Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/258,046

ARTIFICIAL-INTELLIGENCE-BASED REGISTRATION OF X-RAY IMAGES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 16, 2023
Examiner
AKHAVANNIK, HADI
Art Unit
2676
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Metamorphosis GmbH
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
843 granted / 980 resolved
+24.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
1021
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.5%
-29.5% vs TC avg
§103
46.5%
+6.5% vs TC avg
§102
31.9%
-8.1% vs TC avg
§112
2.9%
-37.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 980 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/22/26 has been entered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been considered. Please see Stoianovici (20030120283) who teaches the second object may move while a point on it remains fixed (see pars. 31, 35 and 50, where the tip of the needle remains fixed while the ball end changes location). 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. Claim(s) 1, 5, 7-10, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barrick (6477400) in view of Blau (20160354156) in further view of Stoianovici (20030120283). Regarding claim 1, Barrick teaches a method of processing X-ray images, the method comprising the steps of receiving a first X-ray image showing a first part of a first object, wherein the first X-ray image is generated with a first imaging direction and with a first position of an X-ray source relative to the first object, where the first model is an anatomical body part (col. 3 lines 4-45), receiving a second image showing a second part of the first object, wherein the second X-ray image is generated with a second imaging direction and with a second position of the X-ray source relative to the first object (col. 3 lines 10-30, rotating C arm); registering the first X-ray image and the second X-ray image based on the outline of the first object and based on at least one of the conditions out of the group consisting of: one point having a fixed 3D position relative to the first object, wherein the point is identified and detected in the first X-ray image and the second X-ray image, a part of a second object having a fixed 3D position relative to the first object, wherein based on a model of the second object the part of the second object is identified and detected in the first X-ray image and the second X-ray image, or a third part of the first object, wherein based on the model of the first object the third part of the first object is identified and detected in the first and second X-ray images (col. 3 lines 15-45, registering the two views by a single registration pin. Barrick uses a bone outline to register). Blau teaches receiving a model of the first object (pars. 20-23 and 50-51) and also Blau uses this model to match to the images in pars. 50-51. It would have been obvious prior to the effective filing date of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in Barrick the ability to match with a model as taught by Blau in order to increase registration accuracy. Stoianovici teaches the second object may move while a point on it remains fixed (see pars. 31, 35 and 50, where the tip of the needle remains fixed while the ball end changes location). It would have been obvious prior to the effective filing date of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in Barrick and Blau the ability to have two orientation imaging with fixed instrument points as taught by Stoianovici. The reason is to allow the system to have geometric constraints for target determination. Regarding claim 5, see pars. 20-23 of Blau, scaling to match model. Regarding claim 7, see Barrick col. 3 line 66 to col. 4 line 23, drill guide pin is the second object. Regarding claim 8, see Barrick col. 4 line 50 to col. 5 line 10, position of drill relative to femur. Regarding claim 9, see Barrick col. 4 line 50 to col. 5 line 10, femur, hip screw, guide pin. Regarding claim 10, see Barrick, col. 4 lines 45-65. Both images show femur head. Regarding claim 16, see Barrick col. 3 lines 18-30, single registration pin and Blau teaches known distance ins pars. 40-41 and 58 teaches c arm movement. Regarding claim 17, see Barrick col. 3 lines 10-17. Regarding claim 18, see Barrick col. 5 lines 1-15, femoral head is proximal part of the femor and the drill is an opening instrument. Claim(s) 2-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barrick (6477400) in view of Blau (20160354156) in view of Stoianovici in further view of Blau2 (20110019884). Regarding claim 2, see the rejection of claim 1 which teaches using a first and second x ray image, a model and condition. Blau2 teaches a 3D reconstruction in pars. 97-100. It would have been obvious prior to the effective filing date of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in Stoianovici , Barrick and Blau the ability to create a 3D reconstruction as taught by Blau2 in order to provide guidance in 3 dimensions. Regarding claim 3, see pars. 97-99 of Blau2 which teaches registration. Regarding claim 6, see par. 102 of Blau2 which teaches adding a reference plate. Claim(s) 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barrick (6477400) in view of Blau (20160354156) in view of Stoianovici in view of Blau2 (20110019884) in further view of Mahfouz (20160157751). Regarding claim 12, Mahfouz teaches wherein the first object is a femur and wherein at least one geometrical aspect of the femur is determined based on the 3D reconstruction of the femur, wherein the at least one geometrical aspect is a geometrical aspect out of the group consisting of an angle of anteversion, a CCD angle, an antecurvation, and a bone length (see figures 51-60 and figure 71 whcich shows geometrical aspects claims). It would have been obvious prior to the effective filing date of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in Stoianovici , Barrick, Blau and Blau2 the ability to make measurements as taught by Mahfouz in order to combine the post and pre surgical planning. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HADI AKHAVANNIK whose telephone number is (571)272-8622. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM - 5 PM Monday to Friday. 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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at (571) 272-4637. 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. /HADI AKHAVANNIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2676
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 16, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 10, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 30, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 22, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 04, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602787
PROCEDURE FOR CONTROL, PROGNOSIS AND COMPARATIVE SUPPORT RELATED TO DERMATOLOGICAL LESIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602953
GESTURE RECOGNITION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12579662
HIGH-PRECISION LOCALIZATION OF A MOVING OBJECT ON A TRAJECTORY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573073
JOINT ROTATION/LOCATION FROM EGOCENTRIC IMAGES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12573207
DRIVER ASSISTANCE APPARATUS AND DRIVER ASSISTANCE METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+12.7%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 980 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month