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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument on Pages 10-20 regarding the rejection of Claims 1, 8 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Schwab in view of Huiberts has been fully considered but is not persuasive under new grounds of rejection as below.
Regarding the rejection of all remaining corresponding claims, applicant’s argument submitted on Page 20 relies on the supposed deficiencies with respect to the rejection of parent Claims 1, 8, and 14. Applicant’s argument is moot for the same reasons detailed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 6-10, 13-15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Anthony et al. (US 20130296707).
Regarding Claim 1, Anthony teaches a method for acquiring a target ultrasound image having a target view of one or more anatomical structures, ([0085] “capturing a plurality of ultrasound images of an object such as human tissue” and [0140] “the approach may be improved by providing a reference object within the graphical representation 1700 that represents a target pose”), comprising:
a) acquiring, by an ultrasound probe of an ultrasound system, (Fig. 7 and [0096] “an ultrasound scanning system 700. The system 700 may be used to capture an acquisition state for a handheld ultrasound probe 702”), an ultrasound image ([0085] “capturing a plurality of ultrasound images of an object such as human tissue”);
b) processing, by at least one processor, the ultrasound image to identify a location of the ultrasound probe relative to the target view of the one or more anatomical structures ([0039] “The controller 120 generally includes processing circuitry to control operation of the device 100 as described herein. The controller 120 may receive signals from the sensor 110 indicative of force/torque and from the position sensor 142 of the linear drive system 122 indicative of the position of the probe 112 relative to the travel end points” and [0128] “As shown in step 904, capturing acquisition state data may include capturing a pose of the handheld ultrasound probe, which may be performed substantially concurrently with the step of obtaining the ultrasound image, and may include any of the techniques described above. This step may also or instead employ other techniques for measuring position and orientation of an ultrasound probe with respect to a skin surface.”);
c) causing, by the at least one processor, a display system to simultaneously present the ultrasound image and a reference target view image, (Fig. 18 and [0141] “the user interface 1800 may display a graphical representation 1802 containing a reference image 1804 and a current image 1806,” and [0143] “It will be appreciated that, while a pyramid is depicted, any other suitable graphic may be employed for the reference image 1804 and the current image 1806 without departing from the scope of this disclosure,” where one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that depicting the actual images is within the scope of the disclosure.), wherein:
i) the ultrasound image is presented at a first position on the display system relative to a second position on the display system of the reference target view image, a first one of the first position or the second position on the display system corresponds with the location of the ultrasound probe, (Fig. 18 and [0141] “a user may pivot the ultrasound probe about a point of contact with a target surface, thus bringing the current image 1806 into alignment with the reference image 1804.”),
ii) a second one, different from the first one, of the first position or the second position on the display system corresponds with a target location of the ultrasound probe for acquiring the target view, (Fig. 18, where the depictions of reference image 1804 and current image 1806 are different.),
iii) the first position is a different position on the display system from the second position on the display system when the location of the ultrasound probe is not at the target location of the ultrasound probe for acquiring the target view, (Fig. 18, see when images 1804 and 1806 are not aligned.), and
iv) the first position and the second position provide feedback for moving the ultrasound probe to acquire a target ultrasound image having the target view ([0149] “The graphical representation may be dynamically adjusted during an ultrasound scan or the like in order to provide real time visual feedback to a user on probe positioning.”);
d) tracking, by the at least one processor, the location of the ultrasound probe relative to the target view in one or more subsequently acquired ultrasound images ([0100] “the sensor system 720 may include other sensors 730 such as one or more inertial sensors, range finding sensors (such as sonic, ultrasonic, or infrared range finding subsystems), or any other circuitry or combination of circuitry suitable for tracking relative positions of the ultrasound probe 702”); and
e) updating, by the at least one processor, the first position or the second position on the display system based on the location of the ultrasound probe ([0141] “a user may rotate an ultrasound probe along its access, causing a corresponding rotation of the current image 1806 as shown in a second, updated instance of the user interface 1810. […] a user may pivot the ultrasound probe about a point of contact with a target surface, thus bringing the current image 1806 into alignment with the reference image 1804.”).
Regarding Claim 2, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 1, as discussed above. Furthermore, Anthony teaches obtaining, by the at least one processor, the target ultrasound image having the target view by aligning the ultrasound image and the reference target view image on the display system ([0128] “As shown in step 904, capturing acquisition state data may include capturing a pose of the handheld ultrasound probe, which may be performed substantially concurrently with the step of obtaining the ultrasound image, and may include any of the techniques described above. This step may also or instead employ other techniques for measuring position and orientation of an ultrasound probe with respect to a skin surface.”).
Regarding Claim 3, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 1, as discussed above. Furthermore, Anthony teaches assessing, by the at least one processor, whether the ultrasound probe has obtained the target view by: calculating a distance the ultrasound probe has traveled within a period of time, ([0127] “the acquisition state may include location, orientation, orientation, velocity (in any of the foregoing), acceleration, or any other intrinsic or extrinsic characteristics of […] the ultrasound probe”), calculating a total distance that the ultrasound probe has traveled, ([0039] “The controller 120 may receive signals from the sensor 110 indicative of force/torque and from the position sensor 142 of the linear drive system 122 indicative of the position of the probe 112 relative to the travel end points”), or assessing a quality of the one or more subsequently acquired ultrasound images relative to the target view.
Regarding Claim 6, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 1, as discussed above. Furthermore, Anthony teaches outputting, by the at least one processor, a signal when the target view has been attained ([0152] “a visual alert may be provided such as a visual indicator when the current acquisition state is substantially aligned with the target acquisition state. This may, for example, include flashing the graphical representation, changing a color of the visual indicator, changing a brightness of the visual indicator, changing a shade of the visual indicator, and so forth. Other alerts such as auditory feedback (e.g. a beep or buzzer), tactile feedback (e.g., vibration) or the like may also or instead be used to signal to a user when the current acquisition state is substantially aligned with the target acquisition state. More generally, any visual, auditory, or tactile alerts may be suitably employed to provide feedback to a user that supplements the graphical representation within the user interface.”).
Regarding Claim 7, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 1, as discussed above. Furthermore, Anthony teaches wherein the ultrasound image is a 2D or 3D image ([0086] “two-dimensional ultrasound images”).
Regarding Claim 8, Anthony teaches an ultrasound system, ([0096] “ultrasound scanning system 700”), for acquiring a target ultrasound image having a target view of one or more anatomical structures, ([0085] “capturing a plurality of ultrasound images of an object such as human tissue” and [0140] “the approach may be improved by providing a reference object within the graphical representation 1700 that represents a target pose”), comprising:
a) an ultrasound probe configured to acquire an ultrasound image ([0096] “The system 700 may be used to capture an acquisition state for a handheld ultrasound probe 702”);
b) at least one processor, ([0039] “The controller 120 generally includes processing circuitry to control operation of the device 100 as described herein.”), configured to:
i) process the ultrasound image to identify a location of the ultrasound probe relative to the target view of the one or more anatomical structures ([0039] “The controller 120 may receive signals from the sensor 110 indicative of force/torque and from the position sensor 142 of the linear drive system 122 indicative of the position of the probe 112 relative to the travel end points” and [0128] “As shown in step 904, capturing acquisition state data may include capturing a pose of the handheld ultrasound probe, which may be performed substantially concurrently with the step of obtaining the ultrasound image, and may include any of the techniques described above. This step may also or instead employ other techniques for measuring position and orientation of an ultrasound probe with respect to a skin surface.”);
ii) cause a display system to simultaneously present the ultrasound image and a reference target view image, (Fig. 18 and [0141] “the user interface 1800 may display a graphical representation 1802 containing a reference image 1804 and a current image 1806,” and [0143] “It will be appreciated that, while a pyramid is depicted, any other suitable graphic may be employed for the reference image 1804 and the current image 1806 without departing from the scope of this disclosure,” where one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that depicting the actual images is within the scope of the disclosure.), wherein:
1) the ultrasound image is presented at a first position on the display system relative to a second position on the display system of the reference target view image, (Fig. 18 and [0141] “a user may pivot the ultrasound probe about a point of contact with a target surface, thus bringing the current image 1806 into alignment with the reference image 1804.”),
2) a first one of the first position or the second position on the display system corresponds with the location of the ultrasound probe, (Fig. 18 and [0141] “a user may pivot the ultrasound probe about a point of contact with a target surface, thus bringing the current image 1806 into alignment with the reference image 1804.”),
3) a second one, different from the first one, of the first position or the second position on the display system corresponds with a target location of the ultrasound probe for acquiring the target view, (Fig. 18, where the depictions of reference image 1804 and current image 1806 are different.),
4) the first position is a different position on the display system from the second position on the display system when the location of the ultrasound probe is not at the target location of the ultrasound probe for acquiring the target view, (Fig. 18, see when images 1804 and 1806 are not aligned.), and
5) the first position and the second position provide feedback for moving the ultrasound probe to acquire the target ultrasound image having the target view ([0149] “The graphical representation may be dynamically adjusted during an ultrasound scan or the like in order to provide real time visual feedback to a user on probe positioning.”);
iii) track the location of the ultrasound probe relative to the target view in one or more subsequently acquired ultrasound images ([0100] “the sensor system 720 may include other sensors 730 such as one or more inertial sensors, range finding sensors (such as sonic, ultrasonic, or infrared range finding subsystems), or any other circuitry or combination of circuitry suitable for tracking relative positions of the ultrasound probe 702”); and
iv) update the first position or the second position on the display system of the ultrasound image based on the location of the ultrasound probe ([0141] “a user may rotate an ultrasound probe along its access, causing a corresponding rotation of the current image 1806 as shown in a second, updated instance of the user interface 1810. […] a user may pivot the ultrasound probe about a point of contact with a target surface, thus bringing the current image 1806 into alignment with the reference image 1804.”).
Regarding Claim 9, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 8, as discussed above. Furthermore, Anthony teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to obtain the target ultrasound image having the target view by aligning the ultrasound image and the reference target view image on the display system ([0128] “As shown in step 904, capturing acquisition state data may include capturing a pose of the handheld ultrasound probe, which may be performed substantially concurrently with the step of obtaining the ultrasound image, and may include any of the techniques described above. This step may also or instead employ other techniques for measuring position and orientation of an ultrasound probe with respect to a skin surface.”).
Regarding Claim 10, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 8, as discussed above. Furthermore, Anthony teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to assess whether the ultrasound probe has obtained the target view by calculating a distance the ultrasound probe has traveled within a period of time, ([0127] “the acquisition state may include location, orientation, orientation, velocity (in any of the foregoing), acceleration, or any other intrinsic or extrinsic characteristics of […] the ultrasound probe”), calculating a total distance that the ultrasound probe has traveled, ([0039] “The controller 120 may receive signals from the sensor 110 indicative of force/torque and from the position sensor 142 of the linear drive system 122 indicative of the position of the probe 112 relative to the travel end points”), or assessing a quality of the one or more subsequently acquired ultrasound images relative to the target view.
Regarding Claim 13, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 8, as discussed above. Furthermore, Anthony teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to output a signal when the target view has been attained ([0152] “a visual alert may be provided such as a visual indicator when the current acquisition state is substantially aligned with the target acquisition state. This may, for example, include flashing the graphical representation, changing a color of the visual indicator, changing a brightness of the visual indicator, changing a shade of the visual indicator, and so forth. Other alerts such as auditory feedback (e.g. a beep or buzzer), tactile feedback (e.g., vibration) or the like may also or instead be used to signal to a user when the current acquisition state is substantially aligned with the target acquisition state. More generally, any visual, auditory, or tactile alerts may be suitably employed to provide feedback to a user that supplements the graphical representation within the user interface.”).
Regarding Claim 14, Anthony teaches an ultrasound system, ([0096] “ultrasound scanning system 700”), for acquiring a target ultrasound image having a target view of one or more anatomical structures, ([0085] “capturing a plurality of ultrasound images of an object such as human tissue” and [0140] “the approach may be improved by providing a reference object within the graphical representation 1700 that represents a target pose”), comprising:
a) an ultrasound probe configured to acquire an ultrasound image ([0096] “The system 700 may be used to capture an acquisition state for a handheld ultrasound probe 702”);
b) at least one processor, ([0039] “The controller 120 generally includes processing circuitry to control operation of the device 100 as described herein.”), configured to:
i) process the ultrasound image to identify a location of the ultrasound probe relative to the target view of the one or more anatomical structures ([0039] “The controller 120 may receive signals from the sensor 110 indicative of force/torque and from the position sensor 142 of the linear drive system 122 indicative of the position of the probe 112 relative to the travel end points” and [0128] “As shown in step 904, capturing acquisition state data may include capturing a pose of the handheld ultrasound probe, which may be performed substantially concurrently with the step of obtaining the ultrasound image, and may include any of the techniques described above. This step may also or instead employ other techniques for measuring position and orientation of an ultrasound probe with respect to a skin surface.”);
ii) cause a display system to simultaneously present the ultrasound image and a reference target view image or an intermediate target, (Fig. 18 and [0141] “the user interface 1800 may display a graphical representation 1802 containing a reference image 1804 and a current image 1806,” and [0143] “It will be appreciated that, while a pyramid is depicted, any other suitable graphic may be employed for the reference image 1804 and the current image 1806 without departing from the scope of this disclosure,” where one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that depicting the actual images is within the scope of the disclosure.), wherein:
1) the ultrasound image is presented at a first position on the display system relative to a second position on the display system of the reference target view image or the intermediate target, (Fig. 18 and [0141] “a user may pivot the ultrasound probe about a point of contact with a target surface, thus bringing the current image 1806 into alignment with the reference image 1804.”),
2) a first one of the first position or the second position on the display system corresponds with the location of the ultrasound probe, (Fig. 18 and [0141] “a user may pivot the ultrasound probe about a point of contact with a target surface, thus bringing the current image 1806 into alignment with the reference image 1804.”),
3) a second one, different from the first one, of the first position or the second position on the display system corresponds with a target location of the ultrasound probe for acquiring the target view, (Fig. 18, where the depictions of reference image 1804 and current image 1806 are different.),
4) the first position is a different position on the display system from the second position on the display system when the location of the ultrasound probe is not at the target location of the ultrasound probe for acquiring the target view, (Fig. 18, see when images 1804 and 1806 are not aligned.), and
5) the first position and the second position provide feedback for moving the ultrasound probe to acquire the target ultrasound image having the target view ([0149] “The graphical representation may be dynamically adjusted during an ultrasound scan or the like in order to provide real time visual feedback to a user on probe positioning.”);
iii) track the location of the ultrasound probe relative to the target view in one or more subsequently acquired ultrasound images ([0100] “the sensor system 720 may include other sensors 730 such as one or more inertial sensors, range finding sensors (such as sonic, ultrasonic, or infrared range finding subsystems), or any other circuitry or combination of circuitry suitable for tracking relative positions of the ultrasound probe 702”);
iv) update the first position or the second position of the ultrasound image on the display system based on the location of the ultrasound probe ([0141] “a user may rotate an ultrasound probe along its access, causing a corresponding rotation of the current image 1806 as shown in a second, updated instance of the user interface 1810. […] a user may pivot the ultrasound probe about a point of contact with a target surface, thus bringing the current image 1806 into alignment with the reference image 1804.”); and
v) assess whether the intermediate target or the target view has been acquired by calculating a distance the ultrasound probe has traveled within a period of time, ([0127] “the acquisition state may include location, orientation, orientation, velocity (in any of the foregoing), acceleration, or any other intrinsic or extrinsic characteristics of […] the ultrasound probe”), a total distance that the ultrasound probe has traveled, ([0039] “The controller 120 may receive signals from the sensor 110 indicative of force/torque and from the position sensor 142 of the linear drive system 122 indicative of the position of the probe 112 relative to the travel end points”), or by assessing a quality of the one or more subsequently acquired ultrasound images relative to the target view.
Regarding Claim 15, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 14, as discussed above. Furthermore, Anthony teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to align the target ultrasound image or the intermediate target on the display system when the target view has been acquired ([0128] “As shown in step 904, capturing acquisition state data may include capturing a pose of the handheld ultrasound probe, which may be performed substantially concurrently with the step of obtaining the ultrasound image, and may include any of the techniques described above. This step may also or instead employ other techniques for measuring position and orientation of an ultrasound probe with respect to a skin surface.”).
Regarding Claim 18, Anthony teaches all limitation of Claim 14, as discussed above. Furthermore, Anthony teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to provide visual or auditory guidance to a user in order to acquire the target view ([0132] “Thus in one aspect there is disclosed herein techniques for capturing an acquisition state for an ultrasound scan and using the acquisition state to either control an ultrasound probe (such as with force feedback as described above) or to provide user guidance (such as to direct a user through displayed instructions or tactile feedback to a previous acquisition state for a patient or other target).”).
Regarding Claim 19, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 14, as discussed above. Furthermore, Anthony teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to output a signal when the target view has been attained ([0152] “a visual alert may be provided such as a visual indicator when the current acquisition state is substantially aligned with the target acquisition state. This may, for example, include flashing the graphical representation, changing a color of the visual indicator, changing a brightness of the visual indicator, changing a shade of the visual indicator, and so forth. Other alerts such as auditory feedback (e.g. a beep or buzzer), tactile feedback (e.g., vibration) or the like may also or instead be used to signal to a user when the current acquisition state is substantially aligned with the target acquisition state. More generally, any visual, auditory, or tactile alerts may be suitably employed to provide feedback to a user that supplements the graphical representation within the user interface.”).
Regarding Claim 20, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 14, as discussed above. Furthermore, Anthony teaches wherein the ultrasound image is a 2D or 3D image ([0086] “two-dimensional ultrasound images”).
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.
Claims 4-5, 11-12, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anthony et al. (US 20130296707) in view of Schwab et al. (US 20190183453).
Regarding Claim 4, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 1, as discussed above. However, Anthony does not explicitly teach overlaying, by the at least one processor, the ultrasound image with a graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image, and updating, by the at least one processor, the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image and the first position on the display system based on the location of the ultrasound probe with respect to the target view.
In an analogous ultrasound imaging for obtaining head progression measurements field of endeavor, Schwab teaches a method for acquiring a target ultrasound image having a target view of one or more anatomical structures, ([0007] “The method includes comparing the live image to the reference image frame, adjusting a position of the ultrasound probe based on comparing the live image to the reference image frame to align the second scan plane with the first scan plane” and [0024] “reference image frame 301”), comprising overlaying, by the at least one processor, the ultrasound image with a graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image, ([0029] “The live image 401 includes the pubic symphysis 302 and the fetal head 304” and Figs. 3-5), and updating, by the at least one processor, the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image and the first position on the display system based on the location of the ultrasound probe with respect to the target view ([0031] “the matching of the live image 401 to the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily upon on one or more anatomical structures present in both the reference image frame 301 and the live image 401. For example, determining how well the live image 401 matches the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily on how well the pubic symphysis in the live image matches the pubic symphysis in the reference image as the pubic symphysis is expected to a fixed landmark throughout labor.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to modify the teachings of Anthony with the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image because the modification ensures the proper scan plane and minimizes possible error in clinical determination of the anatomical structure being imaged, as taught by Schwab in [0003].
Regarding Claim 5, the modified method of Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 4, as discussed above. Furthermore, Schwab teaches aligning, by the at least one processor, the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image with the reference target view image ([0031] “At step 210, the operator deliberately adjusts the position of the ultrasound probe 106 to align the second scan plane (as represented by, the live image 401) with the first scan plane (as represented by the reference image frame 301). When the live image 401 matches or closely matches with the reference image frame 301, it is a good indication to the user that the second scan plane is aligned with the first scan plane. […] the matching of the live image 401 to the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily upon on one or more anatomical structures present in both the reference image frame 301 and the live image 401. For example, determining how well the live image 401 matches the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily on how well the pubic symphysis in the live image matches the pubic symphysis in the reference image as the pubic symphysis is expected to a fixed landmark throughout labor.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to modify the teachings of Anthony with the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image for the same reasons as Claim 4 above.
Regarding Claim 11, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 8, as discussed above. However, Anthony does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one processor is further configured to overlay the ultrasound image with a graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image, and updating, by the at least one processor, the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image and the first position on the display system based on the location of the ultrasound probe with respect to the target view.
In an analogous ultrasound imaging for obtaining head progression measurements field of endeavor, Schwab teaches an ultrasound system for acquiring a target ultrasound image having a target view of one or more anatomical structures, (Abstract “An ultrasound imaging system and method for obtaining head progression measurements includes accessing a reference image frame acquired along a first scan plane and obtaining a first head progression measurement from the reference image frame.”), wherein the at least one processor is further configured to overlay the ultrasound image with a graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image, ([0029] “The live image 401 includes the pubic symphysis 302 and the fetal head 304” and Figs. 3-5), and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to update the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image and the first position on the display system based on the location of the ultrasound probe with respect to the target view ([0031] “the matching of the live image 401 to the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily upon on one or more anatomical structures present in both the reference image frame 301 and the live image 401. For example, determining how well the live image 401 matches the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily on how well the pubic symphysis in the live image matches the pubic symphysis in the reference image as the pubic symphysis is expected to a fixed landmark throughout labor.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to modify the teachings of Anthony with the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image because the modification ensures the proper scan plane and minimizes possible error in clinical determination of the anatomical structure being imaged, as taught by Schwab in [0003].
Regarding Claim 12, the modified system of Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 11, as discussed above. Furthermore, Schwab teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to align the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image with the reference target view image ([0031] “At step 210, the operator deliberately adjusts the position of the ultrasound probe 106 to align the second scan plane (as represented by, the live image 401) with the first scan plane (as represented by the reference image frame 301). When the live image 401 matches or closely matches with the reference image frame 301, it is a good indication to the user that the second scan plane is aligned with the first scan plane. […] the matching of the live image 401 to the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily upon on one or more anatomical structures present in both the reference image frame 301 and the live image 401. For example, determining how well the live image 401 matches the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily on how well the pubic symphysis in the live image matches the pubic symphysis in the reference image as the pubic symphysis is expected to a fixed landmark throughout labor.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to modify the teachings of Anthony with the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image for the same reasons as Claim 11 above.
Regarding Claim 16, Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 14, as discussed above. However, Anthony does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one processor is further configured to overlay the ultrasound image with a graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image, and update the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image on the display system based on the location of the ultrasound probe with respect to the target view.
In an analogous ultrasound imaging for obtaining head progression measurements field of endeavor, Schwab teaches an ultrasound system for acquiring a target ultrasound image having a target view of one or more anatomical structures, (Abstract “An ultrasound imaging system and method for obtaining head progression measurements includes accessing a reference image frame acquired along a first scan plane and obtaining a first head progression measurement from the reference image frame.”),
teach wherein the at least one processor is further configured to overlay the ultrasound image with a graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image, ([0029] “The live image 401 includes the pubic symphysis 302 and the fetal head 304” and Figs. 3-5), and update the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image on the display system based on the location of the ultrasound probe with respect to the target view ([0031] “the matching of the live image 401 to the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily upon on one or more anatomical structures present in both the reference image frame 301 and the live image 401. For example, determining how well the live image 401 matches the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily on how well the pubic symphysis in the live image matches the pubic symphysis in the reference image as the pubic symphysis is expected to a fixed landmark throughout labor.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to modify the teachings of Anthony with the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image because the modification ensures the proper scan plane and minimizes possible error in clinical determination of the anatomical structure being imaged, as taught by Schwab in [0003].
Regarding Claim 17, the modified system of Anthony teaches all limitations of Claim 16, as discussed above. Furthermore, Schwab teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to align the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image with the reference target view image ([0031] “At step 210, the operator deliberately adjusts the position of the ultrasound probe 106 to align the second scan plane (as represented by, the live image 401) with the first scan plane (as represented by the reference image frame 301). When the live image 401 matches or closely matches with the reference image frame 301, it is a good indication to the user that the second scan plane is aligned with the first scan plane. […] the matching of the live image 401 to the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily upon on one or more anatomical structures present in both the reference image frame 301 and the live image 401. For example, determining how well the live image 401 matches the reference image frame 301 may be based primarily on how well the pubic symphysis in the live image matches the pubic symphysis in the reference image as the pubic symphysis is expected to a fixed landmark throughout labor.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to modify the teachings of Anthony with the graphical representation of the one or more anatomical structures in the ultrasound image for the same reasons as Claim 16 above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MARIA CHRISTINA TALTY whose telephone number is (571)272-8022. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30-5:30 EST.
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, Mike Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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.
/MARIA CHRISTINA TALTY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/MICHAEL J CAREY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights