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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for a power supply for a radio frequency coil assembly of a MRI apparatus, does not reasonably provide enablement for a power supply for any component. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
Regarding claim 1, the claim discloses “a power supply device for a magnetic resonance system” only in the preamble in the claim. The preamble does not have patentable weight. Therefore, the scope of the limitations of the power supply in the body of the claim are for any component according to the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim. Taking these factors into account, undue experimentation would be required by one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the full scope of claim 1. Claims 2-15 are rejected for depending on claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu (US 2012/0287678).
Regarding claim 1, Xu teaches a power supply device for a magnetic resonance system, comprising:
a DC power source [Fig. 9-13, see Vin. See also rest of reference.];
a full-bridge circuit coupled to the DC power source and having a first bridge arm and a second bridge arm, the full-bridge circuit being used to output a periodic voltage signal through the first bridge arm and the second bridge arm [Fig. 9-13, see switch transistors Q1-Q4 which form a full bridge. See also rest of reference.];
a resonant circuit, having a symmetrical circuit structure, wherein two symmetric input terminals are connected to the first bridge arm and the second bridge arm, respectively, so as to receive the periodic voltage signal [Fig. 9-13, see capacitors (such as C91-C92) and inductors (such as L91 and L92) in the middle of the circuit arrangement. The LC circuits are symmetric. See also rest of reference.]; and
a boost circuit, connected to two symmetric output terminals of the resonant circuit so as to receive the periodic voltage signal modulated by the resonant circuit, the boost circuit being used to provide a boosted voltage, and the boosted voltage having an amplitude greater than the amplitude of the periodic voltage signal [See boost auto-transformer. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 2, Xu further teaches wherein the resonant circuit comprises a first inductor, a first capacitor, a second capacitor and a second inductor, one end of the first inductor being connected to the first bridge arm, one end of the second inductor being connected to the second bridge arm, the other end of the first inductor being connected sequentially in series to the first capacitor and the second capacitor, and then connected to the other end of the second inductor, the other ends of the first inductor and the second inductor serving as the two symmetric output terminals, respectively, and a connection node of the first capacitor and the second capacitor being grounded [Fig. 9-13, see capacitors (such as C91-C92) and inductors (such as L91 and L92) in the middle of the circuit arrangement. The LC circuits are symmetric. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 3, Xu further teaches wherein the boost circuit comprises a symmetrical circuit structure, the symmetrical circuit structure comprising a first boost portion and a second boost portion, the first boost portion and the second boost portion being connected to the two symmetric output terminals of the resonant circuit, respectively, and the first boost portion and the second boost portion being used to produce divided voltages of the boosted voltage [Fig. 9-13, See boost auto-transformer. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 5, Xu further teaches further comprising an energy storage capacitor, wherein both the first boost portion and the second boost portion are connected to a positive electrode of the energy storage capacitor so as to provide the boosted voltage to the energy storage capacitor [See C93, C103, C113, C123, C133 in Figs. 9-13. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 6, Xu further teaches wherein a fifth diode is connected between the first boost portion and second boost portion, and the energy storage capacitor [See Diodes D91/92, D101/102, D111/112, D121/122, D131/132 in Figs. 9-13. See also rest of reference.].
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Xu, in view of Hirakawa (US 2021/0288583).
Regarding claim 4, Xu teaches the limitations of claim 3, which this claim depends from.
Xu is silent in teaching wherein the first boost portion comprises a plurality of third capacitors, a plurality of fifth capacitors, a plurality of first diodes and a plurality of second diodes, and the second boost portion comprises a plurality of fourth capacitors, the plurality of fifth capacitors, a plurality of third diodes and a plurality of fourth diodes, a negative electrode of each third capacitor being connected to an anode of a first diode and a cathode of a second diode, each third capacitor corresponding to one fourth capacitor, a negative electrode of the fourth capacitor corresponding to each third capacitor being connected to an anode of a third diode and a cathode of a fourth diode, cathodes of each first diode and a corresponding third diode being connected to each other and then connected to a positive electrode of a fifth capacitor, and anodes of each second diode and a corresponding fourth diode being connected to each other and then connected to a negative electrode of a fifth capacitor.
Hirakawa teaches wherein the first boost portion comprises a plurality of third capacitors, a plurality of fifth capacitors, a plurality of first diodes and a plurality of second diodes, and the second boost portion comprises a plurality of fourth capacitors, the plurality of fifth capacitors, a plurality of third diodes and a plurality of fourth diodes, a negative electrode of each third capacitor being connected to an anode of a first diode and a cathode of a second diode, each third capacitor corresponding to one fourth capacitor, a negative electrode of the fourth capacitor corresponding to each third capacitor being connected to an anode of a third diode and a cathode of a fourth diode, cathodes of each first diode and a corresponding third diode being connected to each other and then connected to a positive electrode of a fifth capacitor, and anodes of each second diode and a corresponding fourth diode being connected to each other and then connected to a negative electrode of a fifth capacitor [See Fig. 8. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Xu and Hirakawa because both references teach a rectifier circuits and Hirakawa teaches the claimed configuration is a known configuration for a rectifier circuit [Hirakawa - See Fig. 8. See also rest of reference.].
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Xu, in view of Gataric (US 11,114,932).
Regarding claim 7, Xu teaches the limitations of claim 2, which this claim depends from.
Xu is silent in teaching wherein the first inductor and the second inductor are wound to form a coupled inductor.
Gataric teaches wherein the first inductor and the second inductor are wound to form a coupled inductor [See coupled inductor. See Fig. 6. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Xu and Gataric because both references are in the field of electrical converters and because Gataric teaches the coupled inductors can reduce ripple currents.
Regarding claim 8, Xu and Gataric teaches the limitations of claim 7, which this claim depends from.
Xu is silent in teaching wherein the first inductor and the second inductor are wound and extended to form a ring shape.
Gataric teaches wherein the first inductor and the second inductor are wound and extended to form a ring shape [See coupled inductor. See Fig. 6. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Xu and Gataric because both references are in the field of electrical converters and because Gataric teaches the coupled inductors can reduce ripple currents.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Xu, in view of previously cited Gataric, and in further view of Park (US 2022/0140722).
Regarding claim 9, Xu and Gataric teaches the limitations of claim 8, which this claim depends from.
Gataric further teaches wherein the coupled inductor comprises an circular carrier, and the first inductor and the second inductor are each wound in parallel along the entire periphery of the circular carrier in multiple turns [See coupled inductor. See Fig. 6. See also rest of reference.].
However, Xu and Gataric are silent in teaching an annular carrier.
Park further teaches wherein the coupled inductor comprises an annular carrier, and the first inductor and the second inductor are wound along the periphery of the annular carrier in multiple turns [Fig. 8. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Xu and Gataric with the teachings of Park because all references are in the field of electrical converters and Park teaches it is known in the art to wind inductors along an annular carrier [Park - Fig. 8. See also rest of reference.].
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Xu, in view of Song (US 2015/0115954).
Regarding claim 10, Xu teaches the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends from.
Xu is silent in teaching further comprising a controller, for controlling the full-bridge circuit to output the periodic voltage signal.
Song, which is also in the field of bridge circuits, teaches further comprising a controller, for controlling the full-bridge circuit to output the periodic voltage signal [¶0028. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Xu and Song because both references are in the field of bridge circuits and because Song teaches it is known to use a control signal to control the switches of the bridge circuits [Song - ¶0028. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 11, Xu teaches the limitations of claim 10, which this claim depends from.
Xu is silent in teaching wherein the full-bridge circuit comprises a plurality of field-effect transistor switches, and the controller is used to switch the plurality of field-effect transistor switches between on and off, wherein a switching frequency of the controller for the plurality of field-effect transistor switches is outside of an operating frequency range of the magnetic resonance system.
Song, which is also in the field of bridge circuits, teaches wherein the full-bridge circuit comprises a plurality of field-effect transistor switches, and the controller is used to switch the plurality of field-effect transistor switches between on and off, wherein a switching frequency of the controller for the plurality of field-effect transistor switches is outside of an operating frequency range of the magnetic resonance system [¶0028, ¶0041. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Xu and Song because both references are in the field of bridge circuits and because Song teaches it is known to use a control signal to control the switches of the bridge circuits [Song - ¶0028. See also rest of reference.].
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Xu, in view of Gu (US 2020/0200845).
Regarding claim 12, Xu teaches the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends from.
However, Xu is silent in teaching wherein the power supply device is integrated in a resonance assembly of the magnetic resonance system.
Gu, which is also in the field of power supplies, teaches wherein the power supply device is integrated in a resonance assembly of the magnetic resonance system [¶0002].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Xu and Gu because both references are in the field of power supplies and because Xu teaches that the disclosed that the resonant converter is important to the developing trends of switchable power supplies, and the RF power supply of Gu is switchable.
Regarding claim 13, Xu teaches the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends from.
Xu teaches the power supply device of claim 1 [see claim 1 above].
Xu is silent in teaching a magnetic resonance system, comprising: a main magnet; a radio frequency coil; a radio frequency control link, comprising at least one of a radio frequency transmit link and a radio frequency receive link; and a power supply device, for supplying power to one or more loads in the radio frequency control link.
Gu teaches a magnetic resonance system, comprising: a main magnet [Fig. 1]; a radio frequency coil [Fig. 1]; a radio frequency control link, comprising at least one of a radio frequency transmit link and a radio frequency receive link [Fig. 1]; and a power supply device, for supplying power to one or more loads in the radio frequency control link [Fig. 1 and ¶0002].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Xu and Gu because both references are in the field of power supplies and because Xu teaches that the disclosed that the resonant converter is important to the developing trends of switchable power supplies, and the RF power supply of Gu is switchable.
Regarding claim 14, Xu and Gu teach the limitations of claim 13, which this claim depends from.
Xu is silent in teaching wherein the main magnet, the radio frequency coil, the one or more loads of the radio frequency control link, and the power supply device thereof are all disposed in a magnet room.
Gu teaches wherein the main magnet, the radio frequency coil, the one or more loads of the radio frequency control link, and the power supply device thereof are all disposed in a magnet room [Fig. 1 and ¶0002].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Xu and Gu because both references are in the field of power supplies and because Xu teaches that the disclosed that the resonant converter is important to the developing trends of switchable power supplies, and the RF power supply of Gu is switchable.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Xu, in view of previously cited Gu, and in further view of Tomiha (US 2014/0097844).
Regarding claim 15, Xu and Gu teach the limitations of claim 13, which this claim depends from.
Xu and Gu are silent in teaching wherein the power supply device is disposed in a housing accommodating the main magnet.
Tomiha further teaches wherein the power supply device is disposed in a housing accommodating the main magnet [Fig. 11, wherein batter 304 is part of second radio communication unit 300A, which can be located in the MRI bore (see Fig. 1). See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Xu and Gu with the teachings of Tomiha because Tomiha teaches it is possible for RF power supplies to be located in the MRI bore closer to the RF coil, which can reduce power loss.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RISHI R PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-4385. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7 a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Jessica Han can be reached at 571-272-2078. 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.
/RISHI R PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896