancelled (and thereby suppressed) as long as the operator does not actually perform an input instruction to the instruction input section 2. Examiner's note: the examiner is interpreting the determination of a lack of user input to read on the "monitoring user presence" as claimed, as an absence of user input corresponding to the releasing of the user input device could reasonably be interpreted as a "lack of user presence"); and
In accordance with a determination that the user presence meets one or more predetermined criterion, switching operation of the user input device from the assisted mode to the unassisted mode (0094, when the control mode is changed to the control mode of the unilateral control system according to the determination result (that the movement amount exceeds the threshold value), then unintended movement of the instruction input section 2 and the treatment section 4 can be cancelled (and thereby suppressed) as long as the operator does not actually perform an input instruction to the instruction input section 2. 0106, Further, such unintended operation is temporarily generated, and hence the operation state is returned to the normal operation state after the lapse of the predetermined time, so as to thereby enable the operator to continue the control operation in the normal state of good operability. Examiner's note: the examiner is interpreting the "lapse of predetermined time" to read on the "predetermined criteria," as the lapse of time corresponds to a period of time where the operator is not interacting with the user input device).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, and Yoshie further teaches wherein the stored instructions further include instructions for, while operating the user input device in the assisted mode:
Tracking movement of the user input device (0102, However, in the state where the reaction force Fm' is applied, for example when the operator carelessly releases the hand from the instruction input section 2, the force Fm generated by the operation by the operator is eliminated. Examiner's note: the examiner is interpreting the determination of the lack of reaction force applied to the user input device to read on the "movement of the user input device," as it is determining a lack of movement of the user input device by the operator); and
In accordance with a determination that the movement of the user input device meets predetermined criteria, switching operation of the user input device from the assisted mode to the unassisted mode (0106, Further, such unintended operation is temporarily generated, and hence the operation state is returned to the normal operation state after the lapse of the predetermined time, so as to thereby enable the operator to continue the control operation in the normal state of good operability. Examiner's note: the examiner is interpreting the "lapse of predetermined time" to read on the "predetermined criteria," as the lapse of time corresponds to a period of time where the operator is not interacting with the user input device).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, and Yoshie further teaches wherein the sensor tracks movement of the user input device, and wherein identifying the drift of the user input device includes determining that the tracked movement corresponds to an unintentional movement (0104, That is, there is caused a state where an unintended operation is performed. However, the present embodiment is configured such that the direction of the reaction force applied to the instruction input section 2 in this case and the movement of the instruction input section 2 in the direction are monitored, and that when such movement is generated and when the movement amount exceeds the threshold value, the unintended operation is suppressed in such a manner of stopping the operation of the power section).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, and Yoshie further teaches wherein identifying the drift of the user input device comprises detecting a movement instability in the user input device (0104, That is, there is caused a state where an unintended operation is performed. However, the present embodiment is configured such that the direction of the reaction force applied to the instruction input section 2 in this case and the movement of the instruction input section 2 in the direction are monitored, and that when such movement is generated and when the movement amount exceeds the threshold value, the unintended operation is suppressed in such a manner of stopping the operation of the power section).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, and Yoshie further teaches wherein the modification further comprises one or more of:
Performing a position control operation where the user input device is moved to a known position; or
Performing a velocity control operation where a velocity of the input device is reduced or set to zero (0092, In the control mode of the unilateral control system shown in FIG. 5, the instruction input section 2 is separated from the instruction input section control section 3'. The instruction input section 2 is not driven by the instruction input section driving section 3'. That is, in the control mode of the unilateral control system, the state of the control mode is set such that the instruction input section 2 is not driven even when force is made to act on the treatment section 4, so as to be fed back as the force information to the instruction input section control section 3'. Examiner's note: the examiner is interpreting the cessation of driving the instruction input section 2 in the unilateral control mode as a "velocity control operation," as it amounts to changing the velocity of the input section to zero.).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, and Yoshie further teaches wherein the second set of parameters includes a modification to one or more parameters of the first set of parameters, and the modification to the one or more parameters comprises applying a weak feedback control (0092, In the control mode of the unilateral control system shown in FIG. 5, the instruction input section 2 is separated from the instruction input section control section 3'. The instruction input section 2 is not driven by the instruction input section driving section 3'. That is, in the control mode of the unilateral control system, the state of the control mode is set such that the instruction input section 2 is not driven even when force is made to act on the treatment section 4, so as to be fed back as the force information to the instruction input section control section 3'. Examiner's note: the examiner is interpreting the reduction in force feedback when in the unilateral control mode to read on the "weak feedback control," as the reduction in force feedback causes the force feedback to be "weaker" than the force feedback in the force feedback type bilateral control mode).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, and Levinson further teaches it further comprising a robotic arm coupled with the medical instrument for moving the medical instrument in accordance with one or more instructions from the processor (0091, FIGS. 1A-B show a control console (FIG. 1A) comprising a plurality of input arms for controlling movement of a corresponding plurality of surgical arms (FIG. 1B), according to some embodiments.).
Yoshie and Levinson are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical system controls. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the included the robotic arm of Levinson in order to provide further means of performing surgery on a patient. The motivation to combine is to expand the capabilities of the surgical system.
Regarding claim 13, Yoshie discloses a method for operating a medical system that includes a user input device for controlling a medical instrument, the method comprising:
Operating the user input device in an unassisted mode, including applying a first set of parameters to the user input device (0080, When the power source of the treatment instrument system 1 shown in FIG. 2 is turned on, the treatment instrument system 1 starts a control operation in (a control mode of) the predetermined control system, as shown in step S1. Specifically, the CPU 21 starts a control operation in the control mode based on the force reflecting type bilateral control system shown in FIG. 3, that is, in the force reflecting type bilateral control mode. 0077, In the force reflecting type bilateral control shown in FIG. 3, the position information Xm generated by the input instruction given to the instruction input section 2 is subtracted by the position information Xs of the treatment section 4, and the subtracted position information (Xm-Xs) is sent to the treatment section control section 5'. The treatment section control section 5' performs position control of the treatment section 4 on the basis of subtracted position information (Xm-Xs).);
While operating in the unassisted mode, detecting drift of the user input device (0084-0088, Then as shown in step S4, the motor 14j' driven by the motor driver 16j' supplies the force to effect the rotation around the corresponding joint shaft 11j'. Further, as shown in step S5, the CPU 21 monitors the rotation angle of the joint shaft 11j' of the instruction input section 2 on the basis of the detection signal of the encoder 15j'. Then, as shown in step S6, the CPU 21 determines whether or not the direction of the force (driving force) to rotate the joint shaft 11j' coincides with the direction of movement (detected in the preceding step S4). When the directions are not coincident with each other, the CPU 21 returns to step S2. On the other hand, when determining that the directions are coincident with each other, the CPU 21 determines, in next step S7, whether or not the amount of movement (movement amount) exceeds a predetermined threshold value. In other words, the CPU 21 determines whether or not movement in the acting direction of the driving force driving the instruction input section 2 is generated in an amount exceeding the predetermined threshold value. When the movement amount does not exceed the threshold value, the CPU 21 returns to step 2. On the contrary, when the movement amount exceeds the threshold value, the CPU 21 suppresses, in step S8, the operation of the power section (driving section) in the control system, or changes the control mode to the other control mode so as to suppress the operation of the power section.);
In accordance with detecting the drift, switching operation of the user input device to an assisted mode (0089, in the case where the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system as shown in FIG. 3 is adopted in the control system before the determination, the CPU 21 may change the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system to, for example, a control mode of an unilateral control system, as a control mode at the specific time as shown in FIG. 5, that is, an unilateral control mode.), including applying a second set of parameters that is distinct from the first set of parameters (0089, Specifically, the CPU 21 stops the operation of both the power sections of the motors 14j' and 14j, or stops the operation of at least one of the power sections of the motors 14j' and 14j. Alternatively, in the case where the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system as shown in FIG. 3 is adopted in the control system before the determination, the CPU 21 may change the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system to, for example, a control mode of an unilateral control system, as a control mode at the specific time as shown in FIG. 5, that is, an unilateral control mode. 0092, In the control mode of the unilateral control system shown in FIG. 5, the instruction input section 2 is separated from the instruction input section control section 3'. The instruction input section 2 is not driven by the instruction input section driving section 3'. That is, in the control mode of the unilateral control system, the state of the control mode is set such that the instruction input section 2 is not driven even when force is made to act on the treatment section 4, so as to be fed back as the force information to the instruction input section control section 3'. 0093, In other words, in the control mode of the unilateral control system, only the position control of the treatment section 4 is performed by the input instruction given to the instruction input section 2, and feedback means of the force information is not provided.) the second set of parameters including a modification to one or more parameters of the first set of parameters (0092, In the control mode of the unilateral control system shown in FIG. 5, the instruction input section 2 is separated from the instruction input section control section 3'. The instruction input section 2 is not driven by the instruction input section driving section 3'. That is, in the control mode of the unilateral control system, the state of the control mode is set such that the instruction input section 2 is not driven even when force is made to act on the treatment section 4, so as to be fed back as the force information to the instruction input section control section 3');
While operating in the assisted mode, determining that the user input device is stable (0095, Further, in this case, the determination result in step S7 or the information in step S8 is notified to the operator by the display section 22, and the like. Further, in next step S9, the CPU 21 is set in the state to wait for the elapse of the predetermined time on the basis of the timer started by the determination result. 0096, When the predetermined time elapses, the CPU 21 performs, as shown in step S10, processing to restore the control state to the initial state (in other words, to cancel the suppression) and returns to the processing in step S2.); and
In accordance with the determination, switching the operation of the user input device to the unassisted mode (0095, Further, in this case, the determination result in step S7 or the information in step S8 is notified to the operator by the display section 22, and the like. Further, in next step S9, the CPU 21 is set in the state to wait for the elapse of the predetermined time on the basis of the timer started by the determination result. 0096, When the predetermined time elapses, the CPU 21 performs, as shown in step S10, processing to restore the control state to the initial state (in other words, to cancel the suppression) and returns to the processing in step S2.).
Yoshie fails to explicitly disclose, however, wherein the modification comprises one or more of:
Increasing a damping of the user input device;
Increasing a stiffness of the user input device; or
Adjusting a brake control of a joint of the user input device by increasing friction within the joint;
Levinson, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein modifying a parameter includes adjusting a brake control of a joint of the user input device by increasing friction within the joint (0151, In some embodiments, as further detailed below, an input arm joint comprises a brake, and when entering pause mode, electrical supply to the brake is ceased, causing portions of the brake to cling to each other and thereby restrict or prevent movement of the joint. Optionally, disconnecting of electrical supply to the joint brakes is timed so that all joints of the input arm are locked altogether, and the input arm is maintained at the selected position, optionally being the last position set by the user. In some embodiments, the brake is an electromagnetic brake, which is optionally normally closed (locked to prevent movement).).
Yoshie and Levinson are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical device control systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the brake control of Levinson in order to provide a means of responding safely to a detected change in mode. The motivation to combine is to ensure that movement is prevented during a mode change, in order to increase the safety of the system overall.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the method of claim 13, and Yoshie further teaches wherein determining that the user input device is stable comprises determining that the user input device has been operating in the assisted mode for a predetermined amount of time (0095, Further, in this case, the determination result in step S7 or the information in step S8 is notified to the operator by the display section 22, and the like. Further, in next step S9, the CPU 21 is set in the state to wait for the elapse of the predetermined time on the basis of the timer started by the determination result. 0096, When the predetermined time elapses, the CPU 21 performs, as shown in step S10, processing to restore the control state to the initial state (in other words, to cancel the suppression) and returns to the processing in step S2.).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the method of claim 13, and Yoshie further teaches wherein determining that the user input device is stable comprises determining that a user presence at the user input device meets one or more predetermined criterion (0094, when the control mode is changed to the control mode of the unilateral control system according to the determination result (that the movement amount exceeds the threshold value), then unintended movement of the instruction input section 2 and the treatment section 4 can be cancelled (and thereby suppressed) as long as the operator does not actually perform an input instruction to the instruction input section 2.).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the method of claim 13, and Yoshie further teaches wherein detecting the drift of the user input device comprises:
Tracking movement of the user input device (0104, That is, there is caused a state where an unintended operation is performed. However, the present embodiment is configured such that the direction of the reaction force applied to the instruction input section 2 in this case and the movement of the instruction input section 2 in the direction are monitored, and that when such movement is generated and when the movement amount exceeds the threshold value, the unintended operation is suppressed in such a manner of stopping the operation of the power section); and
Determining that the tracked movement corresponds to an unintentional movement (0104, That is, there is caused a state where an unintended operation is performed. However, the present embodiment is configured such that the direction of the reaction force applied to the instruction input section 2 in this case and the movement of the instruction input section 2 in the direction are monitored, and that when such movement is generated and when the movement amount exceeds the threshold value, the unintended operation is suppressed in such a manner of stopping the operation of the power section).
Regarding claim 20, Yoshie discloses a method for operating a medical system that includes a user input device for controlling a medical instrument, the method comprising:
Operating the user input device in an unassisted mode, including applying a first set of parameters to the user input device (0080, When the power source of the treatment instrument system 1 shown in FIG. 2 is turned on, the treatment instrument system 1 starts a control operation in (a control mode of) the predetermined control system, as shown in step S1. Specifically, the CPU 21 starts a control operation in the control mode based on the force reflecting type bilateral control system shown in FIG. 3, that is, in the force reflecting type bilateral control mode. 0077, In the force reflecting type bilateral control shown in FIG. 3, the position information Xm generated by the input instruction given to the instruction input section 2 is subtracted by the position information Xs of the treatment section 4, and the subtracted position information (Xm-Xs) is sent to the treatment section control section 5'. The treatment section control section 5' performs position control of the treatment section 4 on the basis of subtracted position information (Xm-Xs).);
While operating in the unassisted mode, identifying drift of the user input device (0084-0088, Then as shown in step S4, the motor 14j' driven by the motor driver 16j' supplies the force to effect the rotation around the corresponding joint shaft 11j'. Further, as shown in step S5, the CPU 21 monitors the rotation angle of the joint shaft 11j' of the instruction input section 2 on the basis of the detection signal of the encoder 15j'. Then, as shown in step S6, the CPU 21 determines whether or not the direction of the force (driving force) to rotate the joint shaft 11j' coincides with the direction of movement (detected in the preceding step S4). When the directions are not coincident with each other, the CPU 21 returns to step S2. On the other hand, when determining that the directions are coincident with each other, the CPU 21 determines, in next step S7, whether or not the amount of movement (movement amount) exceeds a predetermined threshold value. In other words, the CPU 21 determines whether or not movement in the acting direction of the driving force driving the instruction input section 2 is generated in an amount exceeding the predetermined threshold value. When the movement amount does not exceed the threshold value, the CPU 21 returns to step 2. On the contrary, when the movement amount exceeds the threshold value, the CPU 21 suppresses, in step S8, the operation of the power section (driving section) in the control system, or changes the control mode to the other control mode so as to suppress the operation of the power section.); and
In accordance with detecting the drift, switching operation of the user input device to an assisted mode, including applying a second set of parameters that is distinct from the first set of parameters (0089, in the case where the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system as shown in FIG. 3 is adopted in the control system before the determination, the CPU 21 may change the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system to, for example, a control mode of an unilateral control system, as a control mode at the specific time as shown in FIG. 5, that is, an unilateral control mode. 0089, Specifically, the CPU 21 stops the operation of both the power sections of the motors 14j' and 14j, or stops the operation of at least one of the power sections of the motors 14j' and 14j. Alternatively, in the case where the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system as shown in FIG. 3 is adopted in the control system before the determination, the CPU 21 may change the control mode of the force reflecting type bilateral system to, for example, a control mode of an unilateral control system, as a control mode at the specific time as shown in FIG. 5, that is, an unilateral control mode. 0092, In the control mode of the unilateral control system shown in FIG. 5, the instruction input section 2 is separated from the instruction input section control section 3'. The instruction input section 2 is not driven by the instruction input section driving section 3'. That is, in the control mode of the unilateral control system, the state of the control mode is set such that the instruction input section 2 is not driven even when force is made to act on the treatment section 4, so as to be fed back as the force information to the instruction input section control section 3'. 0093, In other words, in the control mode of the unilateral control system, only the position control of the treatment section 4 is performed by the input instruction given to the instruction input section 2, and feedback means of the force information is not provided.).
Yoshie fails to explicitly disclose, however, wherein the second set of parameters provide haptic feedback to the user input device that maintains a current position of the user input device.
Levinson, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach providing haptic feedback to the user input device that maintains a current position of the user input device (0151, In some embodiments, as further detailed below, an input arm joint comprises a brake, and when entering pause mode, electrical supply to the brake is ceased, causing portions of the brake to cling to each other and thereby restrict or prevent movement of the joint. Optionally, disconnecting of electrical supply to the joint brakes is timed so that all joints of the input arm are locked altogether, and the input arm is maintained at the selected position, optionally being the last position set by the user. In some embodiments, the brake is an electromagnetic brake, which is optionally normally closed (locked to prevent movement).).
Yoshie and Levinson are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical device control systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the brake control of Levinson in order to provide a means of responding safely to a detected change in mode. The motivation to combine is to ensure that movement is prevented during a mode change, in order to increase the safety of the system overall.
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, and Levinson further teaches wherein the modification comprises adjusting the brake control of the joint of the user input device by increasing the friction within the joint (0151, In some embodiments, as further detailed below, an input arm joint comprises a brake, and when entering pause mode, electrical supply to the brake is ceased, causing portions of the brake to cling to each other and thereby restrict or prevent movement of the joint. Optionally, disconnecting of electrical supply to the joint brakes is timed so that all joints of the input arm are locked altogether, and the input arm is maintained at the selected position, optionally being the last position set by the user. In some embodiments, the brake is an electromagnetic brake, which is optionally normally closed (locked to prevent movement).).
Yoshie and Levinson are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical device control systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the brake control of Levinson in order to provide a means of responding safely to a detected change in mode. The motivation to combine is to ensure that movement is prevented during a mode change, in order to increase the safety of the system overall.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshie in view of Levinson, and further in view of Tekiela (US 20200046439 A1), hereafter Tekiela.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, and Yoshie further teaches wherein the sensor is an encoder (0053, to the rotary shaft of the motor 14i, there is attached, for example, a rotary encoder 15i serving as a position sensor for detecting an angle of rotation of the rotary shaft. 0059, to the CPU 21 which configures the control section 6, there are inputted, as position information, signals detected by encoders 15a' to 15c' which can detect the instruction input operation of the instruction input section 2 performed by the operator.).
The examiner notes that, while rotary encoders often employ light-based sensing means, it is unclear whether the encoder of Yoshie is an optical encoder. Therefore, in order to promote compact prosecution, the examiner is relying on Tekiela to teach wherein the sensor includes a capacitance-based or a light-based sensor (0036, processor 277 may be coupled to capacitive sensors 275 on the surface of controller 261 (e.g., similar to the capacitive sensing of a touch screen) to determine if/how a user is holding controller 261 (e.g., determining placement of fingers on controller 261, if controller 261 is fully in hand, if controller 261 has been dropped, etc.).).
Yoshie, Levinson, and Tekiela are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical device control systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the capacitive sensors of Tekiela in order to provide an affirmative means of determining the presence of a user. The motivation to combine is to ensure that the system is able to determine when a user is present at the control device.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshie in view of Levinson, and further in view of Kirschenman (US 20090247993 A1), hereafter Kirschenman.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the modification comprises increasing the damping of the user input device.
Kirschenman, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein the modification comprises increasing the damping of the user input device (0121, If desired, the system may include a corresponding haptic response in the input joystick. For zones A, B, and C, such a haptic response may involve changing the dampening force on the handle (e.g., as the tip moves closer to the wall, the user might feel as if the tip is caught in an increasingly dense sludge). Once the tip starts to cross the barrier between zone C and zone D, this feeling may be accompanied by a force that prevents inadvertent continued motion.).
Yoshie, Levinson, and Kirschenman are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical control systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the damping increasing of Kirschenman in order to provide a means of ensuring that erroneous movements are avoided. The motivation to combine is to ensure that the surgery is performed as safely as possible.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshie in view of Levinson, and further in view of He (US 20190220097 A1), hereafter He.
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the modification comprises increasing the stiffness of the user input device.
He, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein the modification comprises increasing the stiffness of the user input device (0076, In some examples, the stiffness of the input device may be increased back to normal levels during process 380. 0071, At the process 380, the end effector associated with the input device is operated using the end effector. Once engagement between the hand and the input device is obtained, the hand is used to change the position and/or orientation of the distal portion of the input device. In some examples, the change in the position and/or orientation of the distal portion of the input device may be detected based on signals from one or more joint sensors of the input device and/or the repositionable arm to which the input device is couple indicating that the input device is being moved. In some examples, the change in the position and/or orientation of the distal portion of the input device is used to cause corresponding changes in the position and/or orientation of the end effector associated with the input device.).
Yoshie, Levinson, and He are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical control systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the stiffness increasing of He in order to provide a means of ensuring that erroneous movements are avoided. The motivation to combine is to ensure that the surgery is performed as safely as possible.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshie in view of Levinson, and further in view of Carlson (US 20170265956 A1), hereafter Carlson.
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Yoshie and Levinson teaches the medical system of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the modification comprises reducing the motion scaling between the user input device and the medical instrument so that motion of the user input device results in smaller tool tip motion of the medical instrument.
Carlson, however, in an analogous field of endeavor, does teach wherein the modification comprises reducing the motion scaling between the user input device and the medical instrument so that motion of the user input device results in smaller tool tip motion of the medical instrument (0064, Different motion scaling parameters (e.g., the ratio for scaling the input movement to the output movement) may be determined from the measured distances 606, 612. For example, when the tip 604 of the instrument 602 is closer to the point of interest 608 and the measured distance 612 is small, the motion scaling parameter may be lower than when the tip 604 of the instrument 602 is farther away from the point of interest 608. As illustrated in FIG. 6B, the lower motion scaling parameter maps an insertion motion of the operator input device to cause the distal tip 604 of the medical instrument 602 to move a distance D3 when the instrument is closer to the point of interest 608. As illustrated in FIG. 6A, a higher motion scaling parameter associated with the larger measured distance 606 maps the same insertion motion of the operator input device to cause the distal tip 604 of the medical instrument 602 to move a distance D4. Thus, the tip 604 of the instrument is scaled for smaller movement D3 when the tip is closer to the point of interest. Although the lower motion scaling parameter is shown to be associated with a smaller displacement output, it may also or alternatively be associated with a smaller rotational motion, smaller velocity or smaller acceleration output. Thus, the operator input movement would map more cautiously (smaller displacements, slower velocities and accelerations) when the distal tip is closer to the point of interest and greater precautions may be needed to access a target tissue or to reduce the risk of puncturing the airways. By scaling the ratio between input control and movement of the medical instrument 602 lower, it is less likely that the instrument will contact the point of interest 608 with excessive force. Even with constant input from the input control mechanism, the medical instrument 602 may slow down and even become stopped, based upon the changing measured distance between the distal tip of the instrument and the point of interest 608.).
Yoshie, Levinson, and Carlson are analogous because they are in a similar field of endeavor, e.g., surgical control systems. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to have included the motion scaling adjustment of Carlson in order to provide a means of adjusting the ratio of the movement of the input device to the movement output device. The motivation to combine is to ensure that an instrument does not contact the patient with excessive force, increasing the safety of the system (see at least 0064 of Carlson).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BLAKE A WOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-6830. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM Eastern.
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.
/BLAKE A WOOD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3658
Prosecution Insights