Office Action 1: Non-Final Rejection (2024-10-23)
Rejection types: 103 - Obviousness, Double Patenting

CLAIMS:
IN THE CLAIMS

Client Ref. No. VRB5085USCNT2

1\. (currently amended) A surgical robotic system, comprising:a tool drive to be coupled to a distal end of a surgical robotic arm, the tool drive comprising a docking interface to receive a trocar and configured to secure an attachment portion of the trocar to the docking interface;
one or more sensors operable to visually sense a surface feature of the trocar as image data; and
one or more processors configured to determine a position of the troca , andsignal a plurality of actuators in the arm to guide the robotic arm so that the tool drive, coupled to the distal end of the arm, is guided toward the determined position of the trocar along a pre-determined path that is generated independently of the image data.

2\. (currently amended) The surgical robotic system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to generate a planned trajectory that includes the pre-determined path, wherein the planned traj ectory starts from a known pose of the docking interface to the determined position of the trocar, wherein the planned trajectory is generated based on i) a log of prior movements of the arm and ii) signals received from a plurality of force or torque sensors in the arm,and guide the robotic arm along the planned trajectory.

3\. (original) The surgical robotic system of claim 2, wherein the one or more processors are configured to guide the robotic arm by controlling the plurality of actuators to automatically drive the arm along the planned trajectory.

4\. (original) The surgical robotic system of claim 2, wherein the one or more processors are configured to guide the robotic arm by controlling the plurality of actuators to assist an operator who is manually forcing the arm.

5\. (original) The surgical robotic system of claim 2, wherein the one or more processors are configured to control the plurality of actuators to resist an operator's manual forcing of the robotic arm when the operator's manual forcing is directing the robotic arm away from the planned trajectory.

6\. (original) The surgical robotic system of claim 5, wherein the actuators controlled by the one or more processors resist an operator's manual guidance of the robotic arm away from the planned trajectory with a force that is proportional to a distance between the robotic arm and the planned trajectory.

7\. (original) The surgical robotic system of claim 2 wherein the planned trajectory avoids collision of the robotic arm with one or more of a patient, a table on which the patient rests, bedside staff, a cable, a pipe, and other surgical robotic arms.

8\. (original) The surgical robotic system of claim 1, wherein the arm comprises a switch that when manually actuated by an operator changes a mode of operation between a first mode in which the one or more processors guide the robotic arm under admittance control of the actuators, and a second mode in which the one or more processors control the actuators to enable fully manual guidance of the robotic arm.

9\. (currently amended) The surgical robotic system of claim 1, wherein the trocar has been inserted into a body of a patient on a table,and the one or more processors determine the position of the trocar by computing a location of a head of the trocar using a physical model having knowledge of a type of surgery, a size of the patient, a location and an orientation of the patient on the table, and a location of the trocar as inserted into the patient .

10\. (currently amended) The surgical robotic system of claim 9 wherein the one or more processors are configured to

a) generate a planned trajectory that includes the pre-determined path, wherein the planned trajectory starts from a first, known position of the docking interface to a second position of the docking interface, wherein the second position is closer to the determined position of the trocar than the first, known position, the planned trajectory computed by the one or more processors based on i) a log of prior movements of the arm and ii) signals received from a plurality of force or torque sensors in the arm, and
b) guide the robotic arm along the planned trajectory , .

11\. (currently amended) The surgical robotic system of claim 10 wherein the one or more processors are configured to respond to the second position of the docking interface having been reached by providing an alert or feedback to an operator of the system, the system further comprising a switch that, when actuated, signals the processor to i) activate the one or more sensors, ii) determine the position of the trocar based on the visually sensed surface feature, or iii) guide the robotic arm toward the position of the trocar that is determined based on the visually sensed surface feature.

12\. (original) The surgical robotic system of claim 1, wherein the one or more sensors are disposed in the docking interface.

13\. (original) The surgical robotic system of claim 12, wherein the docking interface comprises a sterile adapter coupled to a frontal portion thereof, the one or more sensors being mounted on the sterile adapter.

14\. (currently amended) A method for docking a robotic arm of a surgical robotic system to a trocar, the method comprising:

determining, by one or more processors, a position of the trocarby computing a location of a head of the trocar using a physical model having knowledge of a type of surgery, a size of a patient on a table, a location and an orientation of the patient on the table, and a location of the trocar as inserted into the patien ;
calculating, by the one or more processors, a planned trajectory from a known pose of the docking interface to the determined position of the trocar, wherein the planned trajectory is calculated based on i) a log of prior movements of the arm and ii) signals received from a plurality of force or torque sensors in the arm; and
driving, by the one or more processors, a plurality of actuators in the robotic arm to guide the docking interface along the planned trajectory .
15\. (original) The method of claim 14, further comprising determining, by the one or more processors, a distance between the docking interface and the planned trajectory, and controlling the plurality of actuators in the robotic arm to guide the robotic arm toward the planned trajectory based on the distance.
16\. (original) The method of claim 14, further comprising determining, by the processor, a component of a manual force applied by an operator on the robotic arm in the direction of the planned trajectory, and controlling the plurality of actuators in the robotic arm to guide the robotic arm along the planned trajectory based on the component of the manual force applied by the operator along the planned trajectory.
17\. (original) The method of claim 16, wherein the processor controls the plurality of actuators in the robotic arm to guide the robotic arm along the planned trajectory with a force determined by a product of i) the component of the manual force applied by the operator along the planned trajectory and ii) a predetermined scalar value.

18\. (original) The method of claim 14, further comprising determining, by the processor, a component of a manual force applied by an operator on the robotic arm in a direction away from a direction of the planned trajectory, and controlling the plurality of actuators in the robotic arm to drive the robotic arm toward the planned trajectory based on the component of the manual force applied by the operator in the direction away from the planned trajectory.
19\. (original) The method of claim 18, wherein the processor controls the plurality of actuators in the robotic arm to drive the robotic arm toward the planned trajectory with a force determined by a product of i) the component of the manual force applied by the operator in the direction away from the planned trajectory and ii) a predetermined scalar value.
20\. (currently amended) The method of claim 14, further comprising:
producing, by one or more sensors operable to visually sense a surface feature of the trocar, an image of the surface feature of the trocar, wherein the one or more sensors are part of a camera on the arm, and the one or more processors control the plurality of actuators in the robotic arm to maintain the surface feature at a center of a field of view of the camera while the arm moves along the planned trajectory.

OFFICE ACTION:
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 .  Pursuant to communications filed on 21 February 2024, this is a First Action Non-Final Rejection on the Merits.  Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 13 March 2024 and 01 May 2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.  Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) have been considered by the Examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA  as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 9, 12 and 13 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 9-10 and 12-13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,911,910 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are coextensive in scope to the allowed claims and would fully be encompassed and/or anticipated by the issued U.S. Patent.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant provides similar limitations as in claim 2 of the issued U.S. Patent, wherein both of the respective claim(s) include (similar limitations provided in bold):
A surgical robotic system, comprising:
a tool drive to be coupled to a distal end of a surgical robotic arm, the tool drive comprising a docking interface to receive a trocar and configured to secure an attachment portion of the trocar to the docking interface;
one or more sensors operable to visually sense a surface feature of the trocar as image data; and
one or more processors configured to
determine a position (location) of the trocar, and
signal a plurality of actuators in the arm to guide the robotic arm so that the tool drive, coupled to the distal end of the arm, is guided toward the determined position of the trocar along a pre-determined path that is generated independently of the image data.
Although conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because removing inherent and/or unnecessary limitation(s)/step(s) or adding an element and its function would be within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art. It is well settled that the adding or deleting of an element and its function(s) in the claim of the present application are an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA 1963). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App. 1969). Omission of a referenced element or step whose function is not needed would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Examiner further notes wherein although the claims are not identical (slightly broader), they are commensurate in scope to the claim limitations provided in the issued U.S. Patent, and likewise would anticipate the currently provided claim limitations.
Regarding claims 9, 12 and 13, Applicant provides similar limitations as provided in at least claims 1-2, 9-10 and 12-13, respectively, of the issued U.S. Patent. Although conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because removing inherent and/or unnecessary limitation(s)/step(s) or adding an element and its function would be within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art. It is well settled that the adding or deleting of an element and its function(s) as in the claims of the present application are an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA 1963). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App. 1969). Omission of a referenced element or step whose function is not needed would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Examiner further notes wherein although the claims are not identical (slightly broader), they are commensurate in scope to the claim limitations provided in the issued U.S. Patent, and likewise would anticipate the currently provided claim limitations.
Claims 1, 8, 12 and 13 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 8, 12 and 13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,529,734 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are coextensive in scope to the allowed claims and would fully be encompassed and/or anticipated by the issued U.S. Patent.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant provides similar limitations as in claim 2 of the issued U.S. Patent, wherein both of the respective claim(s) include (similar limitations provided in bold):
A surgical robotic system, comprising:
a tool drive to be coupled to a distal end of a surgical robotic arm, the tool drive comprising a docking interface to receive a trocar and configured to move to and configured to secure an attachment portion of the trocar to the docking interface;
one or more sensors operable to visually sense a surface feature of the trocar as image data; and
one or more processors configured to
determine a position of the trocar, and
signal a plurality of actuators in the arm to guide the robotic arm so that the tool drive, coupled to the distal end of the arm, is guided toward the determined position of the trocar along a pre-determined path that is generated independently of the image data.
Although conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because removing inherent and/or unnecessary limitation(s)/step(s) or adding an element and its function would be within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art. It is well settled that the adding or deleting of an element and its function(s) in the claim of the present application are an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA 1963). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App. 1969). Omission of a referenced element or step whose function is not needed would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Examiner further notes wherein although the claims are not identical (slightly broader), they are commensurate in scope to the claim limitations provided in the issued U.S. Patent, and likewise would anticipate the currently provided claim limitations.
Regarding claims 8, 12 and 13, Applicant provides similar limitations as provided in at least claims 1-2, 8 and 12-13, respectively, of the issued U.S. Patent. Although conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because removing inherent and/or unnecessary limitation(s)/step(s) or adding an element and its function would be within the level of one of ordinary skill in the art. It is well settled that the adding or deleting of an element and its function(s) as in the claims of the present application are an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA 1963). Also note Ex parte Rainu, 168 USPQ 375 (Bd. App. 1969). Omission of a referenced element or step whose function is not needed would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Examiner further notes wherein although the claims are not identical (slightly broader), they are commensurate in scope to the claim limitations provided in the issued U.S. Patent, and likewise would anticipate the currently provided claim limitations.
Examiner notes wherein the nonstatutory double patenting rejection(s) provided herein would be overcome with a timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA  as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
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.
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) 1, 8, 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson et al (US 2019/0321115 A1, hereinafter Anderson).
Regarding claim 1, Anderson teaches a surgical robotic system (Figure 1, robotic surgical system 100; at least as in paragraph 0048), comprising:
a tool drive (Figure 2A-B, tool driver 220) to be coupled to a distal end of a surgical robotic arm (Figures 2A & 18A-B, robotic arm 210, 1804), the tool drive comprising a docking interface to receive a trocar (Figures 18A-B, instrument 1840, wherein said instrument may be a cannula or trocar) and configured to secure an attachment portion of the trocar to the docking interface (Figures 1-2C & 18A-B; at least as in paragraphs 0053-0056, 0110-0112 and 0115);
one or more sensors (Figure 3, tracking element 370) operable to visually sense a surface feature of the trocar as image data (Figures 2A-3 & 17A-18B; at least as in paragraphs 0058-0059, 0066-0068, 0095, 0104, 0110-0112 and 0115); and
one or more processors (at least as disclosed in paragraph 0093) configured to determine a position of the trocar, and signal a plurality of actuators in the arm to guide the robotic arm so that the tool drive, coupled to the distal end of the arm, is guided toward the determined position of the trocar along a pre-determined path that is generated independently of the image data (Figures 1-3 & 17A-18B; at least as in paragraphs 0053-0056, 0066-0068, 0093-0095, 0110-0112 and 0115).
Anderson differs from the instant invention regarding the structure/arrangement of said docking interface.  Examiner contends wherein it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide the claimed arrangement, since Applicant has not disclosed that the claimed arrangement solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with the system/method of Anderson, and a rearrangement of parts of a system only requires routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 8, Anderson further discloses wherein the arm comprises a switch that when manually actuated by an operator changes a mode of operation between a first mode in which the one or more processors guide the robotic arm under admittance control of the actuators, and a second mode in which the one or more processors control the actuators to enable fully manual guidance of the robotic arm (Figures 18A-B; at least as in paragraphs 0101-0104 and 0110-0115, wherein multiple control modes are provided with the robotic surgical system).
Regarding claim 12, Anderson further teaches wherein the one or more sensors are disposed in the docking interface (Figures 2A-3 & 17A-18B; at least as in paragraphs 0058-0059, 0066-0068, 0095, 0104, 0110-0112 and 0115).  Examiner additionally notes, for similar reasons provided with respect to claim 1 above, wherein the position of the sensor is merely a design choice practices within general knowledge in the relevant field of the art.
Regarding claim 13, Anderson is silent regarding wherein the docking interface comprises a sterile adapter coupled to a frontal portion thereof, the one or more sensors being mounted on the sterile adapter. However, Examiner contends wherein it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide a sterile adapter with the surgical robotic system since sterile adapters are well known and commonly used in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7 and 9-11 are 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.
Claims 14-20 are allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892 – Notice of References Cited form.  Examiner additionally notes the following references, in the same field of endeavor as the instant invention, and also reads on many of the claim limitations of the instant invention;
US 2018/0168746 A1, issued to Swayze et al, which is directed towards methods and devices for attaching a trocar to a surgical arm.
US 2016/0100898 A1, issued to Jinno et al, which is directed towards a method for controlling a medical manipulator including a trocar.
US 2020/0268453 A1, issued to Fuerst et al, which is directed towards systems and methods for magnetic sensing and docking with a trocar.


NEXT OFFICE ACTION: DETAILED ACTION
REASONS FOR ALLOWANCE
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art fails to teach,
“one or more processors configured to determine a position of the trocar,
generate a planned trajectory that includes a pre-determined path generated independently of the image data, wherein the planned trajectory starts from a known pose of the docking interface to the determined position of the trocar and is generated based on i) a log of prior movements of the surgical robotic arm and ii) signals received from a plurality of force or torque sensors in the surgical robotic arm, and
signal a plurality of actuators in the arm to guide the robotic arm so that the tool drive, coupled to the distal end of the arm, is guided toward the determined position of the trocar along the pre-determined path”, which provides an improved method/system for facilitating a more efficient mechanical attachment between a robotic arm/tool and a trocar of a surgical robotic system.
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

CITED REFERENCE SUMMARIES: Ref US20190321115A1: Claims:
An apparatus comprising: a base configured to couple to a patient at a preliminary port location for a robotic arm; a member coupled to the base and comprising a first end and a second end opposite the first end; and at least one tracking element coupled to the member, wherein the at least one tracking element is configured to allow tracking of the member relative to the preliminary port location.
a base configured to couple to a patient at a preliminary port location for a robotic arm;
a member coupled to the base and comprising a first end and a second end opposite the first end; and
at least one tracking element coupled to the member, wherein the at least one tracking element is configured to allow tracking of the member relative to the preliminary port location.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the base is configured to be coupled to the patient via at least one of suction or an adhesive material.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the member is coupled to the base via a flexible joint, the flexible joint being configured such that the member is pivotable relative to the base.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the member is rotationally fixed relative to the base.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the at least one tracking element is disposed on the second end of the member.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the at least one tracking element comprises infrared reflective material.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the at least one tracking element comprises an electromagnetic transmitter.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the at least one tracking element comprises a plurality of tracking elements arranged in a pattern.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the base and the member collectively define a lumen such that, when the base is disposed on the patient, a marking element can be inserted through the lumen to contact the patient.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the member is transitionable between an extended configuration and a compressed configuration and the apparatus further comprises a marking element engaged with the member, such that when the base is coupled to the patient, the marking element is spaced apart from the patient when the member is in the extended configuration and the marking element is in contact with the patient when the member is in the compressed configuration.
A method comprising: receiving the location of at least one tracking element associated with a port placement guide positioned at a preliminary port location on a patient; analyzing a workspace around the preliminary port location based at least in part on the received location of the at least one tracking element; associating a port location with the preliminary port location based at least in part on the analysis of the workspace around the preliminary port location; registering a distal end of a robotic arm to the port location; and manipulating the distal end of the robotic arm toward the port location.
receiving the location of at least one tracking element associated with a port placement guide positioned at a preliminary port location on a patient;
analyzing a workspace around the preliminary port location based at least in part on the received location of the at least one tracking element;
associating a port location with the preliminary port location based at least in part on the analysis of the workspace around the preliminary port location;
registering a distal end of a robotic arm to the port location; and
manipulating the distal end of the robotic arm toward the port location.
The method of claim 11 , wherein analyzing comprises assessing the preliminary port location relative to at least one of an anatomical feature of the patient and an access location associated with an intended procedure.
The method of claim 11 , wherein the preliminary port location is a first preliminary port location and the port location is a first port location, wherein analyzing comprises assessing at least one of a location of a second robotic arm, the location of a second preliminary port location, and the location of a second port location.
The method of claim 11 , wherein the preliminary port location is a first preliminary port location and the port location is a first port location, further comprising receiving a second location associated with the port placement guide positioned at a second preliminary port location on the patient.
The method of claim 11 , wherein manipulating the distal end of the robotic arm comprises automatically controlling the robotic arm via a trajectory following algorithm.
The method of claim 11 , wherein manipulating the distal end of the robotic arm comprises assistively controlling the robotic arm via one or more virtual fixtures.
A method comprising: positioning a port placement guide at a preliminary port location on a patient, the port placement guide comprising a base configured to be coupled to the patient and a member coupled to the base; identifying a port location for a robotic arm based at least in part on an analysis of a workspace around the preliminary port location; removing the port placement guide from the preliminary port location; and moving the robotic arm toward the port location.
positioning a port placement guide at a preliminary port location on a patient, the port placement guide comprising a base configured to be coupled to the patient and a member coupled to the base;
identifying a port location for a robotic arm based at least in part on an analysis of a workspace around the preliminary port location;
removing the port placement guide from the preliminary port location; and
moving the robotic arm toward the port location.
The method of claim 17 , further comprising repositioning the port placement guide at a second preliminary port location.
The method of claim 17 , further comprising: creating an incision at the port location; partially inserting a medical instrument through the port location; and coupling the distal end of the robotic arm to the medical instrument.
creating an incision at the port location;
partially inserting a medical instrument through the port location; and
coupling the distal end of the robotic arm to the medical instrument.
The method of claim 17 , further comprising: marking the patient surface at the port location via translating a marking element through a lumen defined by the port placement guide.
marking the patient surface at the port location via translating a marking element through a lumen defined by the port placement guide.
Ref US20190053824A1: Claims:
An apparatus for attaching a cannula to a robotic surgical system, the apparatus comprising: a first clamp component configured to pivot between an open position and a closed position; a second clamp component spaced from the first clamp component, the first and second clamp components defining a region configured to receive a portion of the cannula, the first and second clamp components configured to retain the portion of the cannula in the region when the first clamp component is in the closed position; a locking component coupled to the first clamp component and configured to pivot the first clamp component between the open position and the closed position; and a locating structure disposed on at least one of the first clamp component and the second clamp component configured to mate with a corresponding structure disposed on the portion of the cannula.
a first clamp component configured to pivot between an open position and a closed position;
a second clamp component spaced from the first clamp component, the first and second clamp components defining a region configured to receive a portion of the cannula, the first and second clamp components configured to retain the portion of the cannula in the region when the first clamp component is in the closed position;
a locking component coupled to the first clamp component and configured to pivot the first clamp component between the open position and the closed position; and
a locating structure disposed on at least one of the first clamp component and the second clamp component configured to mate with a corresponding structure disposed on the portion of the cannula.
The apparatus of claim 1 , further comprising a sterile barrier configured to separate the first and second clamp components from the cannula when the portion of the cannula is received in the region.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the locking component is configured to pivot between an unlocked position in which the locking component positions the first clamp component in the open position and a locked over-center position in which the locking component positions the first clamp component in the closed position
The apparatus of claim 3 , wherein the locking component is configured to lock the first clamp component in the closed position when the locking component is in the locked over-center position.
The apparatus of claim 3 , wherein the first clamp component has a slot formed therein, the slot extending along a partial length of the first clamp component.
The apparatus of claim 5 , wherein the locking component includes a first end and a second end, the first end movable along a length of the slot formed in the first clamp component, the second end configured to be moved to pivot the locking component between the unlocked position and the locked over-center position.
The apparatus of claim 6 , wherein the first end of the locking component moves in a first direction along the slot when the locking component pivots from the unlocked position to the locked over-center position, wherein the first end of the locking component moves in a second direction along the slot opposite to the first direction when the locking component pivots from the locked over-center position to the unlocked position.
wherein the first end of the locking component moves in a second direction along the slot opposite to the first direction when the locking component pivots from the locked over-center position to the unlocked position.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the locating structure includes at least one tapered surface configured to guide the portion of the cannula into the region between the first and second clamp components in a predefined orientation relative to the first and second clamp components.
The apparatus of claim 8 , wherein the locating structure is configured to latch into the structure disposed on the portion of the cannula and retain the portion of the cannula within the region defined by the first and second clamp components when the first clamp component is in the closed position.
The apparatus of claim 8 , wherein the locating structure includes two tapered surfaces forming a triangular protrusion.
The apparatus of claim 1 , wherein the locating structure is frusto-pyramidal.
The apparatus of claim 1 , further comprising a spring configured to bias the first clamp component in the closed position.
The apparatus of claim 1 , further comprising a support, wherein the support is coupled to the first clamp component via a pivot, wherein the support is further coupled to the second clamp component.
wherein the support is coupled to the first clamp component via a pivot,
wherein the support is further coupled to the second clamp component.
A method, comprising: positioning a locking component of an attachment apparatus for a cannula in an unlocked position, wherein the locking component is operatively coupled to a first clamp component and configured to pivot the first clamp component between an open position and a closed position, wherein the first clamp component is positioned in the open position when the locking component is positioned in the unlocked position; inserting a portion of the cannula into a region between the first clamp component and a second clamp component; and moving the locking component from the unlocked position to a locked over-center position to pivot the first clamp component to the closed position, the first and second clamp components configured to retain the portion of the cannula in the region when the first clamp component is in the closed position.
positioning a locking component of an attachment apparatus for a cannula in an unlocked position, wherein the locking component is operatively coupled to a first clamp component and configured to pivot the first clamp component between an open position and a closed position, wherein the first clamp component is positioned in the open position when the locking component is positioned in the unlocked position;
inserting a portion of the cannula into a region between the first clamp component and a second clamp component; and
moving the locking component from the unlocked position to a locked over-center position to pivot the first clamp component to the closed position, the first and second clamp components configured to retain the portion of the cannula in the region when the first clamp component is in the closed position.
The method of claim 14 , wherein the locking component is configured to pivot between the unlocked position and the locked over-center position.
The method of claim 15 , wherein the locking component is biased toward the locked over-center position when the locking component is in the locked over-center position.
The method of claim 15 , wherein the locking component includes a first end and a second end, the first end movable along a length of a slot formed in the first clamp component, the second end configured to be moved to pivot the locking component between the unlocked position and the locked over-center position.
The method of claim 17 , wherein the first end of the locking component moves in a first direction along the slot when the locking component pivots from the unlocked position to the locked over-center position, and wherein the first end of the locking component moves in a second direction along the slot opposite to the first direction when the locking component pivots from the locked over-center position to the unlocked position.
The method of claim 14 , wherein the cannula is inserted into the region in a predefined orientation in which a locating structure disposed on at least one of the first clamp component and the second clamp component mates with a corresponding structure disposed on the portion of the cannula.
The method of claim 19 , wherein the locating structure includes a first tapered surface and a second tapered surface, the first and the second tapered surfaces forming a triangular protrusion, and wherein the triangular protrusion is configured to latch into the portion of the cannula and retain the portion of the cannula within the region defined by the first and second clamp components when the first clamp component is in the closed position.
wherein the triangular protrusion is configured to latch into the portion of the cannula and retain the portion of the cannula within the region defined by the first and second clamp components when the first clamp component is in the closed position.
Ref US20180168746A1: Claims:
A surgical system, comprising: a trocar having a housing and a cannula extending distally from the housing, the housing and the cannula defining a tool pathway extending therethrough for receiving a tool; and a trocar support configured to be mounted on a distal end of a surgical robotic arm, the trocar being configured to have a first position in which the trocar is coupled to the support being configured to engage the trocar in a first configuration that allows free movement of the trocar relative to the trocar support, and in a second configuration in which the trocar is locked in a fixed position relative to the trocar support.
a trocar having a housing and a cannula extending distally from the housing, the housing and the cannula defining a tool pathway extending therethrough for receiving a tool; and
a trocar support configured to be mounted on a distal end of a surgical robotic arm, the trocar being configured to have a first position in which the trocar is coupled to the support being configured to engage the trocar in a first configuration that allows free movement of the trocar relative to the trocar support, and in a second configuration in which the trocar is locked in a fixed position relative to the trocar support.
The system of claim 1 , wherein the trocar support includes a latch configured to move the trocar support between the first and the second configurations.
The system of claim 2 , wherein the latch is slidable to move the trocar support between the first configuration and the second configuration.
The system of claim 2 , wherein the latch pivots to move the trocar support between the first configuration and the second configuration.
The system of claim 2 , wherein the latch is biased to one of the first and second configurations.
The system of claim 1 , wherein the trocar support is configured to automatically engage the trocar in the first configuration when the trocar is mounted onto the trocar support.
The system of claim 1 , wherein the trocar support includes a receiver having a shape that corresponds to a protrusion formed on the trocar for mating the trocar to the trocar support.
The system of claim 1 , wherein the trocar is freely rotatable relative to the support in the first configuration.
The system of claim 1 , wherein the trocar support includes a linkage assembly for mating the trocar to the trocar support in at least one of the first and second configurations.
The system of claim 1 , wherein the trocar support in the first configuration is configured to prevent axial movement of the trocar along a longitudinal axis of the trocar.
The system of claim 1 , further comprising a robotic arm having the trocar support mated thereto.
A surgical system, comprising: a trocar having a housing and a cannula extending distally from the housing, the housing and the cannula defining a tool pathway extending therethrough for receiving a tool, the trocar having a mating element formed thereon; and a trocar support configured to be mounted on a distal end of a surgical robotic arm and having at least one receiving feature thereon, the trocar being configured to freely rotatably mate to the trocar support when the mating element is seated within the receiving feature of the trocar support, and the trocar support having a lock configured to engage and prevent movement of the trocar relative to the trocar support.
a trocar having a housing and a cannula extending distally from the housing, the housing and the cannula defining a tool pathway extending therethrough for receiving a tool, the trocar having a mating element formed thereon; and
a trocar support configured to be mounted on a distal end of a surgical robotic arm and having at least one receiving feature thereon, the trocar being configured to freely rotatably mate to the trocar support when the mating element is seated within the receiving feature of the trocar support, and the trocar support having a lock configured to engage and prevent movement of the trocar relative to the trocar support.
The system of claim 12 , wherein the mating element and the receiving feature comprise corresponding double dove tail pieces.
The system of claim 12 , wherein the trocar is configured to be locked relative to the trocar support by pivoting the trocar relative to the trocar support.
The system of claim 12 , further comprising alignment features on the trocar and the trocar support for aligning the trocar relative to the trocar support.
The system of claim 12 , wherein the receiving feature is selected from the group consisting of a set of jaws, a sliding block, a hook, and a clamp.
A surgical system, comprising: a trocar having a housing and a cannula extending distally from the housing, the housing and the cannula defining a tool pathway extending therethrough for receiving a tool, the trocar having a mating element formed thereon; an
[Truncated to input limit]