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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments field 07/30/2026 with respect to claim 10 have been considered but is moot in view of new grounds of rejection. Note, the scope of claim have changed, and section of MPEP 2144.04. VI.B has been added to previously presented references, as necessitated by the amendments, so as to formulate the presented 103 rejection below.
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 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones [US 20160225192 A1] in view of Johnson [US 20200275988 A1] and further in view of Quaid [US 20040106916 A1].
As per claim 10, Jones teaches robotic surgical system comprising:
a first extended reality ("XR") headset configured to be worn by a user during a surgical procedure (Jones Fig 14 HMD) and including a see-through display screen configured to display a world-registered XR image and to allow at least a portion of a real-world scene to pass therethrough for viewing by the user (Jones ¶0027 “The display screen 110 can provide a monocular see-through display or a stereo set of see-through displays so that the user can view information displayed on the display while looking through the display to view other objects.”);
a tracking system (Johnson Fig 14, cameras markers coordinates for tracking system) configured to determine a real-world pose of the XR headset and a real- world pose of a real-world element (Jones Fig 14, ¶0091 “the position tracking system 810 can include a camera system 902 that tracks the location tracking markers 904 attached to a surgery table, tracking markers 906 attached to patient adjacent to a surgical or other target site, tracking markers 908 attached to a surgery tool and/or prosthetic, and tracking markers 910 attached to the HMD 100”), the real-world pose of the XR headset and the real-world pose of the real-world element being determined relative to a real-world coordinate system (Jones ¶0092 “navigation coordinate system”);
an XR headset controller (Fig 13 item 820) configured to: communicate with the navigation controller to receive navigation information from a navigation controller which provides guidance to the user during the surgical procedure on the anatomical structure (Jones Figs 13-14, communication between controllers, ¶0092 “The navigation coordinate system data and the inertial coordinate system data …by a fusion component 914”, implies a navigation controller), and
and generate the world-registered XR image based on the real-world pose of the XR headset and the real-world pose of the real-world element for display on the see-through display screen (Jones Fig. 10), wherein the world-registered XR image includes a virtual element that is generated based on a characteristic of the real-world element and user interface ("UI") data based on the navigation information (Jones ¶0082 model based on images captured by x-ray equipment, endoscope cameras, magnetic resonance imaging, which is UI data).
Firstly, Jones does not expressly teach world registered XR images.
Johnson teaches world registration (Johnson ¶0043 "system and method for image to world registration for medical augmented reality applications, using a world spatial map. This invention is a method to link any point in an image frame of reference to its corresponding position in the visual world using spatial mapping with a head mounted display (HMD) (world tracking)").
The advantage of world registration are detailed in ¶0088-¶0093 of Johnson including no requirements for a. external hardware or software, b. mixed markers to be in the line of site, c. preoperative imaging or data, d. setup or initialization required, a system a consistent with conventional workflow and intuitive to use. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus in Johnson by using world registration so as to achieve one or more of advantages listed in Johnson, when using an HMD with augmented reality applications.
Secondly, Jones in view of Johnson does not expressly teach a surgical robot that includes: a robot base, a robot arm connected to the robot base and configured to position an end effector which is configured to guide movement of a surgical tool, at least one motor operatively connected to move the robot arm relative to the robot base, and the navigation controller configured to: determine a target pose for the surgical tool based on a surgical plan defining where a surgical procedure is to be performed using the surgical tool on an anatomical structure and based on a pose of the anatomical structure, and generate steering information based on the target pose for the surgical tool, the pose of the anatomical structure, and the pose of the surgical tool, the steering information indicating where the surgical tool needs to be moved under control of the at least one motor.
Quaid in a related field of guidance system and method for surgical procedures teaches a surgical robot that includes: a robot base, a robot arm connected to the robot base (Quaid Figs 1-2) and
configured to position an end effector which is configured to guide movement of a surgical tool (Quaid Figs 1-2 item 113, ¶0037-¶0038),
at least one motor operatively connected to move the robot arm relative to the robot base (Quaid ¶0045 “…This robotic arm has a cable transmission, which provides high bandwidth, backdrivability, and force fidelity. … direct-drive systems or systems with other types of low-friction transmissions or systems with a combination of transmission types may also be well-suited to serve as a haptic device for surgical applications”¶0047 “position sensors that are mounted on drive motors… control techniques for systems that include sensors on both the drive and load sides of a transmission” These sections imply motors for moving the arms), and
the navigation controller (Quaid ¶0043 “processor based system 36”) configured to: determine a target pose for the surgical tool based on a surgical plan defining where a surgical procedure is to be performed using the surgical tool on an anatomical structure and based on a pose of the anatomical structure (¶0061 “the user performs surgical planning by pushing haptic device 113 around until a pose is found where the cues from the attractive haptic objects are active indicating that surgical tool 112, when attached to haptic device 113, would reach the target region,”, pose for target region based on use of surgical tool at structure and target regions pose) , and
generate steering information based on the target pose for the surgical tool the pose of the anatomical structure, and the pose of the surgical tool (Quaid ¶0077 “Haptic object 26 is preferably steerable or reconfigurable. For example, the haptic object may be defined to move or to change position and/or orientation as the haptic device (or the surgical tool or instrument coupled to it) moves. i.e. steering based on based on pose of the surgical tool, ¶0077 “allows, for example, the user to guide surgical tool 112 toward the target area”, i.e. based on pose of anatomical area),
the steering information indicating where the surgical tool needs to be moved under control of the at least one motor (Quaid ¶0068 “to guide haptic device 113 toward poses where the virtual tool has the desired relationship with the target region”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus in Jones by utilizing aspects of a computer-assisted surgery systems and surgical navigation system as in Quaid. The motivation would be to provide autonomous robots for procedures like that in Jones, with useful information like visual, audio, tactile, haptic, or other means for control (Quaid abstract).
The other difference is that Jones in view of Johnson and Quaid does not expressly teach
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-9 are allowed over prior art of record. Applicant has amended claim 1 with previously indicated allowable subject matter. Examiner’s updated search does not find any references of record applicable for applying a proper rejection under anticipation or obviousness analysis.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OOMMEN JACOB whose telephone number is (571)270-5166. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:00.
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, ANNE M KOZAK can be reached at 571-270-0552. 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.
/Oommen Jacob/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights