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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a Final office action on merit. Claims 1-37, are presently pending and have been considered below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/12/2023, 5/25/2023, 7/19/2023, 10/20/2023. And 5/21/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or
nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 1, 7-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0290225 A1, Dunican et al. (hereinafter Dunican) in view of US 2019/0099159 A1, Voigt et al. (hereinafter Voigt).
As to claim 1, Dunican discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising computer-readable instructions for causing one or more processors to perform a method for generating a visualization of volumetric data, the method comprising:
receiving a set of computerized tomographic (CT) data representative of a lung (Figs 1A-1C, 19; pars 0014, 0018, receiving a set of multidetector CT (MDCT) data for a lung);
receiving a selection of a lung segment that corresponds to a subset of the set of CT data (pars 0007-0013, 0015, 0099, 0107, 0150, select a lung segment);
generating a multi-planar reformat (MPR) view from the CT data (par 0052, a MPR from a CT scan is created), the MPR view being a view of CT data representative of a portion of the lung intersecting a plane extending through the lung, such that the MPR view includes (i) a planar portion of the selected lung segment (Fig 1D, CT evaluation area cross CT Axial Plane; Fig 1H, segments with no plugs; pars 0018, 0099, sequential MDCT slices) and (ii) a portion of the lung, coplanar with the planar portion, not corresponding to the selected lung segment (Figs 1D, 1H, 19, identifying mucus plug; pars 0007-0012); and
generating a display image of the MPR view (Figs 1D, 1H, 19) , the display image visually distinguishing the planar portion of the selected lung segment from the portion of the lung coplanar with the planar portion and not corresponding to the selected lung segment (Figs 6-7, 19; pars 0024, 0034, 0080).
Dunican does not expressly disclose the MDCT being three-dimensional.
Voigt, in the same or similar field of endeavor, further teaches a CT can be either two-dimensional or three-dimensional (pars 0005, 0017-0019, 0035, 0042).
Therefore, consider Dunican and Voigt’s teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of skill in the art before the fling date of invention to incorporate Voigt’s teachings in Dunican’s method to process and analyze three dimensional MDCT image.
As to claim 7, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein visually distinguishing the planar portion of the selected lung segment from the portion of the lung coplanar with the planar portion and not corresponding to the selected lung segment comprises displaying the planar portion of the selected lung segment according to a first display criteria and displaying the portion of the lung coplanar with the planar portion and not corresponding to the selected lung segment according to a second display criteria (Dunican: Figs 6-7, lung segment and mucus plug being displayed with different colors).
As to claim 8, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 7, wherein the first and second display criteria comprise one or more criteria from the group consisting of: color, transparency, focus/blur, obfuscation, and brightness (see rejection in claim 7).
As to claim 9, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8, wherein visually distinguishing the planar portion of the selected lung segment from the portion of the lung coplanar with the planar portion and not corresponding to the selected lung segment comprises obfuscating the portion of the lung coplanar with the planar portion and not corresponding to the selected lung segment (Dunican: Figs 1D, 6-7, lung segment and mucus plug can be distinguished from the shape, color, etc.).
As to claim 10, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 9, wherein generating the display image comprises obfuscating CT data representing lung tissue within a predetermined margin from the chest wall (Dunican: Figs 1D, 6-7, 14-15; pars 0018, 0031-0032, 0237).
As to claim 11, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 10, wherein the predetermined margin is 2 cm such that CT data representing lung tissue within 2 cm of the chest wall is obfuscated from display in the display image ((Dunican: Figs 1D, 6-7, 2 cm margin).
As to claim 12, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 8, wherein visually distinguishing the planar portion of the selected lung segment from the portion of the lung coplanar with the planar portion and not corresponding to the selected lung segment comprises highlighting the portion of the lung coplanar with the planar portion and not corresponding to the selected lung segment in a semi-transparent color (Figs 1D, 6-7).
As to claim 13, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 7, wherein the selected lung segment comprises a sublobe (Dunican: pars 0015, 18, upper or lower lobe of a lung).
As to claim 14, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises receiving an input characterizing the selected lung segment (Dunican: pars 0015, 0099, 0107, 0150).
As to claim 15, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the input characterizing the lung segment comprises an input related to whether a mucus plug is present within the selected lung segment (Dunican: Fig 19; pars 0006, 0013-0014, 0018, 0025, identify whether a mucus plug is present and/or amount of mucus plug).
As to claim 16, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the input characterizing the lung segment comprises an input selecting one from a list of possible characterizations of the lung segment (see rejection in claim 15).
As to claim 17, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 16, wherein the list of possible characterizations of the lung segment includes an indication of a presence and/or location of bronchiectasis (Dunican: Figs 8A-8B; pars 0025, 0249, 0308), occlusion (Dunican: Figs 0007-0013), and mucus plug (Dunican: Fig 19; pars 0007, 0013-0014, 0018, 0025).
As to claim 18, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 14, wherein the selected lung segment comprises a first lung segment corresponding to a first subset of the set of CT data, and wherein the method further comprises determining whether all lung segments from a list of a plurality of lung segments have been characterized (Dunican: pars 0018, 0051-0052, 0118, , 0247, 0281, 0308, multiple slices parallel to the scan plane being evaluated for mucus plugs).
As to claim 21, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein generating the display image comprises obfuscating CT data representing lung tissue within a predetermined margin from the chest wall (Dunican: Figs 1D, 7, 17, 19; pars 0034).
Claims 4-5, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunican in view of Voigt and further in view of US 2021/0312616 A1, Thomas et al. (hereinafter Thomas).
As to claim 4, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: generating a multi-planar reformat (MPR) image from the set of CT data (par 0052, a MPR from a CT scan is created); and receiving a selection of a location within the MPR image (see rejection in claim 1), the selected location corresponding to a selected location in the selected lung segment ; and wherein the generated MPR view from the CT data comprises CT data representative of a portion of the lung intersecting a plane extending through the lung that includes the selected location in the selected lung segment such that the MPR view includes a planar portion of the selected lung segment containing the selected location but does not expressly disclose the MPR being a topographic MPR (see rejection in claim 1).
Dunican as modified does not expressly disclose the MPR being a topographic MPR (tMPR). Thomas, in the same or similar field of endeavor, further teaches topographic multi-planar reformat or tMPR may be used to generating a topographic multi-planar reformat (tMPR) image from the set of CT data (Fig 9A; par 0045), and the tMPR image comprising a two-dimensional representation of the selected lung segment (par 0045, a tMPR my project of an anatomical structure (patient’s lung) into a single two-dimensional image); and receiving a selection of a location within the tMPR image (pars 0005, 0008, 0029, 0045-0046, location of interest).
Therefore, consider Dunican as modified and Thomas’s teachings as whole, it would have been obvious to one of skill in the art before the filing date of invention to incorporate Thomas’s teachings on tMPR in Dunican as modified’s method to visualize patient’s lungs to manage a large amount of data.
As to claim 5, Dunican as modified discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 4, wherein the display image further comprises the generated tMPR image (Thomas: pars 0045-0047).
As to claim 22, it essentially discloses claims 1, 4-5 with small variation. Rejection in claims 1, 4-5 are therefore incorporated herein. More specifically Dunican as modified discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising computer-readable instructions for causing one or more processors to perform a method for generating a visualization of volumetric data (Fig 1), the method comprising:
receiving a set of three-dimensional computerized tomographic (CT) data representative of a lung (Dunican: Figs 1A-1C, 19; pars 0014, 0018, receiving a set of multidetector CT (MDCT) data for a lung);
identifying a location of a candidate artifact present within an airway within the CT data (Dunican: pars 0009-0014, 0050, identifying area/location of a subject such as mucus plugging in an airway within the CT data);
generating a topographic multi-planar reformat (tMPR) image representative of a section of the CT data including the candidate artifact and a portion of the airway including the candidate artifact (Thomas: pars 0045, 0047-0048), the tMPR image comprising a 2-dimensional representation of the airway within the CT data (Thomas: par 0045, see rejection in claim 4);
generating a multi-planar reformat (MPR) view of the CT data (par 0052, a MPR from a CT scan is created),
the MPR view of the CT data including CT data within a first plane and including at least a portion of the candidate artifact (see rejection in claim 1, mucus plugging being a candidate artifact), the first plane being defined by a shape of the candidate artifact or a shape of the airway including the candidate artifact (see rejection in claim 1); and generating a display image simultaneously comprising the tMPR image and the MPR view (Thomas: par 0045). Note since tMPR can project 3D visualization view into a 2D image, an ordinary skill in the art would appreciate and understand that displaying MPR and tMPR images side-by-side would be beneficial to see more inside or from different perspective in examining mucus issue in an airway of patient’s lung. Also see motivation statement in claim 4.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3, 6 19-20, 23-37 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.
Reasons for Allowance
Prior art of record (Dunican, Voigt, Thomas) neither discloses alone nor teaches in combination functions and features recited in claims 2, 3, and 6. In addition, prior art of record neither discloses alone nor teaches in combination functions and features recited in claims 19 and 23. Claim 20 depends from claim 19 and claims 24-37 depend from claim 23 directly or indirectly.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but they are nor persuasive. Applicant argues that Dunican does not teach selecting a lung segment, examine would like to direct applicant’s attention to pars 0015, 0099, 0107, 0150 of Dunican as indicated in non-Final office action. Dunican also teaches display image to visually distinguish the portion of interest for selected lung segment as indicated. Above rationale or discussion applies to claim 1 as well as claim 22, and other dependent claims.
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.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular column, line number, paragraphs and/or figure(s) in the reference(s) as applied to the claims for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the reference(s) in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Qun Shen whose telephone number is (571) 270-7927. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Friday from 9:00-5:00. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's Supervisor, Amandeep Saini can be reached on (571) 272-3382. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/QUN SHEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2662