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. Priority This application is a 371 of PCT/EP2022/067032 filed 06/22/2022. This application also claims foreign priority to EP 21183383.5 filed 07/02/2021. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted was filed on 12/26/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 2 of the Specification filed 12/26/2023, “JP 2004 201977, disclose various MRI systems and infared ” should be corrected to: “JP 2004 201977, disclose various MRI systems and infrared ” Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: “on auxiliary equipment of the magnetic resonance system” should be corrected to: “on auxiliary equipment of the magnetic resonance imaging system” Claim 13 is objected to because of the following: “ the infrared light source” should be corrected to: “ an infrared light source” Appropriate correction is required. 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. 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. Claim s 1 -3 , 6-7 , 9-10 , and 13 -14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mostafavi (US20040116804) in view of Acktar (“Comparison of IR Absorber Coating Methods” , https://acktar.com/absorber-coating-methods/ ) . Regarding claim 1 , Mostafavi teaches a magnetic resonance imaging system (1802), the magnetic resonance imaging system (1802) comprising: an infrared camera system (108a, 108b) for monitoring a subject (106) when undergoing an examination while positioned in an examination zone of the magnetic resonance imaging system, the infrared camera system (108a, 108b) comprising an infrared camera (108a) (Fig. 18, [0047], [0055], wherein the camera 108 detecting and being sensitive to infrared light comprises the camera being an infrared camera, [0152], “ During setup operations, the patient is scanned or imaged using an imaging device, such as MRI device 1802 … During patient setup, a first video camera 108a provides images of the patient ”) , wherein said infrared camera (108a) is adapted to operate in an infrared wavelength range that corresponds to, or substantially overlaps with, the range over which a coating absorbs and/or diffusely reflects infrared light ([0047], wherein the camera 108 captures and detect s reflected infrared light, [0055], and wherein the camera having infrared filters removed/disabled to increase camera’s sensitivity to infrared light comprises the camera 108a being an infrared camera and thus being adapted to operate in an infrared wavelength range that corresponds to, or substantially overlaps with, a range over which a coating absorbs and/or diffusely reflects infrared light ) . However, Mostafavi fails to teach a coating on at least one wall of at least one of: a room housing the magnetic resonance imaging system, on an interior wall of a magnet assembly around the examination room, or on auxiliary equipment of the magnetic resonance system for use inside the examination zone, wherein said coating is adapted to at least absorb or diffusely reflect infrared light, so as to avoid spurious reflections of infrared light into a field of view of the infrared camera and/or to provide diffuse auxiliary lighting . In an analogous infrared light field of endeavor Acktar teaches such a feature. Acktar teaches infrared (IR) absorbing coating methods including IR absorbing paint, IR absorbing foils and films, and IR coating services (Pages 1-2). A cktar teaches wherein applications of IR absorbers include medical applications and imaging (Middle of Page 1). Acktar teaches wherein the IR absorbers are primarily used to suppress stray light in optical systems (Middle of Page 1). Acktar teaches wherein IR absorbing paint can be applied to materials to eliminate reflection of IR wavelength, and can be used in surveillance cameras (Bottom of Page 1). Acktar teaches wherein sensing and imaging applications are sensitive to signal-to-noise ratio, and the coating can provide excellent stray light suppression (Middle of Page 2). Acktar therefore teaches a coating adapted to absorb infrared light, so as to avoid spurious reflection of infrared light into a field of view of an infrared camera or imaging/sensing system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Mostafavi to use an IR absorbing coating as taught by Acktar (Pages 1-2). By using IR absorbing coating, reflections of stray light may be suppressed, thereby improving signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) as recognized by Acktar (Pages 1-2). Acktar teaches wherein applications of the coating includes medical and imaging. Therefore, an ordinarily skilled artisan modifying the invention of Mostafavi with the teachings of Acktar to use IR absorbing coating for the purpose of suppressing stray light would predictably result in the coating of a wall of a room housing the MRI system, an interior wall of the MRI assembly, or an auxiliary equipment for use inside the examination room with material which absorbs infrared light because these objects are normally in the view of the camera . The benefit and motivation, as mentioned above, would be the improvement of SNR through the suppression of stray light as recognized by Acktar . Regarding claim 2 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1. Mostafavi further teaches wherein said auxiliary equipment comprises a radiofrequency transmitter/receiver coil and/or a patient couch (104) (Fig. 18, [015 2 -0155], wherein the patient 106 rest ing on a treatment table 104 compris es a patient couch, and wherein the cameras 108a, 108b are configured to provide images of the patient on said couch/table ). Regarding claim 3 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1. However, Mostafavi fails to teach wherein said coating is adapted for absorbing infrared light in a spectral range above 800 nm by at least 30%. In an analogous infrared light field of endeavor Acktar teaches such a feature. Acktar teaches infrared (IR) absorbing coating methods including IR absorbing paint, IR absorbing foils and films, and IR coating services (Pages 1-2). Acktar teaches wherein infrared radiation is characterized by wavelengths ranging from 700 – 1050 nm (Top of page 1). Acktar teaches coatings which can absorb 99% of near infrared (NIR) to far infrared (FIR) (Page 2, under “4. COATING SERVICES FOR IR ABSORPTION”). Acktar therefore teaches a coating adapted for absorbing infrared light in a spectral range above 800 nm by at least 30% (wherein absorbing 99% of NIR-FIR comprises absorbing infrared light in a spectral range above 800 nm by at least 30%). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Mostafavi to use a coating which can absorb 99% of near to far infrared wavelength as taught by Acktar (Page 2). Infrared light may predictably be sufficiently absorbed by using such a coating, thereby reducing the amount of stray light reflected and improving signal to noise ratio. Regarding claim 6 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1. However, Mostafavi fails to teach wherein said coating covers an area of at least 10 cm 2 of the surface of said at least one wall of the room and/or said interior wall and/or said auxiliary equipment. While Mostafavi in view of Acktar fails to teach such a feature, it would have still been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the combination of Mostafavi and Acktar to have the coating cover an area of at least cm 2 of the surface of the at least one wall of the room, interior wall, or auxiliary equipment as recited by the claim. Mostafavi teaches wherein the camera (108a) is targeted towards the patient, patient couch, MRI, and MRI room (Fig. 18, [0152]). Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches application of a coating to objects in the view of the camera to suppress stray light. Therefore, Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches application of the coating on at least a wall of the room, the interior wall of the MRI, or auxiliary equipment (i.e. patient couch) . Mostafavi in view of Acktar thus teaches structurally the same invention as what is claimed except for wherein the coating covers a surface area of at least 10 cm 2 . The coating covering a surface area of at least 10 cm 2 is an optimized parameter and is a result-effective variable. Having the infrared light absorbing coating cover a greater amount of surface area predictably results in more infrared light being absorbed, thereby reducing the amount of infrared light reflected, thus suppressing stray light and glare to the infrared camera. Through routine optimization, an ordinarily skilled artisan may arrive at covering a surface of said at least one wall of the room and/or said interior wall and/or said auxiliary equipment with the coating by at least 10 cm 2 for the purposes of suppressing stray light and glare. Moreover, the claimed range of at least 10 cm 2 is merely a workable range as there is no evidence this range is critically important or produces unexpected results. See MPEP §2144.05 (II), “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation”. In re Aller , 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1995). Regarding claim 7 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1. Mostafavi further teaches wherein said infrared camera system (108a, 108b) comprises an infrared light source (602) configured to direct infrared light into the examination zone ( Figs. 6a-6b & 18, [0047], [0055] , “ IR illuminator 602 produces one or more beams of infrared light that is directed in the same direction as camera 108 ”, [0152], wherein the camera 108a providing images of the patient during an MRI scan comprises its infrared light source 602 being configured to direct infrared light into the examination zone ) . Regarding claim 9 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1. Mostafavi teaches the invention further comprising an image processor to derive information about the subject (404) from the acquired image or images ([0046], [0048], [0084], wherein physiological motion of the patient is derived from the images). Regarding claim 10 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 9. Mostafavi further teaches wherein said information comprises a value indicative of vital signs, motion, and/or mood of the subject ([0077], [0081], [0084], wherein monitoring respiration via quantifying movement comprise a value indicative of vital signs, and wherein physiological motion of the patient is similarly quantified). Regarding claim 13 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1. Mostafavi further teaches the invention comprising at least one mirror or reflective surface (landmarks) arranged in the examination zone to reflect infrared light from a body part of the subject onto the infrared camera (108a) and/or to reflect light from the infrared light source onto said body part ( Fig. 18, [0047] , wherein an infrared source projects infrared light and the infrared light is reflected from the body landmarks to the camera 108, [0140], [0152], wherein patient being scanned using an MRI comprises body landmarks on the subject being arranged in the examination zone ). Regarding claim 14 , Mostafavi teaches a method for adapting a magnetic resonance imaging system (1802) (Fig. 18, [0151-0152]) , the method comprises: obtaining a magnetic resonance imaging system (1802) having an examination zone for positioning therein a subject (106) to be imaged by the magnetic resonance imaging system (1802) , in which the magnetic resonance imaging system (1802) comprises an infrared camera system (108a, 108b) , which includes an infrared camera (108a, 108b) , for monitoring the subject (106) while undergoing examination (Fig. 18, [0047], [0055], wherein the camera 108 detecting and being sensitive to infrared light comprises the camera being an infrared camera, [0152], “ During setup operations, the patient is scanned or imaged using an imaging device, such as MRI device 1802 … During patient setup, a first video camera 108a provides images of the patient ”) , wherein said infrared camera (108a) is adapted to operate in an infrared wavelength range that corresponds to, or substantially overlaps with, the range over which a coating absorbs and/or diffusely reflects infrared light ([0047], wherein the camera 108 captures and detects reflected infrared light, [0055], and wherein the camera having infrared filters removed/disabled to increase camera’s sensitivity to infrared light comprises the camera 108a being an infrared camera and thus being adapted to operate in an infrared wavelength range that corresponds to, or substantially overlaps with, a range over which a coating absorbs and/or diffusely reflects infrared light). However, Mostafavi fails to teach applying a coating on at least one wall of a room that houses the magnetic resonance imaging system, on an interior wall of a magnet assembly of the system, or on auxiliary equipment of the magnetic resonance system for use inside the examination zone, wherein said coating is adapted to at least one of absorb or diffusely reflect infrared light so as to avoid spurious reflections of infrared light into a field of view of the infrared camera and/or to provide diffuse auxiliary lighting. In an analogous infrared light field of endeavor Acktar teaches such a feature. Acktar teaches infrared (IR) absorbing coating methods including IR absorbing paint, IR absorbing foils and films, and IR coating services (Pages 1-2). Acktar teaches wherein applications of IR absorbers include medical applications and imaging (Middle of Page 1). Acktar teaches wherein the IR absorbers are primarily used to suppress stray light in optical systems (Middle of Page 1). Acktar teaches wherein IR absorbing paint can be applied to materials to eliminate reflection of IR wavelength, and can be used in surveillance cameras (Bottom of Page 1). Acktar teaches wherein sensing and imaging applications are sensitive to signal-to-noise ratio, and the coating can provide excellent stray light suppression (Middle of Page 2). Acktar therefore teaches a coating adapted to absorb infrared light, so as to avoid spurious reflection of infrared light into a field of view of an infrared camera or imaging/sensing system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Mostafavi to apply an IR absorbing coating as taught by Acktar (Pages 1-2). By applying an IR absorbing coating, reflections of stray light may be suppressed, thereby improving signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) as recognized by Acktar (Pages 1-2). Acktar teaches wherein applications of the coating includes medical and imaging. Therefore, an ordinarily skilled artisan modifying the invention of Mostafavi with the teachings of Acktar to use IR absorbing coating for the purpose of suppressing stray light would predictably result in the coating of a wall of a room housing the MRI system, an interior wall of the MRI assembly, or an auxiliary equipment for use inside the examination room with material which absorbs infrared light because these objects are normally in the view of the camera. The benefit and motivation, as mentioned above, would be the improvement of SNR through the suppression of stray light as recognized by Acktar . Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mostafavi (US20040116804) in view of Acktar (“Comparison of IR Absorber Coating Methods”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kojima (JPH0725419U , translation provided ). Regarding claim 4 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1. However, Mostafavi fails to teach wherein said coating is adapted for diffusely reflecting incident infrared light. In an analogous optical system and coating field of endeavor, Kojima teaches such a feature. Kojima teaches light-emitting elements (25) which emit infrared light directed towards a protective panel 23 (hard coated surface 23A), and also teaches light-receiving elements (26) ([0029]). Kojima teaches the protective panel (23) includes a hard coat surface (23A) which is subjected to a non-glare treatment ([0034]). Kojima teaches wherein the hard coat surface (23A) may diffusely reflect infrared light (42) to prevent the light from being incident on the light receiving elements (26) ([0043]). Kojima teaches by diffusely reflecting infrared light, malfunctions may be prevented ([0043]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Mostafavi to have the coating be adapted for diffusely reflecting infrared light as taught by Kojima ([0043]). By diffusely reflecting infrared light, glare may be reduced and malfunctions of the camera may be prevented as recognized by Kojima ([0034], [0043]). However, the modified combination noted above fails to particularly teach wherein the coating is adapted to diffusely reflecting at least 30% of incident infrared light in a spectral range above 800 nm . While Mostafavi in view of Acktar and Kojima fail to teach such a feature, it would have still been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the combination noted above to have the coating be adapted to reflect at least 30% of incident infrared light in a spectral range above 800 nm as recited by the claim. Mostafavi in view of Acktar modified by the teachings of Kojima results in the coating being adapted to diffusely reflect infrared light as shown above. Mostafavi in view of Acktar and Kojima therefore teach structurally the same invention except for wherein at least 30% of incident infrared light is reflected in a spectral range above 800 nm. These parameters comprise optimized parameters and are result-effective variables. The more percent of incident infrared light is diffused, the more glare is reduced. Moreover, infrared wavelength ranges from 780 nm to 1mm. By diffusely reflecting infrared light in a spectral range above 800 nm, most of infrared light is diffusely reflected, thereby reducing glare as seen from a camera which operates in infrared (an infrared camera). Thus, it would have been obvious to optimize the claimed parameter to diffusely reflect at least 30% of infrared light in a spectral range above 800 nm as glare or stray light may be suppressed. Through routine optimization, an ordinarily skilled artisan optimizing for anti-glare or glare reduction may adjust the coating such that it diffusely reflects at least 30% of incident infrared light in a spectral range above 800 nm. Moreover, the claimed ranges of at least 30% and above 800 nm are merely workable ranges as there is no evidence these ranges are critically important or produce unexpected results. See MPEP §2144.05 (II), “[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation”. In re Aller , 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1995). Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mostafavi (US20040116804) in view of Acktar (“Comparison of IR Absorber Coating Methods”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Inoue (US 20100053759 ). Regarding claim 5 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1. However, Mostafavi fails to teach wherein said coating is adapted to reflect and/or transmit at least 50% of incident light in the visible spectrum. In an analogous coating field of endeavor, Inoue teaches such a feature. Inoue teaches an antireflection coating (Title, abstract). Inoue teaches wherein the antireflection coating (1) may reflect equal to 50% in the wavelength region 400 to 700 nm (visible light range), thereby having low reflection characteristics in the visible light region ([0056]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Mostafavi to have the coating be adapted to reflect 50% of visible light as taught by Inoue ([0056]). The coating reflecting 50% of visible light may reduce reflection and thus be an antireflection coating as recognized by Inoue ([0056]), thereby making the coating predictably easier to look at due to it reflecting less visible light. Claim s 8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mostafavi (US20040116804) in view of Acktar (“Comparison of IR Absorber Coating Methods”) as applied to claim s 1 and 14 respectively above, and further in view of Gustafsson ( US20170143271 ). Regarding claim 8 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1. However, Mostafavi fails to teach wherein said infrared camera system is lo c ated outside the examination zone and positioned on or integrated in a flange of the interior wall of the magnet assembly. In an analogous MRI system field of endeavor, Gustafsson teaches such a feature. Gustaf s son teaches an MRI scanner with a device (502) comprising a flange for mounting camera modules (108A-108D) (Figs. 5-6, [0078-0080]). Gustaf s son teaches wherein the camera modules may be sensitive to infrared and thus comprise infrared cameras ([0066]). As shown by figure 5 of Gusta fs son, the camera system is located outside of the examination zone (i.e. center region of the bore) and positioned on or integrated in a flange (502) of the interior wall (104) of the magnet assembly (Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Mostafavi to have the camera system be outside of the examination zone and mounted or integrated into a flange of the inner wall of the MRI as taught by Gustafsson (Figs. 5-6, [0066], [0078-0080]). By using the flange and mounted cameras, an MRI may be retrofitted with a motion detection and/or correction system as recognized by Gustafsson (Abstract, [0078-0079]). Regarding claim 15 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 14. However, Mostafavi fails to explicitly teach wherein said step of obtaining the magnetic resonance imaging system comprises modifying a preinstalled magnetic resonance imaging system by installing said infrared camera system. In an analogous MRI system field of endeavor, Gustafsson teaches such a feature. Gustafsson teaches retrofitting a pre-existing medical imaging scanner with a motion detection system (Abstract, [0050]). Gustafsson teaches an MRI scanner may be retrofitted with a device (502) comprising a flange for mounting camera modules (108A-108D) (Figs. 5-6, [0078-0080]). Gustafsson teaches wherein the camera modules may be sensitive to infrared and thus comprise infrared cameras ([0066]). Gustafsson further teaches wherein the cameras (108) themselves may be retrofitted to a medical imaging scanner ([0057]). Gustafsson therefore teaches modifying a preinstalled MRI system (retrofitting) by installing an infrared camera system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Mostafavi to modify or retrofit existing MRI systems with the infrared camera system as taught by Gustafsson (Figs. 5-6, Abstract, [0050], [0066], [0078-0080]). By having the infrared camera system be capable of being retrofitted or installed onto existing MRI scanners, existing MRI scanners may predictably be used with motion tracking to monitor a patient rather than having to buy an entirely new MRI system, thereby improving cost efficiency. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mostafavi (US20040116804) in view of Acktar (“Comparison of IR Absorber Coating Methods”) as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Xia (US 20220313088 ). Regarding claim 11 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 9. However, Mostafavi fails to teach the invention comprising a reconstructor to construct a magnetic resonance image from magnetic resonance signal acquired by the magnetic resonance system, wherein said information determined by said image processor comprises respiratory and/or cardiac phase information and wherein said reconstructor is adapted to take said respiratory and/or cardiac phase information into account to correct said acquired signals and/or said reconstructed magnetic resonance image for motion. In an analogous magnetic resonance imaging system field of endeavor, Xia teaches such a feature. Xia teaches a medical system (100) including a medical device (100) comprising an magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) device (Fig. 1, [0015], [0038], [0040]). Xia teaches a detection device comprising a camera configured to obtain detection data of a patient or subject ([0085]). Xia teaches determining cardiac motion and respiration motion from the detection data ([0004], [0006] , [0086], [0088] ) . Xia teaches wherein cardiac motion includes cardiac phase information ([0087]). Xia teaches MRI images may be reconstructed based on cardiac motion data and/or respiratory motion data ([0095]). Moreover, Xia teaches wherein artifact correction on the MRI image may be performed based on cardiac motion data and/or respiratory motion data ([0096]). Xia therefore teaches a reconstructor configured to construct an MRI image, wherein said information comprises respiratory and cardiac phase information, and wherein the reconstructor is adapted to take said respiratory and/or cardiac phase information into account to correct said acquired signals and/or said reconstructed magnetic resonance image for motion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Mostafavi to determine cardiac and respiration data and to correct for cardiac and respiration motion in reconstruction of a magnetic resonance image as taught by Xia ([0085-0086], [0088], [0095-0096]). Motion artifacts from cardiac and respiratory motion may predictably be eliminated or reduced as recognized by Xia ([0095-0096]), thereby improving magnetic resonance image quality. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mostafavi (US20040116804) in view of Acktar (“Comparison of IR Absorber Coating Methods”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ichiza ( JP2017123966 , translation provided) and Giles ( US20120298117 ) . Regarding claim 12 , Mostafavi in view of Acktar teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1. However, Mostafavi fails to teach the invention comprising a sheet to cover a part of the body of the subject and/or another object in the examination zone that is not intended to be observed by the infrared camera system, wherein said sheet is adapted to absorb, attenuate, and/or diffusely reflect infrared light. In an analogous imaging of a subject field of endeavor, Ichiza teaches such a feature. Ichiza teaches a camera (10) configured to monitor physical activity of a subject (1) laying on a table (Fig. 1, [0036]). Ichiza teaches wherein the system includes an infrared absorber (40) configured to be placed on the subject (1) during monitoring ( Figs. 1 & 14, [0036], [0043] , [0046], [0049] ) . Ichiza teaches wherein the infrared absorber is tape and thus comprises a sheet (Figs. 1 & 14, [0043]). Moreover, Ichiza teaches wherein the absorber (40) may be used with MRI as long as it does not contain metal ([0159]). Ichiza teaches wherein the absorber (40) is used to measure light and thus adjust lighting via a light source (20) ([0049]). Ichiza therefore teaches a sheet to cover a part of the body of the subject, wherein said sheet is adapted to absorb infrared light. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Mostafavi to place a sheet of infrared absorbing material on the patient as recognized by Ichiza (Figs. 1 & 14, [0036], [0043], [0046], [0049]). Body motion, such as breathing, may accurately be measured even in bright environments by using the infrared absorbing sheet (40), and using the infrared absorbing sheet improves SNR as recognized by Ichiza ([0054]). However, the modified combination noted above fails to teach wherein the infrared absorbing sheet is a cloth sheet or blanket. In an analogous infrared absorbing coating field of endeavor, Giles teaches such a feature. Giles teaches a film layer (100) configured to be incorporated into a patient warming blanket (207) ([0024], [0033], [0035-0036]). Giles teaches the film layer (100) includes a thermally absorptive coating (103) ([0029]). Giles teaches wherein the absorptive coating of the patient warming blanket is configured to absorb infrared light (Claim 9). Giles therefore teaches a blanket configured to cover a part of the body of a patient and adapted to absorb infrared light. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Mostafavi in view of Ichiza to use a blanket to absorb infrared light as taught by Giles (Claim 9). A patient may predictably be kept warm by using a blanket, and Giles teaches wherein the blanket may be used during medical procedures ([0018]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT TOMMY T LY whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-6404 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 12:00pm-8:00pm eastern time . 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 Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 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. /TOMMY T LY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3797 /SERKAN AKAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797