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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/22/26 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kumar (Us 2020/0163635 A1).
With respect to independent claim 1, Kumar teaches in Figs. 6 – 9, 1. (Previously Presented) An x-ray imaging system, comprising:
a movable x-ray scanning module 100 configured to generate a sweeping beam as shown in Fig. 8 of x- rays;
a positioning arm 600; and
a detector panel 602 coupled to or configured to be coupled to the positioning arm, the positioning arm configured to allow an operator to position the detector panel relative to and independently from the movable x-ray scanning module and with an orientation for receiving x-rays from a target 122 resulting from the sweeping beam of x-rays being incident at the target or transmitted through the target.
With respect to dependent claim 10, Kumar teaches wherein the detector panel in coupled arrangement with the positioning arm is configured to be positioned by the operator to receive at least one of (i) transmission x-rays through the target as shown in Fig. 6 and (ii) backscatter, side scatter, or forward scatter x-rays from the target.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 6 and 8 – 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar, and further in view of Cox (US 2018/0055467 A1; previously cited).
The teaching of Kumar has been discussed above.
With respect to dependent claim 6, Kumar is silent with wherein the detector panel is at least one of (i) non-planar and (ii) flexible.
Cox, a pertinent art, teaches non planar detector 104 in Fig. 15. In view of this, it would be obvious at the time of the claimed invention was filed to modify the teaching of Kumar in order to have a detector in a desired shape. This is in consistency with the Supreme Court Decision of the KSR. V. International Co.: Obvious to try – choosing form a finite number of predictable results.
With respect to dependent claim 8, Kumar is silent with wherein the positioning arm further includes a plurality of telescoping sections, the plurality of telescoping sections sufficiently stiff in a fully extended state to support the detector panel in an operator- defined position and orientation.
Cox teaches in paragraph [0050] the limitation of claim 8. In view of this, it would be obvious at the time of the claimed invention was filed to modify the teaching of Kumar in order to position desired detector in a desired position. This is in consistency with the Supreme Court Decision of the KSR. V. International Co.: applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
With respect to dependent claim 9, Cox teaches in paragraph [0050] wherein the positioning arm is adjustable along its length.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar, and further in view of Brunnett (US 3,976,885).
The teaching of Kumar has been discussed above.
With respect to dependent claim 11, Kumar is silent with (i) at least one of an electrical cable configured to connect the detector panel operably to a processor of the x- ray imaging system or (ii) a wireless link subsystem configured to connect the detector panel operably to the processor of the x-ray imaging system via a wireless communications protocol.
Brunnett, a pertinent art, teaches at least one of an electrical cable 20 configured to connect the detector panel operably to a processor 18 of the x- ray imaging system. In view of this, it would be obvious at the time of the claimed invention was filed to modify the teaching of Kumar in order to form an image by a known method. This is in consistency with the Supreme Court Decision of the KSR. V. International Co.: applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 – 4, 12, and 15 – 16 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.
Claims 7 and 13 – 14 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to dependent claim 2 and its dependent claims 3 – 4, the prior art of record fails to teach or reasonably suggest:
wherein the detector panel is an auxiliary detector panel, and wherein the movable x-ray scanning module includes a primary detector oriented to receive backscatter x-rays from the target resulting from the sweeping beam of x-rays being incident at the target.
With respect to independent claim 7, the prior art of record fails to teach or reasonably suggest:
at least one location or orientation sensor located in at least one of the positioning arm, detector panel, and movable x-ray scanning module, the at least one location or orientation sensor configured to output a signal that can be used by a processor to determine a relative location or orientation of the detector panel with respect to the movable x-ray scanning module.
With respect to dependent claim 12, the prior art of record fails to teach or reasonably suggest:
wherein the detector panel comprises: one or more scintillator volumes configured to be oriented along a scan axis of a scanning beam of x-rays to receive x-rays from the scanning beam transmitted through a target, the one or more scintillator volumes further configured to produce scintillation photons responsive to receiving the x-rays; a plurality of ribbons of wavelength-shifting fibers (WSFs) optically coupled to the one or more scintillator volumes along the scan axis via a spatial periodic adjacency of the plurality of ribbons to the scan axis, the plurality of ribbons configured to receive scintillation photons from the one or more scintillator volumes via the spatial periodic adjacency as the scanning beam of x-rays scans over the scan axis; at least one respective photodetector coupled to an end of each respective ribbon of the plurality of ribbons, each respective photodetector configured to detect the scintillation photons carried by the respective ribbon and to produce a respective signal responsively; and a signal combiner configured to combine, selectively, respective signals from one or more ribbons of the plurality of ribbons, for positions of the scanning beam along the scan axis, to create a combined signal representing a scan of the target with enhanced spatial resolution.
With respect to independent claim 13, the prior art of record fails to teach or reasonably suggest: an x-ray imaging system comprising:
a light detection structure, the light detection structure including a tubular support structure having a curved outer surface, and a plurality of ribbons of wavelength-shifting fibers (WSFs) wrapped around the curved outer surface in a spatially periodic,substantially helical pattern, the plurality of ribbons of WSFs being configured to carry light to be detected at respective ends of respective ribbons of the plurality of ribbons.
With respect to dependent claim 14, the prior art of record fails to teach or reasonably suggest:
a scintillator volume having an entrance surface and an exit surface, the entrance surface configured to receive incident x-rays, the scintillator volume configured to emitscintillation light responsive to the incident x-rays, and the exit surface configured to pass a portion of the incident x-rays that traverse a thickness of the scintillator volume between the entrance surface and the exit surface; a first plurality of light guides optically coupled to the entrance surface of the scintillator volume; a second plurality of light guides optically coupled to the exit surface of the scintillator volume; at least one first photodetector optically coupled to an end of the first plurality of light guides and configured to output a first signal responsive to scintillation light from the scintillator volume; at least one second photodetector optically coupled to an end of the second plurality of light guides and configured to output a second signal responsive to scintillation light from the scintillator volume; and a spectrum analyzer configured to receive the first and second signals responsive to the scintillation light from the scintillator volume and to determine a characteristic of an energy spectrum of the incident x-rays based on the first and second signals.
With respect to dependent claim 15, the prior art of record fails to teach or reasonably suggest:
a detector structure configured for use with the scanning beam of x-rays, the detector panel, and a detector module that is configured to output an x-ray image signal responsive to the detector panel's receiving x-rays from a target resulting from the sweeping beam of x-rays being incident at the target, the detector structure comprising: a plurality of ribbons of wavelength-shifting fibers (WSF) optically coupled to one or more layers of scintillator volumes, wherein the scintillator volumes are arranged to optically couple to the WSF ribbons in a repeating pattern along one or more axes of the detector; at least one photodetector coupled to one or more ends of each of the ribbons for detecting scintillation photons; a combiner configured to combine the signals from one or more of the ribbons for each orientation of the scanning beam to create a combined signal for each beam orientation.
With respect to dependent claim 16, the prior art of record fails to teach or reasonably suggest:
a light detection structure, the light detection structure including a plurality of scintillator volumes configured to be oriented spaced from each other and in a spatially periodic form along a scan axis of a scanning beam of x-rays to receive x-rays from the scanning beam transmitted through a target, the plurality of scintillator volumes further configured to produce scintillation photons responsive to receiving the x-rays; and a wavelength-shifting fiber (WSF) ribbon optically coupled to the plurality of scintillator volumes along the scan axis, the ribbons configured to receive scintillation photons from the plurality of scintillator volumes via the optical coupling as the scanning beam of x-rays scans over the scan axis.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIHO KIM, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-1628. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8-5 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, David 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.
KIHO KIM, Ph.D.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/Kiho Kim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights