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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/18/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 02/18/2025 are accepted by the Examiner.
Specification
The disclosure filed on 02/18/2025 is accepted by the Examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12260561 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-15 of the present application are anticipated by claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12260561 B2 because they are a combination of this claims that is a finite number of possibilities). See also KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc. Case cited as 550 US (2007). In the KSR case, the Court stated that in certain circumstances what is obvious to try is also obvious, such as where "there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem, and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense." Regarding hindsight, the Court found that "[r]igid preventive rules that deny fact finders recourse to common sense . . . are neither necessary under our case law nor consistent with it." The Court stated that "familiar items may have obvious uses beyond their primary purposes," analogizing an obvious invention to the fitting together of pieces to a puzzle. The Court in this regard further stated that the person of ordinary skill is also a person of ordinary creativity, and not "an automaton."
Present Application
US 12260561 B2
1. A system for tracking at least one object in computer-assisted surgery, comprising:
at least one ultrasound imaging system;
a processing unit; and
a non-transitory computer-readable memory communicatively coupled to the processing unit and comprising computer-readable program instructions executable by the processing unit for:
obtaining orientation data for an object using the at least one ultrasound imaging system connected to
a tool and/or a robot arm supporting the tool,
concurrently obtaining position and orientation data for the robot arm relative to a frame of reference, registering the at least one object with the robot arm to determine a position of the at least one object in the frame of reference, and continuously tracking and outputting the position and orientation of the at least one object in the frame of reference, using the orientation data from the at least
one ultrasound imaging system the
position and orientation data for the robot arm
17. A system for tracking at least one object in computer-assisted surgery, comprising:
a processing unit; and
a non-transitory computer-readable memory communicatively coupled to the processing unit and comprising computer-readable program instructions executable by the processing unit for:
obtaining orientation data from at least one ultrasound imaging
system connected to
at least one object;
concurrently obtaining position and orientation data for a robot arm relative to a frame of reference; registering the at least one object with the robot arm to determine a position of the at least one object in the frame of reference; and continuously tracking and outputting the position and orientation of the at least one object in the frame of reference, using the orientation data from the at least
one ultrasound imaging system on the
at least one object and the
position and orientation data for the robot arm
2. The system according to claim 1, wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable by the processing unit for controlling the robot arm as a function of a position and orientation of the at least one object.
18. The system according to claim 17, wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable by the processing unit for controlling the robot arm as a function of a position and orientation of the at least one object.
3. The system according to claim 1, wherein the system performs the continuously tracking and outputting the position and orientation solely with sensors in the robot arm and the at least one ultrasound imaging system.
19. The system according to claim 17, wherein the system performs the continuously tracking and outputting the position and orientation solely with sensors in the robot arm and the at least one ultrasound imaging system.
4. The system according to claim 2, wherein the system performs the continuously tracking and outputting the position and orientation without optical tracking
20. The system according to claim 18, wherein the system performs the continuously tracking and outputting the position and orientation without optical tracking.
5. The system according to claim 1, wherein concurrently obtaining position and orientation data for the robot arm relative to the frame of reference includes determining the position and orientation data for the robot arm from sensors in the robot arm.
5. The system according to claim 1, wherein concurrently obtaining position and orientation data for the robot arm relative to the frame of reference includes determining the position and orientation data for the robot arm from sensors in the robot arm.
6. The system according to claim 5, wherein the sensors in the robot arm are joint sensors
6. The system according to claim 5, wherein the sensors in the robot arm are joint sensors.
7. The system according to claim 1, wherein registering the at least one object with the robot arm includes performing at least one contact handshake with the robot arm or the tool.
7. The system according to claim 1, wherein registering the at least one object with the robot arm includes performing at least one contact handshake with the robot arm.
8. The system according to claim 7, wherein the at least one contact handshake includes the robot arm contacting points on the object.
8. The system according to claim 7, wherein the at least one contact handshake includes the robot arm contacting the at least one inertial sensor unit on the object.
9. The system according to claim 8, wherein the object is a bone.
10. The system according to claim 9, wherein the object is a bone.
10 The system according to claim 7, wherein performing at least one contact handshake with the robot arm or the tool is repeated at a time interval.
11. The system according to claim 7, wherein performing at least one contact handshake with the robot arm
is repeated at a time interval.
11. The system according to claim 1, wherein registering the at least one object with the robot arm includes obtaining live images of the object and processing the images of the object relative to the robot arm to register the object in the frame of reference.
12. The system according to claim 1, wherein registering the at least one object with the robot arm includes obtaining live images of the object and processing the images of the object relative to the robot arm to register the object in the frame of reference.
12. The system according to claim 11, wherein obtaining the live images includes obtaining the live images from a point of view on the robot arm.
13. The system according to claim 12, wherein obtaining the live images includes obtaining the live images from a point of view on the robot arm.
13. The system according to claim 12, further including determining the position and orientation data for the point of view from sensors in the robot arm.
14. The system according to claim 13, further including determining the position and orientation data for the point of view from sensors in the robot arm.
14. The system according to claim 1, further including registering a preoperative virtual model of the object to the at least one object in the frame of reference.
15. The system according to claim 1, further including registering a preoperative virtual model of the object to the at least one object in the frame of reference.
15. The system according to claim 1, further including registering a preoperative virtual model of the object to the at least one object in the frame of reference.
16. The system according to claim 1, further including registering a preoperative virtual model of the object to the at least one object in the frame of reference.
Claims 16-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12260561 B2 in view of Amiot (US 20180235715 A1).
Regarding claim 16, claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12260561 B2 discloses claim 1, claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12260561 B2 also discloses the ultrasound imaging system is mounted onto the tool (claim 17). claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12260561 B2 don’t specifically disclose a cutting tool. Amiot discloses a cutting tool (paragraph [0066] “As a non-exhaustive example, other tools that may be supported by the tool head 24 include a registration pointer, a reamer (e.g., cylindrical, tapered), a reciprocating saw, a retractor, a laser rangefinder or light-emitting device (e.g., the indicator device of U.S. Pat. No. 8,882,777) depending on the nature of the surgery. The various tools may be part of a multi-mandible configuration or may be interchangeable, whether with human assistance, or as an automated process.”) Claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12260561 B2 and Amiot are analogous art because they are from the same filed of communications. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate in the claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12260561 B2 the saw disclosed by Amiot. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been a non-exhaustive example tools that may be supported (Amiot paragraph [0066]).
Regarding claim 17, claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12260561 B2 and Amiot disclose claim 16, Amiot also discloses a saw (paragraph [0066] “As a non-exhaustive example, other tools that may be supported by the tool head 24 include a registration pointer, a reamer (e.g., cylindrical, tapered), a reciprocating saw, a retractor, a laser rangefinder or light-emitting device (e.g., the indicator device of U.S. Pat. No. 8,882,777) depending on the nature of the surgery. The various tools may be part of a multi-mandible configuration or may be interchangeable, whether with human assistance, or as an automated process.”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Richard (US 20210121234 A1) discloses method and system for validating bone alterations in computer-assisted surgery.
Sexson (US 20220079687 A1) discloses robot mounted camera registration and tracking system for orthopedic and neurological surgery.
Kostrzewski (US 20180021096 A1) discloses apparatus, systems, and methods for precise guidance of surgical tools.
Weiss (US 20240358461 A1) discloses multi-arm robotic systems and methods for monitoring a target or performing a surgical procedure.
Krieger (US 20200194117 A1) discloses systems, methods, and media for remote trauma assessment.
Nikou (US 20240081784 A1) discloses methods for improved ultrasound imaging to emphasize structures of interest and devices thereof.
Chav (US 20210128250 A1) discloses computer-assisted surgery with electromagnetic tracking.
Bernard (US 20200211240 A1) discloses systems and methods for deep learning-based image reconstruction.
Crawford (US 20220008147 A1) discloses system and method for surgical tool insertion using multi axis force and moment feedback.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN A TORRES whose telephone number is (571) 272-3119. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Kenneth N Vanderpuye can be reached at (571) 272-3078. 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.
/JUAN A TORRES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights