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 § 102
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) 2-7, 12-14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Siemens Healthcare GMBH (DE202016006654), hereinafter referred to as Siemens. With reference to claim 2, Siemens teaches A magnetic resonance imaging apparatus comprising: a superconducting magnet configured to generate a static magnetic field (¶0004); a cooling device configured to cool the superconducting magnet (¶0004); a main power supply configured to supply power to the cooling device (¶0006); a subsidiary power supply configured to supply power to the cooling device during power outage of the main power supply (¶0009); processing circuitry configured to determine a point of time at which a reduction of a magnetic force of the superconducting magnet is started based on a capacity of the subsidiary power supply and a temperature of the superconducting magnet when a power outage of the main power supply occurs (¶0010, ¶0012); and a magnetic-force reducing device configured to start reducing the magnetic force of the superconducting magnet after the determined point of time has elapsed from initiation of the power outage of the main power supply (¶0013).
With reference to claim 3, Siemens further teaches the processing circuitry is further configured to: determine a first time during which the subsidiary power supply is capable of supplying power to the cooling device based on the capacity of the subsidiary power supply, obtain the temperature of the superconducting magnet, determine a second time needed to reduce the magnetic force of the superconducting magnet based on an excitation current of the superconducting magnet and the obtained temperature, and determine the point of time based on the first time and the second time (¶0012, ¶0018). With reference to claim 4, Siemens further teaches the processing circuitry is further configured to determine the first time based on a capacity of the subsidiary power supply that allows for output or a remaining capacity of the subsidiary power supply (¶0012, ¶0013). With reference to claim 5, Siemens further teaches the processing circuitry is configured to determine the second time based on the excitation current, the temperature, and power required for the magnetic-force reducing device to reduce the magnetic force (¶0018, ¶0050). With reference to claim 6, Siemens further teaches the subsidiary power supply is configured to further supply power to the processing circuitry during the power outage of the main power supply (¶0026). With reference to claim 7, Siemens further teaches processing circuitry is further configured to: obtain the temperature measured by one or more thermometers arranged in a structure of the superconducting magnet before the reduction of the magnetic force is started, and determine the second time using the obtained temperature (¶0018). With reference to claim 12, Siemens further teaches the magnetic-force reducing device is further configured to stop the reduction of the magnetic force when restoration of power of the main power supply is detected (¶0014). With reference to claim 13, Siemens further teaches processing circuitry is further configured to measure the temperature when the reduction of the magnetic force is performed, and the magnetic-force reducing device is further configured to adjust an amount of a change per unit time in a current flowing from the superconducting magnet to a load included in the magnetic-force reducing device based on the measured temperature when performing the reduction of the magnetic force (¶0018). With reference to claim 14, Siemens further teaches the processing circuitry is further configured to measure the temperature when the reduction of the magnetic force is performed, and the magnetic-force reducing device is further configured to adjust an amount of a change per unit time in a current flowing from the superconducting magnet to a load included in the magnetic-force reducing device based on the measured temperature and a cooling capability corresponding to aging degradation of the cooling device (¶0018).
With reference to claim 16, Siemens teaches a method of controlling a superconducting magnet, the method comprising: determining a point of time at which reduction of a magnetic force of a superconducting magnet is started based on a capacity of a subsidiary power supply and a temperature of the superconducting magnet when a power outage of a main power supply occurs, wherein the subsidiary power supply is configured to supply power to a cooling device, and the cooling device is configured to cool the superconducting magnet (¶0012, ¶0017, ¶0018); and starting reducing the magnetic force of the superconducting magnet using a magnetic-force reducing device after the determined point of time has elapsed from initiation of the power outage of the main power supply (¶0014).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-11 and 15 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed "processing circuitry is further configured to determine the second time based on positions of the thermometer, a superconducting coil included in the superconducting magnet, a refrigerator included in the cooling device, and an amount of heat transfer among the thermometer, the superconducting coil, and the refrigerator, in addition to the excitation current and the temperature" in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 8. The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed "in a case where the reduction of the magnetic force is performed based on an amount of a change in the excitation current per unit time, the processing circuitry is further configured to determine, as the second time, a time required for the reduction of the magnetic force that would prevent the temperature from increasing to a particular temperature at which quenching occurs due to heat generation in the superconducting magnet " in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 9.
The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed "processing circuitry is further configured to determine the second time based on a change in the excitation current per unit time, the temperature, and a temperature change of the superconducting magnet per unit time " in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claims 10 and 11.
The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed "magnetic-force reducing device is further configured to: determine a permissible value of an increase in the temperature of the superconducting magnet based on residual energy of the superconducting magnet, and adjust an amount of a change per unit time in a current flowing to a load included in the magnetic-force reducing device based on the permissible value " in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 15.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “Further, as shown in Figure 2, the ‘653 application discloses a cooling system 70 that includes a pulse tube cooler 72 with a compressor 71. Further, the ‘654 application discloses a second uninterruptable power supply 69 that supplies power to the cooling system 70. See ‘654 paragraphs 28 and 54. Thus, Applicant respectfully submits that the ‘654 application fails to disclose both a main power supply configured to supply power to the cooling device, and a subsidiary power supply configured to supply power to the cooling device during the power outage of the main power supply” The examiner respectfully disagrees. While there is an embodiment with a second uninterruptable power supply, the examiner does not rely on that embodiment for the rejection. In paragraphs 12, Siemens teaches “an external power supply (main power supply configured to supply power to the cooling device)” and “first uninterruptible power supply (subsidiary power supply configured to supply power to the cooling device during the power outage of the main power supply).” The examiner is not relying on the “conceivable embodiment(s)” of paragraph 28 and 54.
Applicant further argues that “In particular, Applicant respectfully submits that the ‘654 application fails to disclose the subsidiary power supply configured to supply power to the cooling device during power outage of the main power supply, as required by Claim 2. Rather, the ‘654 application discloses a first uninterruptable power supply device that supplies power to the power supply device 60. and discloses a second uninterruptable power supply device 69 that supplies power to the cooling device. See ‘654 paragraph 28.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees, as taught in paragraph 28 and 54, the addition of a second uninterruptable power supply device 69 is optional, as it is “ one conceivable embodiment” and further states in paragraph 54 “a second uninterruptable power supply 69, which is designed to supply power to further units of the magnetic resonance tomograph 1 in addition to the power supply device 60, for example the control unit 20 of the magnetic resonance tomograph 1 and/or the cooling system 70.” It is therefore taught in Siemens that the power of the cooling system 70 by a second uninterruptable power supply 69 is optional.
Applicant further argues that “Further, Applicant respectfully submits that it follows that the '654 application fails to disclose processing circuitry configured to determine a point of time at which a reduction of a magnetic force of the superconducting magnet is started based on a capacity of the subsidiary power supply and a temperature of the superconducting magnet when a power outage of the main power supply occurs, as recited in Claim 2. In particular, the '654 application does not disclose, for example, the point of time is determined based on a capacity of the subsidiary power supply, for example, the second uninterruptable power supply 69 in the '654 system.
Rather, ‘654 paragraph 13 merely discloses comparing the remaining power-supply time of the first uninterruptible power-supply device 64 with the time required for ramp- down, but neither discloses nor suggests that the remaining power-supply time of the second uninterruptable power supply device 69 (which supplies power to the cooling device 70) is used.
In this regard, Applicant notes that, in the '654 system, the energy management unit 65 is connected to the first uninterruptable power supply device 64, and the energy management unit 65 manages the power from the first uninterruptable power supply device 64 to the ramp-down unit 62. However, the '654 application, in particular '654 Figure 2, does not disclose that the energy management unit 65 is connected to the second uninterruptable power supply device 69. The second uninterruptable power supply device 69 is not subject to power management by the energy management unit 65. For the reasons stated above, Applicant respectfully traverse the rejection of Claim 2 as anticipated by the ‘654 application”
The examiner respectfully disagrees. While there is an embodiment with a second uninterruptable power supply, the examiner is relying on the embodiment that discloses just the first uninterruptible power supply, as the Siemens discloses in paragraphs 28 and 54 that the second uninterruptible power supply is optional.
Applicant further argues that “Claim 16 recites limitations analogous to the limitations recited in Claim 2. Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, Applicant respectfully traverse the rejection of Claim 16 as anticipated by the ‘654 application” The examiner respectfully disagrees as explained above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY H CURRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7505. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm, EST.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/GREGORY H CURRAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852