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 Amendment
The amendment filed 10/10/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-16 remain pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 10-13 of Applicant Remarks, filed 10/10/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 13, and 15 under 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Carrasco-Zevallos (US20160338589A1).
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: scanning system in claims 1, 13, and 15.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the “computer program comprising computer-readable instructions” of claims 15 and 16 encompasses signals per se. The specification does not explicitly limit the computer-readable instructions to be non-transitory, which does not exclude propagating electromagnetic waves. As understood in light of the specification, the broadest reasonable interpretation of claims 15 and 16 encompasses signals which are not within one of the four statutory categories of invention. See MPEP 2106.03. It is suggested that claim 1 be amended to recite the computer-readable instructions to be on a “non-transitory computer-readable medium” to overcome this rejection.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carrasco-Zevallos (US20160338589A1) in view of An (US 2016/040977 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Carrasco-Zevallos teaches a Fourier-domain optical tomography, FD-OCT, imaging system (paragraphs [0034] and [0056] specify the system is a swept-source OCT system, which is a type of FD-OCT), comprising:
an FD-OCT scanner (102, Fig. 1) arranged to generate OCT data by performing a scan of an imaging target to acquire samples (abstract) whose values are indicative of an optical property of the imaging target at respective scan locations in the imaging target (paragraph [0007]), the FD-OCT scanner comprising a scanning system (108, Fig. 1) arranged to perform a scan of a light beam across the imaging target (paragraph [0045]) and collect light that has been scattered by the imaging target during the scan (112, Fig. 1); and
a controller (118, Fig. 1) arranged to control the scanning system of the FD-OCT scanner to compensate for a relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner during the scan (paragraphs [0040], [0041]).
Carrasco-Zevallos teaches the controller bases the movement of the scanning system on a comparison between two images (paragraphs [0040], [0041]). Carrasco-Zevallos does not teach the use of complex OCT data, or the controller arranged to perform a cross-correlation calculation that uses phase information of the acquired samples, and controlling the scanning system based on the cross-correlation calculation.
However, in the same field of endeavor of reducing motion artifacts in OCT imaging, An discloses an FD-OCT system (paragraph [0004]) which generates complex data (paragraph [0017], [0027]) and uses a cross-correlation calculation that uses phase information (paragraphs [0024], [0027]) to correct for motion (paragraph [0005]).
An discloses that complex OCT data contains phase information, which leads to higher accuracy in calculating motion displacement (paragraph [0027]). An also discloses that the use of a cross-correlation function using the phase information accounts for motion achieves sub-pixel level shifts (paragraph [0004]). Thus, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the FD-OCT system which uses complex data to calculate a cross-correlation calculation to compensate for motion taught in An with the OCT system and controller which controls the scanning system to compensate for motion of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Regarding claim 2, Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An teaches the system as explained above in claim 1, and further teaches the controller (Carrasco-Zevallos: 118, Fig. 1) perform the cross-correlation calculation (An: paragraphs [0024], [0027]) by:
acquiring a first set of the samples (An: one of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]), the samples of the first set comprising samples that have been acquired by the FD-OCT scanner scanning the imaging target along a first scan line (An: paragraph [0019] discloses 300 A-scans per B-scan) on the imaging target;
acquiring a second set of the samples (An: a second of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]), the samples of the second set comprising samples that have been acquired by the FD-OCT scanner scanning the imaging target along a second scan line on the imaging target (An: paragraph [0019] discloses 300 A-scans per B-scan), wherein the second scan line at least partially overlaps the first scan line (An: paragraph [0024]); and
performing the cross-correlation calculation to calculate a cross-correlation between a third set of samples (An: a third of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]) comprising at least some samples of the first set of samples (An: paragraph [0024]), and a fourth set of samples (An: a fourth of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]) comprising at least some samples of the second set of samples (An: paragraph [0024]), at least some samples of the third set of samples and at least some samples of the fourth set of samples having been acquired from a common region of the imaging target at which the first scan line and the second scan line overlap (An: paragraph [0024] discloses the four B-scans that make up a cluster overlap by more than 80%. It is the position of the examiner that this means at least some of the 3rd and 4th B-scans would overlap with the 1st and 2nd B-scans), the cross-correlation calculation being based on phase information in the third set of samples and phase information in the fourth set of samples (An: paragraph [0024] discloses any of the B-scans may be selected for the cross-correlation calculation), and
control the FD-OCT scanner to compensate for the relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner during the scan by:
registering the first set of samples and the second set of samples with respect to each other using the calculated cross-correlation to determine a value of an offset indicator (An: peak value, paragraph [0025]) that is indicative of an offset between scan locations of the first set of samples and scan locations of the second set of samples (An: paragraph [0025]); and using the determined value of the offset indicator to control the FD-OCT scanner (Carrasco-Zevallos: paragraphs [0040], [0041]), during the scan, to compensate for a relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner that occurred between the acquisition of the first set of samples and the acquisition of the second set of samples by the FD-OCT scanner (An: paragraphs [0030], [0031]; Figs. 5 and 6 depict the scans before and after the motion compensation is applied; paragraph [0005] discloses the method is used in real-time between B-scans, which would be during a C-scan).
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the cross-correlation calculation taught in An with the motion compensation achieved by the controller of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Regarding claim 3, Carrasco-Zevallos as modified An teaches the system as explained above in claim 1, and An further teaches the FD-OCT scanner is arranged to generate the complex OCT data by performing, as the scan, repeat linear scans (An: four B-scans, paragraph [0019]) of the imaging target along overlapping scan lines on the imaging target (An: paragraph [0024]), such that the acquired samples define repeat B-scans of the imaging target (An: cluster, paragraph [0019]), and
the controller (Carrasco-Zevallos: 118, Fig. 1) is arranged to:
perform the cross-correlation calculation by:
acquiring, as the first set of the samples, a first B-scan of the repeat B-scans (An: one of the 80 cluster - paragraphs [0019], [0024]);
acquiring, as the second set of the samples, a second B-scan of the repeat B-scans (An: a second of the 80 clusters, paragraphs [0019], [0024]); and
performing, as the cross-correlation calculation, a cross-correlation calculation to calculate a two-dimensional cross-correlation between one or more A-scans of the first B-scan (An: dotted line, Fig. 5a; paragraph [0030]) , and A-scans of the second B-scan (An: solid line, Fig. 5a; paragraph [0030]), wherein the A-scans of the second B-scan include A-scans that are correspondingly located in the second B-scan to the one or more A-scans in the first B-scan (An: paragraph [0030] implies the A-scans are located at the same depth, as it is the only way to meaningfully compare the shifts), and control the FD-OCT scanner to compensate for the relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner during the scan (Carrasco-Zevallos: paragraphs [0040], [0041]) by:
registering the first B-scan, as the first set of samples, and the second B-scan, as the second set of samples, with respect to each other, by using the calculated cross-correlation to determine, as the value of the offset indicator (An: peak value, paragraph [0025]), an offset value that is indicative of an offset between the first B-scan and the second B-scan (An: paragraph [0025]); and
controlling the FD-OCT scanner to compensate for a relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner that occurred between the acquisition of the first B-scan and the acquisition of the second B-scan by the FD-OCT scanner, by using the determined offset value (An: paragraphs [0030], [0031]; Figs. 5 and 6 depict the scans before and after the motion compensation is applied).
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the cross-correlation calculation taught in An with the motion compensation achieved by the controller of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Regarding claim 6, Carrasco-Zevallos in view of An teaches the system as explained above in claim 2, and An further teaches the FD-OCT scanner (An: 107, Fig. 1) is arranged to generate the complex OCT data (An: paragraphs [0017], [0027]) by performing, as the scan, an area OCT scan of the imaging target to acquire samples having complex values that are indicative of the optical property of the imaging target at respective scan locations (An: paragraph [0015]) that are distributed three-dimensionally in the imaging target (An: paragraph [0035]), and
the controller (Carrasco-Zevallos: 118, Fig. 1) is arranged to perform the cross-correlation calculation by acquiring, as the first set of samples, a set of samples comprising samples which have been acquired by the FD-OCT scanner scanning the imaging target along the first scan line as at least a part of the area OCT scan, wherein the second scan line crosses the first scan line (An: Examiner is interpreting this to fall in the variety of B-scan directions disclosed at the end of paragraph [0017]).
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the motion compensation method taught in An with the controller of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Regarding claim 13, Carrasco-Zevallos teaches a computer-implemented method (paragraph [0063]) of controlling a Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography, FD-OCT, scanner (paragraphs [0034] and [0056] specify the system is a swept-source OCT system, which is a type of FD-OCT), which is generating OCT data by performing a scan of an imaging target to acquire samples (abstract) whose values are indicative of an optical property of the imaging target at respective scan locations in the imaging target (paragraph [0007]), to compensate for a relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner during the scan (paragraphs [0040], [0041]), the method comprising:
controlling a scanning system of the FD-OCT scanner, to compensate for the relative movement between the imaging target and the FD- OCT scanner during the scan (paragraph [0040], [0041]), wherein the FD-OCT scanner comprises the scanning system and the scanning system is arranged to perform a scan of a light beam across the imaging target (paragraph [0045])and to collect light scattered by the imaging target during the scan (112, Fig.1).
Carrasco-Zevallos teaches the controller bases the movement of the scanning system on a comparison between two images (paragraphs [0040], [0041]). Carrasco Zevallos does not teach the use of complex OCT data, or the controller arranged to perform a cross-correlation calculation that uses phase information of the acquired samples, and controlling the scanning system based on the cross-correlation calculation.
However, An discloses an FD-OCT system (paragraph [0004]) which generates complex data (paragraph [0017], [0027]) and uses a cross-correlation calculation that uses phase information (paragraphs [0024], [0027]) to correct for motion (paragraph [0005]).
An discloses that complex OCT data contains phase information, which leads to higher accuracy in calculating motion displacement (paragraph [0027]). An also discloses that the use of a cross-correlation function to account for motion achieves sub-pixel level shifts (paragraph [0004]). Thus, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the FD-OCT system which uses complex data to calculate a cross-correlation calculation to compensate for motion taught in An with the OCT system and controller which controls the scanning system to compensate for motion of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Regarding claim 14, Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An teaches the computer-implemented method as explained above in claim 13, and An further teaches the cross-correlation calculation is performed by: acquiring a first set of the samples (An: one of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]), the samples of the first set comprising samples that have been acquired by the FD-OCT scanner scanning the imaging target along a first scan line (An: paragraph [0019] discloses 300 A-scans per B-scan) on the imaging target;
acquiring a second set of the samples (a second of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]), the samples of the second set comprising samples that have been acquired by the FD-OCT scanner scanning the imaging target along a second scan line on the imaging target (paragraph [0019] discloses 300 A-scans per B-scan), wherein the second scan line at least partially overlaps the first scan line (paragraph [0024]); and
performing the cross-correlation calculation to calculate a cross-correlation between a third set of samples (An: a third of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]) comprising at least some samples of the first set of samples (An: paragraph [0024]), and a fourth set of samples (An: a fourth of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]) comprising at least some samples of the second set of samples (An: paragraph [0024]), at least some samples of the third set of samples and at least some samples of the fourth set of samples having been acquired from a common region of the imaging target at which the first scan line and the second scan line overlap (An: paragraph [0024] discloses the four B-scans that make up a cluster overlap by more than 80%. It is the position of the examiner that this means at least some of the 3rd and 4th B-scans would overlap with the 1st and 2nd B-scans), the cross-correlation calculation being based on phase information in the third set of samples and phase information in the fourth set of samples (An: paragraph [0024] discloses any of the B-scans may be selected for the cross-correlation calculation) and
the FD-OCT scanner is controlled to compensate for the relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner during the scan (Carrasco-Zevallos: paragraphs [0040], [0041])) by:
registering the first set of samples and the second set of samples with respect to each other using the calculated cross-correlation to determine a value of an offset indicator (An: peak value, paragraph [0025]) that is indicative of an offset between scan locations of the first set of samples and scan locations of the second set of samples (An: paragraph [0025]); and
using the determined value of the offset indicator to control the FD-OCT scanner, during the scan, to compensate for a relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner that occurred between the acquisition of the first set of samples and the acquisition of the second set of samples by the FD-OCT scanner (An: paragraphs [0030], [0031]; Figs. 5 and 6 depict the scans before and after the motion compensation is applied. ; paragraph [0005] discloses the method is used in real-time between B-scans, which would be during a C-scan).
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the cross-correlation calculation taught in An with the controller of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Regarding claim 15, Carrasco-Zevallos teaches a computer program comprising computer-readable instructions, which, when executed by a processor (paragraph [0063]) that is controlling a Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography (paragraph [0037]), FD-OCT, scanner to generate OCT data by performing a scan of an imaging target to acquire samples (abstract) whose values are indicative of an optical property of the imaging target at respective scan locations in the imaging target (paragraph [0007]), cause the processor to control the FD-OCT scanner to compensate for a relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner during the scan (paragraph [0040], [0041]), by performing a method comprising:
controlling a scanning system of the FD-OCT scanner to compensate for the relative movement between the imaging target and the FD- OCT scanner during the scan (paragraph [0040], [0041]), wherein the FD-OCT scanner comprises the scanning system and the scanning system is arranged to perform a scan of a light beam across the imaging target (paragraph [0045]) and to collect light scattered by the imaging target during the scan (112, Fig. 1).
Carrasco-Zevallos teaches the controller bases the movement of the scanning system on a comparison between two images (paragraphs [0040], [0041]). Carrasco Zevallos does not teach the use of complex OCT data, or the controller arranged to perform a cross-correlation calculation that uses phase information of the acquired samples, and controlling the scanning system based on the cross-correlation calculation.
However, in the same field of endeavor of reducing motion artifacts in OCT imaging, An discloses an FD-OCT system (paragraph [0004]) which generates complex data (paragraph [0017], [0027]) and uses a cross-correlation calculation that uses phase information (paragraphs [0024], [0027]) to correct for motion (paragraph [0005]).
An discloses that complex OCT data contains phase information, which leads to higher accuracy in calculating motion displacement (paragraph [0027]). An also discloses that the use of a cross-correlation function to account for motion achieves sub-pixel level shifts (paragraph [0004]). Thus, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the FD-OCT system which uses complex data to calculate a cross-correlation calculation to compensate for motion taught in An with the OCT system with the controller which controls the scanning system to compensate for motion of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Regarding claim 16, Carrasco-Zevallos in view of An teaches the computer program as explained in claim 15, and further teaches the cross-correlation calculation is performed by:
acquiring a first set of the samples (An: one of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]), the samples of the first set comprising samples that have been acquired by the FD-OCT scanner scanning the imaging target along a first scan line (An: paragraph [0019] discloses 300 A-scans per B-scan) on the imaging target;
acquiring a second set of the samples (An: a second of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]), the samples of the second set comprising samples that have been acquired by the FD-OCT scanner scanning the imaging target along a second scan line on the imaging target (An: paragraph [0019] discloses 300 A-scans per B-scan), wherein the second scan line at least partially overlaps the first scan line (An: paragraph [0024]); and
performing the cross-correlation calculation to calculate a cross-correlation between a third set of samples (An: a third of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]) comprising at least some samples of the first set of samples (An: paragraph [0024]), and a fourth set of samples (An: a fourth of the four B-scans, paragraph [0019]) comprising at least some samples of the second set of samples (An: paragraph [0024]), at least some samples of the third set of samples and at least some samples of the fourth set of samples having been acquired from a common region of the imaging target at which the first scan line and the second scan line overlap (An: paragraph [0024] discloses the four B-scans that make up a cluster overlap by more than 80%. It is the position of the examiner that this means at least some of the 3rd and 4th B-scans would overlap with the 1st and 2nd B-scans), the cross-correlation calculation being based on phase information in the third set of samples and phase information in the fourth set of samples, and
the FD-OCT scanner is controlled to compensate for the relative movement between the imaging target (An: paragraphs [0030], [0031]; Figs. 5 and 6 depict the scans before and after the motion compensation is applied) and the FD-OCT scanner during the scan by:
registering the first set of samples and the second set of samples with respect to each other using the calculated cross-correlation to determine a value of an offset indicator (An: peak value, paragraph [0025])that is indicative of an offset between scan locations of the first set of samples and scan locations of the second set of samples (An: paragraph [0025]); and
using the determined value of the offset indicator to control the FD-OCT scanner, during the scan, to compensate for a relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner that occurred between the acquisition of the first set of samples and the acquisition of the second set of samples by the FD-OCT scanner (Carrasco-Zevallos: paragraphs [0040], [0041]).
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the cross-correlation calculation taught in An with the controller of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Claims 4, 5, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carrasco-Zevallos (US20160338589A1) in view of An (US 2016/040977 A1) as applied to claim 3 and 6 above, and further in view of Fingler (US9763570).
Regarding claim 4, Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An teaches the invention as explained above in claim 3, and further teaches the controller (Carrasco-Zevallos: 118, Fig. 1) is arrange to perform, as the cross-correlation calculation, a cross-correlation calculation to calculate a two-dimensional cross-correlation (An: paragraph [0005]) between a predetermined number of A-scans of the first B-scan , and A-scans of the second B-scan (An: paragraph [0024] discloses the cross-correlation calculation is done over a "small window" within the B-scans. This would be a predetermined number of A-scans of the B-scans), the cross-correlation calculation being based on phase information (An: paragraph [0027] - complex image data includes phase information) in the predetermined number of A-scans of the first B-scan and phase information in the A-scans of the second B-scan (An: "window", paragraph [0024]).
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the cross-correlation calculation method of motion compensation taught in An with the controller of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An does not teach the predetermined number is selected such that a variation of the phase information among the predetermined number of A-scans of the first B-scan is less than a predetermined degree of variation.
However, in the same field of endeavor of OCT systems, Fingler teaches a method where the phase information is compared to a predetermined degree of variation (threshold - column 12, lines 57-65). Fingler also discloses that this can be performed on a predetermined number of A-scans, rather than all the A-scans (column 11, lines 38-46).
Fingler discloses the method of comparing phase information to a degree of variation is well -known in the art (column 12, lines 57-59) and that using a predetermined number of A-scans would reduce errors caused by the phase (column 15, lines 24—29). Thus, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the OCT imaging system taught in Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An with the thresholding method and predetermined number of A-scans taught in Fingler, as it is a well-known method that reduces errors.
Regarding claim 5, Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An and Fingler teaches the invention as explained above in claim 4, and further teaches the controller (Carrasco-Zevallos: 118, Fig. 1) is arranged to control the FD-OCT scanner to compensate for the relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner during the scan (Carrasco-Zevallos: paragraphs [0040], [0041]) by:
performing a plurality of the cross-correlation calculations to calculate a respective two-dimensional cross-correlation between each set of a plurality of sets of the predetermined number of A-scans of the first B-scan (An: "small window" - paragraph [0024]) and respective A-scans of the second B-scan (An: multiple B-scans - paragraph [0024]), the respective A-scans of the second B-scan including A-scans that are correspondingly located in the second B-scan to the predetermined number of A-scans in the set (An: overlapping B-scans - paragraph [0024]);
combining the calculated cross-correlations to determine, as the offset value, a value that is indicative of an offset between the first B-scan and the second B-scan (An: peak value - paragraph [0025]); and
controlling the FD-OCT scanner to compensate for the relative movement between the imaging target and the FD-OCT scanner by using the determined offset value that is indicative of the offset between the first B-scan and the second B-scan (An: paragraph [0028]).
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the cross-correlation calculation taught in An with the controller of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Regarding claim 7, Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An teaches the invention as explained above in claim 6, and further teaches wherein the first scan line (An: cluster, paragraph [0019] is one of a plurality of scan lines on the imaging target (An: B-scan, paragraph [0019]), the FD-OCT scanner being arranged to perform the area OCT scan by scanning the imaging target along the plurality of scan lines, and to generate an OCT C-scan as the complex OCT data, based on the area OCT scan (An: x and y data - paragraph [0035]).
Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An fails to teach the plurality of B-scans is parallel.
However, Fingler teaches a cluster with at least two parallel B-scans (column 5, lines 9-11).
Fingler teaches that by aligning the B-scans in a parallel manner, the effects of motion on the scans is actually minimized (abstract). Thus, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the OCT imaging system of Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An with the parallel B-scans taught in Fingler as a way to minimize motion in the scans.
Regarding claim 8 Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An and Fingler teaches the invention as explained above in claim 7, and further teaches the controller (Carrasco-Zevallos: 118, Fig. 1) is arranged to perform the cross-correlation calculation by acquiring, as the first set of samples, the complex OCT data of the C-scan (An: paragraph [0035] discloses that the cross-correlation calculation may be extended to a 3D data set to find shifts in x and y, which would be a C-scan).
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the cross-correlation calculation taught in An with the controller of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carrasco-Zevallos (US20160338589A1) in view of An (US 2016/040977 A1) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Shibayama (US 20220214156 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An teaches the invention as explained above in claim 6, but fails to teach the first scan line extends along two dimensions on the imaging target.
However, in the same field of endeavor of optical coherence tomography apparatuses, Shibayama teaches the scanning can be done along a Lissajous curve (paragraph [0074]), which is two dimensional.
Shibayama discloses that Lissajous curves are advantageous as they allow for a shorter scan time compared to other types of scan patterns (paragraph [0077]). An discloses that the more time spent scanning, the more likely it is for movement of the object being imaged (paragraph [0020]). Thus, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the FD-OCT system taught in An with the Lissajous curve taught in Shibayama to achieve a shorter scan time and minimize motion.
Regarding claim 10, Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An teaches the invention as explained above in claim 9, but fails to teach the first scan line defines one of a square, a triangle, a diamond, a circle, an ellipse, a spiral, a square spiral, a Lissajous figure, an epitrochoid, and a hypotrochoid on the imaging target.
However, Shibayama teaches the scanning can be done along a Lissajous curve (paragraph [0074]).
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the FD-OCT system taught in An with the Lissajous curve taught in Shibayama to achieve a shorter scan time and minimize motion.
Regarding claim 11, Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An teaches teach the invention as explained above in claim 6, and further teaches the first scan line (An: B-scan, paragraph [0019]) and the second scan line (An: B-scan, paragraph [0019]) are different parts of a single scan line (An: cluster, paragraph [0019]).
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the method taught in An with the imaging system of Carrasco-Zevallos in order to achieve a higher accuracy of motion calculation by enabling detection of sub-pixel level shifts.
Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An fails to teach the scan line that extends along two dimensions on the imaging target and crosses itself.
However, Shibayama teaches the scanning can be done along a Lissajous curve (paragraph [0074]), which is a two-dimensional path that crosses itself.
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the FD-OCT system taught in An with the Lissajous curve taught in Shibayama to achieve a shorter scan time and minimize motion.
Regarding claim 12, Carrasco-Zevallos as modified by An teaches the invention as explained above in claim 11, but fails to teach the single scan line defines one of a Lissajous figure, an epitrochoid, and a hypotrochoid on the imaging target.
However, Shibayama teaches the scanning can be done along a Lissajous curve (paragraph [0074]).
As discussed above, it would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the FD-OCT system taught in An with the Lissajous curve taught in Shibayama to achieve a shorter scan time and minimize motion.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexandria Mendoza whose telephone number is (571)272-5282. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur 9:00 - 6:00 CDT.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at (571) 270-5789. 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.
/ALEXANDRIA MENDOZA/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/MICHELLE M IACOLETTI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877