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 Amendment
This Office action is responsive to Applicant’s PRELIMINARY AMENDMENT, filed September 13, 2023. Claims 1-14 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it exceeds 150 words in length. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
Claims 1-5, 8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Japanese Application Publication JP 11-73490 A (hereinafter “Yamada”).
Regarding claim 1, Yamada discloses a computer implemented method for providing medical imaging data, comprising:
- obtaining first medical image data acquired by a first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device, wherein using the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device of medical imaging technology is associated with at least one vendor-specific or type-specific image characteristic of the first medical image data at least co-determining an image visualization (image information is input from any one of image information input devices 10 to image processing system 30 (paragraph [0048]));
- identifying the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device (image processing system detects the type of the image input modality of the image information input device that is input source of the input image information by modality identifying means 31 (paragraph [0049]));
- determining, based on the identified first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device, a first transfer rule configured to transfer the at least one image characteristic towards a common reference image characteristic associated with a common reference image visualization across different vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging devices (input image information is switched to be output to input standardization means 33 or output standardization means 34, depending on the modality (type and/or manufacturer (paragraph [0006])) of the input source of the image information (paragraph [0050]));
- generating second medical image data by processing the first medical image data with the first transfer rule (input standardizing means performs conversion processing on the input image information so that the image information does not depend on the characteristics of the input device (paragraph [0053]); after which the input standard image information is input to output standardizing means (paragraph [0054]), which performs conversion processing so as to output a standard image that is dependent on standard gradation characteristics that are preset in advance for each type of image information output device (paragraph [0055])); and
- providing the second medical image data to be displayed (image information output from the output standardizing means to a CRT for display (paragraph [0057])).
Regarding claim 2, Yamada discloses wherein the first transfer rule is vendor specific and/or type specific (modality (type/manufacturer (paragraph [0006]) detected, and image information input to input standardizing means based on detection result (paragraph [0052]); input standardizing means identifies incidental information attached to the input image information, identifies profile information defining a gradation characteristic of the input source, and performs input standardization processing so that image information becomes input standard image information (paragraph [0053])).
Regarding claim 3, Yamada discloses wherein identifying the first vendor- specific or type-specific medical imaging device further comprises: extracting a vendor or type identifier from meta data of the first medical image data (incidental information attached to the input image information defines the gradation characteristic of the input source (paragraph [0053])).
Regarding claim 4, Yamada discloses wherein the at least one image characteristic comprises one or more of a sharpness, a contrast, a noise behavior, a frequency domain, an image histogram, and a grey value representation of the first medical image data or parts of it (gradation characteristic of the input source (paragraph [0053])).
Regarding claim 5, Yamada discloses wherein the first transfer rule comprises a set of transfer parameters configured to modify one or more of a sharpness, a contrast, a noise behavior, a frequency domain, and a grey value representation of the first medical image data or parts of it, in order to transfer the at least one image characteristic towards the common reference image characteristic (image standard image information having gradation characteristics with a standard unified in the device modality (paragraph [0053])).
Regarding claim 8, Yamada discloses wherein the first transfer rule is predefined for the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device (profile information defines incidental information attached to the input information that defines the gradation characteristic of the input source (paragraph [0053])), and wherein determining the first transfer rule further comprises:
- searching, within a data source, the first transfer rule assigned to the first vendor- specific or type-specific medical imaging device, based on the identified first vendor- specific or type-specific medical imaging device (profile information stored in the input standardizing means is searched based on the input source, and the conversion processing is performed so as to result in the creation of input standard image information (paragraph [0053])).
Regarding claim 13, Yamada discloses a device for providing medical imaging data, comprising:
- a processor (image processing system 30 (paragraph [0046])); and
- at least one data interface operatively connected to the processor and configured to receive and/or transmit medical image data (image processing system receives image information from an image information input device 10 via network 100 (paragraph [0048]));
- wherein the processor is configured to:
- obtain first medical image data acquired by a first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device of a medical imaging technology, wherein using the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device of the medical imaging technology is associated with at least one vendor-specific or type-specific image characteristic of the first medical image data at least co-determining an image visualization (image information is input from any one of image information input devices 10 to image processing system 30 (paragraph [0048]));
- identify the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device (image processing system detects the type of the image input modality of the image information input device that is input source of the input image information by modality identifying means 31 (paragraph [0049]));
- determine, based on the identified first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device, a first transfer rule configured to transfer the at least one vendor-specific or type-specific image characteristic towards a common reference image characteristic associated with a common reference image visualization across different vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging devices (input image information is switched to be output to input standardization means 33 or output standardization means 34, depending on the modality (type and/or manufacturer (paragraph [0006])) of the input source of the image information (paragraph [0050]));
- generate second medical image data by processing the first medical image data with the first transfer rule (input standardizing means performs conversion processing on the input image information so that the image information does not depend on the characteristics of the input device (paragraph [0053]); after which the input standard image information is input to output standardizing means (paragraph [0054]), which performs conversion processing so as to output a standard image that is dependent on standard gradation characteristics that are preset in advance for each type of image information output device (paragraph [0055])); and
- provide the second medical image data to be displayed (image information output from the output standardizing means to a CRT for display (paragraph [0057])).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Japanese Application Publication JP 2003-233674 A (hereinafter “Nagaoka”).
Regarding claim 10, Yamada does not expressly disclose wherein the first medical image data is obtained from an image database.
Nagaoka discloses a system where images taken by devices of different modalities are stored as raw data in common data storage device 22. The raw data is converted into a common format by common analysis apparatus 23, after which the converted data are sent back to the common data storage device (paragraphs [0027]-[0028]). Thus, Nagaoka discloses obtaining first medical image data (raw data) from an image database (common data storage device). Providing an image database allows for archiving of patient images for future analysis by medical staff. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teaching of Yamada by providing a common data storage device such as taught by Nagaoka.
Regarding claim 11, Yamada does not expressly disclose wherein the first medical image data is obtained from the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device, and then processed with the first transfer rule to generate the second medical image data, and wherein the second medical image data is provided to an image database. However, as set forth above regarding claim 10, Nagaoka discloses the conversion of raw data into a common format by common analysis apparatus 23, after which the converted data is stored in common data storage device 22, and thus Nagaoka discloses providing the second medical image data (converted data) to an image database (common data storage device). As set forth above, providing an image database allows for archiving of patient images for future analysis by medical staff. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teaching of Yamada by providing a common data storage device such as taught by Nagaoka.
Regarding claim 12, Yamada does not expressly disclose wherein the method is applied to a server arranged between the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical image device and an image database. However, as set forth above regarding claim 10, Nagaoka discloses an arrangement where images taken by devices of different modalities are accessed from common data storage device 22 and converted into a common format by common analysis apparatus 23, after which the converted data are sent back to the common data storage device. In this way, the method of converting to a common format is arranged between the devices of different modalities and storage in the common data storage device in terms of the flow of the process. And while the common analysis apparatus is not expressly disclosed as being a server, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the processing performed by the common analysis apparatus could be easily implemented by a conventional computer programmed for such purposes, including a server. As set forth above, providing an image database allows for archiving of patient images for future analysis by medical staff. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teaching of Yamada by providing a common data storage device such as taught by Nagaoka.
12. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada in view of Nagaoka.
Regarding claim 14, Yamada discloses a device for providing medical imaging data, comprising:
- at least a first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device (input data 10 including a plurality of types of image input modalities (CR device 11, CT device 12, MRI device 13, RI device 14 and other image input modality 15) (paragraph [0037])); and
- a device comprising:
- a processor (image processing system 30 (paragraph [0046])); and
- at least one data interface operatively connected to the processor and configured to receive and/or transmit medical image data (image processing system receives image information from an image information input device 10 via network 100 (paragraph [0048])), wherein the processor is configured to:
- obtain first medical image data acquired by a first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device of a medical imaging technology, wherein using the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device of the medical imaging technology is associated with at least one vendor-specific or type-specific image characteristic of the first medical image data at least co-determining an image visualization (image information is input from any one of image information input devices 10 to image processing system 30 (paragraph [0048]));
- identify the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device (image processing system detects the type of the image input modality of the image information input device that is input source of the input image information by modality identifying means 31 (paragraph [0049]));
- determine, based on the identified first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device, a first transfer rule configured to transfer the at least one vendor-specific or type-specific image characteristic towards a common reference image characteristic associated with a common reference image visualization across different vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging devices (input image information is switched to be output to input standardization means 33 or output standardization means 34, depending on the modality (type and/or manufacturer (paragraph [0006])) of the input source of the image information (paragraph [0050]));
- generate second medical image data by processing the first medical image data with the first transfer rule (input standardizing means performs conversion processing on the input image information so that the image information does not depend on the characteristics of the input device (paragraph [0053]); after which the input standard image information is input to output standardizing means (paragraph [0054]), which performs conversion processing so as to output a standard image that is dependent on standard gradation characteristics that are preset in advance for each type of image information output device (paragraph [0055])); and
- provide the second medical image data to be displayed (image information output from the output standardizing means to a CRT for display (paragraph [0057])).
Yamada does not expressly disclose an image database.
As set forth above regarding claim 10, Nagaoka discloses a system where images taken by devices of different modalities are stored as raw data in common data storage device 22. The raw data is converted into a common format by common analysis apparatus 23, after which the converted data are sent back to the common data storage device (paragraphs [0027]-[0028]). Thus, Nagaoka discloses an image database (common data storage device). Providing an image database allows for archiving of patient images for future analysis by medical staff. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teaching of Yamada by providing a common data storage device such as taught by Nagaoka.
Allowable Subject Matter
13. Claims 6, 7 and 9 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.
14. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 6, the cited prior art fails to disclose or suggest Applicant’s method of claim 1, wherein determining the first transfer rule further comprises:
- analyzing a number of first medical image data, each assigned to the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device, and determining the at least one image characteristic for each of the number of first medical image data; and
- determining, for each of the number of first medical image data, a difference between the corresponding one at least one image characteristic and the common reference image characteristic, and generating, based on the determined difference, an individual set of transfer parameters for the first transfer rule for each of the number of medical image data, wherein the individual set of transfer parameters is configured to transfer the corresponding one of the at least one image characteristic of the number of first medical image data towards the common reference image characteristic.
Claim 7 depends from claim 6.
Regarding claim 9, the cited prior art fails to disclose or suggest Applicant’s method of claim 1, wherein the common reference image characteristic and/or the common reference image visualization is common to the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device and additionally to at least one second vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device of the medical imaging technology used to acquire the first medical image data, wherein the underlying medical imaging technology of the first vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device and the second vendor-specific or type-specific medical imaging device is the same, and wherein the second medical image data is generated by processing the first medical image data by a second transfer rule configured to transfer the at least one image characteristic of the first medical image towards the common reference image characteristic associated with the common reference image visualization.
15. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS D LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7436. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30AM-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, Akwasi Sarpong can be reached at 571-270-3438. 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.
/THOMAS D LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681