DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument on Pages 8-10 regarding the rejection of Claims 1 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Ling in view of Matsumoto has been fully considered but is not persuasive under new grounds of rejection as below.
Regarding the rejection of all remaining corresponding claims, applicant’s argument submitted on Page 10 relies on the supposed deficiencies with respect to the rejection of parent Claims 1 and 9. Applicant’s argument is moot for the same reasons detailed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6, 8-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robinson et al. (US 6210328) in view of Hyun et al. (US 20190295295).
Regarding Claim 1, Robinson teaches a method, (Abstract “An ultrasonic diagnostic imaging […] method are described in which the number of acquired ultrasonic images which are compounded to form a spatially compounded image is variable.”), comprising:
a) obtaining ultrasound receive signals from a region of interest (ROI) of an imaging subject (Claim 19 “acquiring a plurality of ultrasonic echoes from a target”);
b) generating a plurality of angle-emphasis images from the ultrasound receive signals, each angle-emphasis image generated from a different weighted summation of the ultrasound receive signals, (Column 1 Lines 7-10 “This invention relates to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems and, in particular, to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems which produce spatially compounded images by combining a variable number of received images,” Column 3 Lines 44-47 “Combining may comprise summation, averaging, peak detection, or other combinational means. The samples being combined may also be weighted prior to combining in this step of the process,” Column 4 Lines 8-9 “The digital signal processors 60 can weight the received image data” and Claim 19 “acquiring a plurality of ultrasonic echoes from a target from a plurality of different look directions”), the plurality of angle-emphasis images including a first angle-emphasis image and a second angle-emphasis image (Abstract “acquired ultrasonic images” and Column 2 Lines 54-59 “A scanhead 10 including an array transducer 12 transmits beams at different angles over an image field denoted by the dashed rectangle and parallelograms. Three groups of scanlines are indicated in the drawing, labeled A, B, and C with each group being steered at a different angle relative to the scanhead.”); and
c) generating a spatial compound image from at least the first angle-emphasis image and the second angle-emphasis image (Column 1 Lines 7-10 “This invention relates to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems and, in particular, to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems which produce spatially compounded images by combining a variable number of received images” and Column 4 Lines 35-43 “The digital signal processors 60 determine the number of frames which are to be compounded to improve image quality while still providing an acceptable realtime compound image frame rate. Increasing the number of component frames does not lead to a proportional or unlimited increase in the image quality of the compound image. There is, therefore, a practical maximum number of frames, each steered by a minimum angle, that can be usefully employed to improve image quality in spatial compound scanning.”).
However, Robinson does not explicitly teach displaying, on a display device, a plurality of overlaid images, each overlaid image including a respective angle-emphasis image of the plurality of angle-emphasis images overlaid on the spatial compound image, the plurality of overlaid images including a first overlaid image including the first angle-emphasis image overlaid on the spatial compound image and a second overlaid image including the first angle-emphasis image overlaid on the spatial compound image.
In an analogous ultrasound speckle reduction field of endeavor, Hyun teaches a method ([0012] “the present invention provides a method for ultrasound image reconstruction using a neural network.”), comprising: displaying, on a display device, a plurality of overlaid images, each overlaid image including a respective angle-emphasis image of the plurality of angle-emphasis images overlaid on the spatial compound image, the plurality of overlaid images including a first overlaid image including the first angle-emphasis image overlaid on the spatial compound image and a second overlaid image including the first angle-emphasis image overlaid on the spatial compound image (Figs. 7A and 7B, where the spatial compounding image (SC) is overlaid between the black lines on the B-mode ultrasound image.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to modify the teachings of Robinson with Hyun because the modification of overlaying the spatial compound image on the ultrasound image provides the user with a way to observe whether the quality (SNR, etc.) of the image was improved from the original (the angle-emphasis ultrasound image). If the quality is not up to the satisfaction of the user, they may readjust the spatial compounding settings to include more or less angles during acquisition around the region of interest.
Regarding Claim 2, the modified method of Robinson teaches all limitations of Claim 1, as discussed above. Furthermore, Robinson teaches performing a transmit scan sequence with an ultrasound probe to transmit a plurality of ultrasound beams to the ROI, and wherein the ultrasound receive signals are collected by the ultrasound probe from echoes of the plurality of ultrasound beams (Claim 19 “acquiring a plurality of ultrasonic echoes from a target” and Column 2 Lines 54-59 “A scanhead 10 including an array transducer 12 transmits beams at different angles over an image field denoted by the dashed rectangle and parallelograms. Three groups of scanlines are indicated in the drawing, labeled A, B, and C with each group being steered at a different angle relative to the scanhead.” Where scanhead 10 is interpreted as an ultrasound probe.).
Regarding Claim 3, the modified method of Robinson teaches all limitations of Claim 2, as discussed above. Furthermore, Robinson teaches wherein performing the transmit scan sequence comprises transmitting the plurality of ultrasound beams at a plurality of different transmit angles (Column 2 Lines 54-59 “A scanhead 10 including an array transducer 12 transmits beams at different angles over an image field denoted by the dashed rectangle and parallelograms. Three groups of scanlines are indicated in the drawing, labeled A, B, and C with each group being steered at a different angle relative to the scanhead.”), and wherein a respective ultrasound receive signal dataset is collected by the ultrasound probe from echoes of each ultrasound beam of the plurality of ultrasound beams transmitted at a respective angle of the plurality of different transmit angles, (Column 2 Lines 64-65 “The echoes returned from along each scanline are received by the elements of the array”), and wherein the plurality of angle-emphasis images is generated from one or more of the ultrasound receive signal datasets (Figs. 1-2 and Column 1 Lines 7-10 “This invention relates to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems and, in particular, to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems which produce spatially compounded images by combining a variable number of received images,” where the variable number of received images are interpreted as the ultrasound receive signal data sets.).
Regarding Claim 4, the modified method of Robinson teaches all limitations of Claim 2, as discussed above. Furthermore, Robinson teaches wherein the ultrasound receive signals includes one or more ultrasound receive signal datasets each collected by the ultrasound probe from echoes received at a respective angle of a plurality of different receive angles (Claim 19 “acquiring a plurality of ultrasonic echoes from a target,” Column 2 Lines 54-59 “A scanhead 10 including an array transducer 12 transmits beams at different angles over an image field denoted by the dashed rectangle and parallelograms. Three groups of scanlines are indicated in the drawing, labeled A, B, and C with each group being steered at a different angle relative to the scanhead,” and Column 2 Lines 64-65 “The echoes returned from along each scanline are received by the elements of the array”).
Regarding Claim 5, the modified method of Robinson teaches all limitations of Claim 2, as discussed above. Furthermore, Robinson teaches wherein each angle-emphasis image corresponds to a different transmit and/or receive angle of a plurality of transmit and/or receive angles, and wherein the plurality of transmit and/or receive angles are selected in response to user input (Column 6 Lines 31-41 “As the number of frames compounded in the displayed compound image decreases, the depth of the region of greatest compounding increases, but is comprised of fewer compounded image frames. In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, as the image depth is decreased, the maximum steering angle of the steered transmit beams also increases. A comparison of FIGS. 3a-3c illustrates how a greater maximum steering angle will more effectively cover a shallow imaging depth, whereas a lesser maximum steering angle is more effective for greater imaging depths.”).
Regarding Claim 6, the modified method of Robinson teaches all limitations of Claim 5, as discussed above. Furthermore, Robinson teaches wherein the transmit scan sequence includes one or more parameters selected based on a size of the ROI and the plurality of transmit and/or receive angles (Column 4 Lines 16-24 “In accordance with the principles of the present invention, the digital signal processors are responsive to changes in system control parameters including […] size of region of interest” and Column 6 Lines 34-41 “In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, as the image depth is decreased, the maximum steering angle of the steered transmit beams also increases. A comparison of FIGS. 3a-3c illustrates how a greater maximum steering angle will more effectively cover a shallow imaging depth, whereas a lesser maximum steering angle is more effective for greater imaging depths.”).
Regarding Claim 8, the modified method of Robinson teaches all limitations of Claim 1, as discussed above. Furthermore, Hyun teaches wherein displaying, on the display device, the plurality of overlaid images comprises displaying the plurality of overlaid images sequentially at a selected frame rate (Figs. 7A and 7B and [0012] “A method is provided for reconstructing speckle-reduced B-mode images directly from real-time ultrasound channel signals using a convolutional neural network.” Where because the images are provided in real-time, it is interpreted that the overlaid images are presented at the same, real-time frame rate.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to modify the teachings of Robinson with Hyun because the modification of overlaying the spatial compound image on the ultrasound image in sequence with one another provides the user with a way to observe whether the quality (SNR, etc.) of the image was improved from the original (the angle-emphasis ultrasound image). If the quality is not up to the satisfaction of the user, they may readjust the spatial compounding settings in real-time to include more or less angles during acquisition around the region of interest.
Regarding Claim 9, Robinson teaches an image processing system, (Abstract “An ultrasonic diagnostic imaging system […] are described in which the number of acquired ultrasonic images which are compounded to form a spatially compounded image is variable.”), comprising a processor, (Column 3 Line 30 “processor 30”), and a non-transitory memory storing instructions that when executed, (One of ordinary skill in the art would understand such is how a processor operates.), cause the processor to:
a) obtain ultrasound receive signals of a region of interest (ROI) of an imaging subject (Claim 19 “acquiring a plurality of ultrasonic echoes from a target”);
b) generate a plurality of angle-emphasis images from the ultrasound receive signals, each angle-emphasis image generated from a respective subset of the ultrasound receive signals, (Column 1 Lines 7-10 “This invention relates to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems and, in particular, to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems which produce spatially compounded images by combining a variable number of received images,” Column 3 Lines 44-47 “Combining may comprise summation, averaging, peak detection, or other combinational means. The samples being combined may also be weighted prior to combining in this step of the process,” Column 4 Lines 8-9 “The digital signal processors 60 can weight the received image data” and Claim 19 “acquiring a plurality of ultrasonic echoes from a target from a plurality of different look directions”), the plurality of angle-emphasis images including a first angle-emphasis image and a second angle-emphasis image (Abstract “acquired ultrasonic images” and Column 2 Lines 54-59 “A scanhead 10 including an array transducer 12 transmits beams at different angles over an image field denoted by the dashed rectangle and parallelograms. Three groups of scanlines are indicated in the drawing, labeled A, B, and C with each group being steered at a different angle relative to the scanhead.”); and
c) generate a spatial compound image from at least the first angle- emphasis image and the second angle-emphasis image (Column 1 Lines 7-10 “This invention relates to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems and, in particular, to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems which produce spatially compounded images by combining a variable number of received images” and Column 4 Lines 35-43 “The digital signal processors 60 determine the number of frames which are to be compounded to improve image quality while still providing an acceptable realtime compound image frame rate. Increasing the number of component frames does not lead to a proportional or unlimited increase in the image quality of the compound image. There is, therefore, a practical maximum number of frames, each steered by a minimum angle, that can be usefully employed to improve image quality in spatial compound scanning.”).
However, Robinson does not explicitly teach a processor and a non-transitory memory storing instructions that when executed, cause the processor to: display, on a display device, a plurality of overlaid images, each overlaid image including a respective angle-emphasis image of the plurality of angle-emphasis images overlaid on the spatial compound image, the plurality of overlaid images including a first overlaid image including the first angle-emphasis image overlaid on the spatial compound image and a second overlaid image including the first angle-emphasis image overlaid on the spatial compound image.
In an analogous ultrasound speckle reduction field of endeavor, Hyun teaches a system ([0012] “the present invention provides a method for ultrasound image reconstruction using a neural network.”), comprising: a processor, (Fig. 1A), and a non-transitory memory storing instructions that when executed, (One of ordinary skill in the art would understand such is how a processor operates.), cause the processor to: display, on a display device, a plurality of overlaid images, each overlaid image including a respective angle-emphasis image of the plurality of angle-emphasis images overlaid on the spatial compound image, the plurality of overlaid images including a first overlaid image including the first angle-emphasis image overlaid on the spatial compound image and a second overlaid image including the first angle-emphasis image overlaid on the spatial compound image (Figs. 7A and 7B, where the spatial compounding image (SC) is overlaid between the black lines on the B-mode ultrasound image.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to modify the teachings of Robinson with Hyun because the modification of overlaying the spatial compound image on the ultrasound image provides the user with a way to observe whether the quality (SNR, etc.) of the image was improved from the original (the angle-emphasis ultrasound image). If the quality is not up to the satisfaction of the user, they may readjust the spatial compounding settings to include more or less angles during acquisition around the region of interest.
Regarding Claim 10, the modified system of Robinson teaches all limitations of Claim 9, as discussed above. Furthermore, Robinson teaches wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the processor to perform a transmit scan sequence with an ultrasound probe to transmit a plurality of ultrasound beams to the ROI, and wherein the ultrasound receive signals are generated by the ultrasound probe from echoes of the plurality of ultrasound beams (Claim 19 “acquiring a plurality of ultrasonic echoes from a target” and Column 2 Lines 54-59 “A scanhead 10 including an array transducer 12 transmits beams at different angles over an image field denoted by the dashed rectangle and parallelograms. Three groups of scanlines are indicated in the drawing, labeled A, B, and C with each group being steered at a different angle relative to the scanhead.” Where scanhead 10 is interpreted as an ultrasound probe.).
Regarding Claim 11, the modified system of Robinson teaches all limitations of Claim 10, as discussed above. Furthermore, Robinson teaches wherein performing the transmit scan sequence comprises transmitting the plurality of ultrasound beams at a plurality of different transmit angles (Column 2 Lines 54-59 “A scanhead 10 including an array transducer 12 transmits beams at different angles over an image field denoted by the dashed rectangle and parallelograms. Three groups of scanlines are indicated in the drawing, labeled A, B, and C with each group being steered at a different angle relative to the scanhead.”), and wherein a respective ultrasound receive signal dataset is collected by the ultrasound probe from echoes of each ultrasound beam of the plurality of ultrasound beams transmitted at a respective angle of the plurality of different transmit angles, (Column 2 Lines 64-65 “The echoes returned from along each scanline are received by the elements of the array”), and wherein the plurality of angle-emphasis images is generated from one or more of the ultrasound receive signal datasets (Figs. 1-2 and Column 1 Lines 7-10 “This invention relates to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems and, in particular, to ultrasonic diagnostic imaging systems which produce spatially compounded images by combining a variable number of received images,” where the variable number of received images are interpreted as the ultrasound receive signal data sets.).
Regarding Claim 12, the modified system of Robinson teaches all limitations of Claim 10, as discussed above. Furthermore, Robinson teaches wherein each angle-emphasis image corresponds to a different transmit and/or receive angle of a plurality of transmit and/or receive angles, and wherein the plurality of transmit and/or receive angles are selected in response to user input (Column 6 Lines 31-41 “As the number of frames compounded in the displayed compound image decreases, the depth of the region of greatest compounding increases, but is comprised of fewer compounded image frames. In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, as the image depth is decreased, the maximum steering angle of the steered transmit beams also increases. A comparison of FIGS. 3a-3c illustrates how a greater maximum steering angle will more effectively cover a shallow imaging depth, whereas a lesser maximum steering angle is more effective for greater imaging depths.”).
Regarding Claim 13, the modified system of Robinson teaches all limitations of Claim 12, as discussed above. Furthermore, Robinson teaches wherein the transmit scan sequence includes one or more parameters selected based on a size of the ROI and the plurality of transmit and/or receive angles (Column 4 Lines 16-24 “In accordance with the principles of the present invention, the digital signal processors are responsive to changes in system control parameters including […] size of region of interest” and Column 6 Lines 34-41 “In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, as the image depth is decreased, the maximum steering angle of the steered transmit beams also increases. A comparison of FIGS. 3a-3c illustrates how a greater maximum steering angle will more effectively cover a shallow imaging depth, whereas a lesser maximum steering angle is more effective for greater imaging depths.”).
Regarding Claim 15, the modified system of Robinson teaches all limitations of Claim 9, as discussed above. Furthermore, Hyun teaches wherein displaying, on the display device, the plurality of overlaid images comprises displaying the plurality of overlaid images simultaneously (Figs. 7A and 7B and [0012] “A method is provided for reconstructing speckle-reduced B-mode images directly from real-time ultrasound channel signals using a convolutional neural network.” Where Figs. 7A and 7B demonstrate that the display of Hyun is capable of displaying a plurality of overlaid images simultaneously.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to modify the teachings of Robinson with Hyun because the modification of overlaying the spatial compound image on the ultrasound image simultaneously with one another provides the user with a way to observe whether the quality (SNR, etc.) of the image was improved from the original (the angle-emphasis ultrasound image) or from other set-ups. If the quality is not up to the satisfaction of the user, they may readjust the spatial compounding settings in real-time to include more or less angles during acquisition around the region of interest or selecting the best compounding angle.
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 MARIA CHRISTINA TALTY whose telephone number is (571)272-8022. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30-5:30 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, Mike Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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.
/MARIA CHRISTINA TALTY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/MICHAEL J CAREY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795