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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of group I and II in the reply filed on 1/8/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that examination of Group I and Group II would not incur serious search because they share the same process for magnetic resonance imaging. This is not found persuasive because the first type and non-type of scanning plane would incur a burden for search.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 6, the phrase "in a case" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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) 1-2, 6-7, 9, 15-16, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dumoulin et al (Pub. No.: US 2014/0376794)
Regarding claims 1, 19-20, Dumoulin et al disclose a method for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanning, comprising:
acquiring original k-space data of a current scanning plane in a current scanning plane segment [see 0062-0065];
generating a first plane image of the current scanning plane based on the original k-space data [see 0062];
determining a type of the current scanning plane [see 0021, claims 71, 75] by disclosing the current scan is one of a sagittal, coronal, or axial plane. In certain embodiments, the current scan is a 2-D image, a 3-D image, or a 4-D scan including one of a temporal cycle [see 0021];
determining a prediction mode for the current scanning plane based on the type of the current scanning plane [see fig 8, 0021, 0062];
wherein the prediction mode (linear predictor) comprises a MR intra-frame imaging mode or a MR inter-frame prediction mode [see fig 8, 0012, 0054];
generating (by reconstructing the current image, emphasis added) a second plane image of the current scanning plane with the determined prediction mode based on the first plane image of the current scanning plane [see 0012-0013, 0025, figs 5-6, 8, 10];
wherein a resolution of the second plane image is greater (by optimizing the acquired first plane image; the resolution of the newly reconstructed second image is consequently greater, emphasis added) than a resolution of the first plane image [see 0012-0013, abstract, 0041] by disclosing the method provided may optimize previously acquired MRI image data sets to reconstruct an MRI image scan data set and image [see abstract].
As disclosed herein, the low-resolution knee image once transformed provides a high-resolution knee image [see 0041].
Regarding claim 2, Dumoulin et al disclose wherein generating the second plane image of the current scanning plane with the determined prediction mode based on the first plane image of the current scanning plane, comprises:
in response to the prediction mode for the current scanning plane being the MR inter-
frame prediction mode,
determining a neighboring scanning plane corresponding to the current scanning plane and obtaining a second plane image of the neighboring scanning plane [see 0114-0115];
performing imaging prediction for the current scanning plane based on the first plane image of the current scanning plane and the second plane image of the neighboring scanning plane to generate the second plane image of the current scanning plane [see 0114-0115].
Regarding claim 7, Dumoulin et al disclose wherein determining the neighboring scanning plane corresponding to the current scanning plane [see 0114-0115] further comprises:
determining a preceding scanning plane of the first type or the second type corresponding
to a scanning position near to that of the current scanning plane as the neighboring scanning plane corresponding to the current scanning plane [see 0114-0115].
Regarding claim 9, Dumoulin et al disclose wherein generating the second plane image of the current scanning plane with the determined prediction mode based on the first plane image of the current scanning plane, comprises:
in response to the prediction mode for the current scanning plane being the MR intra-
frame imaging mode, performing intra-frame imaging based on the first plane image of the
current scanning plane to generate the second plane image of the current scanning plane [see 0114-0115]
Regarding claim 15, Dumoulin et al disclose wherein the current scanning plane segment comprises a plurality of scanning planes, and the plurality of scanning planes are scanned by under-sampling with different under-sampling factors [see 0056].
Regarding claim 16, Dumoulin et al disclose an electronic device for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanning, comprising:
at least one processor (image processing component);
a memory communicatively connected to the at least one processor;
wherein the memory stores instructions executable by the at least one processor, and
execution of the instructions by the at least one processor causes the at least one processor to:
acquire original k-space data of a current scanning plane in a current scanning plane segment [see 0062-0065];
generating a first plane image of the current scanning plane based on the original k-space data [see 0062-0065];
determine a type of the current scanning plane [see 0021, claims 71, 75] by disclosing the current scan is one of a sagittal, coronal, or axial plane. In certain embodiments, the current scan is a 2-D image, a 3-D image, or a 4-D scan including one of a temporal cycle [see 0021];
determine a prediction mode for the current scanning plane based on the type of the current scanning plane [see fig 8, 0012, 0054];
wherein the prediction mode comprises a MR intra-frame imaging mode or a MR inter-frame prediction mode [see fig 8, 0012, 0054];
generate a second plane image of the current scanning plane with the determined
prediction mode based on the first plane image of the current scanning plane [see 0012-0013, 0025, figs 5-6, 8, 10];
wherein a resolution of the second plane image is greater than a resolution of the first plane image [see 0012-0013, abstract, 0041] by disclosing the method provided may optimize previously acquired MRI image data sets to reconstruct an MRI image scan data set and image [see abstract].
As disclosed herein, the low-resolution knee image once transformed provides a high-resolution knee image [see 0041].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6, 8, 10-14 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: No prior arts of record alone or in combination discloses the following:
Claim 3,
“before performing the imaging prediction for the current scanning plane based on the first plane image of the current scanning plane and the second plane image of the neighboring scanning plane:
obtaining a structural similarity between the first plane image of the current scanning plane and at least one of a first plane image or the second plane image of the neighboring scanning plane;
performing the imaging prediction for the current scanning plane based on the first plane image of the current scanning plane and the second plane image of the neighboring scanning plane, further comprising:
in response to determining that the structural similarity is greater than a preset similarity threshold, performing the imaging prediction for the current scanning plane based on the first plane image of the current scanning plane and the second plane image of the neighboring scanning plane”
Claim 6,
“comprises a unidirectional inter-frame prediction mode or a bidirectional inter-frame prediction mode,
determining the neighboring scanning plane corresponding to the current scanning plane further comprises:
in a case where the determined prediction mode is the unidirectional inter-frame prediction mode, determining a forward predicted neighboring scanning plane in the current scanning plane segment as the neighboring scanning plane corresponding to the current scanning plane;
or
in a case where the determined prediction mode is the bidirectional inter-frame prediction mode, determining both a forward predicted scanning plane and a backward predicted scanning plane in the current scanning plane segment as the neighboring scanning plane corresponding to the current scanning plane”
Claim 8,
“in a case where the current scanning plane is a plane set comprising a plurality of sub-scanning planes, performing, by starting from an initial sub-scanning plane of the plane set, MR inter-frame prediction for each sub-scanning plane in the plane set,
generating a second plane image for each sub-scanning plane in the plane set, until imaging of all the sub-scanning planes in the plane set is completed, and then proceeding to a next scanning plane or a next scanning plane segment”
Claim 10,
“wherein the type of the current scanning plane comprises a first type or a non-first type, the first type of scanning plane corresponding to a first under-sampling factor smaller than an under-sampling factor corresponding to the non-first type of scanning plane;
wherein determining the prediction mode for the current scanning plane based on the type
of the current scanning plane, comprises:
in response to the current scanning plane being of the first type, determining the MR intra-frame imaging mode as the prediction mode for the current scanning plane;
in response to the current scanning plane being of the non-first type, determining the MR inter-frame prediction mode as the prediction mode for the current scanning plane”
Claim 11,
in response to the current scanning plane being of the second type, determining the unidirectional inter-frame prediction mode as the prediction mode for the current scanning plane;
and
in response to the current scanning plane being of the third type, determining the bidirectional inter-frame prediction mode as the prediction mode for the current scanning plane”
Claim 12,
“performing feature extraction on an input plane image to obtain a feature image, wherein the input plane image comprises the first plane image of the current scanning plane;
generating predicted k-space data for the feature image, and generating a predicted enhancement plane image of the current scanning plane based on the predicted k-space data;
obtaining residual information of the predicted enhancement plane image;
generating the second plane image of the current scanning plane based on the residual information and the predicted enhancement plane image”
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOEL F BRUTUS whose telephone number is (571)270-3847. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Sat, 11:00 AM to 7:00 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, Anne Kozak can be reached at 571-270-0552. 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.
/JOEL F BRUTUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797