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 .
This application has been examined. Claims 18-37 are pending.
The prior art submitted on 2/27/25 has been considered.
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.
Claims 18-21, 23-26, 31, and 34-36, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Prisco (US 2010/0249506 A1).
As per claim 18, Prisco discloses a system comprising: a flexible instrument (see at least [0030-0031] and figure 1, a steerable endoscope 110); an input device (see at least [0040] input device 303); an insertion drive system comprising a drive motor (see at least [0034] disclose either or both the interface 116 and the robot arm 301 include motors that drive the cables used to steer the endoscope tip 112, the robot arm 301 may also be configured to insert/retract the endoscope 110 into and out of an aperture in the patient); and a control system configured to selectively switch between a computer assisted mode and a manual mode (see at least [0034] disclose in figure 3, the electromechanical interface 116 allows the endoscope 110 to be electrically and mechanically coupled to a robot arm 301 whose movement is controlled by a controller 302 in response to operator manipulation of an input device 303); wherein in the computer assisted mode, the control system causes the drive motor to move the flexible instrument along an insertion axis in response to one or more signals received from the input device, and wherein in the manual mode, the control system causes the drive motor to become off or inactive to allow the flexible instrument to be manually moved along the insertion axis (see at least [0033], and [0040], all para. disclose the operator may issue the start guidance command in any one of a number of ways such as depressing an input button or flipping a switch on the input device 303 when the steerable endoscope 110 is being controlled teleoperatively, or depressing an input button of flipping a switch on the handle 116 when the steerable endoscope 110 is being controlled manually).
As per claim 19, Prisco discloses in the manual mode, the control system causes the drive motor to be in a freewheeling state (see at least [0033] disclose when the steerable endoscope 110 is manipulated manually by an operator, a handle 116 is used with appropriated levers or other control mechanism for controllably orientating the endoscope tip 112 by pulling appropriate cables which couple such control mechanisms of the handle 116 to the tip 112; and para. [0040] disclose a foot pedal that may be depressed by the operator so as to turn on or off the guidance).
As per claim 20, Prisco discloses the control system is configured to selectively switch between the computer assisted mode and the manual mode in response to a signal received from the input device (see at least [0033], and [0040], all para. disclose the operator may issue the start guidance command in any one of a number of ways such as depressing an input button or flipping a switch on the input device 303 when the steerable endoscope 110 is being controlled teleoperatively, or depressing an input button of flipping a switch on the handle 116 when the steerable endoscope 110 is being controlled manually).
As per claim 21, Prisco discloses in the computer assisted mode, the control system causes the drive motor to rotate a proximal end of the flexible instrument in response to one or more signals received from the input device (see at least [0034] disclose in addition to controlling bending of the endoscope’s tip 112, the robot arm 301 may also be configured to insert/retract the endoscope 110 about its central axis, and/or rotate the electromechanical interface 116 about a pivot point at the aperture); and in the manual mode, the control system causes the drive motor to become off or inactive to allow the proximal end of the flexible instrument to be manually rotated (see at least [0033] disclose when the steerable endoscope 110 is manipulated manually by an operator, a handle 116 is used with appropriated levers or other control mechanism for controllably orientating the endoscope tip 112 by pulling appropriate cables which couple such control mechanisms of the handle 116 to the tip 112; and para. [0040] disclose a foot pedal that may be depressed by the operator so as to turn on or off the guidance).
As per claim 23, Prisco discloses the input device is a foot pedal (see at least [0040]).
As per claim 24, Prisco discloses the control system is further configured to control an orientation of the flexible instrument based on an input from the input device (see at least [0031-0034] and figure 1, distal tip 111, 112 is bent, turns or steered).
As per claim 25, Prisco discloses the control system is further configured to control the orientation of the flexible instrument while the drive motor is off or inactive in the manual mode (see at least [0033-0034] disclose when the steerable endoscope 110 is manipulated manually by an operator, a handle 116 is used with appropriated levers or other control mechanism for controllably orientating the endoscope tip 112 by pulling appropriate cables which couple such control mechanisms of the handle 116 to the tip 112; and para. [0040] disclose a foot pedal that may be depressed by the operator so as to turn on or off the guidance).
As per claim 26, Prisco discloses controlling the orientation of the flexible instrument comprises controlling an orientation of a distal portion of the flexible instrument (see at least [0031-0034] and figure 1, distal tip 111, 112 is bent, turns or steered).
As per claim 31, Prisco discloses the control system is communicatively positioned between the input device and the flexible instrument (see at least [0034] disclose the controller 302 is communicatively positioned between the input device 303 and the endoscope 110).
Claims 34, 35, and 36, are method claims corresponding to system claims 18,21, and 20 above. Therefore, they are rejected for the same rationales set forth as above.
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.
Claims 22, 27, 30, 32-33, and 37, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prisco (US 2010/0249506 A1) in view of Hunter et al. (US 2015/0011830 A1).
As per claim 22, Priscos does not disclose the input device is a joystick. However, Hunter et al. disclose the input device is a joystick (see at least [0051], and [0099]). It 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 to modify the teach of Prisco by combining the input device is a joystick for the operator control the distal end of an endoscope effectively.
As per claim 27, Prisco does not disclose adjust a stiffness of the flexible instrument. However, Hunter et al. disclose the control system is further configured to adjust a stiffness of the flexible instrument based on an input from the input device (see at least [0041] and [0062] disclose adjustment of the body stiffness of the endoscope). It 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 to modify the teach of Prisco by combining adjust a stiffness of the flexible instrument in order for the endoscope can be easily inserted and withdrawn from the patient body without causing damage.
As per claim 30, Prisco does not disclose adjust a stiffness of the flexible instrument. However, Hunter et al. disclose the control system is further configured to, based on one or more inputs from the input device, adjust an orientation and a stiffness of the flexible instrument (see at least [0041] and [0062] disclose adjustment of the body stiffness of the endoscope). It 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 to modify the teach of Prisco by combining adjust a stiffness of the flexible instrument in order for the endoscope can be easily inserted and withdrawn from the patient body without causing damage.
As per claim 32, Prisco does not disclose when the system is in the manual mode, the flexible instrument has a lower stiffness than when the system is in the computer assisted mode. However, Hunter et al. disclose when the system is in the manual mode, the flexible instrument has a lower stiffness than when the system is in the computer assisted mode (see at least [0041] and [0062], all para. disclose variable stiffness allows the endoscope 100 to be stiffened when it enters the patient’s body so that it can be easily inserted and advanced. When the endoscope exits the body, the stiffness can be reduced so that it can be easily withdrawn from the body). It 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 to modify the teach of Prisco by combining when the system is in the manual mode, the flexible instrument has a lower stiffness than when the system is in the computer assisted mode, in order for the endoscope can be easily inserted and withdrawn from the patient body without causing damage.
As per claim 33, Prisco does not explicitly disclose haptic feedback. However, Hunter et al. disclose when the system is in the manual mode, the control system is further configured to provide haptic feedback based on interactions between the flexible instrument and patient anatomy (see at least [0052-0057] disclose the motor control signals can be generated in response to user commands from an interface device 206 or control panel 220, can be generated in response to feedback signals received from sensing devices on the endoscope). It 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 to modify the teach of Prisco by combining when the system is in the manual mode, the control system is further configured to provide haptic feedback based on interactions between the flexible instrument and patient anatomy to measure and indicate the level of force applied to the tissue by the tip of the endoscope in order to ensure safe insert of the endoscope to the patient body without causing damage,
Claim 37 is a method claim corresponding to system claims 24 and 27 above. Therefore, it is rejected for the same rationales set forth as above.
Claims 28-29, are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected based claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
. Shibasaki (8947514)
. Masaki et al. (8885033)
. Lo et al. (8860793)
. Ozawa et al. (8624966)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DALENA TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6968. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7AM-5PM.
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, ADAM MOTT can be reached at 571-270-5376. 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.
/DALENA TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657