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 .
Priority
Priority is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
The present application has claimed priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 from Korean Patent Application No. KR10-2021-0053091 filed 4/23/2021. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) were filed on 7/27/2023 and 3/31/2025. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: “tempromandibular" (paragraphs 22 and 84) should be spelled “temporomandibular”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 4-5, 8, 14-15 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 4-5 and 14-15: “the each” is improper grammar.
Claims 8 and 18: “tempromandibular" should be spelled “temporomandibular.” Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-5, 9-15, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kaftan (US20130332868A1; filed 6/10/2013).
With regards to claim 1, Kaftan discloses a medical image providing method, performed by a medical image providing apparatus (Kaftan, Fig. 1: shows medical images), comprising:
displaying a list of medical image providing conditions (Kaftan, paragraph 26: “FIG. 2 shows an example of a navigation map 30;” the “navigation map” is interpreted as a list because it contains a consecutive series of selectable objects; the “conditions” are interpreted as the selectable regions within the map);
receiving, from a user, a selection input related to at least one medical image providing condition from the list (Kaftan, abstract: “The navigation map is displayed alongside an image representing a region of the image volume. A selected part of the image volume is identified for review in response to a user selection of a location on the navigation map corresponding to the part.”);
generating an adjusted medical image in which a pre-stored medical image is adjusted based on a medical image providing condition based on the selection input; and providing the adjusted medical image (Kaftan, paragraph 24: “By selecting an organ/structure in the navigation map, typically by clicking on it with a mouse or similar pointing device, the system navigates to this organ and optionally may change visualization parameters such as windowing and zooming based on pre-defined values or values derived directly from the segmentation results.”).
With regards to claim 2, which depends on claim 1, Kaftan discloses wherein the medical image providing condition comprises a first condition on a structure that the user desires to identify on a medical image (Kaftan, paragraph 24: “By selecting an organ/structure in the navigation map, typically by clicking on it with a mouse or similar pointing device, the system navigates to this organ”), and the first condition comprises a plurality of structures comprised in the medical image (Kaftan, fig. 1: the medical images shown in 12A and 12 include multiple regions that can be interpreted as structures).
With regards to claim 3, which depends on claim 2, Kaftan discloses wherein the generating of the adjusted medical image comprises: adjusting an attribute of a structure selected by the user from the first condition based on an attribute of a corresponding structure in a pre-stored medical image (Kaftan, paragraph 24: “By selecting an organ/structure in the navigation map, typically by clicking on it with a mouse or similar pointing device, the system navigates to this organ and optionally may change visualization parameters such as windowing and zooming based on pre-defined values or values derived directly from the segmentation results.” The values are predefined, and the medical image data is merely being navigated through by the user so it is considered pre-stored).
With regards to claim 4, which depends on claim 2, Kaftan discloses wherein each structure matches a plurality of structure groups and each group comprises the each structure and other structures having relations to the each structure and is defined by a combination of different structures (Kaftan, paragraph 19: “In some embodiments, only a part of the navigation map may be shown, for example representing only a presently-viewed organ or data slice, or a region around a presently-viewed organ or data slice. Each subset, such as slice or organ, is selectable on the navigation-mini-map and triggers the navigation of the current view(s) 12, 12A to the organ or data slice selected on the navigation-mini-map. Region-specific visualization settings may be retrieved and applied as appropriate to the selected region;” the slice view is interpreted as a group, and a selected organ or part of a data slice is interpreted as the structure since each one belongs to a group of slices), and the generating of the adjusted medical image comprises: providing a plurality of structure groups matched to the structure selected by the user in the first condition; determining one structure group of the plurality of structure groups based on selection of the user; and adjusting attributes of structures comprised in the structure group to a preset value (Kaftan, paragraph 19: “Each subset, such as slice or organ, is selectable on the navigation-mini-map and triggers the navigation of the current view(s) 12, 12A to the organ or data slice selected on the navigation-mini-map”).
With regards to claim 5, which depends on claim 4, Kaftan discloses wherein the other structures having relations to the each structure are adjacent structures disposed adjacent to each other (Kaftan, paragraph 19: “Each subset, such as slice or organ, is selectable on the navigation-mini-map;” fig. 1: a slice is shown with multiple, adjacent organs), and an attribute of an adjacent structure disposed adjacent to the structure selected by the user is differently displayed (Kaftan, fig. 1: a slice is shown with multiple, adjacent organs; Since the attribute is not defined in any way, it can be interpreted as its position or appearance values, which are necessarily displayed differently since they are adjacent to each other).
With regards to claim 9, which depends on claim 1, Kaftan discloses receiving a change request input for changing a medical image providing condition from the user (Kaftan, paragraph 28: “Allowing the user to change easily from viewing one organ, slice or ROI to another by using the navigation map of the present invention;” paragraph 24: “By selecting an organ/structure in the navigation map, typically by clicking on it with a mouse or similar pointing device, the system navigates to this organ”).
With regards to claim 10, which depends on claim 9, Kaftan discloses wherein the generating of the adjusted medical image comprises: when generating the adjusted medical image, reflecting a changed medical image providing condition based on the change request input (Kaftan, paragraph 28: “Allowing the user to change easily from viewing one organ, slice or ROI to another by using the navigation map of the present invention”).
Claims 11-13 recite substantially similar limitations to claims 1-3 respectively and are thus rejected along the same rationales.
With regards to claim 14, which depends on claim 12, Kaftan discloses wherein each structure matches a plurality of structure groups and each group comprises the each structure and other structures having relations to the each structure and is defined by a combination of different structures (Kaftan, paragraph 19: “In some embodiments, only a part of the navigation map may be shown, for example representing only a presently-viewed organ or data slice, or a region around a presently-viewed organ or data slice. Each subset, such as slice or organ, is selectable on the navigation-mini-map and triggers the navigation of the current view(s) 12, 12A to the organ or data slice selected on the navigation-mini-map. Region-specific visualization settings may be retrieved and applied as appropriate to the selected region;” the slice view is interpreted as a group of structures, and a selected organ or part of a data slice is interpreted as the structure since each one belongs to a group of slices), and the controller is configured to provide a plurality of structure groups matched to the structure selected by the user in the first condition, determine one structure group of the plurality of structure groups based on selection of the user (Kaftan, paragraph 19: “Each subset, such as slice or organ, is selectable on the navigation-mini-map and triggers the navigation of the current view(s) 12, 12A to the organ or data slice selected on the navigation-mini-map”), and generate the adjusted medical image by adjusting opacities and colors of structures comprised in the determined structure group to preset values, respectively (Kaftan, paragraph 26: “Image data subsets, which in this example are slices, which have already been reviewed are highlighted by use of a background color 32 which differs from a background color 34 used to indicate image data subsets which have not yet been viewed. A further background color 36 may be used to indicate a presently-viewed image data subset in order to provide context in respect of its position within the body and an indication of whether neighboring image data subsets have been viewed.”).
Claim 15 recites substantially similar limitations to claim 5 and is thus rejected along the same rationale.
Claims 19-20 recite substantially similar limitations to claims 9-10 respectively and are thus rejected along the same rationales.
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.
Claim(s) 6-8 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaftan in view of Lee et al (US6704439B1; filed 9/14/2000).
With regards to claim 6, which depends on claim 1, Kaftan does not disclose wherein the medical image providing condition comprises a second condition on treatment to be performed by the user, and the second condition comprises at least one of implant, endodontic treatment (endo), orthodontic treatment (ortho), and multiplanar reformation (MPR).
However, Lee et al teaches wherein the medical image providing condition comprises a second condition on treatment to be performed by the user, and the second condition comprises at least one of implant, endodontic treatment (endo), orthodontic treatment (ortho), and multiplanar reformation (MPR) (Lee et al, col 13, lines 1-5: “A dental surgeon can identify the alveolar nerve region in the mandible image of a patient through the above mentioned method, which allows the dental surgeon before implantation to simulate whether or not an implant screw may encroach on the alveolar nerves.” Abstract: “the method allows a dental surgeon to accurately detect the position of the alveolar nerve region during an implantation in an automated manner.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined Kaftan and Lee et al such that the image is adjusted based on a desired treatment of the patient. This would have enabled the invention to automate the region identification (Lee et al, col 2, lines 5-10: “To solve the above problems, it is an objective of the present invention to provide an automated method for identifying an alveolar nerve region in a mandible image obtained by computed tomography (CT)”).
With regards to claim 7, which depends on claim 6, Kaftan does not disclose based on an image selection standard that is set by condition with respect to treatment selected by the user from the second condition, selecting images corresponding to the selected treatment from pre-stored medical images and generating an adjusted medical image.
However, Lee et al teaches based on an image selection standard that is set by condition with respect to treatment selected by the user from the second condition, selecting images corresponding to the selected treatment from pre-stored medical images and generating an adjusted medical image (Lee et al, col 13, lines 5-10: “FIG. 8 shows a state where an implant screw is inserted into an implant site of the mandible image of a patient, which illustrates simulation for the implantation. In FIG. 8, reference numeral 81 represents a 3-dimensional mandible image, and reference numeral 82 represents a virtual implant screw.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined Kaftan and Lee et al such that the image is adjusted based on a desired treatment of the patient. This would have enabled the invention to automate the region identification (Lee et al, col 2, lines 5-10: “To solve the above problems, it is an objective of the present invention to provide an automated method for identifying an alveolar nerve region in a mandible image obtained by computed tomography (CT)”).
With regards to claim 8, which depends on claim 1, Kaftan discloses wherein the medical image providing condition comprises a third condition on a region that the user desires to identify on a medical image (Kaftan, paragraph 19: “Each subset, such as slice or organ, is selectable on the navigation-mini-map and triggers the navigation of the current view(s) 12, 12A to the organ or data slice selected on the navigation-mini-map. Region-specific visualization settings may be retrieved and applied as appropriate to the selected region.”).
However, Kaftan does not disclose the third condition comprises at least one of a tooth region, a bone region, a maxilla region, a mandible region, a sinus region, a nerve region, a tempromandibular joint (TMJ) region, an airway region, and a panorama region.
Lee et al teaches the third condition comprises at least one of a tooth region, a bone region, a maxilla region, a mandible region, a sinus region, a nerve region, a tempromandibular joint (TMJ) region, an airway region, and a panorama region (Lee et al, col 3, lines 11-20: “(a) slicing the 3-dimensional mandible image into a number of 2-dimensional slice images, and selecting one of the slice images; (b) displaying candidate nerve pixels of the selected slice image, one of the candidate nerve pixels being selected as a seed point to be used in identifying the alveolar nerve region of the slice image; (c) a user determining the seed point among the candidate nerve pixels”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined Kaftan and Lee et al such that the targeted region included a region around teeth or bones. This would have enabled the user to use the invention to simulate dental procedures (Lee et al, col 1, lines 30-55: “in the case where a tooth is extracted due to damage as shown in FIG. 1A, an artificial tooth is implanted into the damaged region as follows… it is important for a dental surgeon to inspect accurately the location of the nerves near a desired implant site”).
Claims 16-18 recite substantially similar limitations to claims 6-8 respectively and are thus rejected along the same rationales.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shimizu et al (US20030081255A1): Teaches color processing of medical images.
Zhao (US20180330525A1): Teaches a wizard for selecting and identifying objects in a series of medical images.
Dehmeshki (US20060115135A1): Teaches automatically selecting a parameter set for displaying medical images based on patient data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRODERICK C ANDERSON whose telephone number is (313)446-6566. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday, Thursday-Saturday 9-5 PST.
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, Stephen Hong can be reached at 5712724124. 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.
/B.C.A/Examiner, Art Unit 2178
/STEPHEN S HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2178
Prosecution Insights