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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
The Office Action is in response to the amendment filed 07/14/2026.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112
Applicant's arguments regarding the rejection of claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore the rejection has been withdrawn.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant's arguments regarding the rejection of claims 1-6 and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Keupp et al (US 2020/0348382 A1, heretofore referred to as Keupp) in view of Slavin (US 2008/0081986 A1, heretofore referred to as Slavin) have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Regarding claims 1-6 and 11-20, Applicant argues: “Amended independent claim 1 relates to a method for separating fat from water contributions in at least one magnetic resonance ("MR") image, and recites, in relevant part, "providing periodic radio frequency ('RF') saturation pulses with varying frequency offsets from a water resonance frequency with at least two different offsets, wherein a single echo is acquired following each RF excitation pulse for each of the varying frequency offsets." Amended independent claims 19 and 20 relate to system and computer-accessible medium, respectively, and recite substantially similar subject matter.
In the Office Action, the Examiner conceded that Keupp does not teach the single-echo claim element, but relies on the disclosure in Slavin of a fast gradient echo (fGRE) acquisition, in which "a single alpha pulse is played out and a single k-space line is acquired," to supply it. (Office Action, p. 7). The purported motivation provided by the Examiner for the combination is to "increase accuracy with regards to the fluctuations of the patient's heart rate." (Id., p. 8 - citing Slavin, para. [0029]).
Applicants respectfully assert that the proposed combination of Keupp and Slavin is improper because it would render Keupp inoperable for its intended purpose and change its principle of operation in violation of MPEP §§ 2143.01(V) and 2143.01(VI). A proposed modification that renders the primary reference unsatisfactory for its intended purpose does not support a prima facie case of obviousness, and as such, should not be made.
The Examiner's own characterization of Keupp-and Keupp's express disclosure establishes that Keupp is a Dixon method. Keupp is entitled "Single-Point Dixon Method for Fat- Water Separation in CEST MRI." Keupp's disclosure states that the Z-spectrum acquisition for the reference saturation frequency offset "comprises data from multiple echo shifts or echo times" reconstructed "according to a Dixon-type MRI protocol." (Keupp, [0009], [0038], [0042]). Keupp further describes that "[m]ultiple echo shifts (e.g., 2 or 3) are needed to separate water and fat." (Id. at [0110]). Thus, Keupp's fat/water separation depends fundamentally on acquiring multiple echoes at different echo times or echo shifts. This multi-echo data is the very basis on which Keupp's Dixon reconstruction relies.
Modifying Keupp to acquire only a single echo per excitation, as Slavin describes, would eliminate the multi-echo data on which Keupp's Dixon reconstruction wholly depends, thereby rendering Keupp unsatisfactory for its intended purpose of Dixon-based fat/water separation. A person of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to make a modification that destroys the primary reference's ability to function as intended.
Indeed, the Examiner's stated motivation for the combination further underscores the impropriety of such combination. Slavin's rationale concerns the variable R-R interval and the patient's heart rate in ECG-triggered cardiac delayed-enhancement imaging. (Slavin, paras. [0027] and [0029]). This motivation has no bearing on Keupp's CEST/Dixon fat-water separation, which does not involve any ECG triggering or cardiac imaging. Accordingly, the combination rests on impermissible hindsight rather than a rational underpinning in the prior art.
Additionally, Slavin's saturation pulse is a single, fixed fat-selective saturation pulse used within a spin preparation (with inversion pulses) to null fat and a second tissue. (See id., paras. [0016], [0021] and [0023]). Slavin does not sweep or vary the frequency offset of its saturation pulse, and certainly does not need to do so. Thus, even if the proposed combination of Keupp and Slavin can be made (which it not the case), such purported combination would still fails to teach or suggest "a single echo is acquired following each RF excitation pulse for each of the varying frequency offsets," as explicitly recited in amended independent claims 1, 19 and 20. Thus is because Slavin provides no teaching or suggestion of varying frequency offsets for the saturation pulses.
Because claims 2-18 depend from, and therefore include all the recitations of amended independent claim 1, it is respectfully asserted that these claims are also allowable over the combination of Keupp and Slavin for at least the same reasons stated above with respect to amended independent claim 1. These claims also include additional features not disclosed, taught or suggested by Keupp or Slavin, and therefore are further allowable separately from their dependence on amended independent claim 1.
Thus, for at least such reasons, Applicants respectfully assert that the pending 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection should be withdrawn.”. Applicant asserts that the Dixon method requires multiple echos and is therefore incompatible with a single echo acquisition method. While the Examiner agrees that traditional Dixon methods require at least two or three echoes (collected at different echo times) to calculate and separate water and fat frequencies. The single-point method bypasses this by acquiring data at a single, flexible echo time. While Keupp is silent on acquiring only a single echo, Keupp does suggest at least echos can be acquired by the following methods: “a spin echo protocol, a fast or turbo spin echo protocol, an echo planar imaging protocol, a gradient echo imaging protocol, and a steady-state free procession imaging protocol.”, see Par 0020. As Slavin teaches a Fast Gradient Recalled Echo (fGRE) technique, the Examiner believes that Keupps recitation that a “gradient echo imaging protocol” may be used allows for the combination of Slavins echo acquisition with Keupps Single-point Dixon method. Therefore the rejection stands.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant's arguments regarding the rejection of claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keupp in view of Slavin in view of Feng et al (Feng, Li et al. “XD-GRASP: Golden-Angle Radial MRI with Reconstruction of Extra Motion-State Dimensions Using Compressed Sensing”, Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, 2016, vol. 75, pp. 775-788, heretofore referred to as Feng) have been fully considered and are not persuasive. See above arguments.
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.
Claims 1-6 and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keupp in view of Slavin.
Regarding claim 1, Keupp teaches a method for separating fat from water contributions in at least one magnetic resonance (“MR”) image (Keupp; Par 0008-0009 and Par 0042; Keupp teaches separating the water and fat contributions from a complex MR image), comprising:
providing periodic radio frequency (“RF”) saturation pulses with varying frequency offset from a water resonance frequency with at least two different offsets (Keupp; Fig 1, Element 126, Par 0085, and Par 0086; Keupp teaches using at least a set of saturation frequency offsets), wherein echo data is aquired (Keupp; Par 0126, 0127, 0131, and 0160; Keupp teaches a GRE echo signal may be acquired);
analyzing the signal response to a saturation at different frequencies on a voxel-by-voxel basis (Keupp; Par 0008-0009 and Par 0042; Keupp teaches reconstructing the B0 map along with a water and fat image and using a shift to calculate voxel-by-voxel to determine the complex image data); and
based on the analyzed signal response, separating the fat from the water contributions in the at least one MR image (Keupp; Par 0038, Par 0092, and Par 0108-0118; Keupp teaches creating a separate fat image and a water image).
Keupp does not explicitly teach wherein a single echo is acquired following each RF excitation pulse for each of the varying frequency offsets.
Slavin teaches wherein a single echo is acquired following each RF excitation pulse for each of the varying frequency offsets (Slavin; Fig 2 and Par 0021; Slavin teaches a fGRE acquisition method may be used in which a single alpha pulse is played out and a single k-space line is acquired, i.e. a single echo is acquired after the RF saturation pulses).
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the apparatus of Keupp with the fGRE single echo acquisition of Slavin in order to increase accuracy with regards to the fluctuations of the patients heart rate (Slavin; Par 0029).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 1. Keupp further teaches wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises using a signal-response profile to classify each voxel into substantially containing fat and substantially containing water (Keupp; Par 0025; Keupp teaches using a threshold to classify voxels into ones containing a certain fraction of fat or water).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 1. Keupp further teaches wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises using a signal-response profile to quantitatively estimate a percentage of fat and a percentage of water contained in each voxel (Keupp; Fig 9, Par 0025, and Par 0157; Keupp teaches separating the voxels and displaying the Z-spectra with the estimated percentage of water and fat).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 1. Keupp further teaches wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises radial sampling of k-space to acquire data for different frequency offsets of the RF saturation pulse (Keupp; Par 0039, Par 0043, Par 0087, and Par 0089; Keupp teaches using a frequency dependent phase angle for each offset to align the signals).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 4. Keupp further teaches further comprising sampling radial views such that acquired view angles differ between frequency offsets and the radial views are combined to form a dense set of radial views (Keupp; Fig. 7, Par 0039, Par 0043, Par 0087, Par 0089, and Par 0139; Keupp teaches using a frequency dependent phase angle for each offset to align the signals and overlaying the plots from the phase angles).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 1. Keupp further teaches wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises under-sampling data for each frequency offset by skipping sampling steps to shorten an acquisition duration (Keupp; Par 0131; Keupp teaches skipping acquisition steps if desired, which would shorten the duration).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 5. Keupp further teaches wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises combining the data acquired for the different frequency offsets into at least one of (i) a composite image that shows only water contributions, or (ii) a composite image that shows only the fat contributions (Keupp; Par 0121; Keupp teaches at least providing a composite image with only the water contributions).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 5. Keupp further teaches wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises fitting an analytical signal-response model to an experimentally observed signal-response curve to quantitatively estimate a fat fraction in each voxel (Keupp; Par 0025 and Par 0164-0166; Keupp teaches using modelling to the observed curve to estimate the water and fat contributions).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 5. Keupp further teaches wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises fitting an analytical signal-response model to an experimentally observed signal-response curve to quantitatively and jointly estimate a fat fraction and a static magnetic field deviation B0 in each voxel (Keupp; Par 0025, Par 0159, and Par 0164-0166; Keupp teaches using modelling to the observed curve to estimate the water and fat contributions and to further interpolate the B0 shift in the voxel).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 1. Keupp further teaches wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises using neighborhood relationships to enforce smooth spatial change of an estimated static magnetic field deviation map B0 (Keupp; Par 0153 and 0157; Keupp teaches using neighboring saturation offsets to adjust the B0 shift map, which smooths the change).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 1. Keupp further teaches wherein the separating procedure comprises calculating a phase difference between the fat and the water (Keupp; Par 0101 and Par 0126; Keupp teaches calculating the phase difference between fat and water contributions).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 1. Keupp further teaches wherein the phase difference between the fat and the water is incorporated into an extended two-component fitting model (Keupp; Par 0101, Par 0126, and Par 0151; Keupp teaches calculating the phase difference between fat and water contributions and using a fitting model for the fat saturation spectrum).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 16. Keupp further teaches wherein the extended two-component fitting model is based on at least one of a fat intensity or a water intensity (Keupp; Par 0101, Par 0126, and Par 0151; Keupp teaches calculating the phase difference between fat and water contributions and using a fitting model for the fat saturation spectrum).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 16. Keupp further teaches wherein the extended two-component fitting model is based on at least an overall curve-shift from local B0 inhomogeneities or residual noise (Keupp; Par 0025, Par 0105, Par 0159, and Par 0164-0166; Keupp teaches using modelling to the observed curve to estimate the water and fat contributions and to use the fat suppression pulses to reduce B0 noise).
Regarding claim 19, Keupp teaches a system for separating fat from water contributions in at least one magnetic resonance (“MR”) image (Keupp; Par 0008-0009 and Par 0042; Keupp teaches separating the water and fat contributions from a complex MR image), comprising: at least one computing processor which is configured to: Cause periodic radio frequency (“RF”) saturation pulses with varying frequency offset to be provided from a water resonance frequency with at least two different offsets (Keupp; Fig 1, Element 126, Par 0085, and Par 0086; Keupp teaches using at least a set of saturation frequency offsets), wherein echo data is aquired (Keupp; Par 0126, 0127, 0131, and 0160; Keupp teaches a GRE echo signal may be acquired); analyze the signal response to a saturation at different frequencies on a voxel-by-voxel basis (Keupp; Par 0008-0009 and Par 0042; Keupp teaches reconstructing the B0 map along with a water and fat image and using a shift to calculate voxel-by-voxel to determine the complex image data); and based on the analyzed signal response, separate the fat from the water contributions in the at least one MR image (Keupp; Par 0038, Par 0092, and Par 0108-0118; Keupp teaches creating a separate fat image and a water image).
Keupp does not explicitly wherein a single echo is acquired following each RF excitation pulse for each of the varying frequency offsets.
Slavin teaches wherein a single echo is acquired following each RF excitation pulse for each of the varying frequency offsets (Slavin; Fig 2 and Par 0021; Slavin teaches a fGRE acquisition method may be used in which a single alpha pulse is played out and a single k-space line is acquired, i.e. a single echo is acquired after the RF saturation pulses).
Regarding claim 20, Keupp teaches a non-transitory computer-accessible medium (Keupp; Par 0085-0089; Keupp teaches a memory in a system for operating) having stored thereon computer-executable instructions for separating fat from water contributions in at least one magnetic resonance (“MR”) image (Keupp; Par 0008-0009 and Par 0042; Keupp teaches separating the water and fat contributions from a complex MR image), wherein, when a computer arrangement executes the instructions, the computer arrangement is configured to perform procedures comprising: causing periodic radio frequency (“RF”) saturation pulses with varying frequency offset to be provided from a water resonance frequency with at least two different offsets (Keupp; Fig 1, Element 126, Par 0085, and Par 0086; Keupp teaches using at least a set of saturation frequency offsets), wherein echo data is aquired (Keupp; Par 0126, 0127, 0131, and 0160; Keupp teaches a GRE echo signal may be acquired); analyzing the signal response to a saturation at different frequencies on a voxel-by-voxel basis (Keupp; Par 0008-0009 and Par 0042; Keupp teaches reconstructing the B0 map along with a water and fat image and using a shift to calculate voxel-by-voxel to determine the complex image data); and based on the analyzed signal response, separating the fat from the water contributions in the at least one MR image (Keupp; Par 0038, Par 0092, and Par 0108-0118; Keupp teaches creating a separate fat image and a water image).
Keupp does not explicitly teach wherein a single echo is acquired following each RF excitation pulse for each of the varying frequency offsets.
Slavin teaches wherein a single echo is acquired following each RF excitation pulse for each of the varying frequency offsets (Slavin; Fig 2 and Par 0021; Slavin teaches a fGRE acquisition method may be used in which a single alpha pulse is played out and a single k-space line is acquired, i.e. a single echo is acquired after the RF saturation pulses).
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keupp in view of Slavin in view of Feng.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 6.
The combination of Keupp and Slavin does not explicitly teach wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises using a compressed-sensing principle to recover images for different frequency offsets by utilizing correlations between the data from adjacent frequency offsets.
Feng teaches wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises using a compressed-sensing principle to recover images for different frequency offsets by utilizing correlations between the data from adjacent frequency offsets (Feng; Pgs 3-4, Section A Simple Example of XD-GRASP and Pgs 10-11, Section Discussion; Feng teaches using correlations of the frequency offsets next to each other in order to better reconstruct the image).
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the apparatus of the combination of Keupp and Slavin with the sensing principles of Feng in order to provide a better image while the target has respiratory motion (Feng; Pgs 2-3, Section Introduction).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Keupp and Slavin teaches the method of claim 1.
The combination of Keupp and Slavin is silent on wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises using an XD-GRASP procedure and a compressed-sensing procedure for radial sampling to recover images for all frequency offsets.
Feng teaches wherein the analyzing of the signal response comprises using an extra-dimensional golden-angle radial sparse parallel (“XD-GRASP”) procedure and a compressed-sensing procedure for radial sampling to recover images for all frequency offsets (Feng; Pgs 3-4, Section A Simple Example of XD-GRASP and Pgs 10-11, Section Discussion, Section Discussion; Feng teaches using correlations of the frequency offsets next to each other in order to better reconstruct the image).
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the apparatus of the combination of Keupp and Slavin with the sensing principles of Feng in order to provide a better image while the target has respiratory motion (Feng; Pgs 2-3, Section Introduction).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Keupp, Slavin, and Feng teaches the method of claim 8. Feng further teaches wherein the offset frequency is treated as extra dimension for the XD-GRASP procedure (Feng; Pgs 3-4, Section A Simple Example of XD-GRASP and Pgs 10-11, Section Discussion; Feng teaches using correlations of the frequency offsets next to each other in order to better reconstruct the image).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keupp in view of Slavin in view of Feng in further view of Kartausch et al (US 2021/0025957 A1, heretofore referred to as Kartausch).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Keupp, Slavin, and Feng teaches the method of claim8.
The combination of Keupp, Slavin, and Feng is silent on further comprising performing a correlation of adjacent frequency offsets by penalizing an L1 norm or an L2 norm of the finite difference of the image intensity between a current frequency offset and at least one of the adjacent frequency offsets on a voxel-by-voxel basis.
Kartausch teaches performing a correlation of adjacent frequency offsets by penalizing an L1 norm or an L2 norm of the finite difference of the image intensity between a current frequency offset (Kartausch; Par 0039-0040; Kartausch teaches adjusting the offset with the L1 or L2 norm) and at least one of the adjacent frequency offsets on a voxel-by-voxel basis (Kartausch; Par 0052; Kartausch teaches this a voxel-wise method).
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the apparatus of the combination of Keupp, Slavin, and Feng with the correlation of Kartausch in order to provide a better data consistency (Kartausch; Par 0040).
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 ADAM S CLARKE whose telephone number is (571)270-3792. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm.
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, Judy Nguyen can be reached on (571)272-2258. 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.
/ADAM S CLARKE/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/NEEL D SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
