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 1, 6, 10 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 3-4, the phrase “each set of guide wheels” should read “each set of the at least one set of guide wheels”, to properly refer to the guide wheels previously introduced.
In claim 6, line 1, the phrase “the corresponding end effector portion” should read “the corresponding portion of the first end effector portion and the second end effector portion” or similar language.
In claim 6, line 5, the phrase “the respective driving wire” should read “the respective driving wire of the driving wires” or similar language.
In claim 10, line 6, the phrase “a center of second wire portion” should read “a center of the second wire portion”.
In claim 20, lines 3-4, the phrase “each set of guide wheels” should read “each set of the at least one set of guide wheels”, to properly refer to the guide wheels previously introduced.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 11, the claim recites “a first guide wheel portion” in line 1. It is unclear whether the phrase is referring to the first guide wheel portion previously introduced, or introducing a new, separate first guide wheel portion. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite. For examination purposes, the phrase is interpreted to refer to the first guide wheel portion previously introduced.
Regarding claim 17, the claim recites “the small end” in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, since a small end has not been previously introduced. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite. For examination purposes, the phrase is interpreted to refer to at least one of the end portions previously introduced.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7-15 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kilroy (US 2015/0150635 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kilroy discloses (see abstract; paras. [0088]-[0216]; figs. 1a-18e) an end effector (fig. 1a) of a surgical instrument (30, para. [0091]), comprising:
a lower support member (360, fig. 1a);
at least one set of guide wheels (includes pulleys 340a, 340b, 350a and 350b, para. [0093]; fig. 1b) disposed on the lower support member (fig. 1a), wherein each set of guide wheels is rotatable about a corresponding guide wheel axis (rotatable around axis 380, para. [0097]) of at least one guide wheel axis relative to the lower support member (fig. 1a);
a middle support member (330, para. [0092]; fig. 2), including a first support portion (includes 330a and 330b, para. [0095]) for defining an effector axis (370) and a second support portion (332) for defining one guide wheel axis of the at least one guide wheel axis (defines 380), wherein the second support portion and one set of guide wheels of the at least one set of guide wheels are rotatable about the one guide wheel axis (para. [0097]), wherein the first support portion is disposed in a distal direction of the second support portion (depicted in fig. 2); and
an end effector tool (310, para. [0096]), wherein the end effector tool is connected to the lower support member through the middle support member (depicted in fig. 1a), and the end effector tool is rotatable about the effector axis relative to the first support portion (rotatable around 370, para. [0096]);
wherein the effector axis and the one guide wheel axis are skew lines (370 and 380 considered to be skew lines because they do not intersect, are not parallel and exist in different planes, which is consistent with fig. 1 of the instant spec.), and the effector axis is angled relative to the one guide wheel axis (370 can be angled relative to 380, considered to be distinct from an orthogonal angle since Kilroy discloses the angled axes being distinct from orthogonal axes, para. [0095]).
However, Kilroy fails to explicitly disclose an included angle between the effector axis and the one guide wheel axis is an acute angle.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the angle disclosed in Kilroy to be acute, since it has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges ‘overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art’ a prima facie case of obviousness exists.” In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Further, applicant appears to have placed no criticality on the claimed range (see para. [0049] describing the included angle being acute, but no criticality indicated of a specific angle).
Regarding claim 2, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 1. Kilroy further discloses wherein at a pitch angle of 0°, both the effector axis and the one guide wheel axis are perpendicular to an axis direction of the instrument, where the axis direction of the instrument refers to a proximal-distal direction of the instrument (depicted in fig. 1a as orthogonal relative to the longitudinal direction of the tool).
Regarding claim 3, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 1. Kilroy further discloses wherein the end effector tool includes a first end effector portion (310a, para. [0096]) and a second end effector portion (310b) that are opposite to each other (fig. 1a), and each of the first end effector portion and the second end effector portion is rotatably connected to the first support portion about the effector axis (para. [0096]).
Regarding claim 7, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 3. Kilroy further discloses wherein the at least one set of guide wheels includes an upper guide wheel set (includes pulleys 425a-b and 427a-b, note para. [0163] describes tool 400 substantially similar to tool 30 in figs. 1a-3b, such that the structure of the tool is considered to be substantially the same with the addition of pulley sets, para. [0163]; fig. 12a),
wherein the upper guide wheel set is rotatable about a first guide wheel axis relative to the lower support member (considered to rotate around axis of 425a-b and 427 a-b, fig. 12a);
wherein the upper guide wheel set includes a first upper guide wheel (425b) and a second upper guide wheel (427b, fig. 12b) that are located on a side of the second support portion (located on the same side, considered to be located on one side of 332, figs. 2 and 12b), and a third upper guide wheel (427a) and a fourth upper guide wheel (425a) that are located on another side of the second support portion (located on opposite side of 425b and 427b, considered to be on another side of 332); and
wherein the second upper guide wheel is closer to the second support portion than the first upper guide wheel (closer to longitudinal axis of tool, depicted in fig. 12b) and the third upper guide wheel is closer to the second support portion than the fourth upper guide wheel (closer to longitudinal axis of tool, depicted in fig. 12b).
Regarding claim 8, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 7. Kilroy further discloses further comprising a first driving wire (390a, para. [0099]; figs. 3a-b) and a second driving wire (390b);
wherein the first driving wire rides on a first guide wheel portion (320a, fig. 3a) of the first end effector portion (fig. 3a) and the first driving wire has a first wire portion and a second wire portion (first and second portions of cable 390a extend on each side of pulley 320a, fig. 3a), wherein the first wire portion of the first driving wire extends downward from a side of the first guide wheel portion and rides on the first upper guide wheel (winds at least partially around 340a and 340b, considered to wind similarly around 425b as depicted in fig. 12a, para. [0100]), and the second wire portion of the first driving wire extends downward from another side of the first guide wheel portion and rides on the third upper guide wheel (cable 390a winds around 320a and at least partially around second set of pulleys 340a and 350b, considered to wind similarly around 427a as depicted in figs. 1b and 12a, para. [0100]); and
wherein the second driving wire rides on a second guide wheel portion (320b, para. [0102]) of the second end effector portion (fig. 3a), and the second driving wire has a first wire portion and a second wire portion (first and second portions of cable 390b extend on each side of pulley 320b, fig. 3a), wherein the first wire portion of the second driving wire extends downward from a side of the second guide wheel portion and rides on the second upper guide wheel (winds at least partially around 350a and 350b, considered to wind similarly around 427b as depicted in fig. 12a, fig. 1b), and the second wire portion of the second driving wire extends downward from another side of the second guide wheel portion and rides on the fourth upper guide wheel (cable 390b winds around 320b and at least partially around second set of pulleys 340a and 340b, considered to wind similarly around 425a as depicted in figs. 1b and 12a, para. [0102]).
Regarding claim 9, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 7.
However, with respect to the cited embodiment, Kilroy (as modified) fails to teach wherein the second upper guide wheel has a diameter larger than a diameter of the first upper guide wheel, and the third upper guide wheel has a diameter larger than a diameter of the fourth upper guide wheel.
However, in a separate embodiment, Kilroy teaches (paras. [0191]-[0194]; fig. 17b), in the same field of endeavor, an end effector comprising inner pulleys having a larger diameter than outer pulleys (paras. [0191]-[0192]; fig. 17b), for the purpose of increasing the reliability and usable lifetime of the cables by causing the cables to bend less frequently, such that they experience fewer and less tight turns (para. [0194]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diameter of the inner pulleys in the upper guide wheel set of Kilroy (as modified) to have larger diameters than the outer pulleys, in order to increase the reliability and usable lifetime of the cables by causing the cables to bend less frequently, such that they experience fewer and less tight turns, based on the teachings of a separate embodiment of Kilroy (para. [0194]).
Regarding claim 10, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 8. Kilroy further discloses wherein in a cross-section of the end effector which is perpendicular to the axis direction of the instrument and where the first guide wheel axis lies on (cross-section falling along axis 380), a first reference line segment is defined by a center of the first wire portion of the first driving wire and a center of the second wire portion of the first driving wire (each portion of cable 390a extends to proximal end of tool, considered to define a first reference line segment falling along the cross-section between centers of each portion of cable 390a, fig. 3a), and a second reference line segment is defined by a center of the first wire portion of the second driving wire and a center of second wire portion of the second driving wire (each portion of cable 390b extends to proximal end of tool, considered to define a second reference line segment falling along the cross-section between centers of each portion of cable 390b, fig. 3a); and
wherein the first reference line segment is parallel to the second reference line segment (cables 390a and 390b routed through aperture 30c and exit through aperture 30b as depicted in figs. 1a-3b, depicted as parallel in fig. 3a, therefore considered to have parallel line segments relative to each other), and a line defined by a midpoint of the first reference line segment and a midpoint of the second reference line segment is parallel to or skew with the effector axis (combination considered to further teach the line along a horizontal cross-section angled relative to the longitudinal axis of the tool).
Regarding claim 11, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 10. Kilroy further discloses wherein a projection of a first guide wheel portion on the horizontal cross-section overlaps the first reference line and a projection of the second guide wheel portion on the horizontal cross-section overlaps the second reference line (projections of 320a and 320b considered to overlap the first and second reference lines, since cables 390a and 390b ride along pulleys 320a-b and would therefore overlap).
Regarding claim 12, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 8. Kilroy further discloses wherein the at least one set of guide wheels further comprises a lower guide wheel set (includes 440a-b and 450a-b, para. [0163]), and the lower guide wheel set is rotatable about a second guide wheel axis relative to the lower support member (considered to be rotatable around axis of pulleys), wherein
the lower guide wheel set includes a first lower guide wheel (440b), a second lower guide wheel (450b), a third lower guide wheel (450a), and a fourth lower guide wheel (440a) arranged sequentially (fig. 12b); and
the second lower guide wheel and the third lower guide wheel are disposed between the first lower guide wheel and the fourth lower guide wheel (fig. 12b).
Regarding claim 13, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 12. Kilroy further discloses wherein the first driving wire (490a, considered to be the same as cable 390a) extending downward from the first upper guide wheel (425b) runs through a clearance between the first upper guide wheel and the first lower guide wheel (440b) and extends downward to ride on the first lower guide wheel (see fig. 13a, portion of cable 490a extends between outer wheels of upper and lower guide wheel sets, see 425b) and the first driving wire extending downward from the third upper guide wheel runs through a clearance between the third upper guide wheel and the third lower guide wheel and extends downward to ride on the third lower guide wheel (see fig. 13a, first cable 490a extends downwards and extends between inner wheels of upper and lower guide wheel sets, see 427a);
wherein the second driving wire (see 490b, considered to be the same as cable 390b) extending downward from the second upper guide wheel (427b) runs through a clearance between the second upper guide wheel and the second lower guide wheel and extends downward to ride on the second lower guide wheel (see fig. 13b), and the second driving wire extending downward from the fourth upper guide wheel (425a) runs through a clearance between the fourth upper guide wheel and the fourth lower guide wheel and extends downward to ride on the fourth lower guide wheel (see fig. 13b).
Regarding claim 14, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 12. Kilroy further discloses wherein the first lower guide wheel has a diameter equal to or greater than a diameter of the second lower guide wheel, and the fourth lower guide wheel has a diameter equal to or greater than a diameter of the third lower guide wheel (depicted as the same in diameter, figs. 12a-b).
Regarding claim 15, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 12. Kilroy further discloses wherein the lower support member includes a bottom wall (forming apertures 30c and 30b, fig. 1a) and two side walls (arms of yoke 360, para. [0092]) extending in an axis direction from the bottom wall (fig. 1a), wherein the bottom wall defines wire passing holes (30c and 30b) through which the driving wires pass (paras. [0100] and [0102]), wherein
the upper guide wheel set and the lower guide wheel set are disposed between the two side walls (upper and lower guide wheel sets in figs. 12a-b considered to be placed similarly between arms of yoke 360 as guide wheel set depicted in fig. 1a); and
each of the two side walls defines a first lower support hole (depicted in fig. 1a), the upper guide wheel set is supported by a guide wheel axis pin (pin of axle 332, see figs. 1a and 12a) fixed to the first lower support holes (fig. 1a), and the lower guide wheel set is supported by another guide wheel axis pin (depicted in fig. 12a).
However, with respect to the cited embodiment, Kilroy (as modified) fails to teach each of the two side walls defining a second lower support hole, the lower guide wheel set fixed to the second lower support holes.
However, in a separate embodiment, Kilroy teaches (para. [0200]; fig. 18a), in the same field of endeavor, an end effector (fig. 18a) comprising a lower support member (yoke 1910) including a first lower support hole (holes extending along axis 1913, yoke is considered to have two arms similar to yoke 360, para. [0203]) and a second lower support hole (second hole proximal of holes extending along axis 1913), a lower guide wheel set fixed to the second lower support holes (see figs. 18b-c depicting two sets of pulleys, such that the second lower support holes are considered to support the second set of pulleys), for the purpose of supporting additional pulleys along rotational axes through the yoke to control motion of the jaws (paras. [0200] and [0203]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the yoke of Kilroy (as modified) to include additional lower support holes, in order to properly accommodate the additional sets of pulleys along rotation axes to control motion of the jaws, based on the suggestions and teachings of the separate embodiment of Kilroy (paras. [0200] and [0203]).
Regarding claim 18, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 1. Kilroy further discloses wherein the first support portion includes a first arm portion (330a) and a second arm portion (330b) spaced apart from the first arm portion along the effector axis (fig. 2), and the end effector tool is disposed between the first arm portion and the second arm portion (fig. 1a).
Regarding claim 19, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 1. Kilroy further discloses wherein at least one pitch driving wire (includes cables 390a and 390b, paras. [0100]-[0104]) is fixed on a corresponding side of both sides of the second support portion (routes on both sides of 322 via pulleys) perpendicular to the one guide wheel axis and along an axis direction of the instrument (extends along longitudinal direction of instrument, depicted in fig. 3a).
Regarding claim 20, Kilroy discloses (see abstract; paras. [0088]-[0216]; figs. 1a-18e) a surgical instrument (30, para. [0091]), comprising an end effector (fig. 1a), the end effector comprising:
a lower support member (360, fig. 1a);
at least one set of guide wheels (includes pulleys 340a, 340b, 350a and 350b, para. [0093]; fig. 1b) disposed on the lower support member (fig. 1a), wherein each set of guide wheels is rotatable about a corresponding guide wheel axis (rotatable around axis 380, para. [0097]) of at least one guide wheel axis relative to the lower support member (fig. 1a);
a middle support member (330, para. [0092]; fig. 2), including a first support portion (includes 330a and 330b, para. [0095]) for defining an effector axis (370) and a second support portion (332) for defining one guide wheel axis of the at least one guide wheel axis (defines 380), wherein the second support portion and one set of guide wheels of the at least one set of guide wheels are rotatable about the one guide wheel axis (para. [0097]), wherein the first support portion is disposed in a distal direction of the second support portion (depicted in fig. 2); and
an end effector tool (310, para. [0096]), wherein the end effector tool is connected to the lower support member through the middle support member (depicted in fig. 1a), and the end effector tool is rotatable about the effector axis relative to the first support portion (rotatable around 370, para. [0096]);
wherein the effector axis and the one guide wheel axis are skew lines (370 and 380 considered to be skew lines because they do not intersect, are not parallel and exist in different planes, which is consistent with fig. 1 of the instant spec.), and the effector axis is angled relative to the one guide wheel axis (370 can be angled relative to 380, considered to be distinct from an orthogonal angle since Kilroy discloses the angled axes being distinct from orthogonal axes, para. [0095]).
However, Kilroy fails to explicitly disclose an included angle between the effector axis and the one guide wheel axis is an acute angle.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the angle disclosed in Kilroy to be acute, since it has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges ‘overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art’ a prima facie case of obviousness exists.” In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Further, applicant appears to have placed no criticality on the claimed range (see para. [0049] describing the included angle being acute, but no criticality indicated of a specific angle).
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (CN 113197671A, translation attached).
Regarding claim 1, Sun discloses (pgs. 1-12; figs. 1-15) an end effector of a surgical instrument (fig. 1), comprising:
a lower support member (110, pg. 5);
at least one set of guide wheels (G12) disposed on the lower support member (figs. 1-2), wherein each set of guide wheels is rotatable about a corresponding guide wheel axis (axis of 130) of at least one guide wheel axis relative to the lower support member (figs. 1-2);
a middle support member (120, pg. 5), including a first support portion (122) for defining an effector axis (axis at 140) and a second support portion (121) for defining one guide wheel axis of the at least one guide wheel axis (axis defined at 130), wherein the second support portion and one set of guide wheels of the at least one set of guide wheels are rotatable about the one guide wheel axis (via 120), wherein the first support portion is disposed in a distal direction of the second support portion (fig. 2); and
an end effector tool (clamping arms 210, pg. 5), wherein the end effector tool is connected to the lower support member through the middle support member (figs. 1-2), and the end effector tool is rotatable about the effector axis relative to the first support portion (rotatable around 140);
wherein the effector axis and the one guide wheel axis are skew lines (axes of 130 and 140 considered to be skew lines because they do not intersect, are not parallel and exist in different planes, which is consistent with fig. 1 of the instant spec.), and the effector axis is angled relative to the one guide wheel axis (axes of 130 and 140 may have an included angle of non-90 degrees, pg. 8).
However, Sun fails to explicitly disclose the included angle between the effector axis and the one guide wheel axis is an acute angle.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the angle disclosed in Sun to be acute, since it has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges ‘overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art’ a prima facie case of obviousness exists.” In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Further, applicant appears to have placed no criticality on the claimed range (see para. [0049] describing the included angle being acute, but no criticality indicated of a specific angle).
Regarding claim 3, Sun (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 1. Sun further discloses wherein the end effector tool includes a first end effector portion (first clamping arm 210, pg. 9) and a second end effector portion (second clamping arm 210) that are opposite to each other (fig. 1), and each of the first end effector portion and the second end effector portion is rotatably connected to the first support portion about the effector axis (rotatable about axis of 140).
Regarding claim 16, Sun (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 3. Sun further discloses wherein the first support portion and the second support portion are each configured in a cylindrical shape (see at least fig. 2), the first support portion and the second support portion are connected at respective cylindrical surfaces of the first support portion and the second support portion (figs. 2 and 7), and the first support portion is disposed between the first end effector portion and the second end effector portion (depicted in figs. 1-2).
Claim(s) 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kilroy in view of Burbank (US 2010/0016853 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 3.
Kilroy further discloses further comprising driving wires (includes cables 390a and 390b, para. [0099]; fig. 3a).
However, Kilroy (as modified) fails to teach wherein each of the first end effector portion and the second end effector portion defines a first threading hole and a second threading hole that are separated in an axis direction of the instrument, and a third threading hole and a fourth threading hole that are separated in the axis direction of the instrument; wherein each respective driving wire of the driving wires has a first wire portion and a second wire portion, wherein the first wire portion passes through, from an inner side of a corresponding end effector portion of the first end effector portion and the second end effector portion, the first threading hole and extends downward to pass through the second threading hole, and wherein the second wire portion passes through, from the inner side of the corresponding end effector portion, the third threading hole and extends downward to pass through the fourth threading hole.
Burbank teaches (para. [0038]; fig. 3b), in the same field of endeavor, an end effector (fig. 2a) comprising a first end effector portion (242a) and a second end effector portion (242b), wherein each of the first end effector portion and the second end effector portion defines a first threading hole and a second threading hole that are separated in an axis direction of the instrument, and a third threading hole and a fourth threading hole that are separated in the axis direction of the instrument (annotated fig. 3b); wherein each respective driving wire of the driving wires has a first wire portion and a second wire portion, wherein the first wire portion passes through, from an inner side of a corresponding end effector portion of the first end effector portion and the second end effector portion, the first threading hole and extends downward to pass through the second threading hole (depicted in fig. 3b), and wherein the second wire portion passes through, from the inner side of the corresponding end effector portion, the third threading hole and extends downward to pass through the fourth threading hole (depicted in fig. 3b), for the purpose of creating friction that resists or prevents sliding of the cable loop, eliminating the space requirement of crimps and the cost associated with crimping (paras. [0038]-[0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the end effector portions of Kilroy (as modified) with an additional set of holes defining a first threading hole and a third threading hole which the cables are wrapped through as claimed, in order to create friction that resists or prevents sliding of the cable loop, eliminating the space requirement of crimps and the cost associated with crimping, based on the suggestions and teachings of Burbank (paras. [0038]-[0039]).
PNG
media_image1.png
450
814
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 3B of Burbank
Regarding claim 5, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 4. Kilroy (as modified) further teaches wherein each of the first end effector portion and the second end effector portion includes a guide wheel portion (320a-b, para. [0095]; fig. 3b of Kilroy), the second threading hole and the fourth threading hole are adjacent to the guide wheel portion (combination considered to further teach arrangement of holes as depicted in fig. 3b of Burbank), the first wire portion passes through the second threading hole and rides on the guide wheel portion (fig. 3b of Burbank), and the second wire portion passes through the fourth threading hole and rides on the guide wheel portion (fig. 3b of Burbank), the first wire portion and the second wire portion are separated by the guide wheel portion (cables extend around pulleys 320a-b, paras. [0100]-[0102], see also fig. 3b of Burbank).
Regarding claim 6, Kilroy (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 4. Kilroy (as modified) further teaches wherein the corresponding end effector portion defines a first groove communicating the first threading hole and the second threading hole (considered to be groove of pulley, which is integral to the jaw of the grasper), and defines a second groove communicating the third threading hole and the fourth threading hole (considered to be groove of pulley, which is integral to the jaw of the grasper), wherein the first groove and the second groove are defined on an outer surface of the corresponding end effector portion, and the respective driving wire is received in the first groove and the second groove (see figs. 3a-b of Kilroy and fig. 3b of Burbank).
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Sato (US 5681348).
Regarding claim 17, Sun (as modified) teaches the end effector of claim 16.
Sun further discloses further comprising an effector axis pin (140), wherein the first support portion defines a first middle support hole (fig. 2), the effector axis pin passes through the first middle support hole (fig. 2).
However, Sun (as modified) fails to teach the effector axis pin is configured in a stepped shape and includes a first end portion, a middle portion, and a second end portion that are sequentially decreased in diameter; wherein the first end effector portion is sleeved on and fixed to the small end, wherein the second end effector portion and the middle support member are sleeved on the middle portion in a clearance fit and rotatable relative to the middle portion, and wherein the first end portion is located on a side of the second end effector portion away from the first end effector portion and abuts the second end effector portion.
Sato teaches (col. 8 line 17-col. 9 line 20; figs. 10-11a), in the same field of endeavor, an end effector (fig. 10) comprising an effector axis pin (230) configured in a stepped shape (fig. 11a) and including a first end portion (23a), a middle portion (233) and a second end portion (232) that are sequentially decreased in diameter (fig. 11a); wherein a first end effector portion (21a) is sleeved on and fixed to a small end (fig. 11a), wherein a second end effector portion (21b) and a middle support member (37) are sleeved on the middle portion (fig. 11a) in a clearance fit and rotatable relative to the middle portion (considered to be rotatable around pivot pin), and wherein the first end portion is located on a side of the second end effector portion away from the first end effector portion (fig. 11a) and abuts the second end effector portion (fig. 11a), for the purpose of preventing narrowing of the sleeve, ensuring clearances among the treatment members and needle and allowing the treatment unit to pivot freely (col. 8 line 61-col. 9 line 20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of the pin 140 of Sun (as modified) to be stepped in shape as claimed, in order to provide secure fit of each of the end effector portions without requiring the additional structure of the buckle, while still allowing the end effector portions to rotate freely around the pivot pin, based on the suggestions and teachings of Sato (col. 8 line 61-col. 9 line 20).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2017/0172553 A1 to Chaplin, disclosing a pulley arrangement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIGID K BYRD whose telephone number is (571)272-7698. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Darwin Erezo can be reached at (571)-272-4695. 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.
/BRIGID K BYRD/Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights