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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/23/26 has been entered. Currently, claims 1-8 and 10-13 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-8 of the remarks, filed 3/23/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 12, and 13 under 35 USC 103(a) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of previously cited prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-8 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over De Man et al. (US 2021/0383582) in view of Shahar et al. (US 2017/0016998) and Hsieh (Coincidence Counters for Charge Sharing Compensation in Spectroscopic Photon Counting Detectors), cited in the IDS dated 4/12/24.
Regarding claims 1, 12, and 13, De Man discloses a storage medium configured to non-temporarily stores a computer program causing a computer to execute processes, a data processing method, and an X-ray CT apparatus comprising: processing circuitry configured to
acquire first data in a first mode outputs signals from each of anode electrodes that read out a charge generated by incident X-rays as counting values (see para 68-71, first image data is acquired via CT scan in a photon counting mode); and
restore, from the first data, second data having a higher spatial resolution than the first data based on a mutual relationship between data acquired in the first mode and data acquired in a second mode (see paras 69, 222-224, 226, 263, 266, and 291, second data with higher spatial resolution is reconstructed from first data, imaging system 100 may be made up of different types of detectors in a detector array 147, the detectors may be photon-counting, scintillation-based, or a combination of the two, the multi-detector type x-ray source and detector configuration 4000 includes both high and low resolution x-ray sources, higher and lower resolution images can be combined to produce an overall composite diagnostic image, during image reconstruction an image reconstructor may use one or a combination of different reconstruction techniques to correct or compensate for scatter, motion, and/or sparse views, although De Man may not explicitly state two modes, it is clear from the above mentioned portions that combinations of detectors and reconstructors exist that can be used in more than one manner).
De man does not disclose expressly the first data including double counting data between adjacent anode pixels corresponding to adjacent anode electrodes and the second mode removing signals read from adjacent anode electrodes within a predetermined time range and outputting signals remaining after removal as counting values.
Shahar discloses the second mode removing signals read from adjacent anode electrodes within a predetermined time range and outputting signals remaining after removal as counting values (see paras 39, 45, 73-75, and 121-122, collected and non-collect charge signals are determined and if the combined value satisfies a threshold the shared event may be counted, a determination of double counting is performed and if the event is deemed the result of double-counting then the event is removed, all counted events for all pixels over a scanning period may be used to reconstruct an image).
Hsieh discloses the first data including double counting data between adjacent anode pixels corresponding to adjacent anode electrodes (see Abstract, page 679, right-hand-column, 2nd para, page 680, left-hand-column, 3rd para, and page 685 IV Discussion, first two paras, CCB utilizes double counting without correction).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine utilizes double counting between adjacent pixels, as described by Hsieh, and the elimination of double counted data between adjacent anode pixels, as described by Shahar, with the system of De Man.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to provide a relatively simple system with the ability to avoid increased noise, degraded energy resolution and reduced spatial resolution thereby increasing system efficiency.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Hsieh and Shahar with De Man to obtain the invention as specified in claims 1, 12, and 13.
Regarding claim 2, De Man further discloses wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to restore the second data by inputting the first data to a trained model (see paras 224, 226, and 291, a deep learning model is utilized for reconstruction).
Regarding claim 3, De Man further discloses wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to restore the second data from the first data by using an analytical model that analyzes the mutual relationship between the data acquired in the first mode and the data acquired in the second mode, or a function (see paras 224, 226, 263, 266, 277, 285-287, 291, and 308, a deep learning model is utilized for reconstruction).
Regarding claim 4, De Man further discloses wherein the second data has approximately a same spatial resolution as the data acquired in the second mode with coincidence counting correction (see paras 222-224 and 226, a multi-type x-ray source can be utilized, and multiple detector types can also be utilized, thereby acquiring image data with similar spatial resolution).
Regarding claim 5, De Man further discloses wherein the model is trained based on third data acquired in the first mode and fourth data acquired in the second mode (see paras 285-287, multiple deep learning models can be utilized and updated to acquire new data based on previous data).
Regarding claim 6, De Man further discloses wherein the third data and the fourth data are individually acquired under a scanning condition in which counts are approximately a same as each other (see paras 73 and 285-287, multiple deep learning models can be utilized and updated to acquire new data based on previous data, scanning conditions can be set).
Regarding claim 7, De Man further discloses wherein the fourth data is acquired under a condition in which an amount of rays per unit time is higher than for the third data (see paras 285-287, multiple deep learning models can be utilized and updated to acquire new data based on previous data, scanning conditions can be set).
Regarding claim 8, De Man further discloses wherein the fourth data is acquired under a condition in which a scan speed is slower than for the third data (see paras 73, 259, and 285-287, multiple deep learning models can be utilized and updated to acquire new data based on previous data, scanning conditions can be set, such as scan speed).
Regarding claim 10, Shahar further discloses wherein the second mode is a mode of discarding double-counted data between adjacent anode pixels (see paras 39 and 73, double counting is eliminated).
Regarding claim 11, De Man further discloses wherein the first data and the second data are projection data, CT image data obtained by performing reconstruction processing on projection data, or image data obtained by performing image processing on CT image data (see para 263, CT image data obtained by reconstructing imaging from projection data).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK R MILIA whose telephone number is (571) 272-7408. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-5pm.
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, Akwasi Sarpong can be reached at 571-270-3438. The fax 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.
/MARK R MILIA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681
Prosecution Insights