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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/19/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-9, 11-16, and 18-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rajguru et al. (WO 2021/140042) in view of Xu (US 2010/0094127).
With respect to claims 1 and 15-16, Rajguru et al. discloses method and system comprising: an intravascular imaging device (102; [0036]; [0040]); and a processing circuit (106; [0036]) configured for communication with the intravascular imaging device (102; [0036]; [0040]), the processing circuit ([0008]) configured to: receive a plurality of intravascular images obtained by the intravascular imaging device during the movement of the intravascular imaging device within a body lumen of a patient ([0008-0009]; [0037-0038]; [0041]); identifying a stent wall of a stent and a vessel portion associated with a lumen of the blood vessel in an intravascular image of the plurality of intravascular images ([0008]; [0069]); calculate a radial distance between the stent wall and the vessel portion (diameter measurements interpreted to include radial; 540; [0008]; [0055]; [0080-0085]; Figs. 5-6); output, to a display in communication with the processor circuit, a screen display (108) comprising a longitudinal cross-sectional view of the blood vessel comprising a top of the vessel portion and an opposite, bottom of the vessel portion ([0008]; [0055]; Figs. 5-6), wherein the longitudinal view of the blood vessel comprises: a graphical representation of the stent ([0008]; [0055]; Figs. 5-6); and an indicator extending between the stent wall and the vessel portion in the longitudinal view such that the indicator visually represents the radial distance (510a; 520a, 530a; 540; 560; 580; 590; [0008]; [0055]; Figs. 5-6). Rajguru et al. does not teach visually depicts the numerical value of the radial distance. However, Xu discloses in the same field of endeavor the distance from stent to the lumen wall is a clinically relevant displayed measurement ([0071]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to display a radial distance indicator and the numerical value of the radial distance as taught by Xu as it is a clinically relevant measurement to be displayed ([0071]). The Examiner notes that the visual representation of the indicator is considered as printed matter or visual aesthetics which does not hold patentable weight. However, changes in size/proportion (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A); length of the indicator), making separable (MPEP 2144.04(V)(C); separating the indicator to top and bottom segments), duplication of parts (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B); adding additional indicators) and rearrangement of parts (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C); modifying the location of the indicator) are all within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art.
With respect to claim 2, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein the processor circuit is further configured to automatically analyze the plurality of intravascular images to determine whether the stent wall is present within the plurality of intravascular images ([0057]; [0064]; [0069]; Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 3, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein the processor circuit is configured to perform the identification of the stent wall and the vessel portion and the calculation of the distance between the stent wall and the vessel portion in response to automatically determining that the stent wall is present in the plurality of intravascular images ([0057]; [0064]; [0069]; Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 4, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein the processor circuit is further configured to determine a stent area for the plurality of images ([0057]; Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 5, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein the processor circuit is further configured to identify a location along the longitudinal view corresponding to a minimum stent area ([0055]; [0057]; Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 6, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein the screen display comprises an intravascular image associated with the location to the minimum stent area ([0055]; [0057]; Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 8, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein the screen display comprises an intravascular image (Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 9, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein the screen display comprises a marker along the longitudinal view corresponding to a location along the longitudinal view at which the intravascular image was obtained (Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 11, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein the radial distance comprises an average distance ([0055]; Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 12, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein the radial distance comprises a maximal distance ([0055]; [0057]; Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 13, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein the processor circuit is configured to generate the longitudinal view of the blood vessel based on the plurality of intravascular images ([0055]; [0057]; Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 14, Rajguru et al. disclose wherein the processor circuit is configured to generate the longitudinal view of the body lumen based on one or more measurements of the associated with at least one of the blood vessel or the lumen within the plurality of intravascular images ([0055]; [0057]; Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 18, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein the screen display comprises a marker along the longitudinal view corresponding to a location of the blood vessel at which the intravascular image was obtained, wherein the indicator and the marker are aligned with one another along the longitudinal view, wherein the marker extends between the first segment and the second segment of the indicator (510a; 520a; 530a; [0055]; [0057]; Figs .5-6; see longitudinal view).
With respect to claim 19, Rajguru et al. discloses wherein visual appearances of the indicator and the marker are different from one another (varying gradient; indicator arrow colors are different; black/white/gray; Figs. 5-6).
With respect to claim 20, Rajguru et al. discloses the subject matter substantially as claimed except for wherein the numerical value is positioned proximate to the longitudinal view and aligned with the indicator and the marker. However, a rearrangement in parts is well within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the location of the numerical value as a rearrangement of parts is well within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art.
With respect to claim 21, Rajguru et al. discloses a marker (520a) along the longitudinal view, wherein the marker comprises a radial line extending between the first side of the graphical representation and a second side of the graphical representation (Fig. 5).
With respect to claim 22, Rajguru et al. discloses the subject matter substantially as claimed except for the shape of the indicator. However, a change in shape is well within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the shape of the indicator as a change in shape is well within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the reference does not teach wherein the radial distance indicator comprises a top indicator segment and a bottom indicator segment that are distinct from one another such that the graphical representation of the stent radially separates the top indicator segment and the bottom indicator segment, wherein the top indicator segment radially extends only between a top of the stent wall and the top of the vessel portion, wherein the bottom indicator segment radially extends only between a bottom of the stent wall and the bottom of the vessel portion. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. Rajguru et al. discloses several indicators that visually represents the radial distance (510a; 520a, 530a; 540; 560; 580; 590; [0008]; [0055]; Figs. 5-6). Although Rajguru et al. does not specifically display a separate radial distance indicator, Xu discloses in the same field of endeavor the distance from stent to the lumen wall is a clinically relevant displayed measurement ([0071]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to display a radial distance indicator and the numerical value of the radial distance as taught by Xu as it is a clinically relevant measurement to be displayed ([0071]). The Examiner notes that the visual representation of the indicator is considered as printed matter or visual aesthetics which does not hold patentable weight. However, changes in size/proportion (MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A); length of the indicator), making separable (MPEP 2144.04(V)(C); separating the indicator to top and bottom segments), duplication of parts (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B); adding additional indicators) and rearrangement of parts (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C); modifying the location of the indicator) are all within the skill level of one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 PETER LUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1609. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, Anhtuan T Nguyen can be reached at (571)272-4963. 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.
/PETER LUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights