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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-12 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/6/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 13-23 in the reply filed on 5/6/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 13-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atarot (US 20150238276 A1) in view of Inoue (US 20150327940 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Atarot teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium including instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving a command indicative of adjusting a viewing direction of the articulatable medical device ([0283], manipulation of the system optics so that the desired portion of the scene is at the center of the field of view.);
generating an image based on signals from the sensing region ([0289], the camera image is transmitted via the camera unit (1115) to the PC, where the 3D image of the region of interest is reconstructed, as described hereinabove); and
processing the image to correct at least one of a projection distortion, a contrast and a color of the image ([0289], Manipulation of the camera image, such as elimination of background light or binarizing, as described hereinabove, can be carried out in the camera unit (1115), in the PC (1140), or any combination thereof.)
Atarot does not explicitly teach determining a sensing region on an imaging sensor based at least in part on the viewing direction;
However, Inoue teaches determining a sensing region on an imaging sensor based at least in part on the viewing direction ([0105], Specifically, when the operator O manipulates the confirmation switch 44b to input the confirmation instruction, the portion of the large intestine P1 projected to the center of the image may be set to the target area P3);
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the targeting system of Atarot to target a location using a part of the imager as described in Inoue in order to set the field of view to a desired specification (Inoue [0105]).
Regarding claim 14, Atarot in view of Inoue teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13,
Further, Atarot teaches wherein the viewing direction comprises a tilt angle ([176] In the present, system, the system comprises at least one articulating section, typically an articulating tool such as an articulating endoscope. The articulating tool can have an articulating tip, where the articulations are near the tip, it can have an articulating body, where the articulations are in the body or shaft of the tool, or both. The articulations allow bending in at least two degrees of freedom (DOF), preferably in four DOF, and possibly in all six DOF (bending in all three directions and rotating in all three directions)).
Regarding claim 15, Atarot in view of Inoue teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 14,
Further, Atarot teaches wherein the sensing region is a portion of the imaging sensor and is selected in a vertical direction (fig. 26, element 100, [0558], surgical tracking system 100 may also comprise one or more button operated wireless transmitters 12a, which transmit, upon activation, a single code wave 14 through aerial 13 to connected receiver 11 that produces a signal processed by computer 15, thereby directing and modifying the spatial position of endoscope 21 to the region of interest, up and down arrows in vertical direction).
Regarding claim 16, Atarot in view of Inoue teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13
Further, Atarot teaches wherein the signals is read out from the sensing region via a row selector and a column selector (fig. 26, element 100, [0558], surgical tracking system 100 may also comprise one or more button operated wireless transmitters 12a, which transmit, upon activation, a single code wave 14 through aerial 13 to connected receiver 11 that produces a signal processed by computer 15, thereby directing and modifying the spatial position of endoscope 21 to the region of interest, up and down arrows in column direction, left and right in the row direction).
Regarding claim 17, Atarot in view of Inoue teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13,
Further, Atarot teaches wherein an array of photodiodes are enabled upon determining the sensor region and wherein photodiodes not in the sensing region are disabled ([0285] In embodiments where the modulation unit (1135) is "upstream" of the light source (1130), the modulation unit (1135) controls the light source (1130) directly so that light (1132) is emitted from different positions in the source (1130) at different times, in order to provide the desired set of structured light rays).
Regarding claim 18, Atarot in view of Inoue teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13,
Further, Inoue teaches wherein the sensing region is determined based on the viewing direction and a predetermined mapping relationship ([0011], a determination unit configured to determine whether a condition is a partial movement condition in which only moving the auxiliary movable section is required or an entire movement condition in which both of moving the auxiliary movable section and moving the main movable section are required, in order to move the treatment section to the position specified in the instruction when the determination unit receives the instruction).
Regarding claim 19, Atarot in view of Inoue teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13
Further, Atarot teaches wherein the vision system comprises two of the imaging sensors providing stereoscopic imaging ([0044], at least one array comprising M cameras, each of the M cameras, where M is a positive integer).
Regarding claim 20, Atarot in view of Inoue teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 19,
Further, Inoue teaches wherein different sensing regions in the two of the imaging sensors are selected to align the different sensing regions in a vertical direction ([0105], Specifically, when the operator O manipulates the confirmation switch 44b to input the confirmation instruction, the portion of the large intestine P1 projected to the center of the image may be set to the target area P3).
Regarding claim 21, Atarot in view of Inoue teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13,
Further, Inoue teaches further comprising decomposing the viewing direction of the articulatable medical device into a first angle and a second angle ([0064], based on the angle detected by the angle detection sensor 34 of the endoscope 30 and the values stored in the memory. The calculation element of the position detector 64 calculates the field-of-vision range R3 with respect to the distal end surface 11a of the overtube 10 based on the position of the distal end surface 31a and the values stored in the memory).
Regarding claim 22, Atarot in view of Inoue teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 21
Further, Inoue teaches wherein the first angle is used to determine the sensing region on the imaging sensor and the second angle is used to control an orientation of the imaging sensor ([0064], based on the angle detected by the angle detection sensor 34 of the endoscope 30 and the values stored in the memory. The calculation element of the position detector 64 calculates the field-of-vision range R3 with respect to the distal end surface 11a of the overtube 10 based on the position of the distal end surface 31a and the values stored in the memory, field of view and device angle are both calculated).
Regarding claim 23, Atarot in view of Inoue teaches The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 13,
Further, Atarot teaches wherein the imaging sensor is located at a distal end of the articulatable medical device ([0290] FIG. 15 shows an embodiment of a distal end (1000) of the endoscope. Modulated light (1132), after transmission through the endoscope, is emitted by the endoscope's optical transmission channels. After reflection from an object (not shown) it is received by the distal end of the camera optics (1020)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY TUAN LUU whose telephone number is (703)756-4592. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday, Thursday-Friday.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Carey can be reached at 5712707235. 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.
/TIMOTHY TUAN LUU/ Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/MICHAEL J CAREY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights