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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application in response to the applicant’s amendments to the rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 05/28/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that for Mochizuki, “the Examiner appears to be equating the term "two-dimensional Doppler image data" in this paragraph with "applying an imaging processing filter to preserve a Doppler mode signal" as set out in the claims” and “makes [no] mention of applying an image processing filter to preserve a Doppler-mode ultrasound signal” (see pg. 11 of applicant’s remarks), and the examiner disagrees.
Claim 1 recites “applying at least one image processing filter to preserve the Doppler-mode ultrasound signal (“preserved Doppler mode signal”)”. Mochizuki teaches generating Doppler data via Doppler processing function 172 (see para. 0046), then applying an edge enhancement filter via image processing function 175 to the generated Doppler data (see para. 0052) in order to “preserve” (enhance) the generated Doppler data. The claim does not recite what is preserved (or filtered out) in the Doppler mode ultrasound signal, only to apply a filter to a Doppler signal preserve the Doppler signal. Therefore, under broadest reasonable interpretation, Mochizuki teaches applying at least one image processing filter to the Doppler-mode ultrasound signal to preserve the Doppler-mode ultrasound signal.
The applicant argues “There is no equivalency between generating, from a preserved Doppler-mode signal of a vascular feature as returned to the ultrasound scanner, the depth of the vascular feature as set out in the present claims and the methodology of Mochizuki” (see pg. 15 of applicant’s remarks), and the examiner disagrees.
Claim 1 recites “generating from the preserved Doppler-mode signal of the vascular feature as returned to the ultrasound scanner, the depth of the vascular feature”. Mochizuki teaches generating and displaying the distance (depth) between the blood vessel within the central portion and the body surface in real time (see para. 0081) based on the preserved (image process filtered) Doppler data (see para. 0052 – “The image processing function 175 is a function for performing predetermined image processing on the two-dimensional B-mode image data and the two-dimensional Doppler image data [Doppler data]…performs image processing (smoothing) [image process filtering on Doppler data to generate preserved Doppler data] for regenerating an image having an average brightness value using multiple image frames in the two-dimensional B-mode image data or the two-dimensional Doppler image data generated by the image generating function 174, image processing (edge enhancement) of using a differential filter within images [image process filtering on Doppler data to generate preserved Doppler data], and so on.”; see para. 0053 – “The display controlling function 176 is a function for controlling how the two-dimensional B-mode image data and the two-dimensional Doppler image data generated or processed by the image processing function 175 [preserved Doppler data] are displayed on the display device 40.”; see para. 0054 – “The processing circuitry 17 may further synthetically combine the two-dimensional B-mode image data having been combined with the two-dimensional Doppler image data [preserved Doppler data], with a measurement line and a measurement value [depth of vessel].”).
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 11, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, and similarly for claims 11 and 20, “applying at least one image processing filter to preserve the Doppler-mode ultrasound signal (“preserved Doppler mode signal”)” should be “applying at least one image processing filter to the Doppler-mode ultrasound signal to preserve the Doppler-mode ultrasound signal (“preserved Doppler mode signal”)” for clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mochizuki et al. (US 20190328317 A1, published October 31, 2019), hereinafter referred to as Mochizuki.
Regarding claim 1, and similarly for claims 11 and 20, Mochizuki teaches a method for automatically determining a depth of a vascular feature on an ultrasound image feed, acquired from an ultrasound scanner, the method comprising:
displaying, on a screen (Fig. 1, display device 40) that is communicatively connected to the ultrasound scanner (ultrasound probe 20), the ultrasound image feed comprising ultrasound image frames of a region of interest comprising the vascular feature (Fig. 9; see para. 0063 - "The physician moves the ultrasound probe 20 while monitoring the tomographic image displayed on the display device 40 for the scan region [ultrasound image feed of ROI], so that the tomographic image will turn the short-axis image of the internal jugular vein [vascular feature] and also include the internal jugular vein at its central portion.");
activating a Doppler mode of the ultrasound scanner, in which the ultrasound scanner obtains a Doppler-mode ultrasound signaI corresponding to the region of interest comprising the vascular feature
(see para. 0047 - "The processing circuitry 17 with the Doppler processing function 172 applies a moving
target indicator (MTI) filter to the data strings corresponding to the same location so that signaIs (clutter
signals) attributable to stationary tissue or slowly moving tissue are suppressed and signals attributable
to a blood flow [of vascular feature] are extracted [Doppler mode signal].");
applying at least one image processing filter to preserve the Doppler-mode ultrasound signaI (the
"preserved Doppler-mode signal") (see para. 0052- "More specifically, and for example, the processing
circuitry 17 with the image processing function 175 [image process filtering] performs image processing
(smoothing) for regenerating an image having an average brightness value using multiple image frames in
the two-dimensional B-mode image data or the two-dimensional Doppler image data [preserved Doppler
mode signal] generated by the image generating function 174, image processing (edge enhancement) of
using a differentiaI filter within images, and so on.");
generating from the preserved Doppler-mode signal of the vascular feature as returned to the
ultrasound scanner (real time), the depth of the vascular feature (see para. 0081 - "The processing
circuitry 17 of the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus 1 analyzes the result of the ultrasound scanning for
the part corresponding to the central portion of the scan region, so that it calculates the distance between
the blood vessel within the central portion and the body surface. The processing circuitry 17 then causes
the display device 40 to display the calculated distance in real time."); and
indicating depth of the vascular feature to a user of ultrasound scanner (Fig. 9; see para. 0077-
"Also, a measurement line L1 is displayed as a line extending from the center of the Doppler image 11
[preserved Doppler mode signal] to the surface of the ultrasound probe 20 [depth of vascular feature],
and a measurement value V1 is displayed right above the point at which the surface of the ultrasound
probe 20 intersects the measurement line L1."; see para. 0081- "The processing circuitry 17 then causes
the display device 40 to display the calculated distance [depth of vascular feature] in real time.").
Furthermore, regarding claims 2 and 12, Mochizuki further teaches wherein the at least one image
processing filter is a temporal filter (see para. 0052 - "More specifically, and for example, the processing
circuitry 17 with the image processing function 175 [image process filtering] performs image processing
(smoothing) for regenerating an image having an average brightness value using multiple image frames in he two-dimensional B-mode image data or the two-dimensional Doppler image data [preserved Doppler
mode signal] generated by the image generating function 174, image processing (edge enhancement) of
using a differential filter [temporal filtering] within images, and so on.").
Furthermore, regarding claims 4 and 14, Mochizuki further teaches wherein the temporal filter is
an adaptive persistence filter which is increased to preserve the Doppler-mode ultrasound signal by
averaging a plurality of ultrasound image frames of the region of interest from the ultrasound image feed
(see para. 0052 - "More specifically, and for example, the processing circuitry 17 with the image
processing function 175 [image process filtering] performs image processing (smoothing) for regenerating
an image having an average brightness value using multiple image frames [adaptive persistence filter] in
the two-dimensional B-mode image data or the two-dimensional Doppler image data [preserved Doppler
mode signal] generated by the image generating function 174, image processing (edge enhancement) of
using a differential filter within images, and so on.").
Furthermore, regarding claims 5 and 15, Mochizuki further teaches an additional step of
optimizing images by applying a wall filter prior to activating the Doppler mode of the ultrasound scanner
(see para. 0047 - "The processing circuitry 17 with the Doppler processing function 172 applies a moving
target indicator (MTI) filter [wall filter] to the data strings corresponding to the same location so that
signals (clutter signals) attributable to stationary tissue or slowly moving tissue are suppressed and signals
attributable to a blood flow [of vascular feature] are extracted [Doppler mode sig na I].").
Furthermore, regarding claims 6 and 16, Mochizuki further teaches an additional step, after
activating the Doppler mode of the ultrasound scanner, of selecting a prominent Doppler-mode
ultrasound signal corresponding to the region of interest comprising the vascular feature (see para. 0070 - "As in the example shown in FIG. 4, the peak value [prominent Doppler mode signal] is detected from
the output addition-averaged power values [Doppler mode signal]. Samples showing an attenuation rate
of T [dB] or below from the detected peak value are extracted from the output addition-averaged power
values and determined to be the "blood flow area" [vascular feature in ROI].").
Furthermore, regarding claims 7 and 17, Mochizuki further teaches an additional step, after
activating the Doppler mode of the ultrasound scanner, of placing a color box place on the region of
interest (see para. 0077- "As shown in FIG. 9, a Doppler image 11 for the interna I jugular vein is displayed
within a ROI indication R1 [color box].").
Furthermore, regarding claims 8 and 19, Mochizuki further teaches wherein the steps of applying
at least one image processing filter, generating from the preserved Doppler-mode signal the depth of the
vascular feature and displaying depth of the vascular feature on the screen occur in real time and without
additional user inputs (see para. 0081 - "The processing circuitry 17 of the ultrasound diagnostic
apparatus 1 analyzes the result of the ultrasound scanning for the part corresponding to the central
portion of the scan region, so that it calculates the distance between the blood vessel within the central
portion and the body surface. The processing circuitry 17 then causes the display device 40 to display the
calculated distance in real time.").
Furthermore, regarding claims 9 and 18, Mochizuki further teaches wherein the screen is within
a multi-purpose electronic device (Fig. 1, display device 40) which is communicatively coupled with the
ultrasound scanner (ultrasound probe 20; see para. 0062 - "The physician moves the ultrasound
probe 20 while monitoring the tomographic image displayed on the display device 40 for the scan
region ... ") and the step of indicating depth of the vascular feature to a user of ultrasound scanner is via at least one of a visual or an audio signal (Fig. 9; see para. 0077 - "Also, a measurement line L1 is displayed
[visual] as a line extending from the center of the Doppler image 11 to the surface of the ultrasound probe
20 [depth of vascular feature], and a measurement value V1 is displayed right above the point at which
the surface of the ultrasound probe 20 intersects the measurement line L1.").
Furthermore, regarding claim 10, Mochizuki further teaches wherein the vascular feature is any
tissue through which blood flows and for which an automatic depth measurement from a skin surface is
instructive for the purposes of therapy, procedures, diagnosis, or treatment (see para. 0080 - "Upon
confirming the measurement line and the measurement value displayed on the tomographic image, the
physician inserts a puncture needle into the subject according to the display.").
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 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Mochizuki in view
of Martins {US 20140357999 Al, published December 4, 2014), hereinafter referred to as Martins.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Mochizuki teaches all of the elements disclosed in claim 2 and 12
above, respectively.
Mochizuki teaches temporal filtering, but does not explicitly teach filtering by increasing a
number of ultrasound image frames.
Whereas, Martins, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the temporal filter is a flash
removal filter which preserves the Doppler-mode ultrasound signal by increasing a number of ultrasound
image frames of the region of interest from the ultrasound image feed (see Claim 7 - " ... wherein the
number of motion cycles determiner increases the number of the plurality of color flow images filtered
by the temporal median filter in response to the motion identifier identifying the detected motion as
motion of the non-flow moving tissue ... ").
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to have modified temporal filtering, as disclosed in Mochizuki, by filtering by
increasing a number of ultrasound image frames, as disclosed in Ma rt ins. One of ordinary skill in the art
would have been motivated to make this modification in order to further improve image quality by
eliminating or reducing color flash artifact, as taught in Martins (see para. 0034).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Kwak et al. (US 20110313292 A1, published December 22, 2011) discloses clutter filtering is performed to remove a low-band clutter signal from a Doppler signal to thereby extract only a blood flow signal and a noise signal, noise may be removed through signal processing, and the components on the blood flow signal are displayed on a screen.
Smith et al. (US 20040230111 A1, published November 18, 2004) discloses filtering the 3D Doppler data using a filter.
Kim (US 20170188998 A1, published July 6, 2017) discloses performing the filtering process upon the vector Doppler image based on the vector information.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Nyrobi Celestine whose telephone number is 571-272-0129. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 7:00AM - 5:00PM EST.
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, Pascal Bui-Pho can be reached on 571-272-2714. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Nyrobi Celestine/Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights