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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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) 1, 3, 5-8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Maurer et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 20150131774).
U.S. Patent Application Publication 20150131774
PNG
media_image1.png
586
736
media_image1.png
Greyscale
AbstractSystems, methods, and related computer program products for image-guided radiation treatment (IGRT)... Provided according to one preferred embodiment is an IGRT apparatus including a barrel-style rotatable gantry structure …
therapeutic radiation head (810)
imaging source (852)
detector (854)
As per claim 1, Maurer et al. disclose a radiation therapy system, comprising:
a gantry having a rotation axis (Abstract);
a first radiation source (810) mounted on the gantry, the first radiation source being configured to emit a treatment beam to a treatment area of a target object; and
at least one second radiation source (852) mounted on the gantry, the at least one second radiation source being configured to emit an imaging beam to an imaging area of the target object, the imaging area at least partially overlapping the treatment area (see for example, Fig. 8A (insert) wherein beams coincide (overlap) at 214);
wherein the first radiation source (810) and the at least one second radiation source (852) are rotatable around the rotation axis (214), and a rotation plane of the first radiation source and a rotation plane of the at least one second radiation source are distributed in a direction along the rotation axis so that the first radiation source and the second radiation source are positioned in different radial planes of the gantry along the rotation axis.
[Examiner note: For illustration purposes Fig. 8C shows treatment head (810) rotates along path defined by its ring member; imaging source (852) rotates along path defined by its ring member; the ring members are axially spaced along a longitudinal rotation axis; each source rotates in a circular sweep perpendicular to the rotation axis (Fig. 8A); the two circular sweeps lie in distinct planes separated along the axis (Fig. 8C)].
As per claims 3, 5 and 6, Maurer et al. disclose a radiation therapy system wherein
a) a central beam axis of the imaging beam and the rotation axis of the gantry form an included angle of q, the included angle forming a projection angle of q' (Theta Prime) on a horizontal plane, the q' satisfying following conditions: 0º ≤ q' < 90º;
b) wherein when a vertical line passing through an isocenter of the radiation therapy system is set as a reference line, the central beam axis of the imaging beam and the reference line form an included angle of b, the included angle forming a projection angle of b' (Beta Prime) on a vertical plane where the rotation axis of the gantry is positioned, the satisfying following conditions: 0º < b' ≤ 90º;
c) wherein when a vertical line passing through an isocenter of the radiation therapy system is set as a reference line, the central beam axis of the imaging beam and the reference line form an included angle of b, the included angle forming a projection angle of b" on the rotation plane of the first radiation source, the b" satisfying following conditions: 0º ≤ b" ≤ 90º (see for example, Fig. 8A (insert) shown above).
As per claims 7-8, Maurer et al. disclose a radiation therapy system wherein the first radiation source and the at least second radiation source are relatively fixed on the gantry and wherein the gantry is configured to drive the first radiation source and the at least one second radiation source such that the first radiation source and the at least one second radiation source rotate synchronously (see also Figs. not shown above).
As per claim 11, Maurer et al. disclose a radiation therapy system wherein the radiation therapy system further comprises a second detector (854) arranged opposite to a corresponding one of the at least one second radiation source, the second detector being mounted on the gantry and configured to receive at least part of the imaging beam (see for example, Fig. 8C above).
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, 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) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurer et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20150131774) in view of Maurer et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20110301449).
As per claim 2 Maurer et al. disclose a radiation therapy system as recited in claim 1, but do not explicitly disclose a system wherein at least one of the first radiation source and the at least one second radiation source is mounted on the gantry by an adjustable connecting mechanism configured to adjust a position of the at least one of the first radiation source and the at least one second radiation source relative to the gantry.
PNG
media_image2.png
333
552
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Maurer et al. teach a system mounting a radiation treatment head to a ring gantry such that a radial distance between the radiation treatment head and a central longitudinal axis is dynamically controlled (see for example, para.[0067]; Figs, above (double arrows 308; 310)). Such disclosure teaches an adjustable mechanism between a radiation source and gantry that is configured to adjust the position of the radiation source relative to the gantry structure.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of Maurer et al. such that it incorporated the adjustable connecting mechanism of Maurer et al. One would have been motivated to make such a modification for the purpose(s) of providing dynamically controlled degrees of freedom for at least one radiation source to optimize beam delivery as suggested by Maurer et al. (see for example, para.[0067]; Figs, above).
Claim(s) 4, 9-10 and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurer et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20150131774).
As per claim 4, Maurer et al. disclose a radiation therapy system as recited in claim 3, but do not explicitly disclose a system wherein the q is 30, 45 or 60.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of Maurer et al. such that it incorporated the aforementioned limitations. One would have been motivated to make such a modification for the purposes of selectively an angle theta to achieve a predictable imaging geometry in order to optimize image quality, mechanical clearance and/or collision avoidance constraints as is routinely practiced in the radiographic arts.
As per claim 9, Maurer et al. disclose a radiation therapy system as recited in claim 1, but do not explicitly disclose a system wherein the radiation therapy system further comprises a first detector arranged opposite to the first radiation source, the first detector being mounted on the gantry and configured to receive at least part of the treatment beam.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of Maurer et al. such that it incorporated a detector mounted on the gantry and configured to receive at least part of the treatment beam. One would have been motivated to make such a modification for the purpose(s) of enabling real time monitoring of a target/tumor’s position during treatment; this enhances overall effectiveness of radiation therapy by ensuring radiation is delivered accurately and safely as is routinely practiced in the radiation therapy art.
As per claims 10, and 12-20, Maurer et al. disclose a radiation therapy system as recited in claim 1, but do not explicitly disclose a system further comprising:
arcuate detectors;
wherein a number of at least one second radiation source is two, and the two second radiation sources are spaced apart.
a first imaging component including the at least one second radiation source;
wherein the second imaging component comprises a third radiation source and a fourth detector arranged opposite to the third radiation source;
wherein the second imaging component is an electronic computed tomography imaging component.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the radiation therapy system of Maurer et al. such that it incorporated the aforementioned limitations. One would have been motivated to make such modifications for the purposes including, but not limited to:
reducing image geometric distortion through the use of arcuate detectors and
improving quality and image acquisition time through the use of multiple-source-detector combinations, as is currently practiced in the radiographic and radiological arts.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 COURTNEY D THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-2496. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9 AM - 5 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, David Makiya can be reached at 571-272-2273. 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.
/COURTNEY D THOMAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884