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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-7, 13-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In claims 1 and 20, the limitation “control a voltage to be supplied to the transmission circuit for transmitting the ultrasound wave, a maximum amount of the voltage to be supplied to the transmission circuit being a sum of the first transmission voltage and the second transmission voltage” is not mentioned in the specification and is considered new matter.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 13-16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (US 2019/0008486; hereinafter Jin) in view of Smith et al. (US 2004/0179332; hereinafter Smith), Carp et al. (US 6432055; hereinafter Carp), and Wang et al. (US 2005/0228282; hereinafter Wang).
Jin shows an ultrasound system and method comprising: an ultrasound probe ([0053]); a user interface device (interface of ultrasound diagnosis apparatus 200-1 or 200-2, [0081]; Fig. 3) connected to the ultrasound probe by wire (wireless or wired probe; [0134]); and a mobile information terminal connected to at least one of the ultrasound probe or the user interface device (ultrasound diagnosis apparatus 200-1 or 200-2, [0081]; Fig. 3), wherein the ultrasound probe includes a transducer array (plurality of vibrators, [0059]), a transmission circuit configured to transmit an ultrasound wave from the transducer array ([0059]), a reception circuit configured to generate a sound ray signal based on a reception signal acquired by the transducer array ([0059]), and a first processor configured to generate a first ultrasound image based on the sound ray signal generated by the reception circuit (image processor 120 included in ultrasound probe, [0069]), the user interface device includes a second processor configured to generate a second ultrasound image based on the sound ray signal generated by the reception circuit of the ultrasound probe (second image processor included in apparatus 200-1 or 200-2; [0080]-[0084]), and the mobile information terminal includes a monitor configured to display the first ultrasound image generated by the first processor of the ultrasound probe or the second ultrasound image generated by the second processor of the user interface device (Fig. 3).
Jin also shows wherein the second ultrasound image generated by the second processor of the user interface device includes at least one of an ultrasound elastography image, an image where a blood flow is visualized by using eFLOW or B-flow coded transmission technique, or a contrast image ([0004], [0054], [0078]); wherein the mobile information terminal is configured to accept an input operation of a user in a case in which the mobile information terminal is not connected to the user interface device (user interface type components are considered to be capable of and configured to accept an input operation at any desired time; Fig. 3); wherein the mobile information terminal is wirelessly connected to the ultrasound probe, and the first ultrasound image generated by the first processor of the ultrasound probe is wirelessly transmitted from the ultrasound probe to the mobile information terminal and displayed on the monitor ([0056], [0062], [0063], [0080]-[0084]).
Jin fails to show where a type of the first ultrasound image and a type of the second ultrasound image are different from each other, and generating the second ultrasound image requires a larger computing amount than generating the first ultrasound image.
Jin fails to show a power circuit configured to supply power to the ultrasound probe and supply a transmission voltage for transmitting the ultrasound wave from the transducer array of the probe to the transmission circuit, and change a level of the transmission voltage in response to whether the first ultrasound image is to be generated or the second ultrasound image is to be generated.
Jin fails to show control a voltage to be supplied to the transmission circuit for transmitting the ultrasound wave, a maximum amount of the voltage to be supplied to the transmission circuit being a sum of the first transmission voltage and the second transmission voltage.
Jin also fails to show wherein the user interface device includes a power circuit configured to supply power to the ultrasound probe connected to the user interface device by wire; wherein the power circuit of the user interface device is further configured to supply a transmission voltage for transmitting the ultrasound wave from the transducer array of the ultrasound probe, to the transmission circuit; wherein each of a plurality of the ultrasound probes is connected to the user interface device by wire, the second processor of the user interface device is further configured to select one ultrasound probe among the plurality of ultrasound probes, and generate the second ultrasound image based on the sound ray signal generated by the reception circuit of the ultrasound probe which is selected.
Smith discloses an ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus. Smith teaches where a type of the first ultrasound image and a type of the second ultrasound image are different from each other, and generating the second ultrasound image requires a larger computing amount than generating the first ultrasound image (cart processor provides processing capabilities that are beyond the processing capabilities of the portable unit alone; the cart’s processor may be used to implement powerful data processing packages; [0054]). Smith also teaches wherein the user interface device includes a power circuit configured to supply power to the ultrasound probe connected to the user interface device by wire ([0067], [0111]); wherein the power circuit of the user interface device is further configured to supply a transmission voltage for transmitting the ultrasound wave from the transducer array of the ultrasound probe, to the transmission circuit ([0092]); wherein each of a plurality of the ultrasound probes is connected to the user interface device by wire, the second processor of the user interface device is further configured to select one ultrasound probe among the plurality of ultrasound probes, and generate the second ultrasound image based on the sound ray signal generated by the reception circuit of the ultrasound probe which is selected ([0068]-[0072]).
Carp discloses a medical ultrasound imaging system. Carp teaches a power circuit configured to supply power to the ultrasound probe and supply a transmission voltage for transmitting the ultrasound wave from the transducer array of the probe to the transmission circuit, and change a level of the transmission voltage in response to whether the first ultrasound image is to be generated or the second ultrasound image is to be generated (the supply voltage is preferably set based on the imaging mode, where Doppler modes may be set to a lower voltage; column 8, lines 23-26).
Wang discloses image quality compensation techniques for different ultrasound imaging modes. Wang teaches control a voltage to be supplied to the transmission circuit for transmitting the ultrasound wave, a maximum amount of the voltage to be supplied to the transmission circuit being a sum of the first transmission voltage and the second transmission voltage (maximum voltage level limited by the voltage of the power supply, [0039]; maximum voltage of at least 100V, where different imaging modes may utilize 40, 60 or 100V, [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Jin to utilize a second processor to process a second image that requires a larger computing amount as taught by Smith, as Smith teaches that the enhanced processing capabilities of the cart may be used to provide features that would otherwise be difficult or impossible to implement using only portable unit ([0054]).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Jin to supply power via a wired connection as taught by Smith, as a wired connection will provide a consistent source of power by which to continuously power the transducer. Such wired connection may supply power in addition to an internal probe power source such as a battery, thereby supplementing the limited battery power. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to utilize a plurality of probes as taught by Smith, as Smith teaches that different ultrasound probes may be used to obtain different types of diagnoses, where the different probes are optimized to obtain the different diagnoses ([0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Jin and Smith to change the voltage in response to whether the first image or the second image is to be generated as taught by Carp, as Carp teaches that different types of ultrasound imaging modes are preferably set with different voltage levels in order to accurately obtain images corresponding with the different modes (column 8, lines 23-26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Jin, Smith, and Carp to control a voltage maximum as taught by Wang, in order to avoid damage to the system or undesired overheating that may be caused by high voltage levels.
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (US 2019/0008486; hereinafter Jin) in view of Smith et al. (US 2004/0179332; hereinafter Smith) and Carp et al. (US 6432055; hereinafter Carp), and Wang et al. (US 2005/0228282; hereinafter Wang) as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Kudoh et al. (US 2010/0249600; hereinafter Kudoh).
Jin fails to show wherein the user interface device includes a continuous wave Doppler circuit configured to drive the transducer array in a continuous wave Doppler mode and generate a sound ray signal based on the reception signal acquired by the transducer array, and the second processor configured to generate a continuous wave Doppler image based on the sound ray signal generated by the continuous wave Doppler circuit.
Kudoh discloses an ultrasound probe system. Kudoh teaches wherein the user interface device includes a continuous wave Doppler circuit configured to drive the transducer array in a continuous wave Doppler mode and generate a sound ray signal based on the reception signal acquired by the transducer array, and the second processor configured to generate a continuous wave Doppler image based on the sound ray signal generated by the continuous wave Doppler circuit (continuous wave Doppler mode, [0062]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined invention of Jin, Smith, Carp, and Wang to utilize continuous wave Doppler as taught by Kudoh, as a variety of different ultrasound imaging diagnostic techniques are known to one of ordinary skill in the art and may be selected without undue experimentation depending on the patient’s specific condition or the physician’s preference. In particular, continuous wave Doppler is a known ultrasound imaging technique which provides the diagnostic advantage of measuring blood flow parameters such as the velocity of moving blood cells.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 JONATHAN CWERN whose telephone number is (571)270-1560. 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, Christopher Koharski can be reached at (571) 272-7230. 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.
/JONATHAN CWERN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797