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 .
Response to Arguments
The amendments filed on 07/25/2025 with respect to claims 1 and 11 have been considered and are made of record.
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.
Claim 1-21 and 23 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.
As to Claim 1,
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 1 recites “receiving fMRI data from an MRI system, reconstructing the dataset using a resting state reconstruction process, comparing the reconstructed images to a reference image, and generating an alert”. These operations constitute data collection”. These features are considered abstract ideas because they are directed towards mental steps or relationships, because receiving fMRI data from an MRI system, reconstructing the dataset using a resting state reconstruction process, comparing the reconstructed images to a reference image, and generating an alert. These operations constitute data collection are reasonably implemented with such mental steps or relationships.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The above identified abstract ideas are not reasonably integrated in a practical application as no claim feature reasonably implements or otherwise integrates the above features into required practical application. The additional elements, a magnet system, gradient system, RF system and computer system, perform only conventional MRI computing functions and do not improve the operation of the MRI hardware of computer. The “rs-fMRI reconstruction process” is described solely by its intended results. Accordingly, the abstract idea is not integrated into practical application that improves the functionality of a computer, MRI scanner, or any other technology.
Step 2B: Claim 1 includes “receiving fMRI data from an MRI system, reconstructing the dataset using a resting state reconstruction process, comparing the reconstructed images to a reference image, and generating an alert”. These features are considered abstract ideas because they are directed towards mental steps or relationships,
The recited steps of receiving data, reconstructing using a mathematical process and displaying the results are well understood m routine and conventional activities in the field medical image processing. The above noted additional elements amount to insufficient extra-solution activity because they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and because they are conventional.
Claim 2-10 stands rejected for same reasons as claim 1.
As to Claim 11,
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 11 recites “receiving fMRI data, performing resting state reconstruction, comparing to a reference image, determining motion, and generating an alert”. These features are considered abstract ideas because they are directed towards mental steps or relationships, because “receiving fMRI data, performing resting state reconstruction, comparing to a reference image, determining motion, and generating an alert”. These operations constitute data collection are reasonably implemented with such mental steps or relationships.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The above identified abstract ideas are not reasonably integrated in a practical application as no claim feature reasonably implements or otherwise integrates the above features into required practical application. The additional elements, computer system and MRI perform only conventional MRI computing functions and do not improve the operation of the MRI hardware of computer. The “receiving fMRI data, performing resting state reconstruction, comparing to a reference image, determining motion, and generating an alert”. Accordingly, the abstract idea is not integrated into practical application that improves the functionality of a computer, MRI scanner, or any other technology.
Step 2B: Claim 11 includes “receiving fMRI data, performing resting state reconstruction, comparing to a reference image, determining motion, and generating an alert”. These features are considered abstract ideas because they are directed towards mental steps or relationships,
The recited steps of receiving data, reconstructing using a mathematical process and generating the alerts are well understood m routine and conventional activities in the field medical image processing. The above noted additional elements amount to insufficient extra-solution activity because they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and because they are conventional.
Claim 12-20 stands rejected for same reasons as claim 11.
As to Claim 21,
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 21 recites “an MRI system with magnet, gradient and RF subsystem, and a computer programmed to perform task based acquisition and resting state reconstruction”. These features are considered abstract ideas because they are directed towards mental steps or relationships, because “perform task based acquisition and resting state reconstruction”. These operations constitute data collection are reasonably implemented with such mental steps or relationships.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The above identified abstract ideas are not reasonably integrated in a practical application as no claim feature reasonably implements or otherwise integrates the above features into required practical application. The additional elements an MRI system with magnet, gradient and RF subsystem, and a computer programmed do not improve the operation of the MRI hardware of computer. The “perform task based acquisition and resting state reconstruction”. Accordingly, the abstract idea is not integrated into practical application that improves the functionality of a computer, MRI scanner, or any other technology.
Step 2B: Claim 21 includes “perform task based acquisition and resting state reconstruction”. These features are considered abstract ideas because they are directed towards mental steps or relationships,
The recited steps of receiving data, reconstructing using a mathematical process and generating the alerts are well understood m routine and conventional activities in the field medical image processing. The above noted additional elements amount to insufficient extra-solution activity because they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and because they are conventional.
Claim 23 is 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.
As to Claim 23,
Step 2A, Prong 1: Claim 23 includes receiving functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data, reconstructing the fMRI data,.., using a resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI) reconstruction process without accounting,.., task or stimulus,.., displaying the rs-fMRI image. These features are considered abstract ideas because they are directed towards mental steps or relationships, because receiving functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data, reconstructing the fMRI data,.., using a resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI) reconstruction process without accounting,.., task or stimulus,.., displaying the rs-fMRI image are reasonably implemented with such mental steps or relationships.
Step 2A, Prong 2: The above identified abstract ideas are not reasonably integrated in a practical application as no claim feature reasonably implements or otherwise integrates the above features into required practical application. Although the claim nominally relates to “functional magnetic resonance imaging”, no element imposes any specific limitation on how the MRI data are acquired or how the reconstruction process is implemented in hardware. The claim lacks any recitation of particular MRI components or any technological improvement in MRI operation. Accordingly, the abstract idea is not integrated into practical application that improves the functionality of a computer, MRI scanner, or any other technology.
Step 2B: Claim includes receiving functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data, reconstructing the fMRI data,.., using a resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI) reconstruction process without accounting,.., task or stimulus,.., displaying the rs-fMRI image. These features are considered abstract ideas because they are directed towards mental steps or relationships,
The recited steps of receiving data, reconstructing using a mathematical process and displaying the results are well understood m routine and conventional activities in the field medical image processing. The above noted additional elements amount to insufficient extra-solution activity because they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and because they are conventional.
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claims 1-21 are allowed
Reason for Allowance
4. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Applicant amended independent claims 1 and 11 by adding the limitations similar to prior allowed claims 21 and overcome rejection. In combination with other limitations of the claims. The cited prior arts fail to teach “A system for performing a resting-state functional magnetic resonance image (rs-fMRI) reconstruction of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) dataset,.., control the magnetic gradient system and the RF system to a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) dataset using at least data acquisitionresting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) reconstruction process to generate at least one resting- state (rs) image; during the at least ”, as required by claims 1, 11, 21.
Claims 2-10, 12-20 are in condition for allowance, based on their dependencies.
Note: Claims 1-21 and 23 are rejected under 101 however no prior art rejection has been applied because the prior art of record does not teach the limitations of claims 1, 11 above and further “A method for producing resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) images,.., receiving functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data acquired from a subject as the subject is subjected to at least one of performing a task or experiencing a stimulus; reconstructing the fMRI data acquired as the subject is subjected to at least one of performing a task or experiencing a stimulus using a resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI) reconstruction process without accounting for the at least one of performing the task or experiencing the stimulus to generating rs-fMRI images; and displaying the rs-fMRI images” for claim 23.
Conclusion
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Dosenbach (US Publication 20200225308) discloses REAL TIME MONITORING AND PREDICTION OF MOTION IN MRI.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAQI R NASIR whose telephone number is (571)270-1425. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at (571) 270-5628. 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.
/TAQI R NASIR/ Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858