Appeal No. 2006-1526
Application No. 09/861,815
respective positions articulated by the appellants and the examiner. For the reasons
that follow, we cannot sustain the examiner’s rejection.
Each of appellants’ independent claims 30, 47 and 49 requires a plurality of
optical sensors positioned at the proximal end of the flexible member. Shlomo, the
jumping off point of the rejection, is directed to a flexible elongate medical probe,
a catheter in particular, provided with a position-sensing device, typically near the
catheter’s distal end, that gives rise to signals that are used to determine the
position of the device, and hence the catheter, relative to a frame of reference that
is fixed. The position-sensing device comprises first and second sensors 28, 30
fixed at known positions along a generally distal portion of the length of the
catheter, in known relation to one another and to the distal end. Shlomo teaches
that the catheter, or other probe, may preferably comprise more than two position
sensors and/or bend sensors, which additional sensors may be particularly useful
when a portion of the length of the catheter must be tracked within a convoluted
passage or when the catheter is brought to bear against and is desired to conform to
a convoluted surface within a body cavity. Shlomo emphasizes, however, that the
number of such sensors is held to the minimum needed to achieve the desired
accuracy of determination of the plurality of points along the length of the catheter
(para. bridging cols. 8 and 9). While preferably the first sensor 28, located closest
to the distal end, is a magnetic position sensor, the second sensor may comprise a
bend sensor of the piezoelectric type or fiberoptic type (col. 3, last full para.).
Shlomo does not disclose any sensors at the proximal end of the catheter, let alone
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007