DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 3 and 8-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 recites “…updated with posture information before a manipulation of the user input interface before a first manipulation of the user input interface.” which seems to be repetitive. Examiner suggests amending the claim to recite, “….updated with posture information [[before a manipulation of the user input interface]] before a first manipulation of the user input interface.”
Claims 8 and 13-15 should be amended to recite “wherein [[the]] generating the target state information…”.
Claim 9 should be amended to recite “wherein [[the]] generating the driving element difference information…”.
Claim 10 should be amended to recite “wherein [[the]] generating the modified state information [[comprising]] comprises:..”.
Claim 11 should be amended to recite “wherein [[the]] determining whether the target posture exceeds the driving limit…”.
Claim 12 should be amended to recite “wherein [[the]] generating the modified driving element difference information…”.
Appropriate correction is respectfully requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-7, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bowling et al (US 2023/0234239) hereinafter Bowling.
Regarding claim 1, Bowling discloses a method for driving a surgical instrument, the method comprising:
generating manipulation information of the surgical instrument based on an amount of change in a reference posture of a user input interface for controlling the surgical instrument ([0063] When the manipulator operates in the manual mode, the manipulator responds to the forces and torques the practitioner places on the instrument 160 to position the instrument; Examiner notes that the forces and torques placed on the instrument would be the amount of change in a reference posture);
determining a target posture of the surgical instrument, corresponding to the generated manipulation information ([0063] the manipulator mechanically moves the instrument in a manner that emulates the movement that would have occurred based on the forces and torques applied by the practitioner);
generating target state information for at least one driving element based on whether the target posture exceeds a driving limit of the at least one driving element provided in the surgical instrument ([0063] As the instrument 160 moves, the surgical manipulator 50 and surgical navigation system 210 cooperate to determine if the instrument is within a defined boundary); and
driving the at least one driving element according to the target state information ([0063] Based on these data, the manipulator 50 selectively limits the extent to which the instrument 160 moves).
Regarding claim 2, Bowling discloses wherein:
the driving element comprises a joint ([0069] The connection between two links is referred to as a joint);
the target state information comprises a target joint angle ([0143] the next position of the joint angles of manipulator 50); and
the driving limit comprises a joint limit angle ([0143] joint angle limits).
Regarding claim 5, Bowling discloses wherein the generating the target state information comprises: generating modified state information that constrains a driving status of the at least one driving element not to exceed the driving limit, in response to a determination that the target posture exceeds the driving limit of the at least one driving element provided in the surgical instrument ([0063] As the instrument 160 moves, the surgical manipulator 50 and surgical navigation system 210 cooperate to determine if the instrument is within a defined boundary and the manipulator 50 selectively limits the extent to which the instrument 160 moves).
Regarding claim 6, Bowling discloses wherein the modified state information is decided such that the driving result of the driving element approaches the driving limit as a degree to which the target posture exceeds the driving limit increases ([0055] should the manipulator determine that the practitioner's repositioning of the instrument is resulting in the instrument approaching a boundary which the instrument should not cross, the manipulator prevents the instrument from movement beyond the boundary).
Regarding claim 7, Bowling discloses wherein the driving is configured to update the reference posture of the user input interface with posture information after a manipulation of the user input interface in response to a determination that the target posture exceeds the driving limit of the at least one driving element provided in the surgical instrument ([0056] The manipulator does not move the tip such that the tip is repositioned beyond the boundary. The manipulator does, however, reorient the instrument according to the force detected from the practitioner).
Regarding claim 16, Bowling discloses an apparatus ([0065] manipulator 50) for driving a surgical instrument, the apparatus comprising:
at least one processor ([0086] manipulator controller 124); and
at least one memory ([0119] memory integral to the manipulator controller 124),
wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
generate manipulation information of the surgical instrument based on an amount of change in a reference posture of a user input interface for controlling the surgical instrument ([0063] When the manipulator operates in the manual mode, the manipulator responds to the forces and torques the practitioner places on the instrument 160 to position the instrument; Examiner notes that the forces and torques placed on the instrument would be the amount of change in a reference posture);
determine a target posture of the surgical instrument corresponding to the generated manipulation information ([0063] the manipulator mechanically moves the instrument in a manner that emulates the movement that would have occurred based on the forces and torques applied by the practitioner);
generate target state information for at least one driving element based on whether the target posture exceeds a driving limit of the at least one driving element provided in the surgical instrument ([0063] As the instrument 160 moves, the surgical manipulator 50 and surgical navigation system 210 cooperate to determine if the instrument is within a defined boundary); and
drive the at least one driving element according to the target state information ([0063] Based on these data, the manipulator 50 selectively limits the extent to which the instrument 160 moves).
Regarding claim 17, Bowling discloses a surgical robot system (Fig. 1), comprising:
a user input interface ([0090] user interface 130);
a surgical instrument ([0061] surgical instrument 160); and
at least one processor ([0086] manipulator controller 124),
wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
generate manipulation information of the surgical instrument based on an amount of change in a reference posture of a user input interface for controlling the surgical instrument ([0063] When the manipulator operates in the manual mode, the manipulator responds to the forces and torques the practitioner places on the instrument 160 to position the instrument; Examiner notes that the forces and torques placed on the instrument would be the amount of change in a reference posture);
determine a target posture of the surgical instrument corresponding to the generated manipulation information ([0063] the manipulator mechanically moves the instrument in a manner that emulates the movement that would have occurred based on the forces and torques applied by the practitioner);
generate target state information for at least one driving element based on whether the target posture exceeds a driving limit of the at least one driving element provided in the surgical instrument ([0063] As the instrument 160 moves, the surgical manipulator 50 and surgical navigation system 210 cooperate to determine if the instrument is within a defined boundary); and
drive the at least one driving element according to the target state information ([0063] Based on these data, the manipulator 50 selectively limits the extent to which the instrument 160 moves).
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.
Claim(s) 3-4, 8-9, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowling (US 2023/0234239) in view of Xu et al (US 2023/0293252) hereinafter Xu.
Regarding claim 3, Bowling discloses the method of claim 1 as discussed above, but fails to disclose wherein the reference posture of the user input interface is configured to be updated with posture information before a manipulation of the user input interface before a first manipulation of the user input interface. However, Xu discloses wherein the reference posture of the user input interface is configured to be updated with posture information before a manipulation of the user input interface before a first manipulation of the user input interface ([0034] determining a current pose of a master manipulator; [0034] a master-slave mapping relationship between the master manipulator and the slave tool is established).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method as taught by Bowling with the reference posture of the user input interface is configured to be updated with posture information before a manipulation of the user input interface before a first manipulation of the user input interface as taught by Xu. Such a modification would provide the predictable results of establishing a spatial relationship to implement teleoperation of the slave tool by the master manipulator (Xu, Abstract).
Regarding claim 4, Bowling discloses the method of claim 1 as discussed above, but fails to disclose wherein the determining the target posture comprises: determining the target posture based on a correlation between a predetermined movement of the user input interface and a movement of the surgical instrument. However, Xu discloses wherein the determining the target posture comprises: determining the target posture based on a correlation between a predetermined movement of the user input interface and a movement of the surgical instrument ([0034] a master-slave mapping relationship between the master manipulator and the slave tool is established).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method as taught by Bowling with determining the target posture based on a correlation between a predetermined movement of the user input interface and a movement of the surgical instrument as taught by Xu. Such a modification would provide the predictable results of using the determined relationship to implement teleoperation of the slave tool by the master manipulator (Xu, Abstract).
Regarding claim 8, Bowling discloses wherein the generating the target state information comprises:
generating modified state information in which a driving result of the at least one driving element is constrained to a range within the driving limit of the at least one driving element ([0063] the surgical manipulator 50 and surgical navigation system 210 cooperate to determine if the instrument is within a defined boundary); and
determining whether the target posture exceeds the driving limit of the at least one driving element, based on the modified state information ([0063] Based on these data, the manipulator 50 selectively limits the extent to which the instrument 160 moves).
Bowling fails to disclose generating driving element difference information based on a degree of state change of the at least one driving element, required to change the surgical instrument to the target posture; and
determining whether the target posture exceeds the driving limit of the at least one driving element, based on the driving element difference information and the modified state information.
However, Xu discloses generating driving element difference information based on a degree of state change of the at least one driving element, required to change the surgical instrument to the target posture ([0035] a pose relationship between the master manipulator and the slave tool may include a relationship between a change amount of the pose of the master manipulator and a change amount of the pose of the slave tool).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method as taught by Bowling with generating driving element difference information based on a degree of state change of the at least one driving element, required to change the surgical instrument to the target posture as taught by Xu. Such a modification would provide the predictable results of mapping movement of a driving element needed to position the surgical instrument at the desired location.
Since Bowling discloses determining whether the target posture exceeds the driving limit of the at least one driving element [0063], and Xu discloses generating driving element information [0035], it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method as taught by Bowling with determining whether the target posture exceeds the driving limit of the at least one driving element based on the driving element difference and the modified state information. Such a modification would provide the predictable results of preventing a surgical instrument from exceeding a boundary and potentially harming the patient.
Regarding claim 9, the modified Bowling discloses the method of claim 8 as discussed above, but fails to disclose wherein the generating the driving element difference information comprises:
determining a current posture of the surgical instrument based on information on a current state of the at least one driving element; generating posture difference information based on a difference between the target posture and the current posture of the surgical instrument; and transforming the posture difference information into the driving element difference information.
However, Xu discloses generating the driving element difference information comprises: determining a current posture of the surgical instrument based on information on a current state of the at least one driving element ([0035] Each of the current pose and the target pose of the slave tool may be a pose of the end instrument of the slave tool relative to the slave tool base coordinate system);
generating posture difference information based on a difference between the target posture and the current posture of the surgical instrument ([0035] determining the target pose of the slave tool based on the previous pose and the current pose of the master manipulator and the current pose of the slave tool); and
transforming the posture difference information into the driving element difference information ([0035] a pose relationship between the master manipulator and the slave tool may include a relationship between a change amount of the pose of the master manipulator and a change amount of the pose of the slave tool).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method as taught by Bowling with the generating the driving element difference information comprises: determining a current posture of the surgical instrument based on information on a current state of the at least one driving element; generating posture difference information based on a difference between the target posture and the current posture of the surgical instrument; and transforming the posture difference information into the driving element difference information as taught by Xu. Such a modification would provide the predictable results of mapping movement of a driving element needed to position the surgical instrument at the desired location.
Regarding claim 13, Bowling discloses wherein the generating the target state information further comprises: generating the modified state information as the target state information, in response to a determination that the driving limit is exceeded ([0063] Based on these data, the manipulator 50 selectively limits the extent to which the instrument 160 moves. Specifically, the manipulator constrains the manipulator from movement that would otherwise result in the application of the instrument outside of the defined boundary).
Claim(s) 11-12 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bowling (US 2023/0234239) in view of Xu (US 2023/0293252) and further in view of Prisco et al (US 9,241,767) hereinafter Prisco.
Regarding claim 11, the modified Bowling discloses the method of claim 8 as discussed above, but fails to disclose wherein the determining whether the target posture exceeds the driving limit comprises: determining whether the target posture exceeds the driving limit based on whether a difference between modified driving element difference information and the driving element difference information exceeds a first predetermined threshold.
However, Prisco discloses wherein the determining whether the target posture exceeds the driving limit comprises: determining whether the target posture exceeds the driving limit based on whether a difference between modified driving element difference information and the driving element difference information exceeds a first predetermined threshold (Claim 1: using the processor to automatically determine whether the slave manipulator is being commanded by the operator command to a commanded state of the slave manipulator that is greater than or equal to a threshold value which is less than a limit of the slave manipulator). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the method as taught by Bowling with wherein the determining whether the target posture exceeds the driving limit comprises: determining whether the target posture exceeds the driving limit based on whether a difference between modified driving element difference information and the driving element difference information exceeds a first predetermined threshold as taught by Prisco. Such a modification would provide the predictable results of constraining a surgical instrument within a predetermined boundary.
Regarding claim 12, the modified Bowling discloses the method of claim 11 as discussed above, but fails to disclose herein the generating the modified driving element difference information comprises: generating the modified driving element difference information based on a difference between the modified state information and information on a current state of the at least one driving element.
However, Prisco discloses wherein the generating the modified driving element difference information comprises: generating the modified driving element difference information based on a difference between the modified state information and information on a current state of the at least one driving element (Claim 3: determining the commanded state by transforming movement of the master input device relative to a first reference frame to desired movement of the medical device relative to a second reference frame and applying inverse kinematics of the slave manipulator). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the method as taught by Bowling with wherein the generating the modified driving element difference information comprises: generating the modified driving element difference information based on a difference between the modified state information and information on a current state of the at least one driving element as taught by Prisco. Such a modification would provide the predictable results of constraining a surgical instrument within a predetermined boundary.
Regarding claim 14, the modified Bowling discloses the method of claim 13 as discussed above, but fails to disclose wherein the generating the target state information further comprises: determining a value obtained by adding the driving element difference information to information on a current state of the driving element as the target state information, in response to a determination that the driving limit is not exceeded and a decision that the driving element difference information is less than a second threshold.
However, Prisco discloses wherein the generating the target state information further comprises: determining a value obtained by adding the driving element difference information to information on a current state of the driving element as the target state information, in response to a determination that the driving limit is not exceeded and a decision that the driving element difference information is less than a second threshold (Claim 2: using the processor to determine whether the slave manipulator is being commanded to the commanded state that is greater than or equal to the threshold value which is less than the limit of the slave manipulator comprises determining the commanded state of the joint by using forward kinematics of the master input device and inverse kinematics of the slave manipulator). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the method as taught by Bowling with wherein the generating the target state information further comprises: determining a value obtained by adding the driving element difference information to information on a current state of the driving element as the target state information, in response to a determination that the driving limit is not exceeded and a decision that the driving element difference information is less than a second threshold as taught by Prisco. Such a modification would provide the predictable results of constraining a surgical instrument within a predetermined boundary.
Regarding claim 15, the modified Bowling discloses the method of 14 as discussed above, but fails to disclose wherein the generating the target state information is repeatedly performed until a decision is made that the driving limit is exceeded or a decision is made that the driving element difference information is less than a second threshold.
However, Prisco discloses wherein the generating the target state information is repeatedly performed until a decision is made that the driving limit is exceeded or a decision is made that the driving element difference information is less than a second threshold (Claim 1: using the processor to automatically determine whether the slave manipulator is being commanded by the operator command to a commanded state of the slave manipulator that is greater than or equal to a threshold value which is less than a limit of the slave manipulator; Fig. 4 shows a loop where this process is repeated until the threshold is exceeded (step 402)). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the method as taught by Bowling with wherein the generating the target state information is repeatedly performed until a decision is made that the driving limit is exceeded or a decision is made that the driving element difference information is less than a second threshold as taught by Prisco. Such a modification would provide the predictable results of constraining a surgical instrument within a predetermined boundary.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is 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 WILLOW GRACE WELCH whose telephone number is (703)756-1596. The examiner can normally be reached Usually M-F 8:00am - 4:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Benjamin Klein can be reached at 571-270-5213. 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.
/WILLOW GRACE WELCH/Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/Benjamin J Klein/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights