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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Prosecution on the merits of this application is reopened on claims 1-20 are considered unpatentable for the reasons indicated below:
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 8-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fasoli (US 9,480,440).
Regarding claim 1 and 13-15, Fasoli discloses a rotating component for a gantry of a computed tomography (CT) imaging system (Abstract) (col. 2; lines 31-34; The cylindrical gantry includes a supporting rotatable cylindrical frame 2.) (e.g. figures 1A-2), comprising:
a single-piece structure (col. 2, lines 34-36; components of the cylindrical frame 2 may be welded) (col. 2; lines 31-34; base frame 1) configured to couple to imaging components (FIG. 1A; col. 2; lines 61-63; the cylindrical frame 2 couples to the x-ray source 14 and the x-ray detector 15),
wherein the single-piece structure comprises a drive mechanism (motor 13, 11, belt 11 and pulley 12) integrated on the single-piece structure (see figure 1B) configured to drive rotation of the single-piece structure and the imaging components in response to a driving force (col. 2, lines 56-60; the belt 11 loops around a small toothed pulley 12 that is actuated by a motor 13, thereby enabling rotary action of the cylindrical frame 2),
wherein the single-piece structure comprises a first annular structure, a second annular structure (col. 2; lines 39-42; cylindrical frame has two rotary circular rails 2r; see annotated figure 2 below), and a plurality of cross bars disposed between and coupled to both the first annular structure and the second annular structure (see annotated figure below), wherein the plurality of cross bars are spaced apart relative to each other in a circumferential direction relative to an axis of rotation of the single-piece structure ([col. 2, lines 39-48]; see figure 2 annotated below, a plurality of bars connect the front annular structure to the rear annular structure. The cross bars are disposed in a circumferential direction of the cylindrical frame).
PNG
media_image1.png
383
472
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2 and 18, Fasoli discloses the rotating component of claim 1 and 17, wherein the single-piece structure comprises separate mounting structures (col. 2; lines 31-34; base frame 1) integrated on the single-piece structure (col. 2; lines “…a base frame 1 constructed from welded support beams…”)(see the rejection of claim 1) and configured for mounting the imaging components on the single-piece structure (col. 3; lines 4-11); “… a cable winding-unwinding system 18 comprising a cable carrier 19 and counterweight 20 is provided to manage those cables needed to operate the electronic components mounted to the frame 2. The cable carrier 19 is integral with the base frame 1 at one end,…”).
Regarding claim 8, Fasoli discloses the rotating component of claim 1, wherein the single-piece structure is configured for mounting a power supply of the CT imaging system. (col. 3; lines 4-11)
Regarding claim 9, Fasoli discloses the rotating component of claim 1, wherein the single-piece structure is configured for self-balancing when rotated. (col. 2-3; lines 66-2)
Regarding claim 11 and 16 , Fasoli discloses the rotating component of claim 1 and 15, wherein the drive mechanism is located on a surface of an outer perimeter of the first annular structure. (col. 2; lines 56-60)
Regarding claim 12, Fasoli discloses the rotating component of claim 1, wherein the first annular structure comprises a plurality of mounting holes configured to enable the single-piece structure to be directly coupled to a bearing of the gantry without needing to align the single-piece structure to the bearing of the gantry. (col. 2; lines 39-52)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 3-4, 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fasoni.
Regarding claim 3 and 17, Fasoli discloses the rotating component of claim 2 and 14, wherein the imaging components comprise an X-ray source, and an X-ray detector assembly (col. 3; lines 16-20). (Fasoli do not specifically disclose a collimator, however, the reference does teach that the CBCT system utilizes a cone beam X-ray source (col. 3; lines 16-20). Collimators are commonly utilized in CBCT systems to reduce X-ray scattering and for the production of a cone beam. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art to utilize a X-ray source utilizing a collimator for such purpose.)
Regarding claim 4 and 19, Fasoli discloses the rotating component of claim 3 and 18, wherein the separate mounting structures comprise a plurality of detector mounting structures, wherein each detector mounting structure of the plurality of detector mounting structures is configured for mounting of an X-ray detector module of the X-ray detector assembly (see the rejection of claim 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 is allowed.
Claims 5-7 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:
Regarding claim 5, Fasoli do not disclose the rotating component of claim 3, wherein the separate mounting structures comprise an enclosure configured for mounting the collimator within the enclosure.
Claims 6-7 are objected due to being dependent on objected base claim 5.
Regarding claim 20, Fasoli do not disclose a rotating component for a gantry of a computed tomography (CT) imaging system, comprising:
a single-piece structure configured to couple to imaging components and to rotate about an axis, wherein the single-piece structure comprises:
a first annular structure;
a second annular structure;
a plurality of cross bars disposed between and coupled to both the first annular structure and the second annular structure, wherein the plurality of cross bars are spaced apart relative to each other in a circumferential direction relative to the axis; and
an enclosure integrated on the second annular structure and configured for mounting a collimator within the enclosure, mounting an X-ray source on a side of the enclosure opposite from where the collimator is configured to be mounted, and enabling both the X-ray source and the collimator to be coupled to and to be decoupled from the enclosure mutually exclusive of each other.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUGH H MAUPIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1495. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 5:00 pm.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/HUGH MAUPIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights