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 .
Claims status: amended claim: 1; canceled claims: 5-6; the rest is unchanged.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The Butani 1 is not used in the present rejection.
Applicant's arguments filed 02/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues in pg.5 of the remarks that “Butani 1 has no disclosure related to a controller configured to selectively display the plurality of optical camera images together as overlaid together on the display”. The current does not rely on Butani 1 because after a further consideration it is found that Butani teaches the limitation in para. [0118]-[0121] as shown in the rejection of claim 1 below.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4, 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Butani et al. (US 2021/0199603 A1; pub. Jul. 1, 2021).
Regarding claim 1, Butani et al. disclose in first embodiment: A cabinet x-ray irradiator and optical camera system for performing x-ray irradiation and optical images of a specimen (abstract), the system comprising: a cabinet defining an interior chamber (para. [0013]); a display (para. [0013]); an x-ray system including: an x-ray source (para. [0013]); and a specimen platform (para. [0013]); an optical camera configured to capture camera images of the specimen (para. [0013]); and a controller configured to: control the optical camera to capture and collect a plurality of optical camera images of the specimen; then, display the resultant plurality of optical camera images of the specimen on the display (para. [0014]).
In the first embodiment Butani et al. are silent about: after displaying the resultant plurality of optical camera images, selectively energize the x-ray source to emit x-rays and irradiate through the specimen; then, selectively display the plurality of optical camera images overlaid on the display.
In a further embodiment Butani et al. disclose: after displaying the resultant plurality of optical camera images, selectively energize the x-ray source to emit x-rays and irradiate through the specimen; then, selectively display the plurality of optical camera images together as overlaid together on the display (para. [0118]-[0121]) motivated by the benefits to distinguish different densities of the sample (Butani et al. para. [0123]).
In light of the benefits to distinguish different densities of the sample as taught by Butani et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the two embodiments of Butani et al.
Regarding claim 2, Butani et al. disclose: the cabinet comprises a walled enclosure surrounding the interior chamber (para. [0072]), a door (fig.2 item 24) configured to cover the interior chamber and a sampling chamber within the interior chamber for containing the specimen.
Regarding claim 3, Butani et al. disclose: the specimen platform is configured for excised tissue, organ or bone specimens (para. [0005], [0011]).
Regarding claim 4, Butani et al. disclose: the specimen platform is configured for any organic or inorganic specimen that fits inside an x-ray cabinet (para. [0010]).
Regarding claim 7, Butani et al. disclose: the orientation of the specimen the optical image are substantially the same (para. [0014]).
Regarding claim 8, Butani et al. disclose: the controller is configured to selectively display the optical image on the display simultaneously side-by-side or picture-in-a-picture (para. [0118]).
Regarding claim 9, Butani et al. disclose: the plurality of optical camera images comprise reflected visible light or emitted electromagnetic wavelengths (para. [0119]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAMADOU FAYE whose telephone number is (571)270-0371. The examiner can normally be reached Mon – Fri 9AM-6PM.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/MAMADOU FAYE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884