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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-9, 11-13, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gonzalez Molezzi et al. (US 2011/0208046).
With respect to claims 1 and 11, Gonzalez Molezzi et al. discloses a system comprising: at least one storage device including a set of instruction (0011); and at least one processor in communication with the at least one storage device ([0011]), wherein when executing the set of instructions, the at least one processor causes the system to perform operations including: obtaining an initial image of an object, the initial image including a first region of interest and one or more second ROIs ([0024]); determining, based on the initial image a first position corresponding to the first ROI and one or more second positions each of which corresponds to one of the one or more second ROIs ([0024]; [0033]); obtaining scan data of the object by causing an imaging device to scan the object based on the first position and the one or more second positions ([0030-0031]); determining an injection parameter of a drug that is injected into the object based on the scan data ([0027-0031]); and generating a target image of the object based on the injection parameter and the scan data of the patient ([0029-0031]), and a target model, the target model including a kinetic model, the kinetic model indicating a metabolism situation of the drug injected into the object ([0030]).
With respect to claims 2 and 12, Gonzalez Molezzi et al. discloses determining a scan plan including a scan parameter associated with an overlapping region of scanning regions corresponding to two adjacent second ROI; and obtaining the scan data of the object by causing the imaging device to scan the object based on the scan plan ([0031]; e.g. scan resolution).
With respect to claims 3 and 13, Gonzalez Molezzi et al. discloses determining a scan plan including a moving speed of the object among the first and the one or more second positions; and obtaining the scan data of the object causing the imaging device to scan the object based on the scan plan ([0030]; e.g. perfusion of the contrast agent may be quickened);
With respect to claims 6-7 and 16-17; Gonzalez Molezzi et al. discloses determining a plurality of initial reconstruction images; determining an injection time of the drug; determining a target reconstruction image; and designating an acquisition time associated with the target reconstruction image ([0027-0027]).
With respect to claims 8 and 18, Gonzalez Molezzi et al. discloses the target model including at least one of a reconstruction algorithm ([0040]) or a reconstruction model ([0040]).
With respect to claims 9 and 19, Gonzalez Molezzi et al. discloses causing a display to display a first interface, the first interface including a plurality of preset models each of which indicates a conversion relationship among parameters of the preset model ([0033]; Fig. 3); in response to a trigger instruction, determining the target model from the plurality of preset models (94; 95); and causing the display to display a second interface based on the target model, the second interface including at least one region used to display at least one parameter image of which is related to a parameter of the target model ([0034]; Fig. 4).
With respect to claim 20, Gonzalez Molezzi et al. discloses a system comprising: at least one storage device including a set of instruction (0011); and at least one processor in communication with the at least one storage device ([0011]), wherein when executing the set of instructions, the at least one processor causes the system to perform operations including: obtaining an initial image of an object, the initial image including a first region of interest and one or more second ROIs ([0024]); determining, based on the initial image a first position corresponding to the first ROI and one or more second positions each of which corresponds to one of the one or more second ROIs ([0024]; [0033]); determining a scan plan based on the first position and the one or more second positions ([0031]); obtaining the scan data of the object by causing the imaging device to scan the object based on the scan plan ([0031]; e.g. scan resolution); and obtaining scan data of the object by causing an imaging device to scan the object; determining an injection parameter of a drug that is injected into the object based on the scan data ([0027-0031]); and generating a target image of the object based on the injection parameter and the scan data of the patient ([0029-0031]), and a target model, the target model including a or a kinetic model, the kinetic model indicating a metabolism situation of the drug injected into the object ([0030]).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gonzalez Molezzi et al. (US 2011/0208046) in view of Koh et al. (US 2005/0187462).
Gonzalez Molezzi et al. discloses the subject matter substantially as claimed except for compartment model. However, Koh et al. teaches in the same field of endeavor modeling fluid flow using multi-compartment models ([0006]; [0010]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Gonzalez Molezzi et al. with the pharmacokinetic models as taught by Koh et al. as it is well known to provide a plurality of multi-compartment models to model fluid flow ([0010]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 and 14-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record fails to disclose or render obvious the claimed combination of subject matter particularly wherein the determining the injection parameter of the drug that is injected into the object based on the scan data includes: determining a count of coincidence events for the object based on the scan data, a coincidence event indicating a pair of photons detected by detectors surrounding the object within a preset time window; and determining an injection dose of the drug based ont eh count of the coincidence events.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/11/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the reference does not disclose an image containing a firsts ROI and one or more second ROIs. Particularly, arguing the reference does not disclose dividing the input image into multiple ROIs. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., dividing the input image into multiple ROIs) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., determining multiple distinct scan positions based on multiple different ROIs) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant argues the reference does not disclose how to determine injection parameters. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. Gonzalez Molezzi et al. discloses determining an injection parameter of a drug that is injected into the object based on the scan data ([0027-0031]).
Applicant argues the reference does not teach a kinetic model. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. Gonzalez Molezzi et al. discloses a kinetic model, the kinetic model indicating a metabolism situation of the drug injected into the object ([0030]). Particularly, Gonzalez Molezzi et al. discloses automatically adjusting the timing of the scan, including for example, if a patient’s heart rate or blood pressure increase, the perfusion of the contrast agent may be quickened.
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 PETER LUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1609. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, Anhtuan T Nguyen can be reached at (571)272-4963. 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.
/PETER LUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797