CTFR 18/488,056 CTFR 86141 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Applicant’s Response In Applicant’s Response dated 1/27/26, the Applicant amended Claims 1, 6, 10, 11, 14, 17, 18, canceled Claims 2, 9 and argued Claims previously rejected in the Office Action dated 10/1/25. Claims 1, 3-8, 10-18 are pending examination. In light of the Applicant’s amendments and remarks, the 35 USC 101 and 102 rejections have been withdrawn. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10-12 and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song, in view of Hitoshi et al., United States Patent Publication 20210056690 (hereinafter “Hitoshi”) . Claim 1: Song discloses: A document creation support apparatus comprising at least one processor, wherein the processor is configured to: acquire a medical image including a plurality of regions of interest (see paragraphs [0015] and [0016]). Song teaches the regions of interests can be acquire semi-automatically or automatically from the medical image ; analyze each of the plurality of regions of interest to derive findings of each of the regions of interest, wherein the findings including a type of each of the regions of interest (see paragraph [0015]). Song teaches analyzing different regions of interest to derive findings and suspicious regions. generate text including a description of at least one of the plurality of regions of interest (see paragraph [0064]). Song teaches generating text and keywords based on the weights giving to the features and regions of interest. perform control to display the generated text on an interpretation report screen (see paragraph [0046] and [0057]). Song teaches displaying the generated report. Song fails to expressly disclose acquiring an evaluation value that is set in advance from an evaluation table. Hitoshi discloses: access a memory to refer to an evaluation value table derive an evaluation index as a target of a medical document for each of the plurality of regions of interest by acquiring, from the evaluation value table, an evaluation value that is set in advance and associated with the type of each of the regions of interest (see paragraphs [0080]-[0084]). Hitoshi teaches accessing a memory to use a table with parameters set in advance to label the region of interest based on the type of lesion found ; and Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Song to include the determining priority/index value of the region of interest based on past examination for the purpose of efficiently prioritizing regions of interests based on examination results, as taught by Hitoshi. Claim 3: Song discloses: wherein the processor is configured to determine whether or not to include, in the text, a feature of a region of interest to be included in the text according to the evaluation index (see paragraphs [0005], [0016], [0047]). Song discloses determining the suspicious regions of interests, generating keywords based on the weighted features and generating reports based on the region of interest. Claim 4: Song discloses: wherein the processor is configured to determine a description order of regions of interest to be included in the text according to the evaluation index (see paragraph [0047]). Song teaches determining an order of the keyword description based on the features of the region of interest . Claim 7: Song discloses: wherein the processor is configured to generate the text in a sentence format (see paragraph [0022]). Song teaches the generated report information can be in sentence format . Claim 8: Song discloses: wherein the processor is configured to generate the text in a bullet format or a tabular format (see paragraph [0052]). Song teaches generate text for the reports in table format . Claim 10: Song discloses: wherein the processor is configured to derive the evaluation index according to a presence or absence of change from the same region of interest detected in a past examination (see paragraph [0015]). Song teaches the making changes by the adding the new finding and generating new reports based on the new weighted features. Claim 11: Song fails to expressly disclose priority or index value based on past examination. Hitoshi discloses: wherein the evaluation index is an evaluation value, and the processor is configured to make the evaluation value of a region of interest that has changed from the same region of interest detected in the past examination higher than the evaluation value of a region of interest that has not changed (see paragraphs [0074]). Hitoshi teaches based on the past examination of detected regions of interest, make it those regions of interest higher/lower priority. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Song to include the priority/index value of the region of interest based on past examination for the purpose of efficiently prioritizing regions of interests based on examination results, as taught by Hitoshi. Claim 12: Song fails to expressly disclose priority or index value based on past examination. Hitoshi discloses: wherein the processor is configured to derive the evaluation index according to whether or not the same region of interest has been detected in a past examination (see paragraphs [0074]). Hitoshi teaches based on the past examination of detected regions of interest, make it those regions of interest higher/lower priority. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Song to include the determining priority/index value of the region of interest based on past examination for the purpose of efficiently prioritizing regions of interests based on examination results, as taught by Hitoshi. Claim 14: Song discloses: wherein processor is configured to, in displaying the text, perform control to display a description of a region of interest with the evaluation value higher than at a time of detection in a past examination in an identifiable manner from descriptions of other regions of interest (see paragraphs [0048] and [0049]). Song teaches the weight is a value and controls which description/report is displayed based on the order of the values. Claim 15: Song discloses: wherein the processor is configured to change a display mode of the description regarding the region of interest included in the text according to the evaluation index (see paragraph [0050]). Song teaches a switch to change the views regarding the images and reports. Claim 16: Song discloses: wherein the processor is configured to: perform control to display the derived evaluation index; receive a correction to the evaluation index; and generate the text based on an evaluation index reflecting the received correction (see paragraphs [0047]-[0049] and [0056]). Song teaches the user being able to make adjustments through the user interface to the regions of interests/weights. Claim 17, 18: Although Claim 17 is a method claim and Claim 18 is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, they are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as the apparatus of Claim 1 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song, in view of Hitoshi, in further view of Toshifumi et al., JP2004110398A (hereinafter “Toshifumi”) . Claim 5: Song and Hitoshi fail to expressly disclose determining an amount of description based on index of region of interest. Toshifumi discloses: wherein the processor is configured to determine an amount of description of the text according to the evaluation index for a region of interest to be included in the text (see paragraph [0010]). Toshifumi teaches the number of characters for the description being based on the priority of the region of interest. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Song and Hitoshi to include the number of characters based the index value for the purpose of efficiently prioritizing regions of interests, as taught by Toshifumi. Claim 6: Song and Hitoshi fail to expressly disclose determining an amount of description based on index of region of interest. Toshifumi discloses: wherein the processor is configured to generate text including a description regarding a region of interest in order from a region of interest with a highest evaluation value, the text having a predetermined number of characters as an upper limit value (see paragraphs [0010], [0030] and [0031]). Toshifumi teaches the number of characters being directly tied to the priority of the region of interest. The higher the region of interest, the more characters for the description. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Song and Hitoshi to include the number of characters based the index value for the purpose of efficiently prioritizing regions of interests, as taught by Toshifumi . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song and Hitoshi, in view of Niwa et al., 20130290826 (hereinafter “Niwa”) . Claim 13: Song and Hitoshi fail to expressly disclose the region of interest including an abnormal shadow. Niwa discloses: wherein the region of interest is a region including an abnormal shadow (see paragraph [0005]). Niwa teaches the region of interest in the image is an abnormal shadow. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Song and Hitoshi to include the region of interest being an abnormal shadow for the purpose of efficiently identifying regions of interest and shadows, as taught by Niwa. Response to Arguments 07-38-02 Applicant’s arguments, see REM, filed 1/27/26, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-18 under 35 USC 101 and 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Song and Hitoshi. Discussion of Claim Rejections under 35 USC 102 and 103 Applicant argues Applicant respectfully submits that the cited reference Song does not disclose the derivation of an evaluation index for a region of interest, in particular, "access a memory to refer to an evaluation value table to derive an evaluation index as a target of a medical document for each of the plurality of regions of interest by acquiring, from the evaluation value table, an evaluation value that is set in advance and associated with the type of each of the regions of interest" and does not disclose the determination of a region of interest to be included in the text, in particular, "generate text including a description of at least one of the plurality of regions of interest based on the evaluation value" in claim 1. The Examiner agrees. Song, alone, does not teach the amended claim. The Examiner combined the Hitoshi art to teach the amended limitation. See the above rejection of Claim 1. Applicant argues However, in Song, the specific region of interest mentioned in paragraph [0016] is determined based on manually marked ROIs through user selection (further see paragraph [0047] of Song which is reproduced below). In other words, the specific region of interest to be included in the report in Song is not determined based on an evaluation value that is set in advance and associated with the type of each of the regions of interest. The Examiner agrees that Song does not determine the evaluation value that is set in advance and associated with the type of the regions of interest. The Examiner combines Song and Hitoshi to teach to teaches the amended claim. Hitoshi teaches determining the evaluation value that is set in advance (see the above rejection of Claim 1). Song teaches generating text to be the description of the region of interest (see paragraphs [0064]). Song and Hitoshi, combined, teaches the generating the text for the description of the region of interest based on the type of region of interest. Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 TIONNA M BURKE whose telephone number is (571)270-7259. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8a-4p. 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, Stephen Hong can be reached at (571)272-4124. 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. /TIONNA M BURKE/Examiner, Art Unit 2178 5/22/26 /STEPHEN S HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 2 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 3 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 4 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 5 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 6 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 7 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 8 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 9 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 10 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 11 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 12 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 13 Art Unit: 2178 Application/Control Number: 18/488,056 Page 14 Art Unit: 2178
Prosecution Insights