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.
Claims 1-19 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “determine a relative pose of the target anatomy using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices; determine relative poses of the tracking devices using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices; utilize the communication interfaces to wirelessly share, among the tracking devices, the relative pose of the target anatomy and the relative poses of the tracking devices; define a common coordinate system based on the relative poses of the tracking devices and localize the relative pose of the target anatomy in the common coordinate system; detect a tracking condition or criterion; and based on the tracking condition or criterion, select a group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system” which renders the claim unclear. Earlier in the claim “a plurality of tracking devices” and “detect other tracking devices with the camera” are defined; however, it is unclear whether the further usage of “tracking devices” refer to the “a plurality of tracking devices” or the “other tracking devices”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the tracking devices collectively form the peer-to-peer tracking network.” which renders the claim unclear. Earlier in the claim “a plurality of tracking devices” and “detect other tracking devices with the camera” are defined; however, it is unclear whether the further usage of “tracking devices” refer to the “a plurality of tracking devices” or the “other tracking devices”.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the relative poses of the tracking devices.” which renders the claim unclear. Earlier in the claim “a plurality of tracking devices” and “detect other tracking devices with the camera” are defined; however, it is unclear whether the further usage of “tracking devices” refer to the “a plurality of tracking devices” or the “other tracking devices”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “features of other tracking devices with the camera.” which renders the claim unclear. Earlier in the claim “a plurality of tracking devices” and “detect other tracking devices with the camera” are defined; however, it is unclear whether the further usage of “tracking devices” refer to the “a plurality of tracking devices” or the “other tracking devices”.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “one of the tracking devices is attached to the target anatomy” which renders the claim unclear. Earlier in the claim “a plurality of tracking devices” and “detect other tracking devices with the camera” are defined; however, it is unclear whether the further usage of “tracking devices” refer to the “a plurality of tracking devices” or the “other tracking devices”.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the tracking devices are configured to wirelessly communicate directly with each other to collectively form a peer-to-peer tracking network.” which renders the claim unclear. Earlier in the claim “a plurality of tracking devices” and “detect other tracking devices with the camera” are defined; however, it is unclear whether the further usage of “tracking devices” refer to the “a plurality of tracking devices” or the “other tracking devices”.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “incapable of communicating with the tracking devices, and wherein the controllers are configured to: determine the relative pose of the target anatomy based on detection of the anatomy tracker using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices” which renders the claim unclear. Earlier in the claim “a plurality of tracking devices” and “detect other tracking devices with the camera” are defined; however, it is unclear whether the further usage of “tracking devices” refer to the “a plurality of tracking devices” or the “other tracking devices”.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the tracking condition or criterion comprises one or more tracking devices having reduced visibility” which renders the claim unclear. Earlier in the claim “a plurality of tracking devices” and “detect other tracking devices with the camera” are defined; however, it is unclear whether the further usage of “tracking devices” refer to the “a plurality of tracking devices” or the “other tracking devices”.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the tracking condition or criterion comprises one or more tracking devices having reduced visibility or reduced tracking accuracy with respect to one or more other tracking devices; and the controllers select the group to restore visibility or tracking accuracy with respect to the one or more other tracking devices..” which renders the claim unclear. Earlier in the claim “a plurality of tracking devices” and “detect other tracking devices with the camera” are defined; however, it is unclear whether the further usage of “tracking devices” refer to the “a plurality of tracking devices” or the “other tracking devices”.
Claim 219 recites the limitation “, the method comprising the controllers performing the following: determining a relative pose of the target anatomy using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices; determining relative poses of the tracking devices using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices; utilizing the communication interfaces for wirelessly sharing, among the tracking devices, the relative pose of the target anatomy and the relative poses of the tracking devices; defining a common coordinate system based on the relative poses of the tracking devices” which renders the claim unclear. Earlier in the claim “a plurality of tracking devices” and “detect other tracking devices with the camera” are defined; however, it is unclear whether the further usage of “tracking devices” refer to the “a plurality of tracking devices” or the “other tracking devices”.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marti et al (US20180049809A1; hereinafter referred to as Marti) in view of Vilsmeier et al (US20180367765A1; hereinafter referred to as Vilsmeier) and further in view of Medeiros et al (H. Medeiros, J. Park, and A. Kak, “Distributed object tracking using a cluster-based Kalman filter in wireless camera networks,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 448–463, Aug. 2008).
Regarding Claim 1, Marti discloses a surgical tracking system for tracking a target anatomy (“a redundant reciprocal tracking system composed of at least two trackers… Such setup could be used in surgical navigation system” [Abstract]), comprising:
a plurality of tracking devices, wherein each tracking device comprises a controller, a camera, and a communication interface (“In the optical configuration, the Sensor 20 may be an array of optical detectors in a combination that allows retrieving the distinct 3D positions of the photons generated by the Light Sources. A typical optical tracker would have an electronic circuitry comprising at least the sensor(s), a CPU, persistent memory, a communication link (e. g. wired cable, Bluetooth, WiFi, LiFi, or other equivalent communication technology etc.) and a power source (e. g. battery or an accumulator, rechargeable battery).” [0066], “Another type of optical sensor could comprise one or more 2D optical sensor modules 21… Examples of 2D optical sensor could be: (a) a CMOS/CCD camera array sensor with diaphragm and lens(es) (e.g. a conventional digital camera system) [0073]),
and wherein each tracking device is configured to detect other tracking devices with the camera and be detected by one or more cameras of other tracking devices (“The Sensor sub-assembly comprises two 2D Optical Sensor Modules 21. This Sensor sub-assembly is able to detect the 3D positions (with 4 DoF) of the distinct Light Sources located on the other Tracker via triangulation of the two Optical Sensors Modules.” [0056], “In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]);
and wherein the controllers are configured to: determine relative poses of the tracking devices using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices (“The Sensor sub-assembly comprises two 2D Optical Sensor Modules 21. This Sensor sub-assembly is able to detect the 3D positions (with 4 DoF) of the distinct Light Sources located on the other Tracker via triangulation of the two Optical Sensors Modules.” [0056], “In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]);
utilize the communication interfaces to wirelessly share, among the tracking devices, the relative poses of the tracking devices (“The link between the Trackers 10 could be wired or wireless (e.g. Bluetooth, Zigbee, WiFi, LiFi, Optical Communication, IrDA, etc.). Extra information such as tracker id, serial numbers, calibration, temperature, button status and other sensor and meta-data can be exchanged through this link.” [0068], “A Central Processor 30 may be included in every Tracker 10. Their respective data and/or calculations may be exchanged and the result directly transferred to the main application. In this case, all the metrological processing may be performed in the Trackers 10.” [0083]);
define a common coordinate system based on the relative poses of the tracking devices(“the trackers to send their positional information to either a central processor or to a distributed setup of processors that may be integrated in the trackers and means for the processor or setup of processors to combine the positional information of at least two of said trackers and to compute the rigid transformation of one reference frame with respect to the other” [0027], “In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]).
Marti does not specifically disclose to determine a relative pose of the target anatomy using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices; utilize the communication interfaces to wirelessly share, among the tracking devices, the relative pose of the target anatomy; localize the relative pose of the target anatomy in the common coordinate system; detect a tracking condition or criterion; and based on the tracking condition or criterion, select a group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Vilsmeier teaches a medical tracking system comprising at least two sensor devices which are independently maneuverable [Abstract].
Vilsmeier also teaches to determine a relative pose of the target anatomy using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices (“landmarks of the tibia T are sampled by touching the landmark with the tip of the pointer 13 and determining the position of the markers 9 and 14. Due to the known constellation of the markers relative to the tip of the pointer 13, the position of the tip can be determined from the position of the markers. The positions of the markers are determined by the sensor device 1. The camera 7 of the sensor device 1 captures an image comprising the markers. Due to the known constellation and sizes of the markers, the CPU 3 of the sensor device 1 can analyze the output image of the camera 7 in order to detect the markers and hence the positions of the landmarks in a reference system of the sensor device 1. The CPU 3 uses the size, the shape and the relative positions of the markers in the output image of the camera to determine the position of the tip of the pointer.” [0078]);
utilize the communication interfaces to wirelessly share, among the tracking devices, the relative pose of the target anatomy; and localize the relative pose of the target anatomy in the common coordinate system (“After measurement of the relative position, at least one of the sensor devices 1 or 2 knows the relative position, this means at least the relative orientation in three-rotational dimensions, of the other sensor device in its own reference system. The relative spatial location is not needed in the present workflow, but may also be determined. Since the tibia T and the femur F are registered, the sensor device thus also knows the relative position of the femur F and the tibia T. Preferably, the registration data representing the relation of the bone and the sensor device is also transmitted to the other sensor device. This, again, is performed either in one direction only or both sensor devices transmit the registration data.” [0092]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti as outlined above to determine a relative pose of the target anatomy using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices; utilize the communication interfaces to wirelessly share, among the tracking devices, the relative pose of the target anatomy; localize the relative pose of the target anatomy in the common coordinate system as taught by Vilsmeier, because the likelihood of obstruction of an object to be tracked by a user is reduced [0004].
Marti in view of Vilsmeier does not specifically teach to detect a tracking condition or criterion; and based on the tracking condition or criterion, select a group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Medeieros teaches a distributed object tracking system which employs a cluster-based Kalman filter in a network of wireless cameras [Abstract].
Medeiros also teaches to detect a tracking condition or criterion; and based on the tracking condition or criterion, select a group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system (“When a target is detected, cameras that can observe the same target interact with one another to form a cluster and elect a cluster head. Local measurements of the target acquired by members of the cluster are sent to the cluster head, which then estimates the target position via Kalman filtering and periodically transmits this information to a base station.” [Abstract], “2) Cluster Propagation: Inclusion of new members into active clusters takes place as follows. When a camera detects a new target, it proceeds normally as in the cluster formation step by sending to its neighbors a create cluster message and waiting for the election process to take place… If there are multiple cluster heads near a camera that have detected a target, the camera could, at the cost of a unit of time delay, choose the cluster head which is closest to the target and become its member… Removal of cluster members is trivial; when the target leaves the field of view of a cluster member, all it has to do is send a message informing the cluster head that it is leaving the cluster.” [Pg. 453 Col. 1]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti in view of Vilsmeier as outlined above to detect a tracking condition or criterion; and based on the tracking condition or criterion, select a group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system as taught by Medeiros, because the tracking protocol is able to achieve tracking accuracy while requiring a significantly smaller number of message transmissions in the network. [0004].
Regarding Claim 2, Marti discloses the tracking devices are configured to wirelessly communicate directly with each other to collectively form a peer-to-peer tracking network (“The link between the Trackers 10 could be wired or wireless (e.g. Bluetooth, Zigbee, WiFi, LiFi, Optical Communication, IrDA, etc.). Extra information such as tracker id, serial numbers, calibration, temperature, button status and other sensor and meta-data can be exchanged through this link.” [0068], “A Central Processor 30 may be included in every Tracker 10. Their respective data and/or calculations may be exchanged and the result directly transferred to the main application. In this case, all the metrological processing may be performed in the Trackers 10.” [0083]).
Regarding Claim 3, Marti discloses the tracking devices collectively form the peer-to-peer tracking network without reliance on any stationary and primary tracking system to track and localize the plurality of tracking devices (“A Central Processor 30 may be included in every Tracker 10. Their respective data and/or calculations may be exchanged and the result directly transferred to the main application. In this case, all the metrological processing may be performed in the Trackers 10.” [0083]).
Regarding Claim 5, Marti discloses each tracking device further comprises identifiable features; and each tracking device is configured to detect identifiable features of other tracking devices with the camera (“Trackers 10 are facing each other in a way that Sensor(s) 20 from a first Tracker 10 can sense one or several Sensed Elements 11 located on another Tracker 10 and vice-versa. “ [0064], “The system is designed such as the Sensed Elements 11 can be uniquely identified.” [0088]).
Regarding Claim 6, Marti discloses one of the tracking devices is attached to the target anatomy (“the proposed Tracking System is installed in a computer-assisted surgery setup (see for example FIG. 2). One Tracker 10 is rigidly fixed on the skull of a patient 70.” [0093]).
Marti in view of Vilsmeier does not specifically teach that the controllers are configured to select the group of tracking devices to include the tracking device attached to the target anatomy.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Medeiros teaches that the controllers are configured to select the group of tracking devices to include the tracking device attached to the target anatomy (“When a target is detected, cameras that can observe the same target interact with one another to form a cluster and elect a cluster head. Local measurements of the target acquired by members of the cluster are sent to the cluster head, which then estimates the target position via Kalman filtering and periodically transmits this information to a base station.” [Abstract]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti in view of Vilsmeier as outlined above with the controllers are configured to select the group of tracking devices to include the tracking device attached to the target anatomy as taught by Medeiros, because the tracking protocol is able to achieve tracking accuracy while requiring a significantly smaller number of message transmissions in the network. [0004].
Regarding Claim 8, Marti discloses each tracking device in the selected group is configured to determine the relative pose of: the target anatomy, another tracking device, or both (“In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]).
Regarding Claim 9, Marti discloses the selected group of tracking devices comprises at least: a first tracking device that determines the relative pose of the target anatomy; and a second tracking device that determines the relative pose of the first tracking device (“In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]).
Regarding Claim 10, Marti discloses the second tracking device also determines the relative pose of the target anatomy (“In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]).
Regarding Claim 11, Marti discloses the selected group further includes a third tracking device that determines the relative pose of one or more of: the first tracking device, the second tracking device, and the target anatomy (“In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]).
Regarding Claim 12, Marti in view of Vilsmeier discloses all limitations noted above except that the group is a first group, and after selection of the first group, the controllers are configured to: detect a second tracking condition or criterion; and based on the second tracking condition or criterion, select a second group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system, wherein the second group is different from the first group.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Medeiros teaches that the group is a first group, and after selection of the first group, the controllers are configured to: detect a second tracking condition or criterion; and based on the second tracking condition or criterion, select a second group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system, wherein the second group is different from the first group (“After clusters are created to track specific targets, these clusters must be allowed to propagate through the network as the targets move. Cluster propagation refers to the process of accepting new members into the cluster as they identify the same object, removing members that can no longer see the object, and assigning new cluster heads as the current cluster head leaves the cluster.” [Pg. 450 Col. 2]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti in view of Vilsmeier as outlined above with the controllers are configured to select the group of tracking devices to include the tracking device attached to the target anatomy as taught by Medeiros, because the tracking protocol is able to achieve tracking accuracy while requiring a significantly smaller number of message transmissions in the network. [0004].
Regarding Claim 13, Marti in view of Vilsmeier discloses all limitations noted above except that the controllers are configured to select multiple groups of tracking devices to redundantly determine the relative pose of the target anatomy.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Medeiros teaches that the controllers are configured to select multiple groups of tracking devices to redundantly determine the relative pose of the target anatomy (“Since multiple clusters are allowed to track the same target, if these clusters overlap, they must be able to coalesce into a single cluster. Coalescence of clusters is made possible by per mitting the overhearing of intracluster communications as different clusters come into each other’s communication range” [Pg. 450 Col. 2]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti in view of Vilsmeier as outlined above with the controllers are configured to select multiple groups of tracking devices to redundantly determine the relative pose of the target anatomy as taught by Medeiros, because the tracking protocol is able to achieve tracking accuracy while requiring a significantly smaller number of message transmissions in the network. [0004].
Regarding Claim 14, Marti in view of Vilsmeier discloses all limitations noted above except that the group is a first group, and after selection of the first group, the controllers are configured to: detect a second tracking condition or criterion; and based on the second tracking condition or criterion, select a second group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system, wherein the second group is different from the first group.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Medeiros teaches that the tracking condition or criterion comprises one or more tracking devices having reduced visibility or reduced tracking accuracy with respect to the target anatomy; and the controllers select the group to restore visibility or tracking accuracy with respect to the target anatomy (“After clusters are created to track specific targets, these clusters must be allowed to propagate through the network as the targets move. Cluster propagation refers to the process of accepting new members into the cluster as they identify the same object, removing members that can no longer see the object, and assigning new cluster heads as the current cluster head leaves the cluster.” [Pg. 450 Col. 2]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti in view of Vilsmeier as outlined above with the tracking condition or criterion comprises one or more tracking devices having reduced visibility or reduced tracking accuracy with respect to the target anatomy; and the controllers select the group to restore visibility or tracking accuracy with respect to the target anatomy as taught by Medeiros, because the tracking protocol is able to achieve tracking accuracy while requiring a significantly smaller number of message transmissions in the network. [0004].
Regarding Claim 15, Marti in view of Vilsmeier discloses all limitations noted above except that the tracking condition or criterion comprises one or more tracking devices having reduced visibility or reduced tracking accuracy with respect to one or more other tracking devices; and the controllers select the group to restore visibility or tracking accuracy with respect to the one or more other tracking devices.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Medeiros teaches that the tracking condition or criterion comprises one or more tracking devices having reduced visibility or reduced tracking accuracy with respect to one or more other tracking devices; and the controllers select the group to restore visibility or tracking accuracy with respect to the one or more other tracking devices (“After clusters are created to track specific targets, these clusters must be allowed to propagate through the network as the targets move. Cluster propagation refers to the process of accepting new members into the cluster as they identify the same object, removing members that can no longer see the object, and assigning new cluster heads as the current cluster head leaves the cluster.” [Pg. 450 Col. 2]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti in view of Vilsmeier as outlined above with the tracking condition or criterion comprises one or more tracking devices having reduced visibility or reduced tracking accuracy with respect to one or more other tracking devices; and the controllers select the group to restore visibility or tracking accuracy with respect to the one or more other tracking devices as taught by Medeiros, because the tracking protocol is able to achieve tracking accuracy while requiring a significantly smaller number of message transmissions in the network. [0004].
Regarding Claim 16, Marti discloses each tracking device is coupled to a distinct surgical object (“In an embodiment of the invention, the proposed Tracking System is installed in a computer-assisted surgery setup (see for example FIG. 2). One Tracker 10 is rigidly fixed on the skull of a patient 70. The other is located on a medical device 50 (for example a Biopsy Needle) and operated by a Surgeon/Radiologist 60.“ [0093]).
Regarding Claim 17, Marti discloses each distinct surgical object is selected from among: a first patient anatomy, a second patient anatomy, a hand-held surgical tool, a robotic manipulator arm, a robotic manipulator end effector, a tissue retractor, and a head-mounted device (“In an embodiment of the invention, the proposed Tracking System is installed in a computer-assisted surgery setup (see for example FIG. 2). One Tracker 10 is rigidly fixed on the skull of a patient 70. The other is located on a medical device 50 (for example a Biopsy Needle) and operated by a Surgeon/Radiologist 60.“ [0093]).
Regarding Claim 18, Marti discloses all limitations noted above except that each distinct surgical object is movable during tracking of the target anatomy.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Vilsmeier teaches that each distinct surgical object is movable during tracking of the target anatomy (“According to the present invention, a medical tracking system comprises at least two sensor devices which are independently maneuverable and can be positioned in a fixed position relative to targets. Each sensor device comprises at least one of an orientation sensor and a position sensor for respectively determining sensor data. “Respectively determining” means that at least two sensor devices each determine sensor data.” [0005].
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti as outlined above to determine with each distinct surgical object is movable during tracking of the target anatomy as taught by Vilsmeier, because the likelihood of obstruction of an object to be tracked by a user is reduced [0004].
Regarding Claim 19, Marti discloses a method of operating surgical tracking system for tracking a target anatomy (“a redundant reciprocal tracking system composed of at least two trackers… Such setup could be used in surgical navigation system” [Abstract]),
the surgical tracking system including a plurality of tracking devices, wherein each tracking device comprises a controller, a camera, and a communication interface (“In the optical configuration, the Sensor 20 may be an array of optical detectors in a combination that allows retrieving the distinct 3D positions of the photons generated by the Light Sources. A typical optical tracker would have an electronic circuitry comprising at least the sensor(s), a CPU, persistent memory, a communication link (e. g. wired cable, Bluetooth, WiFi, LiFi, or other equivalent communication technology etc.) and a power source (e. g. battery or an accumulator, rechargeable battery).” [0066], “Another type of optical sensor could comprise one or more 2D optical sensor modules 21… Examples of 2D optical sensor could be: (a) a CMOS/CCD camera array sensor with diaphragm and lens(es) (e.g. a conventional digital camera system) [0073]),
and wherein each tracking device is configured to detect other tracking devices with the camera and be detected by one or more cameras of other tracking devices (“The Sensor sub-assembly comprises two 2D Optical Sensor Modules 21. This Sensor sub-assembly is able to detect the 3D positions (with 4 DoF) of the distinct Light Sources located on the other Tracker via triangulation of the two Optical Sensors Modules.” [0056], “In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]),
the method comprising the controllers performing the following determining relative poses of the tracking devices using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices (“The Sensor sub-assembly comprises two 2D Optical Sensor Modules 21. This Sensor sub-assembly is able to detect the 3D positions (with 4 DoF) of the distinct Light Sources located on the other Tracker via triangulation of the two Optical Sensors Modules.” [0056], “In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]);
utilizing the communication interfaces for wirelessly sharing, among the tracking devices, the relative poses of the tracking devices (“The link between the Trackers 10 could be wired or wireless (e.g. Bluetooth, Zigbee, WiFi, LiFi, Optical Communication, IrDA, etc.). Extra information such as tracker id, serial numbers, calibration, temperature, button status and other sensor and meta-data can be exchanged through this link.” [0068], “A Central Processor 30 may be included in every Tracker 10. Their respective data and/or calculations may be exchanged and the result directly transferred to the main application. In this case, all the metrological processing may be performed in the Trackers 10.” [0083]);
defining a common coordinate system based on the relative poses of the tracking devices (“the trackers to send their positional information to either a central processor or to a distributed setup of processors that may be integrated in the trackers and means for the processor or setup of processors to combine the positional information of at least two of said trackers and to compute the rigid transformation of one reference frame with respect to the other” [0027], “In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]).
Marti does not specifically disclose to determining a relative pose of the target anatomy using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices; utilizing the communication interfaces for wirelessly sharing, among the tracking devices, the relative pose of the target anatomy; detecting a tracking condition or criterion; and based on the tracking condition or criterion, selecting a group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Vilsmeier teaches a medical tracking system comprising at least two sensor devices which are independently maneuverable [Abstract].
Vilsmeier also teaches determining a relative pose of the target anatomy using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices (“landmarks of the tibia T are sampled by touching the landmark with the tip of the pointer 13 and determining the position of the markers 9 and 14. Due to the known constellation of the markers relative to the tip of the pointer 13, the position of the tip can be determined from the position of the markers. The positions of the markers are determined by the sensor device 1. The camera 7 of the sensor device 1 captures an image comprising the markers. Due to the known constellation and sizes of the markers, the CPU 3 of the sensor device 1 can analyze the output image of the camera 7 in order to detect the markers and hence the positions of the landmarks in a reference system of the sensor device 1. The CPU 3 uses the size, the shape and the relative positions of the markers in the output image of the camera to determine the position of the tip of the pointer.” [0078]);
utilizing the communication interfaces for wirelessly sharing, among the tracking devices, the relative pose of the target anatomy (“After measurement of the relative position, at least one of the sensor devices 1 or 2 knows the relative position, this means at least the relative orientation in three-rotational dimensions, of the other sensor device in its own reference system. The relative spatial location is not needed in the present workflow, but may also be determined. Since the tibia T and the femur F are registered, the sensor device thus also knows the relative position of the femur F and the tibia T. Preferably, the registration data representing the relation of the bone and the sensor device is also transmitted to the other sensor device. This, again, is performed either in one direction only or both sensor devices transmit the registration data.” [0092]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti as outlined above with determining a relative pose of the target anatomy using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices; utilizing the communication interfaces for wirelessly sharing, among the tracking devices, the relative pose of the target anatomy as taught by Vilsmeier, because the likelihood of obstruction of an object to be tracked by a user is reduced [0004].
Marti in view of Vilsmeier does not specifically teach detecting a tracking condition or criterion; and based on the tracking condition or criterion, selecting a group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Medeieros teaches a distributed object tracking system which employs a cluster-based Kalman filter in a network of wireless cameras [Abstract].
Medeiros also teaches detecting a tracking condition or criterion; and based on the tracking condition or criterion, selecting a group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system (“When a target is detected, cameras that can observe the same target interact with one another to form a cluster and elect a cluster head. Local measurements of the target acquired by members of the cluster are sent to the cluster head, which then estimates the target position via Kalman filtering and periodically transmits this information to a base station.” [Abstract], “2) Cluster Propagation: Inclusion of new members into active clusters takes place as follows. When a camera detects a new target, it proceeds normally as in the cluster formation step by sending to its neighbors a create cluster message and waiting for the election process to take place… If there are multiple cluster heads near a camera that have detected a target, the camera could, at the cost of a unit of time delay, choose the cluster head which is closest to the target and become its member… Removal of cluster members is trivial; when the target leaves the field of view of a cluster member, all it has to do is send a message informing the cluster head that it is leaving the cluster.” [Pg. 453 Col. 1]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti in view of Vilsmeier as outlined above to detecting a tracking condition or criterion; and based on the tracking condition or criterion, selecting a group of tracking devices to track the target anatomy in the common coordinate system as taught by Medeiros, because the tracking protocol is able to achieve tracking accuracy while requiring a significantly smaller number of message transmissions in the network. [0004].
Regarding Claim 20, Marti discloses a decentralized peer-to-peer surgical tracking system for tracking a surgical target (“a redundant reciprocal tracking system composed of at least two trackers… Such setup could be used in surgical navigation system” [Abstract], “A Central Processor 30 may be included in every Tracker 10. Their respective data and/or calculations may be exchanged and the result directly transferred to the main application. In this case, all the metrological processing may be performed in the Trackers 10.” [0083]), comprising:
a plurality of tracking devices, each tracking device being coupled to a distinct surgical object and each tracking device comprises a controller, a camera, and a communication interface (“In the optical configuration, the Sensor 20 may be an array of optical detectors in a combination that allows retrieving the distinct 3D positions of the photons generated by the Light Sources. A typical optical tracker would have an electronic circuitry comprising at least the sensor(s), a CPU, persistent memory, a communication link (e. g. wired cable, Bluetooth, WiFi, LiFi, or other equivalent communication technology etc.) and a power source (e. g. battery or an accumulator, rechargeable battery).” [0066], “Another type of optical sensor could comprise one or more 2D optical sensor modules 21… Examples of 2D optical sensor could be: (a) a CMOS/CCD camera array sensor with diaphragm and lens(es) (e.g. a conventional digital camera system) [0073], “the proposed Tracking System is installed in a computer-assisted surgery setup (see for example FIG. 2). One Tracker 10 is rigidly fixed on the skull of a patient 70. The other is located on a medical device 50 (for example a Biopsy Needle) and operated by a Surgeon/Radiologist 60.” [0093]),
wherein the tracking devices are configured to: form a peer-to-peer tracking network by wirelessly exchanging information derived from images captured by the cameras (“The Sensor sub-assembly comprises two 2D Optical Sensor Modules 21. This Sensor sub-assembly is able to detect the 3D positions (with 4 DoF) of the distinct Light Sources located on the other Tracker via triangulation of the two Optical Sensors Modules.” [0056], “In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]);
determine relative poses of the tracking devices from the exchanged information (“The Sensor sub-assembly comprises two 2D Optical Sensor Modules 21. This Sensor sub-assembly is able to detect the 3D positions (with 4 DoF) of the distinct Light Sources located on the other Tracker via triangulation of the two Optical Sensors Modules.” [0056], “In a setup composed of three Trackers 10 (a, b and c) as presented in FIG. 4, if Tracker a sense Tracker b (and vice-versa) and Tracker b sense Tracker c (and vice-versa), it is moreover possible to compute the pose of Tracker a in the frame of reference of Tracker c (POSE_ac) and vice-versa (POSE_ca). This will be a combination of POSE_ab and POSE_bc. This technique can be extended to any number of Trackers 10 interacting together and determine their relative poses. Such a system allows to handle a complete occultation between two trackers.” [0089]);
Marti does not specifically disclose to determine a pose of the surgical target based on the relative poses; and select, based on a detected tracking condition or criterion, a subset of the tracking devices to track the surgical target.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Vilsmeier teaches a medical tracking system comprising at least two sensor devices which are independently maneuverable [Abstract].
Vilsmeier also teaches to determine a pose of the surgical target based on the relative poses (“landmarks of the tibia T are sampled by touching the landmark with the tip of the pointer 13 and determining the position of the markers 9 and 14. Due to the known constellation of the markers relative to the tip of the pointer 13, the position of the tip can be determined from the position of the markers. The positions of the markers are determined by the sensor device 1. The camera 7 of the sensor device 1 captures an image comprising the markers. Due to the known constellation and sizes of the markers, the CPU 3 of the sensor device 1 can analyze the output image of the camera 7 in order to detect the markers and hence the positions of the landmarks in a reference system of the sensor device 1. The CPU 3 uses the size, the shape and the relative positions of the markers in the output image of the camera to determine the position of the tip of the pointer.” [0078]);
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti as outlined above to determine a pose of the surgical target based on the relative poses as taught by Vilsmeier, because the likelihood of obstruction of an object to be tracked by a user is reduced [0004].
Marti in view of Vilsmeier does not specifically teach to select, based on a detected tracking condition or criterion, a subset of the tracking devices to track the surgical target.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Medeieros teaches a distributed object tracking system which employs a cluster-based Kalman filter in a network of wireless cameras [Abstract].
Medeiros also teaches to select, based on a detected tracking condition or criterion, a subset of the tracking devices to track the surgical target (“When a target is detected, cameras that can observe the same target interact with one another to form a cluster and elect a cluster head. Local measurements of the target acquired by members of the cluster are sent to the cluster head, which then estimates the target position via Kalman filtering and periodically transmits this information to a base station.” [Abstract], “2) Cluster Propagation: Inclusion of new members into active clusters takes place as follows. When a camera detects a new target, it proceeds normally as in the cluster formation step by sending to its neighbors a create cluster message and waiting for the election process to take place… If there are multiple cluster heads near a camera that have detected a target, the camera could, at the cost of a unit of time delay, choose the cluster head which is closest to the target and become its member… Removal of cluster members is trivial; when the target leaves the field of view of a cluster member, all it has to do is send a message informing the cluster head that it is leaving the cluster.” [Pg. 453 Col. 1]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti in view of Vilsmeier as outlined above to select, based on a detected tracking condition or criterion, a subset of the tracking devices to track the surgical target as taught by Medeiros, because the tracking protocol is able to achieve tracking accuracy while requiring a significantly smaller number of message transmissions in the network [0004].
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marti in view of Vilsmeier and further in view of Medeiros as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Yu et al (US20160035108A1; hereinafter referred to as Yu).
Regarding Claim 4, Marti in view of Vilsmeier and further in view of Medeiros discloses all limitations noted above except that the peer-to-peer tracking network is dynamic such that a geometry of the common coordinate system is configured to change depending on the relative poses of the tracking devices.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Yu teaches a motion tracking system for dynamic tracking of and compensation for motion of a patient [Abstract].
Yu also teaches the peer-to-peer tracking network is dynamic such that a geometry of the common coordinate system is configured to change depending on the relative poses of the tracking devices (“Once the six-degree-of-freedom coordinates for all visible markers are determined, coordinate transforms may be applied to remap the coordinate system origin sequentially to each of the markers, recording the resulting relative positions of the remaining markers in each case. In this manner, the six-degree-of-freedom relative position of each marker with respect to every other marker may be determined.“ [0379])
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti in view of Vilsmeier and further in view of Medeiros as outlined above to determine with the peer-to-peer tracking network is dynamic such that a geometry of the common coordinate system is configured to change depending on the relative poses of the tracking devices as taught by Yu, because it maintains tracking of obscured markers [0383].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marti in view of Vilsmeier and further in view of Medeiros as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Lakin et al (US20070016009A1; hereinafter referred to as Lakin).
Regarding Claim 7, Marti in view of Vilsmeier discloses all limitations noted above except an anatomy tracker coupled to the target anatomy and is incapable of communicating with the tracking devices, and wherein the controllers are configured to: determine the relative pose of the target anatomy based on detection of the anatomy tracker using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices; and select the group of tracking devices to include the at least one tracking device that detects the anatomy tracker.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Medeiros teaches select the group of tracking devices to include the at least one tracking device that detects the anatomy tracker (“When a target is detected, cameras that can observe the same target interact with one another to form a cluster and elect a cluster head. Local measurements of the target acquired by members of the cluster are sent to the cluster head, which then estimates the target position via Kalman filtering and periodically transmits this information to a base station.” [Abstract], “2) Cluster Propagation: Inclusion of new members into active clusters takes place as follows. When a camera detects a new target, it proceeds normally as in the cluster formation step by sending to its neighbors a create cluster message and waiting for the election process to take place… If there are multiple cluster heads near a camera that have detected a target, the camera could, at the cost of a unit of time delay, choose the cluster head which is closest to the target and become its member… Removal of cluster members is trivial; when the target leaves the field of view of a cluster member, all it has to do is send a message informing the cluster head that it is leaving the cluster.” [Pg. 453 Col. 1])
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti in view of Vilsmeier as outlined above to select the group of tracking devices to include the at least one tracking device that detects the anatomy tracker as taught by Medeiros, because the tracking protocol is able to achieve tracking accuracy while requiring a significantly smaller number of message transmissions in the network [0004].
Marti in view of Vilsmeier and further in view of Medeiros does not specifically teach an anatomy tracker coupled to the target anatomy and is incapable of communicating with the tracking devices, and wherein the controllers are configured to: determine the relative pose of the target anatomy based on detection of the anatomy tracker using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Lakin teaches an array for use with a surgical navigation system [Abstract].
Lakin also teaches an anatomy tracker coupled to the target anatomy and is incapable of communicating with the tracking devices, and wherein the controllers are configured to: determine the relative pose of the target anatomy based on detection of the anatomy tracker using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices (“Tracking system 120 can be any system that can determine the three-dimensional location of devices carrying or incorporating markers that serve as tracking indicia… A passive system incorporates retro-reflective markers that reflect infrared light back to the position sensor, and the system triangulates the real-time position (x, y, and z location) and orientation (rotation around x, y, and z axes) of an array 122 and reports the result to the computer system with an accuracy of about 0.35 mm Root Mean Squared (RMS).” [0037], “Patient preparation 438 is similar to instrument set-up because an array is typically rigidly attached to the patient's anatomy 446.” [0044]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Marti in view of Vilsmeier and further in view of Medeiros as outlined above to an anatomy tracker coupled to the target anatomy and is incapable of communicating with the tracking devices, and wherein the controllers are configured to:
determine the relative pose of the target anatomy based on detection of the anatomy tracker using the camera of at least one of the tracking devices as taught by Lakin, because it allows for accurate planning, tracking and navigation of surgical instruments, tools and/or medical devices during an image guided surgery procedure [0004].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN MALDONADO whose telephone number is 703-756-1421. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am-4:00 pm PST M-Th 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, Christopher Koharski can be reached on (571) 272-7230. 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.
/Steven Maldonado/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/CHRISTOPHER KOHARSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3797
