Appeal No. 2006-1526
Application No. 09/861,815
a plurality of sensors positioned at such location, and, further, does not appear to
be interested in position or bend information at the proximal end of the catheter.
Schulz is directed to a hybrid light and non-light tracking system for
tracking the 3-dimensional position of a probe or other rigid body. By
incorporating both light sensors (markers 24) and non-light sensors, such as
angular and linear accelerometers 34 and 31, Schulz “combines the precision and
robustness of light based tracking with another tracking system that does not have
the ‘line of sight’ limitations” (p. 5). The examiner finds that Schulz discloses a
plurality of optical sensors 24 at the proximal end of the probe and determines that
it would have been obvious at the time of appellants’ invention to modify the
position-sensing system of Shlomo to include an auxiliary light based tracking
system using a plurality of light emitting markers as taught by Schulz to provide
more accurate and robust tracking of slight movements, and/or for recalibration of
the instrument (answer, p. 3).
Even assuming that Schulz does disclose a plurality of markers 24 at the
proximal end of the probe, we find no suggestion in the combined teachings of
Schulz and Shlomo to position a plurality of such sensors at the proximal end of
the Shlomo catheter. While the recognition by Schulz of the advantages of a
hybrid light based and non-light based tracking system would appear to have been
generally applicable to Shlomo’s position-responsive catheter, Shlomo does not
indicate any interest in measuring the position of the proximal end of the catheter
but, rather, appears to be exclusively interested in the generally distal portion of the
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007