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 .
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.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-8 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mezger et al (11,495,342).
Regarding claim 1, 12 and 14 Mezger discloses,
An image data input configured to provide optical sensor-based image data of a head of a subject (note col. 13 lines 57-59, acquiring patient image data and col. 14 lines 23-24, image data patient head);
Generate an optical shape of the head based on the image data (note col. 13 lines 59-61, atlas data, col. 10 lines 14-17, atlas data is acquired which describes (for example defines, more particularly represents) a general three-dimensional shape of the anatomical body part);
Provide a plurality of datasets of heads with different head shapes, wherein each dataset comprises a spatially assigned trajectory for a ventricular drain placement for the respective head shape,
map the generated optical shape of the head with at least two of the head shapes of the plurality of datasets (note fig. 1 block S3 and col. 13 lines 61-63, mapping data describing a mapping of the patient image data to the atlas data);
determine a best matching head shape of the dataset and to select the respective assigned (note col. 10 lines 59-67, atlas is matched to medical image data, and the image data are compared with the matched atlas in order to assign a point (a pixel or voxel) of the image data to an object of the matched atlas, thereby segmenting the image data into objects); and
provide a projection of the selected assigned trajectory in spatial relation to the head of the subject as adapted guiding path for ventricular drain placement for the subject (note fig. 1, block S4 and col 13 lines 63 – col. 14 lines 1, spatial relationship data is acquired which describes a predetermined spatial relationship between at least one potential trajectory for placing the external ventricle drainage in the anatomical structure on the one hand and a surface of the anatomical structure)
based on the fig. 1, block S5 and col. 14 lines 2-5, position of an entry point of the external ventricle drainage on the surface of the anatomical structure based on the mapping data and the spatial relationship data).
Regarding claim 2 Mezger discloses,
Wherein the optical sensor-based image data comprises three-dimensional information about the subject's head (note col. 14 lines 22-24).
Regarding claim 3 Mezger discloses,
Store the plurality of (three-dimensional) datasets of heads with different head shapes (note col. 14 lines 19-20, storing atlas data).
Regarding claim 4 Mezger discloses,
Wherein, for the mapping, the data processor is configured to compute a facial recognition algorithm (note col. 14 lines 46-55).
Regarding claim 5 Mezger discloses,
optical sensor is configured to acquire the optical sensor based image data of a head of a subject(note col. 14 lines 22-24) and supply this to the processor and a display is configured to visualize the projection of the selected assigned trajectory in spatial relation to the head of the subject (note col. 5 lines 44-46, trajectory data is output to an output device/display).
Regarding claim 7 Mezger discloses,
Wherein the display is configured to provide the projection of the selected assigned trajectory overlaid to reality for a user (note col. 5 lines 44-46, trajectory data is output to an output device).
Regarding claim 8 Mezger discloses,
wherein the optical sensor comprises at least one depth camera that provides three-dimensional data of the subject (note col. 14 lines 23, 3D model, and col. 2 30-35, 3D modality).
Regarding claims 11 and 13 Mezger discloses,
Wherein the processor is configured to determine a spatial relation of the user's field of view and the subject's head (note col. 13 lines 63-67, spatial relationship data cited); and
Wherein the display is configured to project the adapted guiding path within the user's field of view overlaid to the subject's head based on the mapping of the generated optical shape of the head and the determined best matching head shape (note col. 14 lines 4-5, mapping data).
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 6 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mezger in view of official notice.
Regarding claims 6 and 9, Mezger discloses optical sensor and the display. Mezger does not clearly disclose a user-wearable headset wherein the headset is tracked in relation to the subject's head; and the data processor is configured to perform simultaneous localization and mapping. Official notice is taken to a user-wearable headset wherein the headset is tracked in relation to the subject's head; and the data processor is configured to perform simultaneous localization and mapping. It would have been obvious one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include official notice of wherein headset is track in relation to the subject head. Suggestion/motivation provides alternative tracking methods. It would have been obvious to combine official notice with Mezger to obtain the invention as specified by claims 6 and 9.
Regarding claims 10 Mezger discloses optical sensor and display. Mezger does not clearly disclose a visualization of at least a part of the head of the subject as i) augmented reality, wherein the adapted guiding path is overlaid to reality in the user's field of view. Official notice is taken to visualization of at least a part of the head of the subject as i) augmented reality, wherein the adapted guiding path is overlaid to reality in the user's field of view. It would have been obvious one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include official notice of a visualization of at least part of the head of the subject as augmented reality. Suggestion/motivation provides alternative tracking methods. It would have been obvious to combine official notice with Mezger to obtain the invention as specified by claim 10.
Related Prior Art
Verard et al (8,401,616) wherein the optical sensor comprises at least one depth camera that provides three-dimensional data of the subject (note fig. 16, 3D shape)
Wang et al (10,433,911) An image data input configured to provide optical sensor-based image data of a head of a subject (fig. 29)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY M DESIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-7449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30am-3:00pm.
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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at 571-272-4637. 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.
G.D.
May 27, 2026
/GREGORY M DESIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2676
Prosecution Insights