DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/13/2023 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b ) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the appl icant regards as his invention. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites “of which at least a first one corresponds to an at least approximate local direction of a spatial gradient of ultrasonic travel time from the at least first ultrasound transmitter to one more of the plurality of ultrasound receivers”. Figure 2 appears to show the claimed virtual grid, and based on the claim language, examiner interprets this grid to be used to determine the dimensions of the interior material of an object based on the time-of-flight signals acquired by the receivers. It is unclear if the virtual grid is projected into a pipeline or if the data is translated onto a virtual grid. Based on the claim language, the received data is translated onto a virtual grid so that the time of flight can be calculated. It is also unclear as to what is meant by “at least approximate local direction of a spatial gradient of ultrasonic travel time”. Ultrasonic travel time is a singular value and not a gradient therefore it is unclear as to what is meant by spatial gradient of ultrasound travel time. It is understood in the field that the difference in ultrasonic signal travel times can be used to determine direction, therefore the claim will be interpreted as the reception signals are measured for their time of flight in order to determine their travel direction as well as spatial location on a virtual grid. Dependent claims 2-30 do not remedy the issues presented in claim 1, therefore claims 2-30 are also rejected under 35 USC 112(b). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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 , 2, 3 , 16, 28, 29, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ferdinand WO 2018208151 (as seen in the IDS, please see attached document for citations). As best understood, a s to claim 1, Ferdinand teaches “ A method for examining interior material of an object from a proximal surface of the object using ultrasound (page 1, paragraph 1 teaches “ The present invention relates to a method for examining the interior material of an object from a surface of the object using ultrasound for example having a frequency of at least 100 kHz ”) , wherein the method comprises the steps of: a. transmitting at least a first ultrasound signal, by at least a first ultrasound transmitter of a predetermined group of ultrasound transmitters, to the interior material of the object, wherein in the interior material of the object reflections and/or diffractions of the first ultrasound signal occur (page 1, paragraph 2 teaches “ a. transmitting at least a first ultrasound signal by at least one first ultrasound transmitter of a predetermined group of ultrasound transmitters to the interior material of the object where in the interior material of the object reflections and/or diffractions of the first ultrasound signal occur ”) , b. receiving reflections and/or diffractions of the first ultrasound signal from the interior material of the object using a plurality of ultrasound receivers of a predetermined group of ultrasound receivers, plurality of ultrasound receivers being acoustically coupled to the proximal surface of the object at positions that are distributed in at least one dimension of the proximal surface of the object, and wherein, with each of the plurality of ultrasound receivers, a receiving signal is generated from the received reflections and/or diffractions of the at least first ultrasound signal from the interior material of the object (Page 1, paragraph 3 teaches “ b. receiving reflections and or diffractions of the first ultrasound signal from the interior material of the object using a plurality of ultrasound receivers of a predetermined group of ultrasound receivers which plurality of ultrasound receivers are acoustically coupled to the outer surface of the object at positions which are distributed in at least one dimension of the outer surface of the object, wherein, with each of the plurality of ultrasound receivers, a receiving signal is generated from the received reflections and/or diffractions of the at least first ultrasound signal from the interior material of the object. ”) , and c. processing in combination the receiving signals generated by the plurality of the ultrasound receivers in order to determine, using inverse wave field extrapolation, where in the interior material of the object, reflections and/or diffractions of the transmitted first ultrasound signal occurred (page 1, paragraph 4 teaches “ c. processing in combination the receiving signals generated by the plurality of the ultrasound receivers in order to determine, according to the principle of inverse wave field extrapolation, where in the interior material of the object reflection and/or diffractions of the transmitted first ultrasound signal occur. ”) , wherein the processing is based on at least one predetermined virtual grid of positions at a predetermined area of interest that includes a part of the interior material of the object (Page 2, paragraph 2 teaches “ This portion of the signal is characterized by its amplitude and phase. Thus, in this calculation, the amplitude, phase and arrival time (for calculating which portion of the signal may belong to position Y) of the received signal is taken into account. This portion of the signal which belongs to position Y is calculated for each received signal. The portions of the received signals (expressed in amplitude and phase) which belong to position Y are summed to obtain a characterizing value (for example also expressed in an amplitude and a phase) for position Y. This process is carried out for a plurality of positions Y, Y, Y", etc within the object. The combined result (all characterizing values) for all of these positions provides the basis for making an image of the interior of the object. ”) , wherein each virtual grid of the at least one virtual grid is defined along a series of grid lines that extend along respective directions, of which at least a first one corresponds to an at least approximate local direction of a spatial gradient of ultrasound travel time from the at least first ultrasound transmitter to one or more of the plurality of ultrasound receivers ( Figure 4 shows how the received signals are used to translate the data into an output image within a grid; Page 7, paragraph 6 teaches “ Fig. 4 shows an example of IWEX processing for an image point positioned at a healthy part of the object. Top left: Measurement overview and positions of transmitter T (star), image point A (square) and receiver R (dot). Top right: shot record corresponding to transmitting element 16.50, where the signal of receiving element 16.59 is the dotted line and shown at the bottom right of the figure (with arrival time txAR and amplitude ATAR). Bottom left: temporary output image with ATAR after correction at the position of A ”) .” As to claim 2, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein, for at least one virtual grid of the at least one virtual grid, at least one further one of the respective directions of the grid lines corresponds to a respective at least approximate local direction of the spatial gradient of ultrasound travel time from the at least first ultrasound transmitter to one or more of the plurality of ultrasound receivers (Figure 4 shows the virtual grid whereas Page 1, paragraphs 2 and 3 teach the transmitter and plurality of receivers) .” As to claim 3, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein, for at least one virtual grid of the at least one virtual grid, at least one further one of the respective directions of the grid lines is parallel to the first respective direction (Figure 4 shows the virtual grid which corresponds to the respective directions on the pipeline that is measured. The grid system represents the pipeline so that the location is known) .” As to claim 16, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein a result of the processing based on the at least one predetermined virtual grid is subsequently converted to a result expressed in a rectangular grid (Figure 4) .” As to claim 28, Ferdinand teaches “ a group of transmitters, a group of receivers and a controller communicatively connected to the group of transmitters and the group of receivers, wherein the controller is configured to carry out step c. of the method (Page 1, paragraphs 2-4 ; Page 8, paragraph 14 ) .” As to claim 29, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the controller is also configured to carry out step a. and step b. of the method (Page 1, paragraphs 2-4; Page 8, paragraph 14) .” As to claim 30, Ferdinand teaches “ a user interface configured to obtain user input from a user, wherein the predetermining of the at least one virtual grid of positions is at least partly based on the user input (Page 27, paragraph 2) .” 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. Claim(s) 4 , 5, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferdinand WO 2018208151 (as seen in the IDS, please see attached document for citations) in view of Grimard US 20150000410 . As to claim 4, Ferdinand teaches a virtual grid but does not teach that the virtual grid grid line do not mutually intersect the predetermined area of interest. Grimard teaches “ wherein, for at least one virtual grid of the at least one virtual grid, the grid lines do not mutually intersect within the predetermined area of interest ([0002] teaches “ The grid is typically aligned with main axes of a scanner, designated axes x and y, and a scanning motion is obtained by moving a probe, for example an ultrasonic probe, along one axis or along a combination of axes (for instance x) and repeated after indexing along a perpendicular direction by moving one or a set of axes (for instance y), while maintaining a distance between the probe and the structure surface. Some systems use a plurality of such probes. ” This citation reads as that the grid does not have to align with the axes of the scanner, meaning that under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the grid lines do not mutually intersect within a predetermined area of interest. According to the filed specification, it appears as though the grid lines of the virtual grid either can intersect or cannot intersect within a predetermined area of interest. Based on this, it appears as though the alignment of the virtual grid is determined by the user as to where it is relative to the area of interest. Therefore, aligning the virtual grid as needed only involves routine skill in the art) .” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Grimard with Ferdinand. Utilizing a grid is known in the art. Having control of the grid allows the user to place it relative to the area of interest as needed depending on the location being measured. The grid aids in accuracy, therefore placing it as needed in order to optimize performance would be obvious. As to claim 5, Grimard teaches “ wherein at least one respective grid line of at least one , virtual grid of the at least one virtual grid extends at an angle with a local main direction of sound propagation during use ([0002]; [0003]; [0052]; [0053]; Figures 8) .” As to claim 6, Grimard teaches “ wherein the at least one predetermined virtual grid comprises a plurality of mutually different predetermined virtual grids (Figures 8) .” Claim(s) 7 , 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferdinand WO 2018208151 (as seen in the IDS, please see attached document for citations). As to claim 7, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the at least one virtual grid comprises a virtual grid of which at least on e of the respective grid lines does not intersect a region where the plurality of ultrasound receivers and/or the at least first ultrasound transmitter are acoustically coupled to the proximal surface (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to not intersect a certain region, or place the virtual grid in an area to not intersect the transmitters/ receivers ; Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface ) .” As to claim 8, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the at least one virtual grid comprises a virtual grid of which the respective grid lines have a common intersection zone that is outside, a region where the plurality of ultrasound receivers and/or the at least first ultrasound transmitter are acoustically coupled to the proximal surface (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to be in a predetermined location relative to the plurality of elements. Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface) .” As to claim 9, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the at least one virtual grid comprises a virtual grid of which the respective grid lines have a common intersection zone at the proximal surface of the object, wherein, with respect to the area of interest, the common intersection zone is beyond where the plurality of ultrasound receivers and/or the at least first ultrasound transmitter are acoustically coupled to the proximal surface (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to be in a predetermined location relative to the plurality of elements. Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface) .” As to claim 10, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the object is provided with at least one predetermined reflection surface (Page 1, paragraph 2) , wherein the at least one virtual grid comprises a virtual grid of which the respective grid lines have a common intersection zone at the at least one predetermined reflection surface (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to be in a predetermined location relative to the plurality of elements. Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface) .” As to claim 11, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the object is provided with at least one predetermined reflection surface (Page 1, paragraph 2) , wherein the at least one virtual grid comprises a virtual grid of which the respective grid lines have a common intersection zone that, with respect to the proximal surface of the object, is beyond the at least one predetermined reflection surface, an d wherein the area of interest defines a range along the outside surface and/or along the at least one predetermined reflection surface, wherein the common intersection zone is outside the range (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to be in a predetermined location relative to the plurality of elements. Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface) .” As to claim 12, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the object is provided with at least one predetermined reflection surface (Page 1, paragraph 2) , wherein the at least one virtual grid comprises a virtual grid of which the respective grid lines have a common intersection zone that is outside the object, at a same side of the proximal surface as the plurality of ultrasound receivers and/or the at least first ultrasound transmitter, and wherein the area of interest defines a range along the outside surface and/or along the at least one predetermined reflection surface, wherein the common intersection zone is outside the range (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to be in a predetermined location relative to the plurality of elements. Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface) .” As to claim 13, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the object is provided with at least one predetermined reflection surface (Page 1, paragraph 2) , wherein the at least one virtual grid comprises a virtual grid of which the respective grid lines have a common intersection zone that, with respect to the proximal surface of the object, is beyond the at least one predetermined reflection surface, and wherein the area of interest defines a range along the outside surface and/or along the at least one predetermined reflection surface, wherein the common intersection zone is within the range (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to be in a predetermined location relative to the plurality of elements. Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface) .” As to claim 14, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the at least one virtual grid comprises a virtual grid of which the respective grid lines have a common intersection zone that is outside the object, at a same side of the proximal surface of the object as the plurality of ultrasound receivers and/or the at least first ultrasound transmitter , and wherein the area of interest defines a range along the outside surface and/or along a predetermined reflection surface of the object (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to be in a predetermined location relative to the plurality of elements. Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface) .” As to claim 15, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the at least one virtual grid comprises a virtual grid of which the respective grid lines have a common intersection zone at the proximal surface of the object, and wherein the common intersection zone is in a region where the plurality of ultrasound receivers and/or the at least first ultrasound transmitter are acoustically coupled to the proximal surface (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to be in a predetermined location relative to the plurality of elements. Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface) .” As to claim 17, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein in at least one, virtual grid of the at least one virtual grid, a spacing between the positions is smaller along the grid lines than across the grid lines, at least in one area of the respective virtual grid (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to be in a predetermined location relative to the plurality of elements. Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface) .” As to claim 19, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the predetermined area of interest is non-rectangular (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to be in a predetermined location relative to the plurality of elements. Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface) .” As to claim 20, Ferdinand teaches “ wherein the at least one virtual grid of positions is predetermined based on at least one of the group consisting of:- one or more properties of the predetermined area of interest; - a predetermined spacing between the grid lines; - a predetermined spacing between the positions along the lines; - a position of the at least first ultrasound transmitter; - a position of the plurality of ultrasound receivers; - a position of a reflection surface of the object (Figure 4 teaches a virtual grid. The plurality of receivers can also be moved around, therefore it would obvious one of ordinary skill in the art to move the receivers and transmitters in order for the virtual grid to be in a predetermined location relative to the plurality of elements. Figures 2a and 2b show the plurality of receivers and transmitters coupled to the proximal surface. This claim is written as options with the wording “at least one of the group consisting of”, therefore only the option pertaining to the position of the transmitter and receiver elements will be considered) ; - a frequency and/or wavelength of the at least first ultrasound signal; - a sound velocity of the interior material of the object; and - a sound velocity of a material that is present between the interior material of the object on the one hand and one or more of the at least first ultrasound transmitter and the plurality of ultrasound receivers on the other hand. Conclusion Examiner notes that there is no prior art rejection for claim 18. None of the prior arts teach “the at least one filter being applied only in one or more directions along the grid lines”. Claim 21 does not have a prior art rejection since none of the prior arts teach that the grid positions is determined “based on an estimate of a spatial gradient of ultrasound travel time from the at least first ultrasound transmitter to one or more of the plurality of ultrasound receivers ”. As to claim 22, there is no prior art rejection for this claim, the prior arts do not teach “ at least a portion of the received signal has not reflected within the object on the at least one predetermined reflection surface. ” Claims 25, 26 and 27 depend on claim 22 and therefore also do not have prior art rejections. Claims 23 and 24 do not have prior art rejection since the prior arts do not teach “ at least a portion of the received signal has reflected within the object on the at least one predetermined reflection surface before the ultrasound signal has reached the predetermined position. ” Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT TARUN SINHA whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-3993 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday, 10AM-6PM 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Catherine Rastovski can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-0349 . 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. /TARUN SINHA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2863