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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 11 (Proposed Amendments): The deformable image registration phantom of claim 3, further comprising a series of visual markings,
wherein the series of visual markings are positioned on one or more of a front of the housing, a front of the parallel eccentric inner cylinder, a front of the outer cylinder, and the ball and socket mount to facilitate a measurement of [[the]] relative positions (a lack of an antecedent basis) of two or more of the housing, the parallel eccentric inner cylinder, the outer cylinder, and the ball and socket mount.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12 (Proposed Amendments): The deformable image registration phantom of claim 3, further comprising a plurality of imaging structures,
wherein the plurality of imaging structures is positioned in one or more of the housing, the parallel eccentric inner cylinder, the outer cylinder, and the ball and socket mount to facilitate a measurement of [[the]] relative positions (a lack of an antecedent basis) of two or more of the housing, the parallel eccentric inner cylinder, the outer cylinder, and the ball and socket mount.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 17 (Proposed Amendments): The deformable image registration phantom of claim 16, wherein the inner gimbal rotates about a third axis perpendicular to the first axis and the second [[axis]] axis, and the outer gimbal rotates about a fourth axis perpendicular to the first axis, the second axis, and the third axis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of co-pending Application No. 18/382,773 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 is anticipated by claim 1 of Application No. 18/382,773.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
With respect to claim 1, claim 1 of co-pending Application No. 18/382,773 claims a deformable image registration phantom, comprising:
a housing,
an outer cylinder having a first diameter,
a parallel eccentric inner cylinder having a second diameter smaller than the first diameter,
a ball and socket mount, and
a target mounted to the housing by way of the parallel eccentric inner cylinder, the outer cylinder, and the ball and socket mount,
wherein the parallel eccentric inner cylinder is rotatably mounted within the outer cylinder (lines 19-20), and
wherein the target is rotatably mounted directly or indirectly within the parallel eccentric inner cylinder (lines 21-22).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to the specification have been fully considered. The objection of the specification has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claims 1-17 have been fully considered. The objections of claims 1-17 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claims 2-17 have been fully considered. The objection of claims 2-17 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claim 4 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 4 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claim 5 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 5 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claim 7 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 7 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claim 8 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 8 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claims 9 and 10 have been fully considered. The objections of claims 9 and 10 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claim 10 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 10 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claim 11 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 11 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claim 12 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 12 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claims 13 and 14 have been fully considered. The objections of claims 13 and 14 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claim 14 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 14 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claim 17 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 17 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to claims 7, 11, and 12 have been fully considered. The rejection of claims 7, 11, and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 05 September 2025 with respect to the drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the drawings has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Alexander et al. (U. S. Patent No. 12,427,342 B2) disclosed a Cherenkov image-based solution for an MR-LINAC quality assurance.
Kang et al. (U. S. Patent No. 12,097,385 B2) disclosed a lung phantom unit for a radiotherapy.
Hartley et al. (U. S. Patent No. 11,457,883 B1) disclosed medical imaging systems and associated devices and methods.
Yu (U. S. Patent No. 11,315,440 B2) disclosed a respiratory gating phantom device.
Bornefalk et al. (U. S. Patent No. 11,246,559 B2) disclosed a calibration of an X-ray imaging system.
Yang (U. S. Patent No. 11,110,301 B2) disclosed systems and methods for calibrating an alignment device.
Zhao et al. (U. S. Patent No. 11,090,022 B2) disclosed a dynamic test phantom simulating a cardiovascular motion for a quality evaluation of CT imaging.
Aichert et al. (U. S. Patent No. 10,977,839 B2) disclosed a method and a device for determining a geometry calibration of an imaging device and a method for determining assignment data for a geometry calibration.
Ruchala et al. (U. S. Patent No. 10,939,891 B2) disclosed an automated detection of an identification of phantoms.
Avila (U. S. Patent No. 10,660,600 B2) disclosed a table-top image-calibration phantom.
Wang et al. (U. S. Patent No. 10,092,257 B2) disclosed a dynamic bowtie filter for cone-beam multi-slice CT.
Ueki et al. (U. S. Patent No. 9,888,902 B2) disclosed an X-ray CT device comprising a calculation device, a recording medium, and a maintenance method for an X-ray CT device.
Breuer et al. (U. S. Patent No. 7,675,028 B2) disclosed a low-scattering foam phantom for molecular imaging.
Serban et al. (U. S. Patent No. 7,667,191 B2) disclosed a deformable phantom apparatus.
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 Allen C. Ho, whose telephone number is (571) 272-2491. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10AM - 6PM.
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, David J. Makiya, can be reached at (571) 272-2273. 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.
Allen C. Ho, Ph.D.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/Allen C. Ho/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884 Allen.Ho@uspto.gov