DETAILED ACTION
Non-Final Rejection
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/26/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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) 1-3, 5, 7, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Freeman (US 20060264747 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Freeman teaches a method for controlling a transmitting device (24) comprising a transducer (26) for transmitting waves, said method comprising: modulation (pulse width modulation) of output signals (generate different transmit waveforms) emitted from a pulser in order to control the transducer. (Paragraphs 21, 33, 47-49, 67-71 Claim 1, Figs.1-4A, 6)
Freeman also teaches said modulation being performed by a controller according to at least one of: a) control of a supply voltage (40A,40B) of the pulser (14) by a supply controller (therefore the patch supply voltage, can be varied arbitrarily in this configuration) connected to a supply terminal (20) of the pulser; and control of return signals from the transducer (26) by a return controller connected to a return terminal of the transducer. (Paragraphs 17-20, 22, 48, 67-69, Claim 1, Figs.6-7)
Regarding claim 2, Freeman teaches wherein during the control a), the supply controller modulates a power supplied to the pulser on the supply terminal from a static voltage supplied by a voltage regulator. (Paragraph 55, 57, 58, Figs.3-4A)
Regarding claim 3, Freeman teaches wherein the supply terminal of the pulser to which the supply controller is connected is one of: a positive supply terminal, a negative supply terminal and a ground terminal of the pulser. (Figs.4A-4B)
Regarding claim 5, Freeman teaches wherein the return terminal of the transducer is connected in series to a ground of the transmitting device. (Figs.1-2, 4A-4B, 8)
Regarding claim 7, Freeman teaches wherein the transmitting device (24) comprises a plurality of transducers (26) each controlled by a respective pulser, signal modulation being performed independently per channel between each transducer and the respective pulser. (Paragraphs 9, 46-47, 49, 66, Figs.1-2)
Regarding claim 15, Freeman teaches wherein the output signals are modulated as a function of at least one of: an imaging mode implemented by the pulser to control the transmitting device; a type of transmitting device; and user parameters of the transmitting device. (Paragraphs 10, 13, 32, 47, 69, Claim 1, Figs.1-2, 8)
Regarding claim 16, Freeman teaches wherein the transducer is a piezoelectric transducer. (Paragraph 4, Figs.1-2)
Regarding claim 17, Freeman teaches wherein said method is applied to medical ultrasound imaging. (Paragraph 1, Figs.1-2)
Regarding claim 18, Freeman teaches a computer program comprising instructions for executing the steps of a method according to claim 1 (See Paragraph 7 above) when said program is run by a control system controlling a transducer device. (Abstract, Paragraphs 6, 9, 47, Claim 1, Figs.1-2, 8)
Regarding claim 19, Freeman teaches system for controlling a wave-transmitting device (14, 24) comprising a transducer (26) for emitting waves, said system comprising a pulser (14); and a controller configured to modulate output signals transmitted from the pulser to control the transducer, said controller comprising at least one of: a) a supply controller, connected to a supply terminal (20) of the pulser, configured to control a supply voltage of the pulser; and c) a return controller, connected to a return terminal of the transducer, configured to control return signals from the transducer. (Paragraphs 1, 17-19, 20-22, 33, 47-49, 67-71, Claim 1, Figs1-4A, 6-7)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freeman.
Regarding claim 6, Freeman teaches wherein the output signals are modulated at a modulation frequency Fm of the pulse frequency Ft at which the transducer transmits waves in response to the output signals from the pulser. (Paragraph 20, Figs.1-2, 8) Freeman discloses the claimed invention except for modulation frequency Fm greater than or equal to a fraction 1/P of the pulse frequency Ft and P being an integer equal to 10. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filled to incorporate modulation frequency Fm greater than or equal to a fraction 1/P of the pulse frequency Ft and P being an integer equal to 10, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freeman in view of Akahane (US 20140249420 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Freeman does not explicitly teach wherein the modulation is carried out by means of said supply controller, the modulation being configured to cause a variation over time of the supply voltage of the pulser according to at least two non-zero values.
Akahane teaches wherein the modulation is carried out by means of said supply controller, the modulation being configured to cause a variation over time of the supply voltage of the pulser according to at least two non-zero values. (Paragraphs 40, 56, 69)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Freeman to incorporate wherein the modulation is carried out by means of said supply controller, the modulation being configured to cause a variation over time of the supply voltage of the pulser according to at least two non-zero values in order for the amplitudes of ultrasound to be transmitted from the respective transducers and are adjusted to follow a desired profile.
Claim(s) 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freeman in view of Chen (WO 2017173204 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Freeman does not explicitly teach wherein the method comprises: measuring at least one operating parameter of a transmission chain via which the pulser sends the output signals to the transducer; wherein the output signals are modulated as a function of said at least one measured operating parameter.
Chen teaches wherein the method comprises: measuring at least one operating parameter of a transmission chain via which the pulser sends the output signals to the transducer; wherein the output signals are modulated as a function of said at least one measured operating parameter. (Paragraph 78, Fig.3)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Freeman to incorporate wherein the method comprises: measuring at least one operating parameter of a transmission chain via which the pulser sends the output signals to the transducer; wherein the output signals are modulated as a function of said at least one measured operating parameter in order to perform space-domain apodization of the input signals and optimize the spatial profile of the emitted ultrasound wave.
Regarding claim 9, Freeman does not explicitly teach said at least one operating parameter comprising at least one of: a voltage at the pulser output; the supply voltage of the pulser; a ground voltage of the pulser; a voltage at the terminals of the transmitting device; a voltage received from the transducer; a current at the pulser output; a supply current of the pulser; a ground current of the pulser; a current flowing through the transmitting device; a temperature of the pulser; a temperature of the transmitting device; an electric field emitted by the pulser; an electric field emitted by the transmitting device; a magnetic field emitted by the pulser; a magnetic field emitted by the transmitting device; a sound pressure emitted by the transmitting device; and a sound pressure received by the transmitting device.
Chen teaches said at least one operating parameter comprising at least one of: a voltage at the pulser output; the supply voltage of the pulser; a ground voltage of the pulser; a voltage at the terminals of the transmitting device; a voltage received from the transducer; a current at the pulser output; a supply current of the pulser; a ground current of the pulser ; a current flowing through the transmitting device; a temperature of the pulser; a temperature of the transmitting device; an electric field emitted by the pulser; an electric field emitted by the transmitting device; a magnetic field emitted by the pulser; a magnetic field emitted by the transmitting device; a sound pressure emitted by the transmitting device; and a sound pressure received by the transmitting device. (Paragraphs 49-60, Figs.3, 5A-5B)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Freeman to incorporate said at least one operating parameter comprising at least one of: a voltage at the pulser output; the supply voltage of the pulser; a ground voltage of the pulser; a voltage at the terminals of the transmitting device; a voltage received from the transducer; a current at the pulser output; a supply current of the pulser; a ground current of the pulser ; a current flowing through the transmitting device; a temperature of the pulser; a temperature of the transmitting device; an electric field emitted by the pulser; an electric field emitted by the transmitting device; a magnetic field emitted by the pulser; a magnetic field emitted by the transmitting device; a sound pressure emitted by the transmitting device; and a sound pressure received by the transmitting device in order to perform space-domain apodization of the input signals and optimize the spatial profile of the emitted ultrasound wave.
Regarding claim 10, Freeman does not explicitly teach wherein the method comprises: comparing said at least one operating parameter with respectively one threshold value; the modulation of the output signals being a function of a result of said comparison.
Chen teaches wherein the method comprises: comparing said at least one operating parameter with respectively one threshold value; the modulation of the output signals being a function of a result of said comparison. (Paragraphs 51-53, 55-60, Fig.3)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Freeman to incorporate wherein the method comprises: comparing said at least one operating parameter with respectively one threshold value; the modulation of the output signals being a function of a result of said comparison in order to provide a set of selectable threshold voltages to the terminal of the controller.
Regarding claim 11, Freeman does not explicitly teach wherein the supply controller regulates the supply voltage to a first value during the control a) if said at least one operating parameter does not exceed a respective threshold value, and wherein the control a) comprises adapting the supply voltage from the first value to a second value that is different from the first value if said at least one operating parameter exceeds said respective threshold value.
Chen teaches wherein the supply controller regulates the supply voltage to a first value during the control a) if said at least one operating parameter does not exceed a respective threshold value, and wherein the control a) comprises adapting the supply voltage from the first value to a second value that is different from the first value if said at least one operating parameter exceeds said respective threshold value. (Paragraphs 55-60, Fig.3)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Freeman to incorporate wherein the supply controller regulates the supply voltage to a first value during the control a) if said at least one operating parameter does not exceed a respective threshold value, and wherein the control a) comprises adapting the supply voltage from the first value to a second value that is different from the first value if said at least one operating parameter exceeds said respective threshold value in order to adapt the voltages generated by the controller to voltages compatible to transistors to drive the transistors into their cutoff or conductive state.
Regarding claim 12, Freeman does not explicitly teach wherein the output signals are modulated by slaving at least one of the controls a) and c) as a function of said at least one measured operating parameter.
Chen teaches wherein the output signals are modulated by slaving at least one of the controls a) and c) as a function of said at least one measured operating parameter. (Paragraphs 57-60, Fig.3)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Freeman to incorporate wherein the output signals are modulated by slaving at least one of the controls a) and c) as a function of said at least one measured operating parameter in order to adapt the voltages generated by the controller to voltages compatible to transistors to drive the transistors into their cutoff or conductive state.
Regarding claim 13, Freeman does not explicitly teach wherein said at least one operating parameter is measured during a calibration of the transmission chain, wherein the modulation is carried out after the calibration as a response to at least one command determined as a function of said at least one operating parameter.
Chen teaches wherein said at least one operating parameter is measured during a calibration of the transmission chain, wherein the modulation is carried out after the calibration as a response to at least one command determined as a function of said at least one operating parameter. (Paragraphs 57-60, Fig.3)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Freeman to incorporate wherein said at least one operating parameter is measured during a calibration of the transmission chain, wherein the modulation is carried out after the calibration as a response to at least one command determined as a function of said at least one operating parameter in order to adapt the voltages generated by the controller to voltages compatible to transistors to drive the transistors into their cutoff or conductive state.
Regarding claim 14, Freeman does not explicitly teach measuring at least one operating parameter of transmission chains via which each transducer receives output signals from a respective pulser and upon detection that an operating parameter of a transmission chain meets a predetermined criterion, adapting the modulation of the output signals sent to the transducer of said transmission chain.
Chen teaches measuring at least one operating parameter of transmission chains via which each transducer receives output signals from a respective pulser and upon detection that an operating parameter of a transmission chain meets a predetermined criterion, adapting the modulation of the output signals sent to the transducer of said transmission chain. (Paragraphs 57-60, 64, Fig.3)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Freeman to incorporate measuring at least one operating parameter of transmission chains via which each transducer receives output signals from a respective pulser and upon detection that an operating parameter of a transmission chain meets a predetermined criterion, adapting the modulation of the output signals sent to the transducer of said transmission chain in order to adapt the voltages generated by the controller to voltages and lead to enhanced image contrast.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDALLAH ABULABAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4755. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00am-3:00pm EST.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/ABDALLAH ABULABAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645