DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Objection to claim 1
The amendment to claim 1 overcomes the objection, therefore the objection to claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Rejections under 35 § USC 112(b)
In view of the amendments to the claims, the rejection of claims 1-12 has been withdrawn.
Rejections under 35 § USC 102 and 103
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections under 35 USC §102 and §103 have been fully considered and in view of the amendments, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Yamada (US 20070165960 A1).
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 .
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.
Claims 1, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Caprioli, et. al. (US 20150131888 A1), hereinafter Caprioli, in view of Yamada (US 20070165960 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Caprioli teaches a mass spectrometry image processing (Abstract, [0002]) method comprising:
a step of acquiring a mass spectrometry image that is generated based on mass spectrometry data of a subject (IMS (lower spatial resolution), [0014]-[0015], [0005]);
a step of acquiring an optical image that is generated by imaging the subject, the optical image having a higher resolution than the mass spectrometry image (second molecular imaging modality at higher spatial resolution such as microscopy measurements, [0014]-[0015], [0005]); and
a step of generating a high-resolution mass spectrometry image that has a higher resolution than the mass spectrometry image and is generated based on pixel values of the optical image, and pixel values of the mass spectrometry image, to improve the resolution of the mass
spectrometry image (the predicted IMS image [0036], [0018]-[0021], prediction of observations in a second imaging modality is interpreted as the generated third high-resolution image ([0021]), and this generation is based on the pixel values of the first imaging modality image and the second imaging modality image ([0018])).
Caprioli does not explicitly teach the step of generating the high-resolution mass spectrometry image includes adjusting a reflection ratio including a degree to which pixel values of the mass spectrometry image are reflected in the high-resolution mass spectrometry image.
Yamada teaches the step of generating a high-resolution image includes adjusting a reflection ratio including a degree to which pixel values of the lower-resolution image are reflected in the high-resolution mass spectrometry image ([0019]).
Yamada modifies Caprioli by suggesting adjusting a ratio related to how the pixel values of the lower-resolution image are reflected in the high-resolution image in generating a high-resolution image.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Yamada because such a process allows for correction of pixel values, (Abstract).
Regarding claim 10, Caprioli teaches an image processing method (title) comprising:
a step of acquiring a first image (first molecular imaging modality such as IMS (lower spatial resolution), [0014]-[0015]);
a step of acquiring a second image that has a higher resolution than the first image (second molecular imaging modality at higher spatial resolution such as microscopy measurements, [0014]-[0015]); and
a step of generating a third image that has a higher resolution than the first image and is generated based on pixel values of the second image, and pixel values of the first image (the predicted IMS image [0036], [0018]-[0021], prediction of observations in a second imaging modality is interpreted as the generated third high-resolution image ([0021]), and this generation is based on the pixel values of the first imaging modality image and the second imaging modality image ([0018])), wherein
Caprioli does not explicitly teach in the step of generating the third image, adjustment of a reflection ratio including a degree to which pixel values of the first image are reflected in the third image is executed.
Yamada teaches in the step of generating the third image, adjustment of a reflection ratio including a degree to which pixel values of the first image are reflected in the third image ([0019]).
Yamada modifies Caprioli by suggesting adjusting a ratio related to how the pixel values of a first image are reflected in the third image in generation of the third image.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Yamada because such a process allows for correction of pixel values, (Abstract).
Regarding claim 11, Caprioli teaches a mass spectrometry apparatus comprising:
a mass spectrometry image acquirer configured to acquire a mass spectrometry image that is generated based on mass spectrometry data of a subject (imaging mass spectrometer (IMS system 54, [0025]);
an optical image acquirer configured to acquire an optical image that is generated by imaging the subject, the optical image having a higher resolution than the mass spectrometry image (image produced by microscopy apparatus 52, [0026]); and
an image processor configured to generate a high-resolution mass spectrometry image that has a higher resolution than the mass spectrometry image and is generated based on pixel values of the optical image, and pixel values of the mass spectrometry image, to improve the
resolution of the mass spectrometry image ([0025]-[0034]), wherein
Caprioli does not explicitly teach the image processor is configured to adjust a reflection ratio including a degree to which pixel values of the mass spectrometry image are reflected in the high-resolution mass spectrometry image.
Yamada teaches the image processor is configured to adjust a reflection ratio including a degree to which pixel values of the low-resolution image are reflected in the high-resolution image ([0019]).
Yamada modifies Caprioli by suggesting an image processor is configured to adjust a ratio related to how the pixel values of a lower resolution image are reflected in the high-resolution image in generation of the high resolution image.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Yamada because such a process allows for correction of pixel values, (Abstract).
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caprioli (US 20150131888 A1) and Yamada (US 20070165960 A1) in view of Yamanaka (US 20170116730 A).
Regarding claim 2, Caprioli teaches a mass spectrometry image (IMS, [0025]) and Yamada teaches a reflection ratio ([0019]).
The combination does not explicitly teach wherein the reflection ratio is adjusted based on a coefficient(s) that is/are previously specified by a user.
Yamanaka teaches wherein the variation amount of each pixel value of the image is adjusted based on a coefficient(s) that is/are previously specified by a user ([[0012], [0095]).
Yamanaka modifies the combination by suggesting the mass spectrometry image of Caprioli have its pixel values and their variation, particularly their reflection ratio, as suggested by Yamada, adjusted based on a weight coefficient set by a user.
Since all are directed to image processing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Yamanaka because having a user set an appropriate weight coefficient allows for proper and suitable image analysis, (Yamanaka, [0096]).
Regarding claim 3, Caprioli teaches a mass spectrometry image (IMS, [0025]) and Yamada teaches a reflection ratio ([0019]).
The combination does not explicitly teach further comprising a step of accepting an entry of the coefficient (s) in accordance with an input instruction from the user, wherein the reflection ratio is adjusted based on the coefficient that is accepted in accordance with the input instruction from the user.
Yamanaka teaches further comprising a step of accepting an entry of the coefficient (s) in accordance with an input instruction from the user ([0096]), wherein the variation amount of each pixel value of the image is adjusted based on the coefficient that is accepted in accordance with the input instruction from the user ([0012], [0095]).
Yamanaka modifies the combination by suggesting acceptance of user entry of coefficients upon which the pixel value adjustment and variation, particularly the reflection ratio suggested by Yamada, can be based.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Yamanaka because having an appropriate weight coefficient accepted by user entry allows for proper and suitable image analysis based on these coefficients, (Yamanaka, [0096]).
Regarding claim 4, Caprioli teaches a mass spectrometry image (IMS, [0025]) and Yamada teaches a reflection ratio ([0019]).
The combination does not teach further comprising a step of changing the coefficient (s) that has/have been previously accepted in accordance with the input instruction from the user, wherein the reflection ratio is adjusted based on the changed coefficient(s).
Yamanaka teaches further comprising a step of changing the coefficient (s) that has/have been previously accepted in accordance with the input instruction from the user, wherein the variation amount of each pixel value of the image is adjusted based on the changed coefficient (s) in the adjustment of the variation amount of each pixel value of the image ([0098]).
Yamanaka modifies the combination by suggesting changing the weight coefficient previously accepted from user input, and adjusting the pixels, particularly the reflection ratio suggested by Yamada, of the mass spectrometry image of Caprioli based on the changed coefficients.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Yamanaka because having an appropriate weight coefficient allows for proper and suitable image analysis based on these coefficients, (Yamanaka, [0096]).
Regarding claim 5, Caprioli teaches a high-resolution mass spectrometry image and a mass spectrometry image ([0025]), and Yamada teaches a reflection ratio ([0019]).
The combination does not teach wherein differences between first pixel values, which are the pixel values of the high-resolution mass spectrometry image, and second pixel values, which are the pixel values of the mass spectrometry image, are repeatedly reduced in the step of generating the high-resolution mass spectrometry image; and the adjustment of the reflection ratio is executed by adjusting the reflection ratio including a degree to which the second pixel values of the mass spectrometry image are reflected in the high-resolution mass spectrometry image when reducing the difference between the first pixel value and the second pixel value.
Yamanaka teaches wherein differences between first pixel values, which are
the pixel values of the high-resolution image, and second pixel values, which are the pixel values of the image, are repeatedly reduced in the step of generating the high-resolution image; and the adjustment of a variation amount of each pixel value of the image is executed by adjusting an amount of variation of each second pixel value when reducing the difference between the first pixel value and the second pixel value (difference image is generated multiple times after applying weight coefficients to the image. See Fig. 3, [0011]-[0015]).
Yamanaka modifies the combination by suggesting repeatedly reducing pixel value differences between the mass spectrometry image and high-resolution mass spectrometry image of Caprioli to generate the high-resolution image, and adjusting the variation amount of the second pixel when reducing the difference between the first and second pixel values.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Yamanaka because the process produces improved image quality, (Yamanaka, [0011]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-9 and 12 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 6 and subsequent dependent claims are indicated as allowed for claim 6’s recitation that “the coefficient(s) includes/include a first coefficient that increases the reflection ratio including a degree to which the second pixel values of the mass spectrometry image are reflected in the high-resolution mass spectrometry image as a value of the first coefficients decreases, or a second coefficient that increases the reflection ratio including a degree to which the second pixel values of the mass spectrometry image are reflected in the high-resolution mass spectrometry image as value of the second coefficient increases”
Claim 12 is indicated as allowed for its recitation that “in the step of generating the high-resolution mass spectrometry image, a step of generating the high-resolution mass spectrometry image based on the intermediate image and a coefficient matrix, which is a matrix of a plurality of coefficients, and a step of updating the coefficient matrix to reduce differences between the pixel values of the high- resolution mass spectrometry image and the pixel values of the mass spectrometry image are repeatedly executed to optimize the coefficient matrix, and the high-resolution mass spectrometry image is generated based on the optimized coefficient matrix and the intermediate image.”
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 LAURA E TANDY whose telephone number is (703)756-1720. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 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, Robert Kim can be reached at 5712722293. 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.
LAURA E TANDY
Examiner
Art Unit 2881
/DAVID E SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights