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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-2, 16, and 18-20, of the instant application are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 6, 8, and 11-13, of US Patent 12,210,665 B2, as being described below. The patent claims include all of the limitations of the instant application claims, respectively. The patent claims also include additional limitations. Hence, the instant application claims are generic to the species of invention covered by the respective patent claims. As such, the instant application claims are anticipated by the patent claims and are therefore not patentably distinct therefrom. (See Eli Lilly and Co. v. Barr Laboratories Inc., 58 USPQ2D 1869, "a later genus claim limitation is anticipated by, and therefore not patentably distinct from, an earlier species claim", In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010, "Thus, the generic invention is 'anticipated' by the species of the patented invention" and the instant “application claims are generic to species of invention covered by the patent claim, and since without terminal disclaimer, extant species claims preclude issuance of generic application claims”).
Instant Application 18/986,240.
US Patent 12,210,665 B2
1. A system comprising:
a memory storing instructions;
a processor communicatively coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions to:
determine a particular operation performed during an operating session by a computer-assisted operation system, the particular operation performed with respect to a body while an imaging device included within the computer-assisted operation system provides, for display on a display device during the operating session, imagery of the body from a first viewpoint; define, based on the particular operation, a second viewpoint for the imaging device that is more optimal for performing the particular operation than the first viewpoint; and direct the display device to switch, based on the defining of the second viewpoint, from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying the imagery of the body from the second viewpoint.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: direct the display device to present, while the display device is displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint, an indication that the second viewpoint has been defined; and receive, based on the presenting the indication that the second viewpoint has been defined, user input indicating that a user of the system has selected to view imagery of the body from the second viewpoint instead of viewing the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint; wherein the directing the display device to switch from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying the imagery of the body from the second viewpoint is performed based on the user input.
16. A method comprising: determining a particular operation performed during an operating session by a computer-assisted operation system, the particular operation performed with respect to a body while an imaging device included within the computer-assisted operation system provides, for display on a display device during the operating session, imagery of the body from a first viewpoint; defining, based on the particular operation, a second viewpoint for the imaging device that is more optimal for performing the particular operation than the first viewpoint; and directing the display device to switch, based on the defining of the second viewpoint, from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying the imagery of the body from the second viewpoint.
18. The method of claim 16, wherein the directing the display device to switch from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying the imagery of the body from the second viewpoint is performed automatically once the second viewpoint is defined.
19. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed, direct a processor of a computing device to perform a process comprising: determining a particular operation performed during an operating session by a computer-assisted operation system, the particular operation performed with respect to a body while an imaging device included within the computer-assisted operation system provides, for display on a display device during the operating session, imagery of the body from a first viewpoint; defining, based on the particular operation, a second viewpoint for the imaging device that is more optimal for performing the particular operation than the first viewpoint; and directing the display device to switch, based on the defining of the second viewpoint, from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying the imagery of the body from the second viewpoint.
20. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 19, wherein the directing the display device to switch from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying the imagery of the body from the second viewpoint is performed automatically once the second viewpoint is defined.
1. A system comprising:
a memory storing instructions;
a processor communicatively coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions to:
determine a particular operation performed during an operating session by a computer-assisted operation system, the particular operation performed with respect to a body while an imaging device included within the computer-assisted operation system provides, for display on a display device during the operating session, imagery of the body from a first viewpoint; determine that a first wrist posture associated with the first viewpoint is being used by a user to direct the computer-assisted operation system to perform the particular operation; determine, based on the particular operation, that a second wrist posture associated with a second viewpoint having a horizon orientation distinct from a horizon orientation of the first viewpoint would be more optimal for directing the performing of the particular operation than the first wrist posture; and direct the display device to display an indication of the second viewpoint.
6. The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: receive, based on the display of the indication of the second viewpoint, user input indicating that the user has selected to view imagery of the body from the second viewpoint instead of viewing the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint; and direct the display device to switch, in response to the user input, from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying the imagery of the body from the second viewpoint.
8. A method comprising: determining, by a viewpoint optimization system, a particular operation performed during an operating session by a computer-assisted operation system, the particular operation performed with respect to a body while an imaging device included within the computer-assisted operation system provides, for display on a display device during the operating session, imagery of the body from a first viewpoint; determining, by the viewpoint optimization system, that a first wrist posture associated with the first viewpoint is being used by a user to direct the computer-assisted operation system to perform the particular operation; determining, by the viewpoint optimization system based on the particular operation, that a second wrist posture associated with a second viewpoint having a horizon orientation distinct from a horizon orientation of the first viewpoint would be more optimal for directing the performing of the particular operation than the first wrist posture; and directing, by the viewpoint optimization system, the display device to display an indication of the second viewpoint.
11. The method of claim 8, wherein the directing of the display device to display the indication of the second viewpoint comprises directing the display device to automatically switch, based on the determining that the second wrist posture would be more optimal for directing the performing of the particular operation than the first wrist posture, from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying imagery of the body from the second viewpoint.
12. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed, direct a processor of a computing device to: determine a particular operation performed during an operating session by a computer-assisted operation system, the particular operation performed with respect to a body while an imaging device included within the computer-assisted operation system provides, for display on a display device during the operating session, imagery of the body from a first viewpoint; determine that a first wrist posture associated with the first viewpoint is being used by a user to direct the computer-assisted operation system to perform the particular operation; determine, based on the particular operation, that a second wrist posture associated with a second viewpoint having a horizon orientation distinct from a horizon orientation of the first viewpoint would be more optimal for directing the performing of the particular operation than the first wrist posture; and direct the display device to display an indication of the second viewpoint.
13. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein the directing of the display device to display the indication of the second viewpoint comprises directing the display device to display a graphical object indicative of the second viewpoint while the display device is displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint, the graphical object displayed as an overlay graphic integrated with the displayed imagery of the body from the first viewpoint.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-12, and 16-20, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wada (US PGPUB 2020/0085282 A1).
As per claim 1, Wada discloses a system (Wada, Figs. 2-6) comprising:
a memory storing instructions (Wada, paragraphs 55 and 62);
a processor (Wada, paragraphs 8 and 55) communicatively coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions (Wada, paragraph 55) to:
determine a particular operation performed during an operating session by a computer-assisted operation system (Wada, paragraphs 43 and 44, discloses when the operation mode is the hands-free mode, the control device 500 uses, as the input information, the motion and the direction of the head of the surgeon 20, the gesture of the surgeon 20, sight line position information that indicates the position of the sight line on the screen of the display 140, a voice recognition result, a sound volume, and operation information that indicates the detail of the operation to the foot switch 180.), the particular operation performed with respect to a body while an imaging device included within the computer-assisted operation system provides, for display on a display device during the operating session, imagery of the body from a first viewpoint (Wada, Fig. 2, and paragraph 35, discloses A camera image of the video microscope 112 or the laparoscope 110 is displayed on a display 140);
define, based on the particular operation, a second viewpoint for the imaging device that is more optimal for performing the particular operation than the first viewpoint (Wada, paragraphs 45-46, and 68-70, discloses “zoom in”); and
direct the display device to switch, based on the defining of the second viewpoint, from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying the imagery of the body from the second viewpoint (Wada, paragraphs 65 and 67-71, discloses “zoom out” and “zoom in”).
As per claim 2, Wada further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
direct the display device to present, while the display device is displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint, an indication that the second viewpoint has been defined (Wada, paragraphs 43, 65, 67 and 71); and
receive, based on the presenting the indication that the second viewpoint has been defined, user input indicating that a user of the system has selected to view imagery of the body from the second viewpoint instead of viewing the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint (Wada, paragraphs 43, 65, 67 and 71);
wherein the directing the display device to switch from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying the imagery of the body from the second viewpoint is performed based on the user input (Wada, paragraphs 71 and 76).
As per claim 3, Wada further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the directing the display device to switch from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying the imagery of the body from the second viewpoint is performed automatically once the second viewpoint is defined (Wada, paragraphs 44, 47, 61 and 76).
As per claim 4, Wada further discloses the system of claim 3, wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
detect user input representative of a command for the computer-assisted operation system to enter into an image adjustment mode (Wada, paragraphs 65 and 69);
wherein the automatic directing the display device to switch from displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint to displaying the imagery of the body from the second viewpoint is configured to be performed only while the computer-assisted operation system is in the image adjustment mode (Wada, paragraphs 44, 47, 61, 69, and 76).
As per claim 6, Wada further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein: the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
determine that active imagery portraying a performance of the particular operation with respect to the body is depicted at a first detail level by the display device when displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint (Wada, paragraphs 69 and 77), and
determine that displaying imagery of the body from a viewpoint having a zoom orientation distinct from a zoom orientation of the first viewpoint would cause the active imagery to be depicted at a second detail level more optimal for performing the particular operation than the first detail level (Wada, paragraph 69); and
the second viewpoint is defined to be the viewpoint having the zoom orientation distinct from the zoom orientation of the first viewpoint so that the active imagery is depicted at the second detail level that is more optimal for performing the particular operation (Wada. Paragraphs 69).
As per claim 7, Wada further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein: the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
determine that active imagery portraying a performance of the particular operation with respect to the body is depicted at a first part of a field of view presented by the display device when displaying the imagery of the body from the first viewpoint (Wada, paragraph 77), and
determine that displaying imagery of the body from a viewpoint having a planar orientation distinct from a planar orientation of the first viewpoint would cause the active imagery to be depicted at a second part of the field of view more optimal for performing the particular operation than the first part of the field of view (Wada, paragraphs 76 and 77); and
the second viewpoint is defined to be the viewpoint having the planar orientation distinct from the planar orientation of the first viewpoint so that the active imagery is depicted at the second part of the field of view that is more optimal for performing the particular operation (Wada, paragraphs 77 and 78).
As per claim 8, Wada further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein: the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
determine an identity of a user who selected the first viewpoint (Wada, paragraphs 35 and 38), and
access, based on the identity of the user, user-specific data representative of a viewpoint selection performed by the user prior to the operating session (Wada, paragraphs 43 and 61); and
the second viewpoint is defined further based on the user-specific data representative of the viewpoint selection performed by the user prior to the operating session (Wada, paragraphs 35, 38, and 89).
As per claim 9, Wada further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the defining the second viewpoint that is more optimal for performing the particular operation than the first viewpoint includes:
identifying, based on input provided in real time during the operating session by an expert advisor who is distinct from a user performing the particular operation, a recommended viewpoint for the particular operation (Wada, paragraphs 35, 38, and 55); and defining the second viewpoint based on the recommended viewpoint (Wada, paragraphs 43, 55 and 89).
As per claim 10, Wada further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the defining the second viewpoint that is more optimal for performing the particular operation than the first viewpoint comprises:
accessing data representative of viewpoint selection performed prior to the operating session by an expert advisor who is distinct from a user performing the particular operation (Wada, paragraphs 35, 40, and 55); and
defining the second viewpoint based on the data representative of the viewpoint selection by the expert advisor (Wada, paragraphs 40-41, and 89).
As per claim 11, Wada further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the defining the second viewpoint that is more optimal for performing the particular operation than the first viewpoint comprises:
identifying, based on an automatic viewpoint recommendation algorithm configured to generate operation-specific viewpoint recommendations in real time during the operating session, a recommended viewpoint for the particular operation (Wada, paragraphs 40-41, 53, 89, and 92); and
defining the second viewpoint based on the recommended viewpoint (Wada, paragraphs 41 and 53).
As per claim 12, Wada further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
define a third viewpoint for the imaging device that is more optimal for performing an additional operation than the second viewpoint (Wada, paragraphs 69-71, here please note new zoom level is more optimal than the previous zoom level); and
direct the display device to display an indication of the third viewpoint (Wada, paragraphs 65-66, and 77-78).
As per claim 16, please see the analysis of claim 1.
As per claim 17, please see the analysis of claim 2.
As per claim 18, please see the analysis of claim 3.
As per claim 19, Wada discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed, direct a processor of a computing device to perform a process (Wada, paragraph 55) comprising: For rest of claim limitations please see the analysis of claim 1.
As per claim 20, please see the analysis of claim 3.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, and 13-15, are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED Z HAIDER whose telephone number is (571)270-5169. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY-FRIDAY 9-5:30 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, SAM K Ahn can be reached at 571-272-3044. 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.
/SYED HAIDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights