DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/29/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s response to the last Office Action, filed 11/5/2025, has been entered and made of record.
Applicant has amended claims 1,10, and 11. Claims 15-17 have been added. Claims 1,4-17 are currently pending.
Applicants arguments filed 1/29/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by the amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Futamura et al (US 2021/0056690).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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) 1,4-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoo et al (US 2022/0415013) in view Futamura et al (US 2021/0056690)
As to claim 1, Yoo et al teaches the medical image processing apparatus comprising processing circuitry configured to:
acquire a medical image (medical image 1900, figure 19)
and a heat map ( heat map 1920, figure 19);
determine a transmittance of the heat map based on pixel values of the medical image (If the probability that the pixel is included in the lesion region is low, the heat map 1920 may have high transparency or may be expressed in an inconspicuous color, making it difficult for a medical practitioner to identify. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 19, if the probability that the pixel is included in the lesion region is low as 27%, it may be difficult for the medical practitioner to identify the heat map. The medical imaging device 100 may determine whether or not the maximum value of the probability is lower than a threshold value, so as to determine whether or not it is convenient for the medical practitioner to identify the heat map 1920, paragraph[0117]; [00240]).
While Yoo et al teaches the limitation above, Yoo fails to teach “generate a superimposed image that is an image obtained by superimposing the heat map having the determined transmittance on the medical image; wherein the processing circuitry determines the transmittance based on a product of a first weighting factor for the transmittance depending on a pixel value of the medical image and a second weighting factor for the transmittance depending on a distance from a point of interest on the heat map.
Specifically, Futamura et al teaches in FIG. 8A shows an example of an image in which the heatmap information of multiple types of lesions detected in a present medical image of a patient is colored, and superimposed and displayed as it is on the present medical image. FIG. 8B shows an example of an image in which the heatmap information of multiple types of lesions detected in a past medical image is colored, and superimposed and displayed as it is on the past medical image. Futamura teaches the detection result information is output for each lesion type. The detection result information includes: heatmap information (shown in FIG. 6) indicating certainty degrees of a lesion in respective pixels of a medical image; and the supplementary information (lesion type, image ID for identifying the medical image, examination ID, etc.)( i.e. first weighting factor). A certainty degree of 0 indicates no possibility of a lesion, and a higher certainty degree indicates a higher possibility of a lesion ( paragraph [0052]). Additionally, Futamura teaches the gradient (i.e. second weighting factor)of certainty degrees of the lesion in each lesion-detected region can be obtained, for example, as shown in FIG. 7, by calculating slopes in the x direction (differences between pixel values of pixels adjacent to one another in the x direction) and slopes in the y direction (differences between pixel values of pixels adjacent to one another in the y direction) of the heatmap information, and regarding the maximum value (“50” in FIG. 7) of the absolute values of the slopes as a representative value of the slopes of certainty degrees. Then, the controller 21 determines a lesion-detected region having a larger representative value of the slopes of certainty degrees (having a steeper slope of certainty degrees) as higher priority (having a higher priority degree)(paragraph[0071]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before filing of the claimed invention to superimpose the images and prioritize only those images in order to desirable send only a limited number of heatmaps to an interpretation terminal thus reducing the storage capacity . Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
As to claim 4, Fatamura et al teaches the medical image processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to increase the transmittance as the distance from the point of interest increases ( the gradient (i.e. second weighting factor)of certainty degrees of the lesion in each lesion-detected region can be obtained, for example, as shown in FIG. 7, by calculating slopes in the x direction (differences between pixel values of pixels adjacent to one another in the x direction) and slopes in the y direction (differences between pixel values of pixels adjacent to one another in the y direction) of the heatmap information, and regarding the maximum value (“50” in FIG. 7) of the absolute values of the slopes as a representative value of the slopes of certainty degrees. Then, the controller 21 determines a lesion-detected region having a larger representative value of the slopes of certainty degrees (having a steeper slope of certainty degrees) as higher priority (having a higher priority degree; paragraph[0071]).
As to claim 5, Fatamura et al teaches the medical image processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine the transmittance on the basis of attributes of a patient who is an imaging target when the medical image is generated ( Giving priority to patient attributes makes it possible to give priority to lesions that rarely appear (that the doctor may overlook) in the age and/or the sex of a patient ; paragraph [0085]).
As to claim 6, Fatamura et al teaches the medical image processing apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the attributes of the patient include an age of the patient, and the processing circuitry is further configured to increase the transmittance when the patient is older(When the read parameter ID is 007 (priority given to patient attribute), the controller 21 obtains the incidence rate of each lesion detected in the target medical image for the age and/or the sex of the patient from the statistical information stored in the statistical information DB 234, and determines the priority degree thereof on the basis of the obtained incidence rate. For example, the controller 21 determines lesion-detected regions of lesions having an incidence rate lower (smaller) than a predetermined threshold value as high priority and lesion-detected regions of lesions having an incidence rate equal to or larger (higher) than the predetermined threshold value as low priority; paragraph [0084-0087]; Note that Yoo teaches the medical imaging device 100 may adjust the transparency such that the original medical image is not obstructed by the painted color, paragraph [0081] [0117][0185]).
As to claim 7, Yoo et al teaches the medical image processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to increase the transmittance based of a distance from a contour of a structure included in the medical image (the contour may indicate either the position or the shape of the lesion. The medical imaging device 100 may display at least one lesion with respect to one medical image, paragraph [0102-0106]).
As to claim 8, Yoo et al teaches the medical image processing apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to increase the transmittance as the distance from the contour decreases ( In addition, the medical imaging device 100 may determine a higher score as the length of the at least one arrow 1712, 1722, and 1732 corresponding to the at least one contour 1710, 1720, and 1730 decreases; paragraph [0021-0027],[0228]).
As to claim 9, Futamura et al teaches the medical image processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to cause a display to display the superimposed image ( the controller 21 generates the display information of the lesion-detected regions (heatmap display information of each lesion-detected region and character information indicating the type of the lesion in each lesion-detected region) that is superimposed on the medical image. The heatmap display information is, for example, information colored according to the values of the certainty degrees, paragraph [0090]).
The limitation of claim 10 and 11 has been addressed above .
As to claim 12, Futamura et al teaches the medical image processing apparatus according to claim 1,wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to set, as the point of interest. a pixel having a largest pixel value on the heat map (The controller 21 determines lesion-detected regions having a large gradient of certainty degrees of a lesion as high priority (having a high priority degree). The controller 21 may determine, on the basis of whether the gradient of certainty degrees of the lesion in each lesion-detected region is larger than each of one or more preset threshold values, which priority degree (level) of multiple levels of priority the lesion-detected region has (belongs to), or may determine the priority degrees of the respective lesion-detected regions by assigning numbers to the respective lesion-detected regions in descending order of gradient of certainty degrees and determining the numbers as the priority degrees (the smaller the number is, the higher the priority degree is), paragraph[0071]).
As to claim 13, Yoo teaches the medical image processing apparatus, comprising: processing circuitry configured to acquire a medical image((medical image 1900, figure 19) and a heat map( heat map 1920, figure 19); determine a transmittance of the heat map based on pixel values of the medical image (If the probability that the pixel is included in the lesion region is low, the heat map 1920 may have high transparency or may be expressed in an inconspicuous color, making it difficult for a medical practitioner to identify. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 19, if the probability that the pixel is included in the lesion region is low as 27%, it may be difficult for the medical practitioner to identify the heat map. The medical imaging device 100 may determine whether or not the maximum value of the probability is lower than a threshold value, so as to determine whether or not it is convenient for the medical practitioner to identify the heat map 1920, paragraph[0117]; [00240]).While Yoo et al teaches the medical imaging device 100 may adjust the transparency such that the original medical image is not obstructed by the painted color, paragraph [0081] [0117][0185]), Yoo fails to teach “ generate a superimposed image that is an image obtained by superimposing the heat map having the determined transmittance on the medical image ,wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine the transmittance based on attributes of a patient who is an imaging target when the medical image is generated. Specifically, Futamura et al teaches in FIG. 8A shows an example of an image in which the heatmap information of multiple types of lesions detected in a present medical image of a patient is colored, and superimposed and displayed as it is on the present medical image. FIG. 8B shows an example of an image in which the heatmap information of multiple types of lesions detected in a past medical image is colored, and superimposed and displayed as it is on the past medical image. Futamura teaches the detection result information is output for each lesion type. The detection result information includes: heatmap information (shown in FIG. 6) indicating certainty degrees of a lesion in respective pixels of a medical image; and the supplementary information (lesion type, image ID for identifying the medical image, examination ID, etc.)( i.e. first weighting factor). A certainty degree of 0 indicates no possibility of a lesion, and a higher certainty degree indicates a higher possibility of a lesion ( paragraph [0052]). Additionally, Futamura teaches When the read parameter ID is 007 (priority given to patient attribute), the controller 21 obtains the incidence rate of each lesion detected in the target medical image for the age and/or the sex of the patient from the statistical information stored in the statistical information DB 234, and determines the priority degree thereof on the basis of the obtained incidence rate. For example, the controller 21 determines lesion-detected regions of lesions having an incidence rate lower (smaller) than a predetermined threshold value as high priority and lesion-detected regions of lesions having an incidence rate equal to or larger (higher) than the predetermined threshold value as low priority; paragraph [0084-0087]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before filing of the claimed invention to superimpose the images and prioritize only those images in order to desirable send only a limited number of heatmaps to an interpretation terminal thus reducing the storage capacity . Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
As to claim 14, Yoo teaches the medical image processing apparatus, comprising: processing circuitry configured to acquire a medical image (medical image 1900, figure 19 ) and a heat map ( heat map 1920, figure 19);
determine a transmittance of the heat map based on pixel values of the medical image(If the probability that the pixel is included in the lesion region is low, the heat map 1920 may have high transparency or may be expressed in an inconspicuous color, making it difficult for a medical practitioner to identify. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 19, if the probability that the pixel is included in the lesion region is low as 27%, it may be difficult for the medical practitioner to identify the heat map. The medical imaging device 100 may determine whether or not the maximum value of the probability is lower than a threshold value, so as to determine whether or not it is convenient for the medical practitioner to identify the heat map 1920, paragraph[0117]; [00240]), wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine the transmittance based on a distance from a contour of a structure included in the medical image(the contour may indicate either the position or the shape of the lesion. The medical imaging device 100 may display at least one lesion with respect to one medical image, paragraph [0102-0106];[0228]). While Yoo et al teaches the medical imaging device 100 may adjust the transparency such that the original medical image is not obstructed by the painted color, paragraph [0081] [0117][0185]), Yoo fails to teach “ generate a superimposed image that is an image obtained by superimposing the heat map having the determined transmittance on the medical image . Specifically, Futamura et al teaches in FIG. 8A shows an example of an image in which the heatmap information of multiple types of lesions detected in a present medical image of a patient is colored, and superimposed and displayed as it is on the present medical image. FIG. 8B shows an example of an image in which the heatmap information of multiple types of lesions detected in a past medical image is colored, and superimposed and displayed as it is on the past medical image. Futamura teaches the detection result information is output for each lesion type. The detection result information includes: heatmap information (shown in FIG. 6) indicating certainty degrees of a lesion in respective pixels of a medical image; and the supplementary information (lesion type, image ID for identifying the medical image, examination ID, etc.)( i.e. first weighting factor). A certainty degree of 0 indicates no possibility of a lesion, and a higher certainty degree indicates a higher possibility of a lesion ( paragraph [0052]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before filing of the claimed invention to superimpose the images and prioritize only those images in order to desirable send only a limited number of heatmaps to an interpretation terminal thus reducing the storage capacity . Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
As to claim 15, Futamura teaches the medical image processing apparatus according to claim 1,wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine the first weighting factor based on a pixel value of a reference pixel, which is a pixel on the medical image that overlaps with the point of interest on the heat map when the heat map is superimposed on the medical image (he gradient of certainty degrees of the lesion in each lesion-detected region can be obtained, for example, as shown in FIG. 7, by calculating slopes in the x direction (differences between pixel values of pixels adjacent to one another in the x direction) and slopes in the y direction (differences between pixel values of pixels adjacent to one another in the y direction) of the heatmap information, and regarding the maximum value (“50” in FIG. 7) of the absolute values of the slopes as a representative value of the slopes of certainty degrees. Then, the controller 21 determines a lesion-detected region having a larger representative value of the slopes of certainty degrees (having a steeper slope of certainty degrees) as higher priority (having a higher priority degree; paragraph [0072][0095]).
As to claim 16, Futamura teaches the medical image processing apparatus according to the medical image processing apparatus according to wherein the first weighting factor corresponding to the pixel value of the reference pixel is smallest, and wherein the first weighting factor corresponding to other pixel values that are smaller or larger than the pixel value of the reference pixel is larger than the first weighting factor corresponding to the pixel value of the reference pixel (FIG. 7, by calculating slopes in the x direction (differences between pixel values of pixels adjacent to one another in the x direction) and slopes in the y direction (differences between pixel values of pixels adjacent to one another in the y direction) of the heatmap information, and regarding the maximum value (“50” in FIG. 7) of the absolute values of the slopes as a representative value of the slopes of certainty degrees. Then, the controller 21 determines a lesion-detected region having a larger representative value of the slopes of certainty degrees (having a steeper slope of certainty degrees) as higher priority (having a higher priority degree; paragraph [0072]); Set character size of character information on each lesion-detected region to be larger/smaller as the priority degree is higher/lower; character size, may make another character attribute, such as character color, differ, paragraph [0093-0094], [0071-72];figure 6 and 7 ).
As to claim 17, Futamura teaches the medical image processing apparatus according to the medical image processing apparatus according to wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to minimize the second weighting factor corresponding to a pixel value of a reference pixel, which is a pixel on the medical image that overlaps with the point of interest on the heat map when the heat map is superimposed on the medical image, and wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to increase the second weighting factor as the distance from the point of interest increases (the controller 21 binarizes the heatmap information by using a predetermined threshold value, and identifies a region(s) equal to or larger than the threshold value (region filled with black in FIG. 6) as a lesion-detected region(s), paragraph[0061]; [0071-72][0074]).
Contact information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NANCY BITAR whose telephone number is (571)270-1041. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 p.m..
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, Mrs. Jennifer Mahmoud can be reached at 571-272-2976. 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.
NANCY . BITAR
Examiner
Art Unit 2669
/NANCY BITAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2664