DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the communication received on April 6, 2026 concerning application No. 18/404,174 filed on January 4, 2024.
Claims 1 and 5-45 are currently pending.
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 filed 04/06/2026 regarding the prior art rejection have been fully considered. The amendments to the claims have been entered and overcome the 35 USC 112b rejections of claim 1, 11-15, 22-23, and 41 previously set forth.
Applicant's arguments filed 04/06/2026 regarding the double patenting rejection have been fully considered. A terminal disclaimer was submitted and accepted on 04/06/2026 and overcomes the double patenting rejection previously set forth.
Applicant's arguments filed 04/06/2026 regarding the prior art rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to the applicant’s arguments that the prior art fails to teach “provide dynamic beamforming without sub-aperture beamforming”, examiner respectfully disagrees. As set forth in the previous office action [0120] of Pekar discloses “bias control circuits are each configured to apply a bias voltage to the respective subgroup of elements to which it is connected” and [0104] discloses the driving of the subgroups is for the purpose of beamforming. By applying a bias voltage to an entire subgroup, multiple individual imaging elements are activated with a same bias voltage simultaneously and since the bias voltage is being applied to each element within the subgroup, the activation of the subgroup provides dynamic beamforming without sub-aperture beamforming. This is consistent with the disclosure in the present applications specification. Pg. 38 and pg. 41 of the present applications specification disclose applying a bias voltage to activate certain element groups (rows/columns) dynamically.
Regarding applicant’s arguments on pgs. 14-15 that Pekar teaches sub-aperture beamforming, examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant draws attention to [0046] of Pekar which discloses splitting the active array into two longitudinally adjacent sub-apertures. However, [0118] and [0121] of Pekar disclose individual elements within the array are addressed by the bias control. Therefore the process of activating sub-aperture rows/columns consists of individually activating each individual element within the specific row/column, resulting in dynamic beamforming.
Therefore Pekar teaches “provide dynamic beamforming without sub-aperture beamforming” and the previous office action indicates this. The examiner has not ignored this limitation within claim 1 and did not previously take official notice, as the argued limitation is taught by the cited portion of Pekar set forth in the previous office action and discussed above.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 04/06/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of an patent granted on Application Number 18/404,231 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13, lines 2-3 “a second electrode” should read “the second electrode”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-10, 15-17, 19-23, 37-39, 43, and 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Pekar et al. (US 20220096044, hereinafter Pekar) in view of Adachi et al. (US 20070083119, hereinafter Adachi).
Regarding claim 1, Pekar teaches an imaging device (Abstract, Ultrasound device 12 in fig. 1) comprising:
a transducer comprising an array of individual imaging elements ([0073] “the device 12 comprises a two-dimensional array 16 of transducer elements 18”, the transducer array is considered the transducer) arranged as a plurality of rows longitudinally along the transducer and as a plurality of columns laterally along the transducer (figs. 1-2 show the array includes a plurality of elements arranges a plurality of rows longitudinally and a plurality of columns laterally along the cylindrical transducer. Also see [0107]), wherein a signal connectivity of an individual imaging element is defined by a row address and a column address of the array ([0107]-[0110] and figs. 8-9 disclose each element is connected by an electrode for the column and an electrode for the row, meaning the signal connectivity of an individual element is defined by the row electrode position and the column electrode position);
a plurality of first electrodes, wherein each first electrode is in connection with a row of individual imaging elements ([0109] each transducer element 18 has its own bottom (row) electrode, the bottom electrodes for each element make up the plurality of first electrodes);
a plurality of second electrodes arranged at a non-zero angle relative to the plurality of first electrodes, wherein each second electrode is in connection with a column of individual imaging elements ([0109] each transducer element 18 has its own top (column) electrode, the top electrodes for each element make up the plurality of second electrodes. Fig. 8 shows that the electrodes are arranged in a non-zero angle relation); and
a controller configured to:
control a bias voltage selectively applied to one or more of the plurality of first and/or second electrodes ([0116] “each transducer element, or each of a plurality of subsets of elements, is adapted to become activated in a certain driving mode only upon application of a bias control voltage by a bias control circuit”); and
control a transmit and receive function of a row or column of individual imaging elements, wherein a transmit and receive sequence is controlled in synchrony with the bias voltage ([0116] discloses the elements are adapted to become activated only upon application of a bias control voltage, therefore a transmit sequence is controlled in synchrony with the bias voltage), wherein the bias voltage is configured to:
define a voltage for the row or column connected to the first and/or second electrode ([0121]-[0122] discloses applying a bias voltage to a subgroup of elements, thereby defining a voltage for the row or column connected);
simultaneously activate or deactivate imaging by the individual imaging elements in the row or column based on the row address and/or column address of the individual imaging elements ([0116] “each transducer element, or each of a plurality of subsets of elements, is adapted to become activated in a certain driving mode only upon application of a bias control voltage by a bias control circuit and simultaneous stimulation by a transmit or receive circuit”. [0114] “the driving electronics may include sets of components for independently supplying to each element first and second control signal components”. [0126] discloses simultaneously driving (activating) the transmit circuits of the transducer elements. By driving each of the elements separately, the individual imaging elements are being activated based on their specific location which corresponds to the exact row address and column address position. For example, in order to activate a specific transducer element, the system needs to know what row number the element is in and what column the element is within the row), wherein the bias voltage selectively applied is the same or different from the first and/or second electrode ([0120] “bias control circuits are each configured to apply a bias voltage to the respective subgroup of elements to which it is connected”, by applying a bias voltage to an entire subgroup, each of the elements have the same bias voltage levels”); and
define an angular imaging aperture (Fig. 7 shows the angular imaging apertures defined by the activation of specific elements), to provide dynamic beamforming without sub-aperture beamforming ([0104] discloses the driving of the subgroups is for the purpose of beamforming).
Pekar does not specifically teach a controller configured to: tune an imaging frequency of the imaging elements to achieve a desired imaging frequency to thereby define an angular imaging aperture.
However,
Adachi in a similar field of endeavor teaches a controller (the electronic circuitry of the system shown in fig. 4) configured to: tune an imaging frequency of the imaging elements to achieve a desired imaging frequency to thereby define an angular imaging aperture ([0131] discloses sending the high voltage drive pulse signals to the corresponding C-MUT elements to generate ultrasound waves. [0129] discloses the high voltage drive pulses are in the range of 150V to 200V, thereby allowing the imaging frequency for the imaging elements to be tuned. [0087] discloses “the frequency band of the transmission pulse of the C-MUT can be changed by adjusting the DC biasing voltage”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar to have the controller configured to: tune an imaging frequency of the imaging elements to achieve a desired imaging frequency to thereby define an angular imaging aperture, in order to improve the resolution of the obtained image, as recognized by Adachi ([0019]).
Regarding claim 5, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the bias voltage is applied to activate imaging in one or more rows ([0116] “each transducer element, or each of a plurality of subsets of elements, is adapted to become activated in a certain driving mode only upon application of a bias control voltage by a bias control circuit and simultaneous stimulation by a transmit or receive circuit”, wherein the subsets correspond to the rows).
Regarding claim 6, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the bias voltage is applied to activate imaging in one or more columns ([0116] “each transducer element, or each of a plurality of subsets of elements, is adapted to become activated in a certain driving mode only upon application of a bias control voltage by a bias control circuit and simultaneous stimulation by a transmit or receive circuit”, wherein the subsets correspond to the columns).
Regarding claim 7, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches applying a bias voltage of 0V or a voltage level where a sensitivity of the imaging elements is minimal deactivates imaging in the row or column ([0122] “typically the higher power (collapse) mode is significantly higher power than the lower power (non-biased) mode, and hence the bias voltage, in transforming to the collapse mode, may effectively act as an ON/OFF switch for the transducer element”, the lower power mode is considered a voltage level where a sensitivity of the imaging element is minimal, thereby turning off (deactivating) imaging in the transducer elements).
Regarding claim 8, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 7, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches one or more columns and/or one or more rows are deactivated ([0116] discloses a plurality of subsets (rows/columns) of elements are adapted to be activated, meaning entire rows/columns are adapted to also be deactivated when entering a lower power mode).
Regarding claim 9, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the angular imaging aperture is one or more rows or columns defined based on a beam opening sensitivity of an individual imaging element of the array ([0046] “the annular control mode may comprise controlling the plurality of annular subgroups to generate ultrasound wave output pattern or profile having at least two longitudinally displaced regions of relative high sensitivity”, the subgroups correspond to the rows/columns. [0075] further discloses the transducers are sensitive to the control signal components).
Regarding claim 10, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 9, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the angular imaging aperture is defined as one row or column up to 10 rows or columns inclusive (fig. 7 shows the angular imaging aperture is defined by at least one row or column).
Regarding claim 15, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the bias voltage selectively applied to one or more of the plurality of first and/or second electrodes enables or disables the transmit and/or receive function to define a transmit-receive event wherein each transmit-receive event comprises an activation and/or a tuning scheme ([0116] “each transducer element, or each of a plurality of subsets of elements, is adapted to become activated in a certain driving mode only upon application of a bias control voltage by a bias control circuit and simultaneous stimulation by a transmit or receive circuit”. [0042] “activating an annular subgroup may mean driving the annular subgroup of elements to perform ultrasound sensing, e.g. to generate and/or receive ultrasound signals”, therefore applying the bias voltage to the electrodes enables a transmit and/or receive event, wherein each event comprises an activation).
Regarding claim 16, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 15, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the controller is configured to control the activation and/or tuning scheme individually for each transmit-receive event wherein multiple transmit-receive events may have the same or alternating activation and/or tuning scheme ([0082] “the control means may be a controller, for instance comprising a processor, or may comprise circuitry for controlling driving of the array in the different modes”. [0084] “the control circuit allows for electronic switching between annular (short axis) and the longitudinal (long axis) control modes”, meaning the controller controls the activation of the transmit-receive event such that multiple events have alternating activation, since the controller switches (alternates) between modes).
Regarding claim 17, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the plurality of first electrodes are positioned as back electrodes and the plurality of second electrodes are positioned as front electrodes ([0110] and fig. 8 disclose the electrodes positioned in columns (second electrodes) are positioned on top and are therefore considered front electrodes and the electrodes positioned in rows (first electrodes) are position on bottom and are therefore considered back electrodes).
Regarding claim 19, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the transducer is a Micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS)-based capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer (CMUT) configured as a two-dimensional (2D) array structure ([0074] “each of the transducer elements 18 may comprise one or more CMUT (capacitive micromachine ultrasound transducer) cells”. [0071] further teaches the array is a 2D array. Pg. 25 of the present applications specification discloses a CMUT is a type of MEMs).
Regarding claim 20, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 19, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the 2D array structure is a flexible structure ([0109] discloses the transducer elements are integrated with a flexible membrane, meaning the 2D array is a flexible structure).
Regarding claim 21, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the transducer comprises an electrostrictive material configured as a two-dimensional (2D) array structure ([0034] discloses the transducer elements are adapted to be activated upon application of a bias control voltage. Pg. 26 of the present applications specification discloses an electrostrictive material is any material that can be activated using bias voltage. Therefore since the transducer elements are activated using a bias voltage, the material that makes up the transducer elements is an electrostrictive material).
Regarding claim 22, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the controller comprises an interface for each one of the plurality of first electrodes in connection with a row of individual imaging elements ([0119] “the driving electronics comprises a plurality of transmit and receive circuits and plurality of bias control circuits”, the driving electronics are considered the interfaces. [0107] discloses driver circuit and receiver circuit pairs 56 are connected to the rows of electrodes) wherein the bias voltage applied to the second electrode is enabled, disabled, or defined by the interface ([0116] “each transducer element, or each of a plurality of subsets of elements, is adapted to become activated in a certain driving mode only upon application of a bias control voltage by a bias control circuit and simultaneous stimulation by a transmit or receive circuit”, therefore the driving electronics (interfaces) are used for enable (activate) the bias voltage).
Regarding claim 23, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the controller comprises an interface for each one of the plurality of second electrodes in connection with a column of individual imaging elements ([0119] “the driving electronics comprises a plurality of transmit and receive circuits and plurality of bias control circuits”, the driving electronics are considered the interfaces. [0107] discloses driver circuit and receiver circuit pairs 56 are connected to the columns of electrodes) wherein the bias voltage applied to the second electrode is enabled, disabled, or defined by the interface ([0116] “each transducer element, or each of a plurality of subsets of elements, is adapted to become activated in a certain driving mode only upon application of a bias control voltage by a bias control circuit and simultaneous stimulation by a transmit or receive circuit”, therefore the driving electronics (interfaces) are used for enable (activate) the bias voltage).
Regarding claim 37, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the transducer is cylindrically shaped (fig. 1 shows the transducer array 16 is cylindrically shaped).
Regarding claim 38, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 37, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the array of individual imaging elements is arranged as a plurality of rows longitudinally along the transducer and as a plurality of columns circumferentially around the transducer (fig. 1 shows the individual elements of the array are arrange as a plurality of rows longitudinally and a plurality of columns circumferentially around the transducer. Also see [0073]).
Regarding claim 39, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 38, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the array comprises a number of rows (Nr), a number of individual imaging elements per row (Ne), a row spacing, and a number of columns (Nc) (fig. 2 shows the array comprises a number of rows with a number of individual elements per row and a number of columns. [0076] discloses there is spacing between each neighboring transducer element which corresponds to the row spacing), wherein the total number of imaging elements in the array is (Ne * Nr) (fig. 2 shows the number of elements in the array is Ne * Nr) and the individual imaging elements are connected through a number of connections represented by Nr + Nc (fig. 8 shows the imaging elements are connected through a number of connections represented by Nr + Nc).
Regarding claim 43, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the plurality of second electrodes is arranged orthogonally relative to the plurality of first electrodes (fig. 8 shows the plurality of first electrodes is orthogonal to the plurality of second electrodes).
Regarding claim 45, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the control of the transmit function and/or the receive function uses one or more interfaces that are common to or separate from the interfaces used for bias voltage selection ([0119] “the driving electronics comprises a plurality of transmit and receive circuits and plurality of bias control circuits”, meaning the transmit/receive functions use an interface that is common to the interface used for bias voltage selection, since both circuits are part of the driving electronics).
Claim(s) 11, 18, and 41-42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pekar in view of Adachi as applied to claims 1 and 39 above, and further in view of Brown et al. (US 20200041644, hereinafter Brown).
Regarding claim 11, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the bias voltage applied to the first electrode activates the imaging elements connected to the second electrode for both the transmit function and the receive function.
However,
Brown in a similar field of endeavor teaches the bias voltage applied to the first electrode activates the imaging elements connected to the second electrode for both a transmit function and a receive function ([0226] “each transmit/receive event 505 is performed by applying a set of bias voltages to the second electrode array (as shown at 500) and sending a set of transmit signals to the first electrode array (as shown at 510). The resulting reflected or scattered ultrasound waves are detected as receive signals at 520”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Pekar in view of Adachi to have the bias voltage be applied to the first electrode activates the imaging elements connected to the second electrode for both the transmit function and the receive function in order to improve image quality, as recognized by Brown ([0247]).
Regarding claim 18, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the plurality of first electrodes are positioned as front electrodes and the plurality of second electrodes are positioned as back electrodes.
However,
Brown in a similar field of endeavor teaches the plurality of first electrodes are positioned as front electrodes and the plurality of second electrodes are positioned as back electrodes (fig. 8 shows that the plurality of electrodes positioned as rows (420) represent the first electrodes positioned as front electrodes and the plurality of electrodes positioned as columns (410) represent the second electrodes positioned as back electrodes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Pekar in view of Adachi to have the plurality of first electrodes be positioned as front electrodes and the plurality of second electrodes be positioned as back electrodes in order to reduce the overall size of device, as recognized by Brown ([0245]).
Regarding claim 41, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 39, as set forth above. Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the bias voltage is applied to the first electrode to activate the transmit and/or a receive function on the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode wherein the individual imaging elements transmit and/or receive ultrasound signals in the form of ultrafast wave data.
However,
Brown in a similar field of endeavor teaches the bias voltage is applied to a first electrode to activate a transmit and/or a receive function on the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode ([0223] “a sequence of planes waves or diverging waves may be transmitted and received using an azimuth electrode array of a crossed-electrode array, where the wavefronts of the waves are configured for coherent compounded imaging, and elevation electrodes of the cross-electrode array may be employed by applying bias voltages”. [0224] further teaches the crossed electrode is formed from a first set of electrodes and a second set of electrodes and the ultrasound waves are emitted (transmit function) based on the bias voltage applied by the electrode array. Also see [0226]) wherein the individual imaging elements transmit and/or receive ultrasound signals in the form of ultrafast wave data ([0231] “this method, and variations thereof, may enable the rapid collection of two-dimensional elevation slices, thereby facilitating the ultrafast collection of volumetric image data”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Pekar in view of Adachi to have the bias voltage be applied to the first electrode to activate the transmit and/or a receive function on the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode wherein the individual imaging elements transmit and/or receive ultrasound signals in the form of ultrafast wave data in order to improve image quality, as recognized by Brown ([0247]).
Regarding claim 42, Pekar in view of Adachi and Brown teaches the device of claim 41, as set forth above. Brown further teaches the transducer array comprises a number of individual imaging elements per row (Ne) in an array design allowing ultrafast plane wave and/or diverging wave imaging (fig. 8 shows the array includes a number of individual imaging elements per row. [0231] “this method, and variations thereof, may enable the rapid collection of two-dimensional elevation slices, thereby facilitating the ultrafast collection of volumetric image data”), wherein the plane wave and/or diverging wave imaging mode comprises capturing plane wave reflected signal data at a rate of at least 10 kHz ([0279] discloses the 2D crossed-electrode array obtains slices at 40MHz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Pekar in view of Adachi and Brown to have the transducer array comprises a number of individual imaging elements per row (Ne) in an array design allowing ultrafast plane wave and/or diverging wave imaging, wherein the plane wave and/or diverging wave imaging mode comprises capturing plane wave reflected signal data at a rate of at least 10 kHz in order to improve image quality, as recognized by Brown ([0247]).
Claim(s) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pekar in view of Adachi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zemp (US 20230083086).
Regarding claim 12, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the bias voltage applied to the first electrode activates:
(i) the receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode and the transmit function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode; or
(ii) the transmit function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode and the receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode.
However,
Zemp in a similar field of endeavor teaches the bias voltage applied to a first electrode activates: (i) a receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode and a transmit function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode; or (ii) a transmit function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode and a receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode (Abstract, “a row channel data set is obtained by applying a bias voltage pattern to groups of row electrodes…transmitting a waveform along each of the plurality of row electrodes; and recording received column signals from each of the plurality of column electrodes”, the column electrodes correspond to the second electrode and the row electrodes correspond to the first electrode. Also see [0006]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi to have the bias voltage applied to the first electrode activates: (ii) the transmit function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode and the receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode in order to improve the resolution, contrast, and imaging speed of the device, as recognized by Zemp ([0008]).
Regarding claim 13, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the bias voltage applied to a second electrode activates:
(i) the receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode and the transmit function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode; or
(ii) the transmit function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode and the receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode.
However,
Zemp in a similar field of endeavor teaches the bias voltage applied to a second electrode activates: (i) a receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode and a transmit function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode; or (ii) a transmit function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode and a receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode ([0006] “applying a bias voltage pattern to the plurality of column electrodes…transmitting a waveform along each of the plurality of column electrodes, and recording received row signals from each of the plurality of row electrodes”, the column electrodes correspond to the second electrode and the row electrodes correspond to the first electrode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi to have the bias voltage applied to a second electrode activates: (ii) the transmit function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode and the receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode in order to improve the resolution, contrast, and imaging speed of the device, as recognized by Zemp ([0008]).
Regarding claim 14, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the bias voltage applied to the first electrode activates the transmit or receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode and the transmit or receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode.
However,
Zemp in a similar field of endeavor teaches the bias voltage applied to a first electrode activates a transmit or receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode and a transmit or receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode (Abstract, “a row channel data set is obtained by applying a bias voltage pattern to groups of row electrodes…transmitting a waveform along each of the plurality of row electrodes; and recording received column signals from each of the plurality of column electrodes”, the column electrodes correspond to the second electrode and the row electrodes correspond to the first electrode. Also see [0006]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi to have the bias voltage applied to the first electrode activate the transmit or receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the first electrode and the transmit or receive function of the individual imaging elements connected to the second electrode in order to improve the resolution, contrast, and imaging speed of the device, as recognized by Zemp ([0008]).
Claim(s) 24-26 and 34-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pekar in view of Adachi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bolorforosh et al. (US 20080027320, hereinafter Bolorforosh).
Regarding claim 24, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the controller comprises a protection circuit operably connected in series with each row and each column of individual imaging elements wherein multiple bias voltage levels cannot be simultaneously applied to a given electrode.
However,
Bolorforosh in a similar field of endeavor teaches the controller comprises a protection circuit operably connected in series with each row and each column of individual imaging elements wherein multiple bias voltage levels cannot be simultaneously applied to a given electrode. ([0041] “the switches 28 are transistors”, the switches (protection circuits) are used for selectively connecting the voltage source to the correct row/column of electrodes, thereby protecting each imaging element from simultaneous activation. Fig. 2 shows the switch is in series with the electrodes 22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi to have the controller comprise a protection circuit operably connected in series with each row and each column of individual imaging elements wherein multiple bias voltage levels cannot be simultaneously applied to a given electrode. in order to ensure the voltage is being directed to the correct location, thereby protecting the imaging elements, as recognized by Bolorforosh ([0041]).
Regarding claim 25, Pekar in view of Adachi and Bolorforosh teaches the device of claim 24, as set forth above. Bolorforosh further teaches the protection circuit includes ORing circuits that prevent short circuit conditions ([0038] “the voltage source 30 is…a digital-to-analog converter”. [0041] “the switches 28 are transistors”, the switches (ORing circuits) are used for selectively connecting the voltage source to the correct row/column of electrodes, thereby protecting each imaging element from simultaneous activation. By protecting from simultaneous activation, the switches are preventing short circuit conditions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the protection disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi and Bolorforosh to have the protection circuit include ORing circuits that prevent short circuit conditions in order to ensure the voltage is being directed to the correct location, thereby protecting the imaging elements, as recognized by Bolorforosh ([0041]).
Regarding claim 26, Pekar in view of Adachi and Bolorforosh teaches the device of claim 25, as set forth above. Bolorforosh further teaches the ORing circuits utilize diodes and/or transistors ([0041] discloses the switch (ORing circuit) is a transistor).
Regarding claim 34, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the plurality of imaging elements are acoustic sensors selectively activated by the controller based on the row address and/or the column address of the acoustic sensor to receive a plurality of incident acoustic wave signals as wave data.
However,
Bolorforosh in a similar field of endeavor teaches the plurality of imaging elements are acoustic sensors ([0025] “the elements 20 of the acoustic array 16”, meaning the elements are acoustic sensors) selectively activated by the controller based on the row address and/or the column address of the acoustic sensor ([0041] discloses activating elements along a specific column by connecting the voltage source) to receive a plurality of incident acoustic wave signals as wave data ([0047] discloses acquiring ultrasound data using the activated groups of elements and performing reception beamformation using the groups, the acquired ultrasound data is considered the received wave data).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the imaging elements of Pekar in view of Adachi for the acoustic sensor imaging elements of Bolorforosh because it amounts to simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain the predictable results of generating an ultrasound image.
Regarding claim 35, Pekar in view of Adachi and Bolorforosh teaches the device of claim 34, as set forth above. Bolorforosh further teaches the wave data comprises at least one of plane wave data and/or diverging wave data associated with one or more plane wave transmit-receive cycles carried out by the imaging elements ([0033] discloses the images are formed in a plane normal to the array, meaning the wave data is plane wave data associated with the transmit-receive cycles carried out by the imaging elements).
Regarding claim 36, Pekar in view of Adachi and Bolorforosh teaches the device of claim 36, as set forth above. Bolorforosh further teaches the wave data is full circumferential, three-dimensional (3D) image data. ([0042] “a two-dimensional imaging plane is moved through an interrogating volume for forming a three-dimensional image”. fig. 1 further shows the array extends around the entire housing 12, meaning the obtained wave data is full circumferential).
Claim(s) 27-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pekar in view of Adachi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of van Rens (US 20210052248, hereinafter van Rens).
Regarding claim 27, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the controller comprises an integrated circuit ([0083] “the control means may comprise an application specific integrated circuit”).
Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the integrated circuit is housed in an enclosure together with the imaging elements or positioned upon a substrate together with the imaging elements.
However,
van Rens in a similar field of endeavor teaches an integrated circuit housed in an enclosure with the imaging elements ([0085] discloses the bias voltage circuits 22 is an application specific integrated circuit and is positioned concentric (parallel) with the transducer (imaging) elements. Figs. 2 and 5 shows the circuit 22 and the transducer elements 12 are housed in the same catheter, therefore the integrated circuit is housed in an enclosure with the imaging elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi to have the integrated circuit be housed in an enclosure with the imaging elements in order to reduce the overall size of the imaging device, as recognized by van Rens (Abstract, [0030]).
Regarding claim 28, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the controller is housed separately from the imaging elements and is operably coupled to the imaging elements via circuitry.
However,
van Rens in a similar field of endeavor teaches a controller is housed separately from the imaging elements and is operably coupled to the imaging elements via circuitry ([0085] discloses both the bias voltage circuits 22 (controller) is positioned is communicatively coupled to and distal or proximal to the transducer (imaging) elements. Therefore the analog front-end circuit is housed separately from the imaging elements based on the position of the imaging elements in fig. 2 which shows the separate housings).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi to have the integrated circuit be housed in an enclosure with the imaging elements in order to reduce the overall size of the imaging device, as recognized by van Rens (Abstract, [0030]).
Regarding claim 29, Pekar in view of Adachi and van Rens teaches the device of claim 28, as set forth above. van Rens further teaches the circuitry comprises at least one or more cable assemblies, one or more printed circuits, and/or one or more flexible printed circuits ([0085] discloses the electrical connections are wiring (cable) and/or printed connections).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi and van Rens to have the circuitry comprise at least one or more cable assemblies, one or more printed circuits, and/or one or more flexible printed circuits in order to reduce the overall size of the imaging device, as recognized by van Rens (Abstract, [0030]).
Regarding claim 30, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar further teaches the controller further comprises: an integrated circuit for bias voltage generation and control ([0083] “the control means may comprise an application specific integrated circuit”); and an analog front-end circuit ([0111] and fig. 8 “TX/RX circuits 56”), comprising one or more signal generators ([0126] discloses driving (generating signals from) the transmit/receive circuits to drive the subgroups to generate ultrasound signals), and/or one or more signal transmitters ([0126] by driving the subgroups, the transmit/receive circuits are also transmitting signals to the subgroups), and one or more switching circuits ([0148] discloses switching between transmission and sensing (receiving) modes, therefore the TX/RX circuits comprise a switching circuit to switch between the modes).
Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the integrated circuit is housed in an enclosure with the imaging elements and the analog front-end circuit is housed separately from the imaging elements.
However,
van Rens in a similar field of endeavor teaches an integrated circuit housed in an enclosure with the imaging elements ([0085] discloses the bias voltage circuits 22 is an application specific integrated circuit and is positioned concentric (parallel) with the transducer (imaging) elements. Figs. 2 and 5 shows the circuit 22 and the transducer elements 12 are housed in the same catheter, therefore the integrated circuit is housed in an enclosure with the imaging elements) and an analog front-end circuit housed separately from the imaging elements ([0085] discloses the transmit/receive circuit 32 is positioned distal or proximal to the transducer elements, therefore the analog front-end circuit is housed separately from the imaging elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi to have the integrated circuit is housed in an enclosure with the imaging elements and the analog front-end circuit is housed separately from the imaging elements in order to reduce the overall size of the imaging device, as recognized by van Rens (Abstract, [0030]).
Regarding claim 31, Pekar in view of Adachi and van Rens teaches the device of claim 30, as set forth above. van Rens further teaches the integrated circuit is housed together with the analog front-end circuit at a catheter tip adjacent to the imaging elements ([0085] discloses both the bias voltage circuits 22 and the transmit/receive circuits 32 are positioned distal to the transducer elements 12 which results in the integrated circuit being housed with the analog front-end circuit at a catheter tip adjacent to the imaging elements based on the current location of the transducer elements in figs. 2-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi and van Rens to have the integrated circuit be housed together with the analog front-end circuit at a catheter tip adjacent to the imaging elements in order to reduce the overall size of the imaging device, as recognized by van Rens (Abstract, [0030]).
Regarding claim 32, Pekar in view of Adachi and van Rens teaches the device of claim 30, as set forth above. van Rens further teaches the integrated circuit is housed together with the analog front end circuit operably coupled to the imaging elements and positioned directly adjacent to the imaging elements ([0085] discloses both the bias voltage circuits 22 and the transmit/receive circuits 32 are communicatively coupled to and positioned concentric (parallel) with the transducer elements 12 which results in the integrated circuit being housed with the analog front-end circuit and being directly adjacent to the imaging elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi and van Rens to have the integrated circuit be housed together with the analog front end circuit operably coupled to the imaging elements and positioned directly adjacent to the imaging elements in order to reduce the overall size of the imaging device, as recognized by van Rens (Abstract, [0030]).
Regarding claim 33, Pekar in view of Adachi and van Rens teaches the device of claim 30, as set forth above. van Rens further teaches at least one of the one or more signal generators, the one or more signal transmitters, and the one or more switching circuits are housed in a remote enclosure connected to the imaging elements ([0085] discloses the transmit/receive circuits 32 which contain the switching circuits and signals transmitters are positioned proximal or distal to the transducer (imaging) elements while being communicatively coupled. Fig. 3 shows the position where the circuit 32 is being housed is remote to the transducer elements 12, therefore the housing of the circuits 32 is a remote enclosure connected to the imaging elements) via circuitry comprising one or more cable assemblies, one or more printed circuits, and/or one or more flexible printed circuits ([0085] discloses the electrical connections are wiring (cable) and/or printed connections).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device disclosed by Pekar in view of Adachi and van Rens to have at least one of the one or more switching circuits, the one or more signal transmitters, and the one or more switching circuits are housed in a remote enclosure connected to the imaging elements via circuitry comprising one or more cable assemblies, one or more printed circuits, and/or one or more flexible printed circuits in order to reduce the overall size of the imaging device, as recognized by van Rens (Abstract, [0030]).
Claim(s) 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pekar in view of Adachi as applied to claim 39 above, and further in view of Yang et al. (US 20230190230, hereinafter Yang).
Regarding claim 40, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 39, as set forth above. Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach the row spacing is from about 0.1 degree to about 1 degree in angular direction.
However,
Yang in a similar field of endeavor teaches the row spacing is from 0.1 degree to 1 degree inclusive in angular direction ([0076] “the circumferential array may include any number of ultrasound transducers”, which includes the range of 360-3600 transducers (elements). 360 degrees divided by the number of elements (360-3600) results in the row spacing being from 0.1 degree to 1 degree).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the known technique of having the row spacing be from 0.1 degree to 1 degree inclusive in angular direction of Yang to the device of Pekar in view of Adachi to allow for the predictable results of increasing the total number or imaging elements, thereby improving image quality of the generated images.
Claim(s) 44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pekar in view of Adachi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Notten et al. (US 20210282749, hereinafter Notten).
Regarding claim 44, Pekar in view of Adachi teaches the device of claim 1, as set forth above. Pekar in view of Adachi does not specifically teach one or more bias voltage selection circuits are connected to the controller using one or more multipoint communication interfaces.
However,
Notten in a similar field of endeavor teaches one or more bias voltage selection circuits are connected to the controller using one or more multipoint communication interfaces ([0085] “each element group is adapted to be activated for transmission or reception by the application of a bias voltage, by way of a plurality of bias voltage circuits”, meaning each element group has its own bias voltage circuit. [0102] further teaches the controller 18 is coupled to a DC bias control 45 which applied DC voltages to the transducer elements. Therefore the controller is connected to each of the plurality of bias voltage circuits. The connection between the controller and bias voltage circuits is an example of a multipoint communication interface because one device (controller) is communicating with multiple other device (voltage circuits) over a shared communication channel (connection through the DC bias control 45).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the known technique of having one or more bias voltage selection circuits be connected to the controller using one or more multipoint communication interfaces of Notten to the device of Pekar in view of Adachi to allow for the predictable results of reducing the size of the device by reducing the number of controllers needed within the device, thereby making the device more efficient.
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 ANDREW BEGEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-5:00.
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, Keith Raymond can be reached at 5712701790. 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.
/ANDREW W BEGEMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3798
/KEITH M RAYMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights