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 07/14/2025 is/are partly in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. A majority of the non-patent literature documents have not been provided. Accordingly, the information disclosure document has been partly considered by the examiner. Please see the attached IDS submitted on 07/14/2025.
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.
Claim(s) 14-18, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Mintz (US 20100036394).
Regarding claim 14, Mintz discloses method (FIGS. 1-2, annotated below) of performing minimally invasive surgery, comprising:
advancing a first intracavity device (levitated platform; FIG. 2) through an access site into a body cavity of a patient;
magnetically coupling the first intracavity device to a first positioning device (Lifting magnet is used to move the levitated platform; FIG. 6), wherein the first positioning device is located externally of the patient (FIG. 1);
moving the first intracavity device within the body cavity (Field is modified to move the levitated platform; The PID (proportional, integral, and differential) controller uses the combined error signal to control the electromagnet current to reduce the error and keep the platform at the desired position. FIG. 2; Para [0031]); and
controlling the first intracavity device using a graphical user interface (The image is displayed and keyboard and control knob is used to control the first intracavity device. FIG. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
660
1188
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Mintz discloses wherein the magnetic coupling comprises generating a magnetic field using the first positioning device (Lifting magnet is used to move the levitated platform; FIG. 6).
Regarding claim 16, Mintz discloses wherein moving the first intracavity device within the body cavity further comprises modifying the magnetic field generated by the first positioning device (Field is modified to move the levitated platform; The PID (proportional, integral, and differential) controller uses the combined error signal to control the electromagnet current to reduce the error and keep the platform at the desired position. Para [0031]).
Regarding claim 17, Mintz discloses wherein controlling the first intracavity device comprises actuating the first intracavity device using the graphical user interface (Graphical user interface, FIG. 3, is used to control the levitated platform using a keyboard and knob.).
Regarding claim 18, Mintz discloses further comprising holding the first intracavity device in contact with a patient cavity wall within a predetermined force threshold (Platform is kept at the desired position; Para [0031]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mintz (US 20100036394) in view of Iddan (US 20130172672).
Regarding claim 19, Mintz does not expressly disclose advancing a second intracavity device into the body cavity through the access site.
Iddan is directed to in-vivo medical devices, systems (abstract) and teaches advancing a second intracavity device into the body cavity through the access site (In-vivo medical device may be positioned at the desired location using an external magnetic field; Para [0016]; In-vivo devices 10, 100, 1000; para [0076]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Mintz to include a second intracavity device into the body cavity in accordance with the teaching of Iddan so that more than one intracavity device may be used for more data collection.
Regarding claim 20, Mintz as modified, teaches magnetically coupling the second intracavity device (In-vivo devices 10, 100, 1000; para [0076]) to a second positioning device (Iddan: an external magnetic field is used to control the in-vivo devices; para [0016]), wherein the second positioning device is located externally of the patient (Iddan: In-vivo medical device may be positioned at the desired location using an external magnetic field; Para [0016]; In-vivo devices 10, 100, 1000; para [0076]).
Regarding claim 21, Mintz as modified, teaches controlling the first intracavity device and the second intracavity device using a graphical user interface (Mintz: The image is displayed in a display and a keyboard and control knob is used to control the first intracavity device. FIG. 3; a second intracavity device may be controlled by using another graphical user interface by another user without affecting the first intracavity device. Here, using another graphical user interface separately to control a second intracavity device is a simple addition of another device to the surgical system.).
Claim(s) 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mintz (US 20100036394) in view of Iddan (US 20130172672).
Regarding claim 23, Mintz discloses a method of performing minimally invasive surgery, comprising: advancing a first intracavity device through an access site into a body cavity of a patient (Mintz: Field is modified to move the levitated platform; The PID (proportional, integral, and differential) controller uses the combined error signal to control the electromagnet current to reduce the error and keep the platform at the desired position. FIG. 2; Para [0031]); and moving the first intracavity device within the body cavity (FIG. 2).
Mintz does not expressly disclose advancing a second intracavity device through the access site into the body cavity; and moving the second intracavity device within the body cavity, wherein movement of the first and second intracavity devices is controlled by a single operator unassisted by a second operator.
Iddan is directed to in-vivo medical devices, systems (abstract) and teaches advancing a second intracavity device through the access site into the body cavity (In-vivo medical device may be positioned at the desired location using an external magnetic field; Para [0016]; In-vivo devices 10, 100, 1000; para [0076]) and moving the second intracavity device within the body cavity (In-vivo medical device may be positioned at the desired location using an external magnetic field; Para [0016]; In-vivo devices 10, 100, 1000; para [0076]), wherein movement of the first and second intracavity devices is controlled by a single operator unassisted by a second operator (This is intended use by an operator. See below.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Mintz to include a second intracavity device into the body cavity in accordance with the teaching of Iddan so that more than one intracavity devices may be used for more data collection. Upon modifying, Mintz with Iddan, a movement of the first and second intracavity devices can be controlled by a single operator unassisted by a second operator because the in-vivo devices 10, 100 (the second intracavity devices) could be moved by the user and anchored/docked in place, para [0076]-[0077], and then the first intracavity device could be moved by the operator by using the display screen and keyboard and control knob (FIG. 3, Mintz) to control the first intracavity device. These features are the intended used of the system.
Regarding claim 24, Mintz as modified teaches advancing a third intracavity device through the access site into the body cavity and moving the third intracavity device within the body cavity (Iddan: In-vivo devices 10, 100, 1000; para [0076], are controlled externally by a magnetic device. In-vivo devices 10,100 may be considered as the second and third intracavity device.), wherein movement of the first, second, and third intracavity devices is controlled by the single operator unassisted by a second operator (In-vivo devices 10, 100, can be operated by the user and anchored/docked in place, para [0076]- [0077]). Then, the first intracavity device may be controlled by the operator by using a display and a keyboard and control knob to control the first intracavity device. FIG. 3 of Mintz; These features are intended use of the system.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 22 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Mintz’s graphical user interface could not be further modified to include controlling of the second intracavity device by the same graphical user interface because such controlling would require simultaneously receiving magnetic signals from both the intracavity devices and processing and displaying the position of intracavity devices in the same display for the control by a single operator without assistance from a second operator, as required by claim 22.
Accordingly, claim 22 is allowed.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO – 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHANKAR R GHIMIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-0515. The examiner can normally be reached 8 AM - 5 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, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached on 571-272-4963. 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.
/SHANKAR RAJ GHIMIRE/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/ANHTUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795 6/25/26
Prosecution Insights