DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Response to Arguments
Examiner acknowledges the receipt of the Applicant’s Amendment dated December 4, 2025. Applicant amended claims 1, 15, and 16. Claims 1-3 and 5-16 are pending.
Applicant's arguments have been considered and are persuasive as previously discussed during the interview conducted on November 21, 2025. Upon further search and consideration, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as discussed below in view of the new grounds of rejection over Wong et al. (U.S. Publication 2024/0324870) as necessitated by the amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Applicant has amended claims 1-3, 5, 15, and 16 and the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 5, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adebar et al. (U.S. Publication 2020/0297442, hereinafter “Adebar”) and in further views of Graves et al. (U.S. Publication 2019/0083190, hereinafter “Graves”) and Wong et al. (U.S. Publication 2024/0324870, hereinafter “Wong”).
As to Claim 1, Adebar discloses a method of controlling an endoscope device (100) in [0034] and Fig. 1 as well as (200) in [0040] in Fig. 2A having a scope therein insertable into a human body and being configured to observe an organ inside the human body, the method being performed by a processor (112) in [0037] having “at least one computer processor” in [0037], the method comprising:
obtaining first data from (108) in [0036] and (230) in [0042] regarding an actual movement state (at any particular point in time during normal operation) of a motor (102) in [0034]-[0035] and (204) in [0041] included in an endoscope device (104) in [0034] and (202) in [0041];
obtaining second data “stored data” of “historical pose, position, or orientation data stored for a known point” in [0044] regarding a target movement state of a scope (wherein the “target” merely refers to a movement state that may be the same or different than the actual movement state) included in the endoscope device; and
controlling the motor based on the obtained first data and second data via “signals instructing one or more actuators of teleoperational manipulator assembly 102 to move medical instrument 104” in [0038] to adjust motion of the scope substantially in real time based on the obtained first data as described in [0050], [0054] and [0079],
wherein controlling the motor based on the obtained first data and second data comprises:
obtaining third data “information from visualization system 231 and/or the preoperatively obtained models to provide the physician or other operator with real-time position information” in [0048] regarding an estimated movement state “predicted state (e.g., pose, shape, or motion) of the medical instrument, and is also referred to as a predicted model” in [0080]-[0081] of the scope based on the obtained first data and second data; and
computing a torque (one component of “signals instructing one or more actuators of teleoperational manipulator assembly 102 to move medical instrument 104” in [0038]) for controlling the motor based on the obtained first data, second data, and third data.
In order to expedite prosecution, Graves is cited in the related field of endoscopy wherein a method of controlling an endoscopic device incorporates both synchronous and asynchronous commands which include real-time motor control commands in [0041]. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the method of Adebar wherein asynchronous information is provided in synchronous real-time fashion as taught by Graves in order to fulfill the same function of motor control with predictable results.
However, Adebar does not specifically disclose that the second data relative to an input value received from a user input device. Wong teaches in the analogous field of endoscopy wherein second data corresponding to and determined, in real time, by an input value “user input” in [0045] and [0075]-[0076] received from an input device “input device” in [0045] is obtained such that a target location is detected as further described in [0081], [0088], [0095], and [0105]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention that the method of controlling the endoscope device of Adebar to provide data obtained both historically and in real time in order to fulfill the same function of navigating the endoscope device to a desired target location as taught by Wong via second data corresponding to and determined by the input value with predictable results.
As to Claim 2, Adebar discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the actual movement state of the motor includes at least one of an actual position (at any particular point in time during normal operation) of the motor and actual speed (at any particular point in time during normal operation) of the motor (the actual movement state being thusly defined conceptually), which are measured by a sensor “sensors” in [0035]-[0036] and [0043]-[0044] capably detecting the actual position and speed of the motor.
As to Claim 3, Adebar discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the target movement state of the scope includes at least one of a target position of the scope “stored data” of “historical pose, position, or orientation data stored for a known point” in [0044], target speed of the scope, and target acceleration of the scope, which are computed via the endoscope device.
As to Claim 5, Adebar discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the estimated movement state of the scope includes at least one of an estimated position “pose” in [0080] of the scope and estimated speed “motion” in [0080] of the scope, which are computed based on actual position data of the motor included in the first data and actual speed data of the motor included in the first data.
As to Claim 15, Adebar discloses a computer-readable storage medium (112) in [0037] storing computer program, the computer program, when executed on at least one processor “at least one computer processor” in [0037], causing the processor to perform operations for controlling an endoscope scope, wherein the operations comprise operations of:
obtaining first data from (108) in [0036] and (230) in [0042] regarding an actual movement state (at any particular point in time during normal operation) of a motor (102) in [0034]-[0035] and (204) in [0041] included in an endoscope device (104) in [0034] and (202) in [0041] and second data “stored data” of “historical pose, position, or orientation data stored for a known point” in [0044] regarding a target (wherein the “target” merely refers to a movement state that may be the same or different than the actual movement state) movement state of a scope (100) in [0034] and Fig. 1 as well as (200) in [0040] in Fig. 2A included in the endoscope device; and
controlling the motor based on the obtained first data and second data via “signals instructing one or more actuators of teleoperational manipulator assembly 102 to move medical instrument 104” in [0038] to adjust motion of the scope substantially in real time based on the obtained first data as described in [0050], [0054] and [0079].
In order to expedite prosecution, Graves is cited in the related field of endoscopy whereina method of controlling an endoscopic device incorporates both synchronous and asynchronous commands which include real-time motor control commands in [0041]. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the method of Adebar wherein asynchronous information is provided in synchronous real-time fashion as taught by Graves in order to fulfill the same function of motor control with predictable results.
However, Adebar does not specifically disclose that the second data relative to an input value received from a user input device. Wong teaches in the analogous field of endoscopy wherein second data corresponding to and determined, in real time, by an input value “user input” in [0045] and [0075]-[0076] received from an input device “input device” in [0045] is obtained such that a target location is detected as further described in [0081], [0088], [0095], and [0105]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention that the method of controlling the endoscope device of Adebar to provide data obtained both historically and in real time in order to fulfill the same function of navigating the endoscope device to a desired target location as taught by Wong via second data corresponding to and determined by the input value with predictable results.
As to Claim 16, Adebar discloses a computing device (112) in [0037] for controlling an endoscope device (100) in [0034] and Fig. 1 as well as (200) in [0040] in Fig. 2A having a scope therein insertable into a human body and being configured to observe an organ inside the human body, the computing device comprising:
a processor “at least one computer processor” in [0037] including at least one core; and
memory including program codes executable on the processor;
wherein the processor:
obtains first data from (108) in [0036] and (230) in [0042] regarding an actual movement state (at any particular point in time during normal operation) of a motor (102) in [0034]-[0035] and (204) in [0041] included in an endoscope device (104) in [0034] and (202) in [0041] and second data “stored data” of “historical pose, position, or orientation data stored for a known point” in [0044] regarding a target (wherein the “target” merely refers to a movement state that may be the same or different than the actual movement state) movement state of a scope (100) in [0034] and Fig. 1 as well as (200) in [0040] in Fig. 2A included in the endoscope device;
obtains third data “information from visualization system 231 and/or the preoperatively obtained models to provide the physician or other operator with real-time position information” in [0048] regarding an estimated movement state “predicted state (e.g., pose, shape, or motion) of the medical instrument, and is also referred to as a predicted model” in [0080]-[0081] of the scope based on the obtained first data and second data; and
computes a torque (one component of “signals instructing one or more actuators of teleoperational manipulator assembly 102 to move medical instrument 104” in [0038]) for controlling the motor based on the obtained first data, second data, and third data via “signals instructing one or more actuators of teleoperational manipulator assembly 102 to move medical instrument 104” in [0038] to adjust motion of the scope substantially in real time based on the obtained first data as described in [0050], [0054] and [0079].
In order to expedite prosecution, Graves is cited in the related field of endoscopy whereina method of controlling an endoscopic device incorporates both synchronous and asynchronous commands which include real-time motor control commands in [0041]. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the method of Adebar wherein asynchronous information is provided in synchronous real-time fashion as taught by Graves in order to fulfill the same function of motor control with predictable results.
However, Adebar does not specifically disclose that the second data relative to an input value received from a user input device. Wong teaches in the analogous field of endoscopy wherein second data corresponding to and determined, in real time, by an input value “user input” in [0045] and [0075]-[0076] received from an input device “input device” in [0045] is obtained such that a target location is detected as further described in [0081], [0088], [0095], and [0105]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention that the method of controlling the endoscope device of Adebar to provide data obtained both historically and in real time in order to fulfill the same function of navigating the endoscope device to a desired target location as taught by Wong via second data corresponding to and determined by the input value with predictable results.
Claims 6-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adebar, Graves and Wong and in further view of Yamanaka et al. (U.S. Publication 2016/0228203, hereinafter “Yamanaka”).
As to Claims 6-14, Adebar discloses compensating control due for patient motion in [0077] however does not specifically disclose compensating control due to backlash.
As to Claim 6 in particular, Adebar in view of and Yamanaka discloses the method of claim 1, wherein Yamanaka teaches that obtaining the third data regarding the estimated movement state of the scope comprises: determining whether backlash in [0132], [0134], [0139] and [0182] for the scope has occurred based on actual position data of the motor included in the first data and actual speed data of the motor included in the first data; and generating the third data based on the actual position data of the motor, the actual speed data of the motor, and first compensation data regarding an amount of occurred backlash, which is determined based on whether the backlash for the scope has occurred as shown in Figs. 4 and 10A.
As to Claim 7 in particular, Adebar discloses the method of claim 1, wherein Yamanaka teaches that the torque includes: a first torque for controlling the motor so that the scope follows a position and speed desired by a user; and a second torque for minimizing an error caused in control based on the first torque as shown in Figs. 4 and 10A.
As to Claim 8 in particular, Adebar discloses the method of claim 7, wherein the first torque is computed using a first controller including a mathematical model that uses the second data and the third data as input variables as shown in Fig. 9.
As to Claim 9 in particular, Adebar in view of and Yamanaka discloses the method of claim 8, wherein the mathematical model included in the first controller includes sliding mode control as shown in Figs. 3A-3B.
As to Claim 10 in particular, Adebar in view of and Yamanaka discloses the method of claim 7, wherein the second torque is computed using a second controller including a mathematical model that uses the first data and the second data as input variables as shown in Fig. 9.
As to Claim 11 in particular, Adebar in view of and Yamanaka discloses the method of claim 8, wherein the mathematical model included in the second controller includes a nonlinear compensator as shown in Fig. 9.
As to Claim 12 in particular, Adebar in view of and Yamanaka discloses the method of claim 1, wherein Yamanaka teaches that controlling the motor based on the obtained first data and second data comprises computing a position of the motor based on target position data of the motor determined by the second data and second compensation data regarding an amount of occurred backlash, which is determined based on whether backlash for the scope has occurred in [0132], [0134], [0139] and [0182].
As to Claim 13 in particular, Adebar in view of and Yamanaka discloses the method of claim 12, wherein Yamanaka teaches that the second compensation data is a combination of an estimated value regarding the amount of occurred backlash computed based on the first data and a current state value “estimated value” in [0132], [0134], and [0139] and “load value” in [0182] at a time when the backlash occurs.
As to Claim 14 in particular, Adebar in view of and Yamanaka discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the second compensation data is updated whenever the backlash occurs (during normal operation wherein position, speed, and torque are continuously updated).
As to Claims 6-14, it would have been obvious to provide the method of Adebar with additional motion compensation in the form of backlash as taught by Yamanaka in order to fulfill the same function of scope navigation with predictable results of increasing tracking accuracy.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the enclosed 892 form. 20250108189 and 20240358444 are cited to show similar real-time data relevant to a desired target location or orientation.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM B CHOU whose telephone number is (571) 270-3367. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9 am - 6 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, Michael Carey can be reached on (571) 270-7235. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WILLIAM CHOU/
Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/MICHAEL J CAREY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795