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 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.
Claim 9 is 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 9, the claim recites “a second manual actuator” in line 9. However, the claim depends from claim 7, which recites “a second manual actuator”, thus it is indefinite and unclear if the second manual actuator claimed in claim 9 is the same as the one in claim 7 or is meant to be a separate component. For examination purposes, the limitation will be seen as a separate component, i.e., a third manual actuator.
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) 1-10, 14-18, and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Swayze et al. (US 20180049795 A1) (noted on IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Swayze discloses a manual drive adapter (442) for a robotic instrument (Paragraph 0076), comprising:
an adapter housing configured to be releasably coupled to a force transmission mechanism (412) of the robotic instrument (Figure 10A; Paragraph 0075-76), wherein the force transmission mechanism of the robotic instrument comprises a robotic drive member interface and a robotic input drive member (one or more motors) configured to engage with a robotic drive output of a teleoperated surgical system (Paragraph 0076);
an adapter output drive interface (416) comprising an adapter output drive member (one or more of a non-volatile memory, processor, and/or battery) (Paragraph 0075), wherein the adapter output drive interface is coupled to the adapter housing and is configured to be releasably coupled to the robotic drive member interface of the robotic instrument such that the adapter output drive member is engageable with the robotic input drive member of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0075-76); and
a manual actuator (454, 456, 458) operably coupled to the adapter output drive member such that movement of the manual actuator by a user causes the adapter output drive member to operate one or more degrees of freedom of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0076).
Regarding claim 2, Swayze further discloses wherein when the adapter output drive interface of the manual drive adapter is coupled to the robotic drive member interface of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0075), the robotic input drive member of the robotic instrument is fully capable of being prevented from being engaged with a robotic drive output of a teleoperated surgical system.
Regarding claim 3, Swayze further discloses wherein: the robotic instrument includes a shaft having a proximal end portion coupled to the robotic input drive member of the robotic instrument and a distal end portion coupled to an end effector (462) (Figure 10A-B; Paragraph 0076), and movement of the manual actuator by the user causes the adapter output drive member to move the robotic input drive member of the robotic instrument to actuate the end effector (Paragraph 0076).
Regarding claim 4, Swayze further discloses wherein: the end effector comprises a gripping tool (jaws), movement of the manual actuator actuates the gripping tool when the adapter output drive member is coupled to the robotic input drive member of the robotic instrument (Figure 10A-B; Paragraphs 0076).
Regarding claim 5, Swayze further discloses wherein: the end effector comprises a cutting tool (Paragraph 0052; 0059), movement of the manual actuator actuates the cutting tool to move relative to jaws of the end effector when the adapter output drive member is coupled to the robotic input drive member of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0076).
Regarding claim 6, Swayze further discloses wherein the adapter output drive interface of the manual drive adapter comprises a plurality of adapter output drive members (one or more of a non-volatile memory, processor, and/or battery) configured to be engaged with a plurality of robotic input drive members of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0075-76).
Regarding claim 7, Swayze further discloses wherein: the robotic input drive member is a first robotic input drive member (one of the one or more motors) of the plurality of robotic input drive members of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0075), the manual actuator is a first manual actuator (458) (Paragraph 0076), and the adapter output drive member is a first adapter output drive member (a first of the one or more of a non-volatile memory, processor, and/or battery) of the plurality of adapter output drive members of the manual drive adapter (Paragraph 0075-76), the manual drive adapter further comprising: a second manual actuator (456) operably coupled to a second adapter output drive member (second of the one or more of a non-volatile memory, processor, and/or battery) of the plurality of adapter output drive members (Paragraph 0075-76), wherein the second manual actuator can be manually actuated by the user to cause the second adapter output drive member to move a second input drive member of the plurality of input drive members of the robotic instrument when the adapter housing is coupled to the force transmission mechanism of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0076).
Regarding claim 8, Swayze further discloses wherein: the robotic instrument includes a shaft (410) having a proximal end portion coupled to the force transmission mechanism of the robotic instrument and a distal end portion coupled to an end effector (462) of the robotic instrument (Figure 10A; Paragraph 0076), the end effector comprising a gripping tool (jaws) and a cutting tool (cutting tool) (Paragraph 0052 states the end effector can include two or more components, including jaws and a cutting tool) (Figure 10A-B; Paragraph 0052; 0064; 0076); the first manual actuator is configured to manually actuate the gripping tool when the first adapter output drive member is coupled to the first robotic input drive member of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0076); and the second manual actuator is configured to manually actuate the cutting tool to move relative to jaws of the gripping tool when the second adapter output drive member is coupled to a second robotic input drive member of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0064; 0076).
As best understood in view of the 112(b) issues above, regarding claim 9, Swayze further discloses wherein: the robotic instrument includes a shaft (1136) having a proximal end portion coupled to the force transmission mechanism of the robotic instrument and a distal end portion coupled to a wrist mechanism (1137) of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0052; 0076), the wrist mechanism configured to rotate about a rotation axis to move a position of the wrist mechanism about the rotation axis (Paragraph 0052); the first manual actuator configured to manually actuate the wrist mechanism when the first adapter output drive member is coupled to the first robotic input drive member of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0051); and a third manual actuator (1135) configured to cause the wrist mechanism to be locked in a fixed position relative to the shaft (Paragraph 0051-52).
Regarding claim 10, Swayze further discloses the distal end portion of the shaft is coupled to a link (1137) (Paragraph 0052), the link is coupled to the gripping tool and the cutting tool (Paragraph 0052), the link configured to rotate about a rotation axis to move a position of at least one of the gripping tool or the cutting tool about the rotation axis (Paragraph 0052), the manual drive adapter further comprising:
a third manual actuator (1135) configured to be manually actuated by the user to lock the link in a fixed position relative to the shaft and prevent at least one of the gripping tool or the cutting tool from moving about the rotation axis (Paragraph 0052).
Regarding claim 14, Swayze further discloses a power connection (13) configured such that when the adapter housing is coupled to the force transmission mechanism of the robotic instrument, the robotic instrument is electrically coupled to a power source (Paragraph 0064).
Regarding claim 15, Swayze further discloses wherein the manual drive adapter is provided within a sterile kit (Paragraph 0102-103) and is fully capable of being configured for a single use.
Regarding claim 16, Swayze discloses a manual drive adapter (1120), comprising:
an adapter housing (housing of 1120) configured to be releasably coupled to a force transmission mechanism (1140) of a robotic instrument (Figure 3; Paragraph 0047), the force transmission mechanism of the robotic instrument including a first robotic input drive member (M1) and a second robotic input drive member (M2) (Figure 3; Paragraph 0049), the first robotic input drive member configured to engage with a first robotic drive output (D1) of a teleoperated surgical system (Paragraph 0051), the second robotic input drive member configured to engage with a second robotic drive output (D2) of the teleoperated surgical system (Paragraph 0053);
a first manual actuator (A1) coupled to the adapter housing and configured to be coupled to the first robotic input drive member such that movement of the first manual actuator causes the first robotic input drive member to operate a first tool (1138) of the robotic instrument (Figure 5; Paragraph 0054); and
a second manual actuator (A2) coupled to the adapter housing and configured to be coupled to the second robotic input drive member such that movement of the second manual actuator causes the second robotic input drive member to operate a second tool (a second of 1138) of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0052 states end effector 1138 can include a combination of two pr more various tools) (Figure 5; Paragraph 0055).
Regarding claim 17, Swayze further discloses wherein the robotic instrument includes a shaft (1141) having a proximal end portion coupled to the force transmission mechanism of the robotic instrument and a distal end portion coupled to a link (1143), the link being coupled to the first tool and configured to rotate about a rotation axis to move a position of the first tool about the rotation axis, the manual drive adapter (Paragraph 0055) further comprising: a third actuator (1135) configured to be manually actuated to lock the link in a fixed position relative to the shaft and prevent the first tool from moving about the rotation axis (Paragraph 0052).
Regarding claim 18, Swayze further discloses wherein: the first tool is a gripping tool (jaws) (Paragraph 0052), movement of the first manual actuator actuates the gripping tool when the adapter housing is coupled to the force transmission mechanism of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0054), and the second tool is a cutting tool (cutting tool) (Paragraph 0052), movement of the second manual actuator actuates the cutting tool to move relative to jaws of the gripping tool when the adapter housing is coupled to the force transmission mechanism of the robotic instrument (Paragraph 0054).
Regarding claim 21, Swayze further discloses a power connection (13) configured such that when the adapter housing is coupled to the force transmission mechanism of the robotic instrument, the robotic instrument is electrically coupled to a power source (Paragraph 0064).
Regarding claim 22, Swayze further discloses wherein the manual drive adapter is provided within a sterile kit (Paragraph 0102-103) and is fully capable of being configured for a single use.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 11 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swayze as applied to claims 7 and 16 above, and further in view of Strobl et al. (US 20140276732 A1) (noted on IDS).
Regarding claim 11, Swayze discloses the manual drive adapter of claim 7, but fails to explicitly disclose a lockout mechanism that prevents the second manual actuator from being actuated unless the first manual actuator is actuated.
However, Strobl is directed to a surgical instrument and teaches a lockout mechanism that prevents a button (26) from being actuated unless a trigger (24) is actuated (Figure 1; Paragraph 0032).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Swayze to include a lockout mechanism that prevents the second manual actuator from being actuated unless the first manual actuator is actuated, as taught by Strobl, as both references and the claimed invention are directed to surgical instruments. It would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Swayze with the teachings of Strobl by incorporating a lockout mechanism that prevents the second manual actuator from being actuated unless the first manual actuator is actuated in order to prevent accidental actuation of the instrument.
Regarding claim 19, Swayze discloses the manual drive adapter of claim 16 but fails to explicitly disclose a lockout mechanism that prevents the second manual actuator from being actuated unless the first manual actuator is actuated.
However, Strobl is directed to a surgical instrument and teaches a lockout mechanism that prevents a button (26) from being actuated unless a trigger (24) is actuated (Figure 1; Paragraph 0032).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Swayze to include a lockout mechanism that prevents the second manual actuator from being actuated unless the first manual actuator is actuated, as taught by Strobl, as both references and the claimed invention are directed to surgical instruments. It would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Swayze with the teachings of Strobl by incorporating a lockout mechanism that prevents the second manual actuator from being actuated unless the first manual actuator is actuated in order to prevent accidental actuation of the instrument.
Claim(s) 12-13 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Swayze as applied to claim 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Shelton et al. (US 20180049835 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Swayze discloses the manual drive adapter of claim 1 but fails to explicitly disclose a torque limiter coupled to the manual actuator and configured to limit a torque applied to the adapter output drive member when the manual actuator is moved by the user.
However, Shelton is directed to a robotic surgical instrument and teaches a torque limiter (3048) coupled to a manual actuator and configured to limit a torque applied to the adapter output drive member (2006) when the manual actuator is moved by the user (Figure 11-12; Paragraph 0067-68).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Swayze to include a torque limiter coupled to the manual actuator and configured to limit a torque applied to the adapter output drive member when the manual actuator is moved by the user, as taught by Shelton, as both references and the claimed invention are directed to surgical instruments. It would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Swayze with the teachings of Shelton by incorporating a torque limiter coupled to the manual actuator and configured to limit a torque applied to the adapter output drive member when the manual actuator is moved by the user in order to protect the device from damage by mechanical overload applied by the user (Paragraph 0069).
Regarding claim 13, Shelton further discloses wherein the torque limiter comprises a torsion spring (3048) (Paragraph 0068).
Regarding claim 20, Swayze discloses the manual drive adapter of claim 16 but fails to explicitly disclose a torque limiter coupled to the first manual actuator and configured to limit a torque applied to the first robotic input drive member when the first manual actuator is moved.
However, Shelton is directed to a robotic surgical instrument and teaches a torque limiter (3060) coupled to a manual actuator and configured to limit a torque applied to the first robotic input drive member (2006) when the first manual actuator is moved (Figure 12; Paragraph 0069).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Swayze to include a torque limiter coupled to the manual actuator and configured to limit a torque applied to the first robotic input drive member when the first manual actuator is moved, as taught by Shelton, as both references and the claimed invention are directed to surgical instruments. It would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Swayze with the teachings of Shelton by incorporating a torque limiter coupled to the manual actuator and configured to limit a torque applied to the first robotic input drive member when the first manual actuator is moved in order to protect the device from damage by mechanical overload applied by the user (Paragraph 0069).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZEHRA JAFFRI whose telephone number is (571)272-7738. The examiner can normally be reached 8 AM-5:30 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, 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.
/Z.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3771
/SHAUN L DAVID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights