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 Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Specifically, representative Claim 1 recites:
A method for evaluating non-diffused x-ray signals received from a perturbed object due to an illumination of the perturbed object, the method comprises: calculating an estimated field for each of multiple non-perturbed objects, the multiple non-perturbed objects represent perturbances of the perturbed object; the perturbances are of an order of a wavelength of the non-diffused x-ray signals; and evaluating the non-diffused x-ray signals based on the field of the multiple non-perturbed objects.
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements”.
Under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in a statutory category (process).
Under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the grouping of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation, that covers mathematical concepts (mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations) and mental processes – concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion.
For example, steps of “calculating an estimated field for each of multiple non-perturbed objects, the multiple non-perturbed objects represent perturbances of the perturbed object; the perturbances are of an order of a wavelength of the non-diffused x-ray signals;” are treated by the Examiner as belonging to mathematical concept grouping, while the steps of “evaluating the non-diffused x-ray signals based on the field of the multiple non-perturbed objects” are treated as belonging to mental process grouping.
Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claims 8-10 and 19-20.
Next, under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application.
In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
The above claims comprise the following additional elements:
In Claim 9: a processor;
In Claim 19: a non-transitory computer readable medium;
In Claim 20: a processor.
The additional element of “a non-transitory computer readable medium and a processor (generic processor)” are generally recited and are not qualified as particular machines.
In conclusion, the above additional elements, considered individually and in combination with the other claim elements do not reflect an improvement to other technology or technical field, and, therefore, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B.
However, the above claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (Step 2B analysis).
The claims, therefore, are not patent eligible.
With regards to the dependent claims, claims 2-7 and 11-18 provide additional features/steps which are part of an expanded algorithm, so these limitations should be considered part of an expanded abstract idea of the independent claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if written overcome the 101 rejection set forth in this office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 1, no prior art neither either teaches nor fairly suggest evaluating non-diffused x-ray signals received from a perturbed object due to an illumination of the perturbed object, the method comprises: calculating an estimated field for each of multiple non-perturbed objects, the multiple non-perturbed objects represent perturbances of the perturbed object; the perturbances are of an order of a wavelength of the non-diffused x-ray signals; and evaluating the non-diffused x-ray signals based on the field of the multiple non-perturbed objects.
For this reason, claim 1 and all of it dependencies would be allowable.
Claims 8-10, 19 and 20 include analogous, though not necessarily coextensive feature similar to Claim 1, and would be, therefore, along with all of their dependencies, for similar rationale, allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Walder et al. (TUMOR IMAGING WITH X-RAYS AND OTHER HIGH ENERGY SOURCES USING AS CONTRAST AGENTS PHOTON-EMITTING PHOSPHORS HAVING THERAPEUTIC PROPERTIES, 2020-07-16) teaches system and method for imaging or treating a disease in a human or animal body. The system provides to the human or animal body a pharmaceutical carrier including one or more phosphors which are capable of emitting ultraviolet or visible light into the body and which provide x-ray contrast. The system includes one or more devices which infuse a diseased site with a photoactivatable drug and the pharmaceutical carrier, an initiation energy source comprising an x-ray or high energy source which irradiates the diseased site with at least one of x-rays, gamma rays, or electrons to thereby initiate emission of said ultraviolet or visible light into the body, and a processor programmed to at least one of 1) produce images of the diseased site or 2) control a dose of said x-rays, gamma rays, or electrons to the diseased site for production of said ultraviolet or visible light at the diseased site to activate the photoactivatable drug;
Van et al. (Methods And Apparatus For Calculating Electromagnetic Scattering Properties Of A Structure, 2019-11-14) teaches method of calculating electromagnetic scattering properties of a structure represented as a nominal structure and a structural perturbation, has the steps: 1008 numerically solving a volume integral equation comprising a nominal linear system 1004 to determine a nominal vector field being independent with respect to the structural perturbation; 1010 using a perturbed linear system 1006 to determine an approximation of a vector field perturbation arising from the structural perturbation, by solving a volume integral equation or an adjoint linear system. Matrix-vector multiplication of a nominal linear system matrix convolution operator may be restricted to sub-matrices; and 1012 calculating electromagnetic scattering properties of the structure using the determined nominal vector field and the determined approximation of the vector field perturbation;
Yun et al. (X-RAY INTERFEROMETRIC IMAGING SYSTEM, 2015-08-27) teaches an x-ray interferometric imaging system in which the x-ray source comprises a target having a plurality of structured coherent sub-sources of x-rays embedded in a thermally conducting substrate. The system additionally comprises a beam-splitting grating G.sub.1 that establishes a Talbot interference pattern, which may be a .pi. phase-shifting grating, and an x-ray detector to convert two-dimensional x-ray intensities into electronic signals. The system may also comprise a second analyzer grating G.sub.2 that may be placed in front of the detector to form additional interference fringes, a means to translate the second grating G.sub.2 relative to the detector. The system may additionally comprise an anti-scattering grid to reduce signals from scattered x-rays. Various configurations of dark-field and bright-field detectors are also disclosed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J SINGLETARY whose telephone number is (571)272-4593. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-5:00pm.
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, Lisa Caputo can be reached at (571) 272-2388. 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.
/MICHAEL J SINGLETARY/Examiner, Art Unit 2863