Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/022,133

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REGISTRATION OF MULTIPLE VISION SYSTEMS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 15, 2025
Examiner
BRUTUS, JOEL F
Art Unit
3797
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
922 granted / 1276 resolved
+2.3% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1324
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.9%
-34.1% vs TC avg
§103
47.7%
+7.7% vs TC avg
§102
14.9%
-25.1% vs TC avg
§112
23.6%
-16.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1276 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. 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 pre-AIA 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 – (b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States. Claim(s) 28, 32-35, 37, 39, 42-47 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Ito et al (Pub. No.: US 2009/0292171) Regarding claim 28, Ito et al disclose a system comprising: one or more processors; and a memory storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the system to: receive image data as an elongate medical instrument (treatment instrument 4) traverses a patient anatomy, the image data received by a visualization system [see 0106] by disclosing while the ultrasound probe is inserted through the channel 2F1 under the check of ultrasound images obtained by the ultrasound probe on the display [see 0106]; receive sensor data regarding a position of the elongate medical instrument, the sensor data received from a sensor system (position detection sensors 19A and 19B) of the elongate medical instrument (treatment instrument 4) [see 0126-0127, 0134-0135, figs 19B-D, 20]; determine a first estimated position (calculated position of the first position detection sensor 19A) of the elongate medical instrument within the patient anatomy based on the image data [see 0126-0127, 0134-0135, fig 19B-d, 20]; determine a second estimated position (calculated position of the second position detection sensor 19B) of the elongate medical instrument within the patient anatomy based on the sensor data [see 0126-0127, 0134-0135, fig 19B-d, 20]; determine a position of the elongate medical instrument based on the first estimated position and the second estimated position [see 0126-0127, 0134-0135, fig 19B-d, 20] by disclosing the distal end-position calculation section 23 is able to calculate the accurate position of the treatment instrument distal end B1 [see 0134] and the position of the first position detection sensor associated with the second position detection sensor reveals the position of the distal end of the treatment instrument [see 0126]. Regarding claim 32, Ito et al disclose wherein the sensor system (position detection sensors 19A and 19B) is located within the elongate medical instrument [see 0126-0127, 0134-0135, fig 19B-d, 20]. Regarding claim 33, Ito et al disclose wherein the sensor system is an electromagnetic (EM) sensor system, and wherein the sensor data is EM sensor data [see 0111-0112, 0137]. Regarding claim 34, Ito et al disclose wherein the EM sensor data is captured using an EM sensor located proximal to a tip of the elongate medical instrument [see 0111-0112] Regarding claim 35, Ito et al disclose wherein the image data is captured by an imaging device of the elongate medical instrument located near a tip of the elongate medical instrument [see abstract, 0045-0046, 0140-0141] by disclosing an image pickup section that is able to pick up an image of the bronchus at a distal end portion thereof [see 0141]. Regarding claim 37, Ito et al disclose wherein the elongate medical instrument is a flexible endoscope configured to be inserted into one or more lumens of the patient anatomy [see 0045-0046, 0140-0141]. Regarding claim 39, Ito et al disclose wherein the position of the elongate medical instrument indicates a location of a tip of the elongate medical instrument within the patient anatomy [see 0070, 0115, figs 6B, 7B, 8B, 9B]. Regarding claim 42, Ito et al disclose wherein determining the first estimated position comprises: measuring movement of the elongate medical instrument within the patient anatomy based on the received image data [see 0097]; determining the first estimated position based on the measured movement [see 0116]. Regarding claim 43, Ito et al disclose wherein determining the second estimated position of the elongate medical instrument comprises: determining a position and an orientation of a tip of the elongate medical instrument relative to a plurality of anatomical passageways of the patient anatomy [see 0133, figs 19C-D]. Regarding claim 44, Ito et al disclose identifying a plurality of virtual anatomical passageways of a model of the patient anatomy, the plurality of virtual anatomical passageways located within a subregion of the model of the patient anatomy [see 0047, 0057]; matching the image data with one of the virtual anatomical passageways [see 0047, 0057]; calculating a similarity measure indicating closeness of match between the image data and the virtual anatomical passageway [see 0047, 0057]. Regarding claim 45, Ito et al disclose non-transitory machine-readable media storing instructions that, when run by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: receive image data as an elongate medical instrument traverses a patient anatomy, the image data received by a visualization system [see 0106] by disclosing while the ultrasound probe is inserted through the channel 2F1 under the check of ultrasound images obtained by the ultrasound probe on the display [see 0106]; receive sensor data regarding a position of the elongate medical instrument, the sensor data received from a sensor system ((position detection sensors 19A and 19B)) of the elongate medical instrument [see 0126-0127, 0134-0135, figs 19B-D, 20]; determine a first estimated position (via detector 19A) of the elongate medical instrument within the patient anatomy based on the image data [see 0126-0127, 0134-0135, fig 19B-d, 20]; determine a second estimated position (via detector 19B) of the elongate medical instrument within the patient anatomy based on the sensor data [see 0126-0127, 0134-0135, fig 19B-d, 20]; determine a position of the elongate medical instrument based on the first estimated position and the second estimated position [see 0126-0127, 0134-0135, fig 19B-d, 20] by disclosing the distal end-position calculation section 23 is able to calculate the accurate position of the treatment instrument distal end B1 [see 0134] and the position of the first position detection sensor associated with the second position detection sensor reveals the position of the distal end of the treatment instrument [see 0126]. Regarding claim 46, Ito et al disclose measuring movement of the elongate medical instrument within the patient anatomy based on the received image data [see 0116]; determining the first estimated position based on the measured movement [see 0116]. Regarding claim 47, Ito et al disclose wherein determining the second estimated position of the elongate medical instrument comprises: determining a position and an orientation of a tip of the elongate medical instrument relative to a plurality of anatomical passageways of the patient anatomy [see 0133, figs 19C-D]. 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 29-30 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ito et al (Pub. No.: US 2009/0292171) in view of Ben-Haim et al (Pub. No.: US 2001/0003790). Regarding claims 29-30, Ito et al don’t disclose determine at least one of a pitch, a roll, or a yaw of a distal portion of the elongate medical instrument and wherein the pitch, the roll, or the yaw of the distal portion of the elongate medical instrument is determined based on the sensor data received from the sensor system of the elongate medical instrument. Nonetheless, Ben-Haim et al disclose determine at least one of a pitch, a roll, or a yaw of a distal portion of the elongate medical instrument and wherein the pitch, the roll, or the yaw of the distal portion of the elongate medical instrument is determined based on the sensor data received from the sensor system of the elongate medical instrument [see 0047]. Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was made and would have been motivated to combine Ito et al and Ben-Haim et al by determining at least one of a pitch, a roll, or a yaw of a distal portion of the elongate medical instrument and wherein the pitch, the roll, or the yaw of the distal portion of the elongate medical instrument is determined based on the sensor data received from the sensor system of the elongate medical instrument; to allow for precise maneuvering and stability. Claim 31 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ito et al (Pub. No.: US 2009/0292171) in view of Ben-Haim et al (Pub. No.: US 2001/0003790) as applied to claim 29 and further in view of Schlesinger et al (Pub. No.: US 20100114115) and further in view of Roelle et al (Pub. No.: US 2011/0319910) Regarding claim 31, Ito et al and Ben-Haim et al don’t disclose receive one or more user inputs to manipulate one or more cables of the elongate medical instrument to adjust the pitch, the roll, or the yaw of the distal portion of the elongate medical instrument. Nonetheless, Schlesinger et al disclose receive one or more user inputs to manipulate tensioning mechanism of the elongate medical instrument to adjust the pitch, the roll, or the yaw of the distal portion of the elongate medical instrument [see 0116-0117]. Ito et al, Ben-Haim et al and Schlesinger et al don’t disclose one or more cables. Nonetheless, Roelle et al disclose receive one or more user inputs to manipulate one or more cables of the elongate medical instrument to adjust the pitch, the roll, or the yaw of the distal portion of the elongate medical instrument. [see 0151, 0183, 0200-0204]. Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was made and would have been motivated to combine Ito et al, Ben-Haim et al and Schlesinger et al and Roelle et al by receiving one or more user inputs to manipulate the elongate medical instrument to adjust the pitch, the roll, or the yaw of the distal portion of the elongate medical instrument; to allow for precise maneuvering and stability. Claim 36 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ito et al (Pub. No.: US 2009/0292171) in view of Shahinian et al (Pub. No.: US 2019/0115882). Regarding claim 36, Ito et al don’t disclose wherein the image data comprises a plurality of images captured sequentially in time. Nonetheless, Shahinian et al disclose a plurality of images captured sequentially in time [see 0025] by disclosing sequentially captured plurality of images using an image processing portion during any two successive image illumination intervals of the plurality of image illumination intervals [see 0025]. Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was made and would have been motivated to combine Ito et al and Shahinian et al by capturing a plurality of images captured sequentially in time; this technique offers a radically different perspective than what can be captured in a single image, allowing the viewer to study the rapid progression of movement as it happens. Claim 38 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ito et al (Pub. No.: US 2009/0292171) in view of Adams (Pub. No.: US 2010/0099952). Regarding claim 38, Ito et al don’t disclose wherein the flexible endoscope comprises a plurality of cables configured to change a direction of a tip of the flexible endoscope. Nonetheless, Adams discloses wherein the flexible endoscope comprises a plurality of cables configured to change a direction of a tip of the flexible endoscope [see 0016, 0019, 0023, claim 1] by disclosing two pairs of cables, the tip of the endoscope shaft 104 can be steered in any combination of four directions (four degrees of freedom) [see 0016] Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was made and would have been motivated to combine Ito et al and Adams by using a plurality of cables configured to change a direction of a tip of the flexible endoscope; so that the tip of the endoscope shaft 104 can be steered in any combination of four directions (four degrees of freedom) [see 0016 Adams]. Claims 40-41 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ito et al (Pub. No.: US 2009/0292171) in view of Barbagli et al (Pub. No.: US 2008/0119727) Regarding claim 40, Ito et al don’t disclose register the image data with a model of the patient anatomy. Nonetheless, Barbagli et al disclose register the image data with a model of the patient anatomy [see 0104-0105, 0111-0113]. Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was made and would have been motivated to combine Ito et al and Barbagli et al by registering the image data with a model of the patient anatomy; for improving one's map and one's knowledge of location [see 0113, Barbagli et al]. Regarding claim 41, Ito et al don’t disclose wherein the model of the patient anatomy is generated based on one or more computerized tomography (CT) scans of the patient anatomy. Nonetheless, Barbagli et al disclose wherein the model of the patient anatomy is generated based on one or more computerized tomography (CT) scans of the patient anatomy [see 0104]. Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was made and would have been motivated to combine Ito et al and Barbagli et al by generating a model of the patient based on one or more computerized tomography (CT) scans of the patient anatomy; for improving one's map and one's knowledge of location [see 0113, Barbagli et al]. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOEL F BRUTUS whose telephone number is (571)270-3847. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Sat, 11:00 AM to 7:00 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, Pascal Bui-Pho can be reached at 571-272-2714. 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. /JOEL F BRUTUS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 15, 2025
Application Filed
Dec 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599299
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MULTIMODAL SOFT TISSUE DIAGNOSTICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594131
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR NAVIGATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594124
MEDICAL SYSTEMS AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586191
IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS, MEDICAL IMAGE DIAGNOSTIC APPARATUS, AND BLOOD PRESSURE MONITOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579496
INTRAOPERATIVE VIDEO REVIEW
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+18.0%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1276 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month