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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/07/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
Information Disclosure Statements (IDS)s submitted on07/07/2026 has been entered and fully considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendment of 03/16/2026 has been entered and fully considered by the examiner.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 19-22, 25, 35, 46-47, and 49 have been amended. Claims 3, 5, 7, 10, 13, 15-18, 24, 26, 31-33, and 36-45 have been canceled. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 19-23, 25, 27-30, 34, 35, and 46-49 are currently pending in the application with claims 1 and 20 being independent.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
scanning mechanism in claims 1 and 20 corresponding to stage and motor [see [0123] of instant specification
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 8, 9, 20-23, 30, 34, 35, 46, 47, and 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2019/0307334) hereinafter “Wang” in view of Tan et al. ("three dimensional photoacoustic imaging via scanning a one dimensional linear unfocused ultrasound array", Optic Express, Vol. 25, No. 7) hereinafter “Tan” and Wiemker et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2012/0081386) hereinafter “Wiemker”.
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a photoacoustic computed tomography (PACT) system [see abstract of Wang; PACT system 1700], comprising:
at least one pulsed or modulated light source configured to generate illumination [pulsed laser source (PRO-350-10-Quanta ray with 10Hz pulse repetition rate; see [0143] and Fig. 45 of Wang]
a ring ultrasonic transducer array [see [0144]; a full ring ultrasound array with 220 mm ring diameter] comprising unfocused transducer elements configured to detect photoacoustic waves induced by the illumination [see [0154] last 4 lines of the paragraph disclosing that all unfocused transducers can be used], each unfocused transducer elements of the ring ultrasonic transducer array having a field of view in an elevational direction along an elevational axis; [see [0152]; even though the elevational FOV of the unfocused ultrasound transducer is not mentioned, it is inherent that they would have a numerical value associated with the FOV in elevational direction]
a scanning mechanism configured to move and/or scan the ring ultrasonic transducer array across a plurality of elevational locations in the elevational direction along the elevational axis. [see [0144] of Wang disclosing a linear stage configured to move the transducer in the elevational direction via an a stainless steel rod which inherently passes through a plurality of elevational directions]
one or more data acquisition systems configured to sample photoacoustic signals [see [0014] of Wang disclosing: “The full-ring transducer array is configured to spatially sample a portion of the plurality of photoacoustic signals originating from within a field of view positioned within the imaging plane.”] based on photoacoustic waves detected by the ring ultrasound transducer array while the scanning mechanism scans the ring ultrasonic transducer array across the plurality of elevational locations; and [see [0144]; the laser’s trigger is used to trigger both data acquisition system and linear scanner together to allow recoding of PA signals within 100usec after each laser pulse excitation].
at least one processor [see [0198]; processor 1720] configure to when executing instructions, perform operations of:
reconstructing a 3D volumetric image using the photoacoustic signals sampled by the one or more data acquisition systems; [[see [0148]-[0149] reconstruction of 2D or 3D images are done; see also [0092] [0094] and [0096] disclosing reconstructing 3D volumetric images using 3D back projection process.]
Wang does not disclose that each transducer elements has a field-of-view in a range of between 5 degrees and 30 degrees in an elevational direction along the elevational axis; and that the processor is configured to, at each of the plurality of elevational locations, determining a voxel of the 3D volumetric image with largest amplitude; forming a maximum amplitude projection (MAP) image based on the determined voxels; determining a depth map based on elevational locations and amplitudes of the determined voxels; transferring the depth map to a color image; and forming a color-coded MAP image by modulating the color image using the MAP image.
Tan, directed towards an array of unfocused transducers [see abstract of Tan], further discloses that the FOV of the transducer ring can be in the range of 5 degrees and 30 degrees.[Tan discloses that the size of the transducer elements is 1mmX1mm (see page 4, section under 3.1. imaging system setup); Tan further disclose that the frequency of operation is 4.2 MHz (see FIG. 5). Since speed of sound traveling in tissue is 1.5 mm/usec, the angular FOV is calculated using the following equation:
PNG
media_image1.png
313
725
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Upon calculations, the angular field of view would become = 2. Arcsin (1.5/1x4.2MHz) =7.2 degrees which is within the specified range)]
Wiemker, directed towards visualization of image data sets [see abstract of Wiemker] further discloses that that the processor is configured to, at each of the plurality of elevational locations, determining a voxel of the 3D volumetric image with largest amplitude; [see [0106] disclosing that “wherein from the Voxels arranged along the respective imaginary projection ray a voxel is selected fulfilling a predefined selection criterion for example having the largest intensity”] forming a maximum amplitude projection (MAP) image based on the determined voxels; [see [0106]-[0107]; a maximum intensity projection map is created based on the voxels having largest amplitude] determining a depth map based on elevational locations and amplitudes of the determined voxels; [see [0169] of Wiemker] transferring the depth map to a color image; [see [0169] reciting: “. A color projection image can be computed by a linear Superposition of the feature-specific two-dimensional maximum projection images using feature specific weights like property weights which are described below in more detail and which can be predefined or selected by a user via a property weight setting unit 211] and forming a color-coded MAP image by modulating the color image using the MAP image. [see [0173]-[0175] of Wiemker]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the system of Wang further such that the transducer have a field of view of between 5 and 30 degrees according to the teachings of Tan in order to achieve better imaging quality for unfocused ultrasound transducers.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the system of Wang further such that the processor is configured to, at each of the plurality of elevational locations, determining a voxel of the 3D volumetric image with largest amplitude; forming a maximum amplitude projection (MAP) image based on the determined voxels; determining a depth map based on elevational locations and amplitudes of the determined voxels; transferring the depth map to a color image; and forming a color-coded MAP image by modulating the color image using the MAP image according to the teachings of Wiemker in order to visualize the 3D image volume along strongest voxel value of the 3D image [see [0169] of Wiemker]
Regarding claim 2, Wang further discloses that the ring ultrasonic transducer array is a full-ring ultrasonic transducer array [see FIG. 43 and [0144] of Wang] and the unfocused transducer elements are distributed equally around a circle centered about the elevational axis [see [0144] and FIG. 43-44 and claim 1 of Wang; it is ].
Regarding claim 6, Wang further discloses wherein the illumination is a light beam [pulsed laser source (PRO-350-10-Quanta ray with 10Hz pulse repetition rate; see [0143] and Fig. 43 of Wang]; and further comprising an axicon lens and an engineered diffuser [see [0143] of Wang] in optical communication with the axicon lens, the engineered diffuser [see FIG. 43] configured to convert the light beam into a donut-shaped illumination beam [see [0145] of Wang] or a uniform circular illumination beam.
Regarding claim 8, Wang further discloses that a plurality of preamplifiers [see [0158] of Wang]; wherein the plurality of preamplifiers and the plurality of data acquisition systems in one-to-one mapped association with the unfocused transducer elements [see [0144] disclosing that “each set of preamplifiers is further connected to a 128 data acquisition system”],
Regarding claim 9, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to perform reconstruction of the 2D images using the sampled photoacoustic signals. [see [0148]-[0149] reconstruction of 2D or 3D images are done]
Regarding claim 20, Wang discloses a photoacoustic computed tomography (PACT) method [see abstract of Wang], the method comprising:
causing at least one pulsed light source [pulsed laser light source 1704; see [0192]] to generate one or more light pulses [see [0192] of Wang];
causing a scanning mechanism to move and/or scan a ring ultrasonic transducer array to a plurality of elevational locations in an elevational direction along an axis, wherein while the ring ultrasonic transducer array is moved/scanned in the elevational direction along the axis [see [0144]-[0145] of Wang] each of the unfocused transducer elements of the ring ultrasonic transducer array detects photoacoustic waves induced by the one or more light pulses and within a field-of-view in the elevational direction along the elevational axis and
and using photoacoustic signals sampled from the detected photoacoustic waves to (i) reconstruct a plurality of 2D images and (II) reconstruct a 3D volumetric image using 3D back projection process. [[see [0148]-[0149] reconstruction of 2D or 3D images are done; see also [0092] [0094] and [0096] disclosing reconstructing 3D volumetric images using 3D back projection process.]
Wang does not disclose that each transducer elements has a field-of-view in a range of between 5 degrees and 30 degrees in an elevational direction along the elevational axis;
Tan, directed towards an array of unfocused transducers [see abstract of Tan], further discloses that the FOV of the transducer ring can be in the range of 5 degrees and 30 degrees.[Tan discloses that the size of the transducer elements is 1mmX1mm (see page 4, section under 3.1. imaging system setup); Tan further disclose that the frequency of operation is 4.2 MHz (see FIG. 5). Since speed of sound traveling in tissue is 1.5 mm/usec, the angular FOV is calculated using the following equation:
PNG
media_image1.png
313
725
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Upon calculations, the angular field of view would become = 2. Arcsin (1.5/1x4.2MHz) =7.2 degrees which is within the specified range)]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the system of Wang further such that the transducer have a field of view of between 5 and 30 degrees according to the teachings of Tan in order to achieve better imaging quality for unfocused ultrasound transducers.
Regarding claim 21, Wang further discloses wherein the ring ultrasonic transducer array is moved to a plurality of elevational locations along the elevational axis, [see [0201]; each image is of a different position along elevational axis]
wherein each 2D image of the plurality of 2D images are reconstructed using a set of the photoacoustic signals, sampled [see [0014] of Wang disclosing: “The full-ring transducer array is configured to spatially sample a portion of the plurality of photoacoustic signals originating from within a field of view positioned within the imaging plane.”] while the ultrasonic transducer array is held at one of the plurality of locations along the elevational axis. [see claims 3 and 20-22 and [0201] of Wang disclosing taking a plurality of 2D images at a series of imaging planes and pausing at each plane to take an image]
Regarding claim 22, Wang further discloses causing the scanning mechanism to hold the ring ultrasonic transducer array at each of a plurality of elevational Attorney Docket No: CIT 1P048US/CIT 8372 4Serial No.: 14/065,280locations along the elevational axis for at least a first time period, wherein the plurality of 2D images is reconstructed using photoacoustic signals, sampled[see [0014] of Wang disclosing: “The full-ring transducer array is configured to spatially sample a portion of the plurality of photoacoustic signals originating from within a field of view positioned within the imaging plane.”] while the ring ultrasonic transducer array is held at a corresponding elevational location of the plurality of elevational locations. [see [0201] and claims 20-22 of Wang]
Regarding claim 23, Wang further discloses generating a blood vessel mapping of a specimen being imaged using the plurality of 2D images and/or vascular diameters in the specimen measured using the 3D volumetric image. [see [0239] and [0253]-[0256] of Wang]
Regarding claim 30, Wang further discloses that the one or more light pulses are configured to illuminate a human breast being imaged. [see [0014] of Wang]
Regarding claim 34, Wang further discloses that the one or more one or more light pulses into a donut beam configured to circumferentially illuminate a human breast being imaged. [see [0145] of Wang]
Regarding claim 35, Wang further discloses that the ultrasonic transducer array is a full-ring ultrasonic transducer array [see FIG. 43 and [0144] of Wang] with unfocused transducer elements distributed around a circle centered about the elevational axis[see [0144] and FIG. 44 and claim 1 of Wang], wherein a circumference of the circle is at least 200 mm, [see [0144] of Wang disclosing that the diameter of the ring is 220mm] and wherein the full-ring ultrasonic transducer array is moved/scanned to an outside surface of the human breast while the photoacoustic signals are sampled. [see [0144] disclosing a linear stage to move the transducer array elevational; see Also FIG. 43]
Regarding claim 46, Wang in view of Razansky discloses all the limitations of claim 1 above [see rejection of claim 1].
Wang does not disclose that the each transducer elements of the ring ultrasonic transducer array has a field-of-view in a range of between 5 degrees and 15 degrees in an elevational direction along the elevational axis;
Tan, directed towards an array of unfocused transducers [see abstract of Tan], further discloses that the FOV of the transducer ring can be in the range of 5 degrees and 30 degrees.[Tan discloses that the size of the transducer elements is 1mmX1mm (see page 4, section under 3.1. imaging system setup); Tan further disclose that the frequency of operation is 4.2 MHz (see FIG. 5). Since speed of sound traveling in tissue is 1.5 mm/usec, the angular FOV is calculated using the following equation:
PNG
media_image1.png
313
725
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Upon calculations, the angular field of view would become = 2. Arcsin (1.5/1x4.2MHz) =7.2 degrees which is within the specified range)]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the system of Wang further such that the transducer have a field of view of between 5 and 30 degrees according to the teachings of Tan in order to achieve better imaging quality for unfocused ultrasound transducers.
Regarding claim 47, Wang further discloses that the ultrasonic transducer array is moved/scanned in the elevation direction along the elevational axis [see [0144]-[0145] and [0207]-[0208]of Wang], transducer elements have a field in the elevational direction along the axis. [see [0152]; even though the elevational FOV of the unfocused ultrasound transducer is not mentioned, it is inherent that they would have a numerical value associated with the FOV in elevational direction]
Wang does not disclose that each transducer elements has a field-of-view in a range of between 5 degrees and 15 degrees in an elevational direction along the elevational axis;
Tan, directed towards an array of unfocused transducers [see abstract of Tan], further discloses that the FOV of the transducer ring can be in the range of 5 degrees and 30 degrees.[Tan discloses that the size of the transducer elements is 1mmX1mm (see page 4, section under 3.1. imaging system setup); Tan further disclose that the frequency of operation is 4.2 MHz (see FIG. 5). Since speed of sound traveling in tissue is 1.5 mm/usec, the angular FOV is calculated using the following equation:
PNG
media_image1.png
313
725
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Upon calculations, the angular field of view would become = 2. Arcsin (1.5/1x4.2MHz) =7.2 degrees which is within the specified range)]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the system of Wang further such that the transducer have a field of view of between 5 and 30 degrees according to the teachings of Tan in order to achieve better imaging quality for unfocused ultrasound transducers.
Regarding claim 49, Wang discloses and the unfocused transducer elements are configured to sample [see [0014] of Wang disclosing: “The full-ring transducer array is configured to spatially sample a portion of the plurality of photoacoustic signals originating from within a field of view positioned within the imaging plane.”] photoacoustic signals while the scanning mechanism moves and/or scan the ring ultrasonic transducer array across the plurality of elevational locations [see [0144]-[0145] of Wang];
Claims 4, 19, 25, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2019/0307334) hereinafter “Wang” in view of Tan et al. ("three dimensional photoacoustic imaging via scanning a one dimensional linear unfocused ultrasound array", Optic Express, Vol. 25, No. 7) hereinafter “Tan” and Wiemker et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2012/0081386) hereinafter “Wiemker” as applied to claims 1 and 20 above and further in view of Wang et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2016/0262628) hereinafter “Wang-2”
Regarding claim 4, Wang as modified by Tan discloses all the limitations of claim 1 [see rejection of claim 1 above]
Wang further discloses that scanning mechanism is configured to: (1) move the ultrasonic transducer array to each elevational location of the plurality of elevational locations along the elevational axis and hold at each elevational location for a first time period and/or [see [0207]-0208] of wang]
Wang as modified by Razansky does not expressly disclose that (2) scan the ultrasonic transducer array across the plurality of elevational locations along the axis during a second time period
Wang-2, directed towards imaging a tissue while moving the transducer array [see abstract of Wang-2] further discloses that scan the ultrasonic transducer array across the plurality of elevational locations along the axis during a second time period [see [0081]-[0082] of Wang-2]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the PACT system of Wang as modified by Tan further and scan the ultrasonic transducer array across the plurality of elevational locations along the axis during a second time period according to the teachings of Wang-2 in order to allow for wider view and overcome sensitivity of the images to the orientation and position of the probe allowing for acquiring higher quality images which are not dependent upon the position and angle of the probe resulting in better visual view of the tissue and more accurate diagnosis [see [0004]-[0005] of Wang-2]
Regarding claim 19, Wang further discloses that the PACT system is configured to be switchable [see [0142] disclosing that the system can be switchable between 2D/3D modes] between: (i) a 2D mode, wherein in the 2D mode the ultrasonic transducer array is moved to each elevational location of the plurality of elevational locations long the elevational axis and held at each elevation location of the one or more locations for a first time period; and [see claims 20-22 disclosing taking a plurality of 2D images at a series of imaging planes]
Wang as modified by Razansky does not expressly disclose that (ii) a 3D mode wherein in the 3D mode the ultrasonic transducer array is scanned across the plurality of elevational locations along the axis during a second time period.
Wang-2, directed towards imaging a tissue while moving the transducer array [see abstract of Wang-2] further discloses a 3D mode wherein in the 3D mode the ultrasonic transducer array is scanned across the plurality of elevational locations along the axis during a second time period. [see [0081]-[0082] of Wang-2].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the PACT system of Wang as modified by Tan further and a 3D mode wherein in the 3D mode the ultrasonic transducer array is scanned across the plurality of elevational locations along the axis during a second time period according to the teachings of Wang-2 in order to allow for wider view and overcome sensitivity of the images to the orientation and position of the probe allowing for acquiring higher quality images which are not dependent upon the position and angle of the probe resulting in better visual view of the tissue and more accurate diagnosis [see [0004]-[0005] of Wang-2].
Regarding claim 25, Wang as modified by Tan discloses all the limitations of claim 1 [see rejection of claim 1 above].
Wang as modified by Tan does not disclose that the 3D volumetric image is reconstructed from the photoacoustic signals sampled while the ring ultrasonic transducer array is scanned between the plurality of elevational locations along the axis during a second time period.
Wang-2 further discloses that 3D volumetric image is reconstructed from the photoacoustic signals sampled while the ring ultrasonic transducer array is scanned between the plurality of elevational locations along the axis during a second time period. [see [0081]-[0082] disclosing moving the transducer array along the z-axis in step sizes of 0.14 degrees around the cylinder while moving the array up 0.3mm]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the PACT system of Wang as modified by Tan further and make 3D volumetric image is reconstructed from the photoacoustic signals sampled while the ring ultrasonic transducer array is scanned between the plurality of elevational locations along the axis during a second time period according to the teachings of Wang-2 in order to allow for wider view and overcome sensitivity of the images to the orientation and position of the probe allowing for acquiring higher quality images which are not dependent upon the position and angle of the probe resulting in better visual view of the tissue and more accurate diagnosis [see [0004]-[0005] of Wang-2].
Regarding claim 27, Wang as modified by Tan in view of Wang-2 discloses all the limitations of claim 25 above [see rejection of claim 25 above].
Wang as modified by Razansky in view of Wang-2 does not disclose that the second time period is shorter than 15 seconds.
However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the time period of claim 25 and make it shorter than 10 seconds or shorter than 15 seconds in order to optimize the imaging. Further, it has been held that optimizing a variable and discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claims 11, 12, 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2019/0307334) hereinafter “Wang” in view of Tan et al. ("three dimensional photoacoustic imaging via scanning a one dimensional linear unfocused ultrasound array", Optic Express, Vol. 25, No. 7) hereinafter “Tan” and Wiemker et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2012/0081386) hereinafter “Wiemker” as applied to claims 9 and 20 above, and further in view of D’sa et al. (Wo 2012035472) hereinafter “D’sa”.
Regarding claims 11, and 28 Wang as modified by Tan discloses all the limitations of claims 9 and 20 above [see rejection of claims 9 and 20].
Wang as modified by Tan does not disclose that at least one processor is further configured to execute instructions to determine an elastogram using the plurality of 2D images and/or calculate a vessel density map based on the 3D volumetric image.
D’sa, directed towards quantification of tissue strain using ultrasound elastography images [see abstract of D’sa] further discloses that at least one processor is further configured to execute instructions to determine an elastogram using the plurality of 2D images and/or calculate a vessel density map based on the 3D volumetric image. [see page 9, second paragraph and FIG. 2 disclosing generating an elastogram from a plurality of 2D images] and/or calculate a vessel density map using the 3D volumetric image.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the PACT system of as modified by Tan as modified further and make at least one processor is further configured to execute instructions to determine an elastogram using the plurality of 2D images and/or calculate a vessel density map based on the 3D volumetric image according to the teachings of D’sa in order to increase the accuracy of the elastogram.
Regarding claims 12 and 29, Wang as modified by Tan discloses all the limitations of claims 9 and 20 above [see rejection of claims 9 and 20].
Wang as modified by Tan does not disclose that the at least one procesor is further configured to execute instructions to identify one or more regions with a potential mass using an elastogram (determined using the plurality of 2D images) and/or a vessel density map (determined using the 3D volumetric image).
D’sa further discloses that the at least one processor is further configured to execute instructions to identify one or more regions with a potential mass using the elastogram (determined using the plurality of 2D images) and/or a vessel density map (determined using the 3D volumetric image) [see FIG. 5 and page 11, second paragraph disclosing identifying potential mass areas in an elastogram image determined using a series of B-mode images (i.e. 2D images)].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the PACT system of as modified by Tan further and make the at least one processor is further configured to execute instructions to identify one or more regions with a potential mass using the elastogram and/or the vessel density map according to the teachings of D’sa in order to determine potential lesions in the region of interest by analyzing the elastogram.
Claims 14 and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2019/0307334) hereinafter “Wang” in view of Tan et al. ("three dimensional photoacoustic imaging via scanning a one dimensional linear unfocused ultrasound array", Optic Express, Vol. 25, No. 7) hereinafter “Tan” and Wiemker et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2012/0081386) hereinafter “Wiemker” as applied to claims 9 and 20 above, and further in view of Wiemker et al. (U.S. 2006/0247510) hereinafter “Wiemker”.
Regarding claim 14, Wang as modified by Tan discloses all the limitations of claims 9 and 20 above [see rejection of claim 9].
Wang as modified by Tan does not disclose that the at least one processor is further configured to execute instructions to perform an automated tumor segmentation process to identify one or more regions with a potential mass using the 3D volumetric image.
Wiemker, directed towards automated method of analyzing a volume of interest and segment a tumor [see abstract of Wiemker] discloses that the at least one procesor is further configured to execute instructions to perform an automated tumor segmentation process to identify one or more regions with a potential mass using the 3D volumetric image [see [0043] of Wiemker].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the PACT system of as modified by Tan further and the at least one processor is further configured to execute instructions to perform an automated tumor segmentation process to identify one or more regions with a potential mass using the 3D volumetric image according to the teachings of Wiemker in order to determine potential lesions with the area of interest and increase the accuracy of diagnosis.
Regarding claim 48, Wang as modified by Tan discloses all the limitations of claim 20 above [see rejection of claim 20].
Wang as modified by Tan does not expressly disclose detecting a tumor in a specimen being imaged using one or both of the plurality of 2D images and the 3D volumetric image.
Wiemker further discloses detecting a tumor in a specimen being imaged using one or both of the plurality of 2D images and the 3D volumetric image. [see [0043] of Wiemker].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the PACT system of Wang further and the computing system is further configured to execute instructions to perform an automated tumor segmentation process to identify one or more regions with a potential mass using the 3D volumetric image according to the teachings of Wiemker in order to determine potential lesions with the area of interest and increase the accuracy of diagnosis.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks filed 03/16/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive and the claims were considered to be allowable as the notice of allowance of 04/17/2026. However, in view of the IDS submitted on 07/07/2026, and upon further search and consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the following document:
Tan et al. ("3D photoacoustic imaging via scanning a one dimensional linear unfocused ultrasound array", Optic Express, Vol. 25, No. 7) hereinafter “Tan”.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARJAN - SABOKTAKIN whose telephone number is (303)297-4278. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am-5pm CT.
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, Michael Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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.
/MARJAN SABOKTAKIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/MICHAEL J CAREY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights