DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the communication received on November 10, 2025 concerning application No. 16/485,866 filed on August 13, 2019.
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 16, 19-21, 23, 25 and 29-34 are currently pending.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on November 10, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to the applicant’s arguments that “the claims have been amended to more clearly distinguish the claims over the prior art of record”, examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed below in the rejection the claim amendments do not distinguish the claims over the prior art. The claims as presently filed are patentably indistinct from the previously filed claim set.
Claim Objections
Claims 6, 21, and 34 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 6, 21, and 34, line 3, “each of a plurality of the pre-defined selections” should read “each of the plurality of pre-defined selections” because the claims from which claims 6, 21, and 34 depend previously recite “a plurality of pre-defined selections”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 6, 21 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 6, 21 and 34 recite the limitation “periodically compare the tracked depth position of the medical device to the particular focus depth of each of a plurality of the pre-defined selections” which contains subject matter that was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the art that the inventor has possession of the claimed invention at the time the application was filed. Pg. 15, lines 14-17 of the present applications specification discloses “the current detected needle tip depth is compared to the current transmit focus depth. This comparison is preferably done periodically”. The specification does not disclose that the tracked depth position of the needle tip is compared to “the particular focus depth of each of a plurality of the pre-defined selections” as recited in the claim, but instead only compares the current detected needle tip depth to the current transmit focus depth. For at least the above reasons the above recited limitation of claims 6, 21 and 34 are considered new matter. Additionally, see pgs. 3-4 of the Patent Board Decision dated 09/09/2025.
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 1-2, 4-6, 8, 16, 19-21, 23, 25 and 29-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tahmasebi Maraghoosh et al. (US 2015/0342572, as cited in the Applicant’s 8/13/2019 IDS, hereinafter Tahmasebi) in view of Lin et al. (US 20130053687), Vignon et al. (US 2016/0324501, hereinafter Vignon) and Mo (US 6123670).
Regarding claim 1, Tahmasebi teaches an ultrasound system for setting a probe characteristic (abstract and step 880 in fig. 8), the system comprising:
a probe (330 in fig. 3) having a transducer array ([0042], lines 1-2, “acoustic probe 330 includes a plurality of acoustic transducers”); and
at least one processor (the electronic circuitry of arrangement 300 in fig. 3) configured to:
receive a plurality of selections for a beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic of the probe ([0054] and fig. 7 disclose the acoustic imaging system 320 adjusts the focal zone to a first focal depth and then to a second focal depth meaning a plurality of selections for the focal depth (beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic) is received), each of the selections including settings that comprise optimized parameters for imaging a medical device at a particular focus depth ([0042] discloses electrical signals are applied to the acoustic transducers and “by controlling the relative magnitudes and phases of these electrical signals…to steer the direction and focal depth of the transmitted acoustic beam to a desired focal zone” meaning each of the focal depth selections includes settings that optimizes parameters for imaging a medical device at a particular focus depth. [0054] discloses the focal zones (depths) correspond to the position of a needle 20),
track a depth position of the medical device (20 in fig. 3) within an image field ([0050]-[0053] describe the process of generating acoustic images which track the location of the medical device within a region of interest which is used to obtain the desired depth of focus which is the depth of the medical device. The tracking system includes an electromagnetic tracking system),
select a focus depth corresponding to the tracked depth position of the medical device ([0054] “as tip 21 of needle 20 is moved to a second position…acoustic imaging system 320 automatically adjusts the acoustic beam to have its focal zone at the second position”), and
automatically set the beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic of the probe to a selection, from the plurality of selections, that corresponds to the selected focus depth ([0054] “as tip 21 of needle 20 is moved to a second position…acoustic imaging system 320 automatically adjusts the acoustic beam to have its focal zone at the second position”. The system 320 is selecting the second position over the first position), including setting a parameter of the probe to control the selected focus depth ([0042 discloses the electrical signals (parameters) being sent to the probe are adjusted to transmit the acoustic beam to the desired focal depth. Additionally, step 880 in fig. 8 and [0063] discloses the beam parameters are automatically adjusted).
Tahmasebi does not specifically teach the plurality of selections are pre-defined selections and include pre-defined settings that comprise optimized parameters for imaging a medical device at a particular focus depth.
However,
Lin in a similar field of endeavor teaches the plurality of selections are pre-defined selections ([0060] discloses the apparatus 600 communicates with a memory that stores a table, “the table comprises a plurality of predefined depth values…and a plurality of predefined ultrasound working frequencies respectively corresponding to each of the plurality of predefined depth values” by having access to the table the processor is configured to receive the plurality of predefined selections) and include pre-defined settings that comprise optimized parameters for imaging a medical device at a particular focus depth ([0060] discloses “the table comprises a plurality of predefined depth values…and a plurality of predefined ultrasound working frequencies respectively corresponding to each of the plurality of predefined depth values” and the table stores “the ultrasound working frequency for needle frame collection based on the set scanning depth”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the ultrasound system disclosed by Tahmasebi to have the plurality of selections be pre-defined selections and include pre-defined settings that comprise optimized parameters for imaging the medical device at a particular focus depth. The motivation to make this modification is to improve the work flow of needle guidance and save the latency time, as recognized by Lin ([0044]).
Tahmasebi in view of Lin does not specifically teach the depth position of the medical device is tracked based on responses of an acoustic sensor on the medical device to signals from the transducer array.
However,
Vignon in a similar field of endeavor teaches tracking the depth position of the medical device based on responses of an acoustic sensor on the medical device to signals from the transducer array ([0001], lines 7-12, “the present invention specifically relates to acoustic sensors spatially aligned relative to the interventional tool (e.g., attached to or embedded in a distal tip of a needle or a catheter) for facilitating the relative alignment and position tracking of the interventional tool to the acoustic image plane”. [0032] discloses the position is determined by obtaining the amplitude of the received beams at the sensor 31 in fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the electromagnetic sensor of Tahmasebi in view of Lin for the acoustic sensor of Vignon because it amounts to simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain the predictable results of tracking the position of the medical device.
Tahmasebi in view of Lin and Vignon does not specifically teach the setting of the beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic includes setting beamforming of the transducer array, aperture, and time phasing pulse parameters of the probe to control the focus depth.
However,
Mo in a similar field of endeavor teaches adjusting the focus depth includes setting beamforming of the transducer array, aperture, and time phasing pulse parameters of the probe to control the focus depth (col. 1, lines 13-32 discloses “by selecting the time delay (or phase) and amplitude of the applied voltages, the individual transducer elements in given row can be controlled to…form a net ultrasonic wave…is focused at a selected point along the beam” and “the beamforming parameters of each of the firings may be varied to provide a change in maximum focus…the focal point of each beam being shifted relative to the focal point of the previous beam”. Additionally, col. 7, lines 18-19 discloses “the axial length of the transmit focal zone is a function of the width of the transmit aperture. Also see, col. 6, lines 53-63 for the aperture adjustment. Therefore in order to transmit the ultrasound beam to the correct focus depth, the beamforming of the transducer array, aperture, and time phasing pulse parameters of the probe must be adjusted together.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the ultrasound system disclosed by Tahmasebi in view of Lin and Vignon to have the adjusting of the focus depth include setting beamforming of the transducer array, aperture, and time phasing pulse parameters of the probe to control the focus depth. The motivation to apply the known technique of adjusting the focus depth includes setting beamforming of the transducer array, aperture, and time phasing pulse parameters of the probe to control the focus depth of Mo to the system of Tahmasebi in view of Lin and Vignon would be to allow for the predictable results of ensuring the ultrasound wave is transmitted to the correct focal depth while maintaining an appropriate image quality.
Regarding claims 16 and 31, Tahmasebi teaches a method for setting a probe characteristic (abstract and step 880 in fig. 8) and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored a computer program comprising instructions ([0055] discloses the method 800 is executed using arrangement 300 which represents the processor, therefore the method must be stored within), which, when executed by a processor, the method comprises and instructions cause the processor to:
receiving a plurality of selections for a beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic of the probe ([0054] and fig. 7 disclose the acoustic imaging system 320 adjusts the focal zone to a first focal depth and then to a second focal depth meaning a plurality of selections for the focal depth (beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic) is received), each of the selections including settings that comprise optimized parameters for imaging a medical device at a particular focus depth ([0042] discloses electrical signals are applied to the acoustic transducers and “by controlling the relative magnitudes and phases of these electrical signals…to steer the direction and focal depth of the transmitted acoustic beam to a desired focal zone” meaning each of the focal depth selections includes settings that optimizes parameters for imaging a medical device at a particular focus depth. [0054] discloses the focal zones (depths) correspond to the position of a needle 20),
tracking a depth position of the medical device (20 in fig. 3) within an image field ([0050]-[0053] describe the process of generating acoustic images which track the location of the medical device within a region of interest which is used to obtain the desired depth of focus which is the depth of the medical device. The tracking system includes an electromagnetic tracking system),
selecting a focus depth corresponding to the tracked depth position of the medical device ([0054] “as tip 21 of needle 20 is moved to a second position…acoustic imaging system 320 automatically adjusts the acoustic beam to have its focal zone at the second position”), and
automatically set the beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic of the probe to a selection, from the plurality of selections, that corresponds to the selected focus depth ([0054] “as tip 21 of needle 20 is moved to a second position…acoustic imaging system 320 automatically adjusts the acoustic beam to have its focal zone at the second position”. The system 320 is selecting the second position over the first position), including setting a parameter of the probe to control the selected focus depth ([0042 discloses the electrical signals (parameters) being sent to the probe are adjusted to transmit the acoustic beam to the desired focal depth. Additionally, step 880 in fig. 8 and [0063] discloses the beam parameters are automatically adjusted).
Tahmasebi does not specifically teach the plurality of selections are pre-defined selections and include pre-defined settings that comprise optimized parameters for imaging a medical device at a particular focus depth.
However,
Lin in a similar field of endeavor teaches the plurality of selections are pre-defined selections ([0060] discloses the apparatus 600 communicates with a memory that stores a table, “the table comprises a plurality of predefined depth values…and a plurality of predefined ultrasound working frequencies respectively corresponding to each of the plurality of predefined depth values” by having access to the table the processor is configured to receive the plurality of predefined selections) and include pre-defined settings that comprise optimized parameters for imaging a medical device at a particular focus depth ([0060] discloses “the table comprises a plurality of predefined depth values…and a plurality of predefined ultrasound working frequencies respectively corresponding to each of the plurality of predefined depth values” and the table stores “the ultrasound working frequency for needle frame collection based on the set scanning depth”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method and non-transitory computer-readable medium disclosed by Tahmasebi to have the plurality of selections be pre-defined selections and include pre-defined settings that comprise optimized parameters for imaging the medical device at a particular focus depth. The motivation to make this modification is to improve the work flow of needle guidance and save the latency time, as recognized by Lin ([0044]).
Tahmasebi in view of Lin does not specifically teach the depth position of the medical device is tracked based on responses of an acoustic sensor on the medical device to signals from the transducer array.
However,
Vignon in a similar field of endeavor teaches tracking the depth position of the medical device based on responses of an acoustic sensor on the medical device to signals from the transducer array ([0001], lines 7-12, “the present invention specifically relates to acoustic sensors spatially aligned relative to the interventional tool (e.g., attached to or embedded in a distal tip of a needle or a catheter) for facilitating the relative alignment and position tracking of the interventional tool to the acoustic image plane”. [0032] discloses the position is determined by obtaining the amplitude of the received beams at the sensor 31 in fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the electromagnetic sensor of Tahmasebi in view of Lin for the acoustic sensor of Vignon because it amounts to simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain the predictable results of tracking the position of the medical device.
Tahmasebi in view of Lin and Vignon does not specifically teach the setting of the beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic includes setting beamforming of the transducer array, aperture, and time phasing pulse parameters of the probe to control the focus depth.
However,
Mo in a similar field of endeavor teaches adjusting the focus depth includes setting beamforming of the transducer array, aperture, and time phasing pulse parameters of the probe to control the focus depth (col. 1, lines 13-32 discloses “by selecting the time delay (or phase) and amplitude of the applied voltages, the individual transducer elements in given row can be controlled to…form a net ultrasonic wave…is focused at a selected point along the beam” and “the beamforming parameters of each of the firings may be varied to provide a change in maximum focus…the focal point of each beam being shifted relative to the focal point of the previous beam”. Additionally, col. 7, lines 18-19 discloses “the axial length of the transmit focal zone is a function of the width of the transmit aperture. Also see, col. 6, lines 53-63 for the aperture adjustment. Therefore in order to transmit the ultrasound beam to the correct focus depth, the beamforming of the transducer array, aperture, and time phasing pulse parameters of the probe must be adjusted together.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method and non-transitory computer-readable medium disclosed by Tahmasebi in view of Lin and Vignon to have the adjusting of the focus depth include setting beamforming of the transducer array, aperture, and time phasing pulse parameters of the probe to control the focus depth. The motivation to apply the known technique of adjusting the focus depth includes setting beamforming of the transducer array, aperture, and time phasing pulse parameters of the probe to control the focus depth of Mo to the method and non-transitory computer-readable medium of Tahmasebi in view of Lin and Vignon would be to allow for the predictable results of ensuring the ultrasound wave is transmitted to the correct focal depth while maintaining an appropriate image quality.
Regarding claim 2, Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo teaches the ultrasound system of claim 1, as set forth above. The combination of Tahmasebi and Vignon further teaches the at least one processor is further configured to set the beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic to optimize specificity and strength of a signal received from the acoustic sensor ([0052]-[0053] of Tahmasebi discloses the processor uses the location data obtained from the EM tracking system 310 to determine the location of the tip of the needle and then uses that information to change one of the resolution parameters in order to have the focal depth at the location of the tip of needle. [0032] of Vignon discloses “recording the received amplitude of the signals at transducers 31…increasing amplitude generally means that the sensors 31 are approaching imaging plane 11, whereas decreasing amplitude means that the sensors 31 are going further away from the imaging plane. Thereby moving the imaging plane (focal depth) to the position of the needle tip which corresponds to the position of the acoustic sensor would result in an increased amplitude being measured. Therefore the beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic is being set to optimize specificity and strength of the signal received from the acoustic sensor).
Regarding claims 4, 19 and 32, Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo teaches the ultrasound system of claim 1, method of claim 16 and non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 31, as set forth above. Tahmasebi further teaches the at least one processor is further configured to establish the tracked depth position of the medical device as a depth position of a distal end of the medical device ([0050] discloses “track the location of tip 21 of needle 20”, figs. 3 and 7 show that the tip 21 is located at the distal end of the needle 20 because that is the end that is being inserted first).
Regarding claims 5, 20 and 33, Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo teaches the ultrasound system of claim 1, method of claim 16 and non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 31, as set forth above. Tahmasebi further teaches the at least one processor is further configured to generate at least one of increments and decrements with respect to the selected focus depth based on the tracked depth position of the medical device (as previously described [0050] discloses that the focal depth is adjusted to track the distal end of the medical instrument as it is moved, therefore moving the focal depth either deeper (increment) or more superficially (decrement) to track the instrument).
Regarding claims 6, 21 and 34, Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo teaches the ultrasound system of claim 1, method of claim 16 and non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 31, as set forth above. Tahmasebi further teaches the at least one processor is further configured to periodically compare the tracked depth position of the medical device to the particular focus depth (Fig. 8 and [0064] discloses that the method 800 and the process outlined in [0050]-[0054] is repeated to continually adjust the focus of the acoustic images. Therefore the tracked depth position is periodically compared to the particular focus depth in order to determine whether or not the focus depth needs to be changed).
Lin further teaches the depth position is compared to each of a plurality of the pre-defined selections ([0046] discloses the set scanning depth is searched for within the pre-stored table which comprises each of the plurality of scanning depth. By searching for the set scanning depth within the pre-stored table the system is comparing the set scanning depth to each of the plurality of stored scanning depths to see if any of them are a match. Also see [0049] for when the set scanning depth is not found in the table).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system, method and non-transitory computer-readable medium disclosed by Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo to have the tracked depth position be compared to each of the pre-defined selections. The motivation to apply the known technique of comparing the depth position to each of the pre-defined selections of Lin to the system, method and non-transitory computer-readable medium of Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo would be to allow for the predictable results of ensuring the most accurate pre-defined selection is utilized for the current tracked depth position, thereby ensuring accurate results.
Regarding claims 8 and 23, Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo teaches the ultrasound system of claim 1 and the method of claim 16, as set forth above. Tahmasebi further teaches the at least one processor is further configured to:
determine a depth change of the medical device based on the tracked depth position of the medical device (steps 830-850 in fig. 8 determine the current location of the object and therefore detect whether the depth of the object has changed); and
change the selection set for the beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic of the probe only when the depth change of the medical device exceeds a predetermined threshold ([0050], lines 17-22, “acoustic imaging system 320 to adjust one or more image resolution parameters (e.g. focal length, image depth) of acoustic imaging system 320 to match the real-time location of tip 21 of the medical instrument (e.g., needle 20)”, because the needle is being tracked in real-time any time the needle is being moved from a stationary position it is considered to have a change in depth that exceeds the predetermined threshold because the threshold in this instance is no movement and the focus location will only change if the location of the needle changes).
Regarding claim 25, Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo teaches the ultrasound system of claim 1, as set forth above. Vignon further teaches the signals from the transducer array responded to by the acoustic sensor comprise scan lines generated by the transducer array sweeping across the acoustic sensor ([0032] describes a process of transmitting signals from probe 20 and sensors 31 pick up the signals and record an amplitude of the signals to determine how close the sensors and interventional device are to the imaging plane 11 of probe 20. Having the sensor be able to record an amplitude of the signals moving across the sensor means the signals include scan lines that are swept across the acoustic sensor).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the ultrasound system disclosed by Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo to have the signals from the transducer array responded to by the acoustic sensor comprise scan lines generated by the transducer array sweeping across the acoustic sensor. The motivation to make this modification is to track the position of the medical device, as recognized by Vignon ([0032]).
Regarding claims 29 and 30, Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo teaches the ultrasound system of claim 1 and method of claim 16, as set forth above. Tahmasebi further teaches the at least one processor is configured to change the set selection for the beamformed acoustic pulse characteristic only when a distance between the tracked depth position of the medical device and the selected focal depth is above or below a predetermined distance threshold ([0050], lines 17-22, “acoustic imaging system 320 to adjust one or more image resolution parameters (e.g. focal length, image depth, …) of acoustic imaging system 320 to match the real-time location of tip 21 of the medical instrument (e.g., needle 20)”, because the needle is being tracked in real-time any time the needle is being moved from a stationary position it is considered to have a change in depth that exceeds the predetermined threshold because the threshold in this instance is no movement and the focus location will only change if the location of the needle changes).
Claims 7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Schmiesing et al. (US 6,544,179, hereinafter Schmiesing).
Regarding claim 7, Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo teaches the ultrasound system of claim 1, as set forth above.
Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo does not teach updating the selected focus depth after a fixed number of scan frames.
However,
Schmiesing in a similar field of endeavor teaches updating the focus depth after a fixed number of scan frames (col. 5, lines 29-55, describes a technique which detects an object (anatomical structure) within an image and can either analyze the image data periodically or continuously to track the object over time. If the technique is utilized to periodically analyze the data it would only change the focus after the analysis has concluded and it is well understood that by the analysis occurring periodically it will occur at a fixed interval).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system disclosed by Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo to update the focus depth after a fixed number of scan frames. The motivation to make this modification is in order to track features of the image over time, as recognized by Schmiesing (col. 5, lines 29-55).
Regarding claim 9, Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo teaches the ultrasound system of claim 8, as set forth above.
Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo does not teach wherein the adjustment processor is configured to use hysteresis to prevent oscillation in changing the selected focus depth.
However,
Schmiesing in a similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the processor is configured to use hysteresis to prevent oscillation in changing the focus depth (col. 5, lines 3-5, “using hysteresis or thresholding so that a new focal position is calculated only for relatively large changes in factors used to determine the position of the focal positions”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system disclosed by Tahmasebi in view of Lin, Vignon and Mo to use hysteresis to prevent oscillation in changing the selected focus depth. The motivation to make this modification is in order to reduce jittering of the image, as recognized by Schmiesing (col. 5, lines 3-5).
Conclusion
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW BEGEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-5:00.
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, Keith Raymond can be reached at 5712701790. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANDREW W BEGEMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3798