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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on August 19, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 19, 2026 with respect to claims 1 – 20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Response to Remarks
Applicant argues that Zhou and Clingman is silent on the following limitations below. Examiner respectfully disagrees with the reasons provided below:
In the Remarks (p. 12) regarding claim 1, applicants assert, “Clingman does not disclose that the short sinogram is missing a plurality of views or that the long sinogram is missing a different plurality of views, and Clingman provides no details on what the preprocessing of the sinograms involves, other than stating that the preprocessing is done to reduce or compensate for characteristics of the measuring instrument (e.g., the probe) or the light used”.
Examiner respectfully disagree because Clingman is relied upon to show that the limitation of initializing first and second separately, which is disclosed in [0224], “As will be discussed in more detail below, the short and long sinogram data are preprocessed (step 220) in one or more separate manners to reduce or compensate for undesired data in the sinogram”. Furthermore, Zhou in [0041] is relied upon to disclose missing plurality of views, “interpolation can be used to fill in the missing high-kV projection data (i.e., the high-kV projection data for projection angles during which the low-kV voltage setting was applied). Similarly, interpolation can be used to fill in the missing low-kV projection data” wherein the low-KV sinogram is first sinogram and high-KV sinogram is the second sinogram. Together, Clingman and Zhou teach the limitations highlighted in the aforementioned remarks.
In the Remarks (p. 13) regarding claim 1, applicants assert, “Zhou does not disclose a mechanism by which the sparse view sinograms could be separately processed by the DL-ANN network and still function as intended”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees because Zhou is not relied upon to show that two sinogram are processed separately. Clingman in [0224] is relied upon to show that short and long sinogram are processed separately, “As will be discussed in more detail below, the short and long sinogram data are preprocessed (step 220) in one or more separate manners to reduce or compensate for undesired data in the sinogram”.
In the Remarks (p.15) regarding claim 1, applicants assert, Zhou has no disclosure of adding information from the second sinogram to missing views of the first sinogram to form the first initialized sinogram, nor of the corresponding operation to form the second initialized sinogram.
Examiner respectfully disagrees because Zhou in [0041] is relied upon to disclose missing plurality of views, “interpolation can be used to fill in the missing high-kV projection data (i.e., the high-kV projection data for projection angles during which the low-kV voltage setting was applied). Similarly, interpolation can be used to fill in the missing low-kV projection data” wherein the low-KV sinogram is first sinogram and high-KV sinogram is the second sinogram.
In the Remarks (p.16) regarding claim 1, applicants assert, “There is no identifiable intermediate data structure in Zhou that corresponds to the claimed "first initialized sinogram" or "second initialized sinogram", e.g., a sinogram in which the measured data of one energy is preserved at its obtained views while the missing views are filled with data from the other energy sinogram, and which is then subsequently entered into an interpolation model for further processing”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees because Zhou in [0072] expressly discloses that the system corrects the imperfection in an initial sinogram, “In step 220 of process 202, the sinograms resulting from step 210 are applied to the trained DL-ANN network 361 from process 315. In certain implementations, the DL-ANN network 361 from process 315 performs sinogram completion, and, in other implementations, the DL-ANN network 361 from process 315 corrects for imperfections in an initial sinogram completion performed at step 210”.
For the reasons above, the rejections of claims 1-20 as established in the last Office
Action (non-final, 04/20/2026) is proper and are hereby maintained and incorporated in this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1 – 3, 5, 6, 8, 11, 15, 17 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. Patent Application Publication No. US-20210290193-A1 (hereinafter Zhou) in view of Clingman US Patent Application Publication No. US-20200113505-A1 (hereinafter Clingman).
Regarding claims 1, 11, 15 the combination of Zhou and Clingman as a whole teaches claim 1 for the same grounds of rejection from the Non-Final Office Action of 04/20/2026.
Regarding claims 2 – 3, 5, 6, 8, 17 – 20 the combination of Zhou and Clingman as a whole teaches claim 1, and Zhou teaches claim 2 – 3 and 5 for the same grounds of rejection from the Non-Final Office Action of 04/20/2026.
Claims 4, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Clingman and further in view of Mackie Patent Publication No. WO-2023003924-A1 (hereinafter Mackie) and Jin US Patent Application Publication No. US-20200043163-A1 (hereinafter Jin).
Regarding claim 4, Zhou in the combination discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of views missing from the first sinogram includes multiple sets of consecutive missing views alternating with multiple sets of obtained views (Zhou discloses in Fig. 3A and 3B and in [0058 – 0059], ““The kV setting on the X-ray tube is changed only after a succession of N projection images at different projection angles have been acquired, where N is a number greater than one ... different interval lengths can be applied for different kV settings (e.g., within a given CT scan, more projection images can be acquired at a high-kV setting than at a low-kV setting or vice versa)”), and wherein initializing the first sinogram comprises, for each set of consecutive missing views of the multiple sets of consecutive missing views, identifying complementary views from the second sinogram (Zhou discloses in [0064], “Sparse-view projection data can be approximated from the complete sinograms by designating alternate intervals of the projection angle as corresponding either to a high- or a low-kV setting, and then deleting the low-kV sinogram values for those intervals in which the high-kV setting is applied (and vice versa)”).
Zhou and Clingman in the combination don’t disclose the limitation as further recited in the claim.
Mackie discloses scaling sinogram data of each view of the complementary views from the second sinogram (Mackie in [Page – 17, Paragraph – 1] discloses, “Interpolation via a weighting scheme for the data across detector columns forms a continuous same energy signal in a given projection view”), and filling in each set of consecutive missing views with respective scaled sinogram data to form the first initialized sinogram (Mackie in [Page – 16, Paragraph – 3] discloses, “FIG. 17B is formed and has one complete data set (native samples B and C and conjugate sample A) that can be used to reconstruct the low energy image. Similarly, in FIG. 17C, the conjugate block from FIG. 17A that contains samples B’ and C’ are used to complete the data set required for the high energy image reconstruction (native sample A and conjugate samples B’ and C’)”).
It would have been obvious to one with one having an ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to integrate the technique of Mackie into the system of Zhou in view of Clingman because scaling would help normalize the second sinogram values to match the first, so the filled in views generate better quality initialized and reconstructed image.
Zhou, Clingman and Mackie in the combination don’t disclose the limitation as further recited in the claim.
Jin discloses scaling sinogram data of each view of the complementary views comprises scaling the sinogram data based on a ratio of a value of the second sinogram to a value of the first sinogram (Jin in [0032] discloses, “the first input is a raw PET emission sinogram and the second input is an attenuation-corrected PET emission sinogram of the first input ... Therefore, a ratio between the first and the second input forms attenuation correction factors”).
It would have been obvious to one with one having an ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to integrate the technique of Jin into the system of Zhou in view of Clingman and Mackie because it would allow the system to produce more accurate initialization of the missing views.
Summary of Citations (Jin)
Paragraph [0032]; “the first input is a raw PET emission sinogram and the second input is an attenuation-corrected PET emission sinogram of the first input ... Therefore, a ratio between the first and the second input forms attenuation correction factors”.
Summary of Citations (Zhou)
Paragraph [0058 - 0059]; “The kV setting on the X-ray tube is changed only after a succession of N projection images at different projection angles have been acquired, where N is a number greater than one ... different interval lengths can be applied for different kV settings (e.g., within a given CT scan, more projection images can be acquired at a high-kV setting than at a low-kV setting or vice versa)”.
Paragraph [0064]; “Sparse-view projection data can be approximated from the complete sinograms by designating alternate intervals of the projection angle as corresponding either to a high- or a low-kV setting, and then deleting the low-kV sinogram values for those intervals in which the high-kV setting is applied (and vice versa)”.
Summary of Citations (Mackie)
[Page – 16, Paragraph – 3]; “FIG. 17B is formed and has one complete data set (native samples B and C and conjugate sample A) that can be used to reconstruct the low energy image. Similarly, in FIG. 17C, the conjugate block from FIG. 17A that contains samples B’ and C’ are used to complete the data set required for the high energy image reconstruction (native sample A and conjugate samples B’ and C’)”.
[Page – 17, Paragraph – 1]; “With reference to FIG. 27, an embodiment the high order interpolation is illustrated, which is used to complete the signal for the low energy and high energy data sets. Interpolation via a weighting scheme for the data across detector columns forms a continuous same energy signal in a given projection view”.
Regarding claims 12 and 13, the combination of Zhou, Clingman, Mackie and Jin as a whole teaches claim 12 and 13 for the same grounds of rejection from the Non-Final Office Action of 04/20/2026.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou and Clingman in view of Yang Patent Application Publication No. CN-112489156-A (hereinafter Yang).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Zhou and Clingman as a whole teaches claim 1 but fails to teach the further limitations as recited in claim 7. Yang teaches claim 7 for the same grounds of rejection and motivation established in the Non-Final Office Action of 04/20/2026.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou and Clingman in view of Yang Patent Application Publication No. CN-113436708-A (hereinafter Yang708).
Regarding claim 9, Zhou in the combination discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the plurality of views missing from the first sinogram includes multiple sets of consecutive missing views each alternating with a respective set of obtained views (Zhou in [0064] discloses, “Sparse-view projection data can be approximated from the complete sinograms by designating alternate intervals of the projection angle as corresponding either to a high- or a low-kV setting, and then deleting the low-kV sinogram values for those intervals in which the high-kV setting is applied (and vice versa). In transition regions from the high-kV setting to the low-kV setting (and vice versa)”. Zhou in [0058] discloses about consecutive missing views, “The kV setting on the X-ray tube is changed only after a succession of N projection images at different projection angles have been acquired, where N is a number greater than one”), first initialized sinogram (Zhou discloses about initializing first sinogram in [0069]), N is determined by a number of consecutive missing views in each set of the multiple sets of consecutive missing views (Zhou in [0058] discloses, “The kV setting on the X-ray tube is changed only after a succession of N projection images at different projection angles have been acquired, where N is a number greater than one”. Furthermore, Zhou in [0059] discloses, “the number of successive projection images acquired at a given kV setting does not need to be constant throughout a CT scan, and different interval lengths can be applied for different kV settings”. The consecutive projections obtained at one KV correspond to consecutive missing projections in the complementary sinogram wherein N is not constant).
Zhou and Clingman in the combination don’t disclose the limitation as further recited in the claim.
Yang708 discloses the encoder arm is configured to progressively downsample the features extracted from the to create N downsampled feature sets and pass each downsampled feature (Yang708 in [0022 – 0023] discloses, “Preferably, the convolutional neural networks CNN1, CNN2, and CNN3 each include an encoder, a decoder, and a plurality of hopping connections; the encoder is used to extract features between the inputs and gradually halve the features during the down-sampling process) set of the N downsampled feature sets to the decoder arm and the decoder arm is configured to progressively upsample the final processed feature set using each downsampled feature set (Yang708 in [0053] discloses, “For the first four deconvolution layers in the decoder, we add the jump connection from the convolutional layer accordingly to enhance the robustness of the output. In the decoder, the feature information is preserved by up-sampling features from the decoder and the corresponding encoder. At the end of the decoder, three additional deconvolution layers are added to better preserve the feature information”).
It would have been obvious to one with one having an ordinary skill in art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to integrate the technique of Yang708 into the system of Zhou in view of Clingman because progressively down sampling the extracted feature would make the process of the interpolation problem easier to solve the missing view problem.
Summary of Citations (Zhou)
Paragraph [0058]; “The kV setting on the X-ray tube is changed only after a succession of N projection images at different projection angles have been acquired, where N is a number greater than one”.
Paragraph [0059]; “the number of successive projection images acquired at a given kV setting does not need to be constant throughout a CT scan, and different interval lengths can be applied for different kV settings”.
Paragraph [0064]; “Sparse-view projection data can be approximated from the complete sinograms by designating alternate intervals of the projection angle as corresponding either to a high- or a low-kV setting, and then deleting the low-kV sinogram values for those intervals in which the high-kV setting is applied (and vice versa). In transition regions from the high-kV setting to the low-kV setting (and vice versa)”.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou and Clingman in view of Yang708 and further in view of Zhang Patent Application Publication No. CN-114862982-A (hereinafter Zhang).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Zhou, Clingman and Yang708 as a whole teaches claim 1 but fails to teach the further limitations as recited in claim 7. Zhou and Zhang teach claim 7 for the same grounds of rejection and motivation established in the Non-Final Office Action of 04/20/2026.
Claim 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Clingman and Mackie and further in view of Zhang.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Zhou, Clingman and Mackie as a whole teaches claim 13 but fails to teach the further limitations as recited in claim 14. Zhang teaches claim 14 for the same grounds of rejection and motivation established in the Non-Final Office Action of 04/20/2026.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Clingman and further in view of Wang Patent Publication No. WO-2022266406-A1 (hereinafter Wang).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Zhou and Clingman as a whole teaches claim 15 but fails to teach the further limitations as recited in claim 16. Wang teaches claim 16 for the same grounds of rejection and motivation established in the Non-Final Office Action of 04/20/2026.
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.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAID MUHAMMAD SALEH whose telephone number is (703)756-1684. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am - 5 pm ET.
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, Vu Le can be reached on (571)272-7332. 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.
/ZAID MUHAMMAD SALEH/
Examiner, Art Unit 2668
10/02/2026
/VU LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2668
Prosecution Insights