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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/04/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3, 5-14, and 21-26 remain pending in the application.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 03/04/2026 has been entered. Claim 4 is cancelled, and claims 1, 3, 5-14, and 21-26 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed 11/05/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 03/04/2026 with respect to claim(s) 1 and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Given the amendments to claim 1, reference to Savord is being relied upon to teach dependent claim 12 more-consistently with the instant claim language, as shown below.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 11-12, 14, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savord (US 20150085617 A1, published March 26, 2015) in view of Yano (US 4664122 A, published May 12, 1987), Chiao et al. (US 5882309A, published March 16, 1999), and Guo et al. (US 6160340A, published December12, 2000), hereinafter referred to as Savord, Yano, Chiao, and Guo, respectively.
Regarding claim 1, and similarly for claim 21, Savord teaches an ultrasound device (Fig. 1, 2D array 12 of probe 10 as ultrasound device) comprising:
an array (Fig. 5, 2D array 12) having a center row of transducer elements of a first width in an elevation direction and two or more outer rows of transducer elements of a second or other widths in the elevation direction, wherein the first width is different and smaller than the second width (Fig. 5, width of central rows 80 is smaller than width of outer rows 82, 82’, 84, 84’, 86, 86’, 88, 88’),
the center row being between the two or more outer rows with each of two opposite sides of the center row being adjacent to at least one row of the two or more outer rows along an azimuth direction, perpendicular to the elevation direction (Fig. 5, center rows 80 between outer rows 82, 82’, 84, 84’, 86, 86’, 88, 88’; see para. 0023 – “If planes are to be scanned in the orthogonal direction, a set of planes which each extend in the elevation direction, a patch arrangement such as shown in FIG. 5 can be used. The active aperture 36 of the 2D array 12 of FIG. 5 has seven columns of patches extending in the elevation dimension which are uniformly sized in the azimuth (horizontal in the drawing) direction.”),
wherein element pitch of transducer elements in the center row is equal to element pitch of transducer elements in rows of the two or more outer rows that are adjacent to the center row (Fig. 5, distance between transducer elements of 2D array 12 (pitch) are equal, which is inherent and known in the art); and
a controller coupled to the array (Fig. 1, controller 26 coupled to 2D array 12 via system BF (beamformer) 22) and configured to control the center row of transducer elements and two or more outer rows of transducer elements to operate at a same time or at different times (see para. 0023 – “Scanning is performed by starting reception with the smallest patches 80 in the center, first one or all three, then progressively adding [different times] the adjacent patches in symmetrical pairs out from the center to grow the active aperture to the full aperture 36 [same time] at the greatest depth of field.”).
Savord teaches operating the array, but does not explicitly teach the center row operates as a linear array and a pair of rows of the two or more outer rows operate as a phased array.
Whereas, Yano, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches wherein, during operation, the center row operates as a linear array and a pair of rows of the two or more outer rows operate as a phased array Fig. 2; see col. 2, lines 56-59 – "This arrangement allows to obtain a tomogram of the object by the subarray A [center row] responsive to the electronic linear scan [linear array], and diagnostic information such as a blood flow by the subarrays B1 and B2."; see col. 3, lines 32-36 – “....ultrasonic beams 4 and 5 can be transmitted at large deflection angles 61 and 62 by delay-driving [phased array] the peripheral [outer rows] transducer elements. The beams 4 and 5 are used as ultrasonic Doppler beams for measuring a blood flow rate.").
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified operating the array, as disclosed in Savord, by having the center row operate as a linear array and a pair of rows of the two or more outer rows operate as a phased array, as disclosed in Yano. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to display a blood flow pattern waveform at a measuring point designated on the B mode image, as taught in Yano (see col. 3, lines 45-48).
Savord in view of Yano teaches an array, and it is known in the art to couple lens to an array, but does not explicitly teach lens coupled to the array.
Whereas, Chiao, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches a lens (Fig. 5A, lens 36); and an array coupled to the lens (Fig. 5A, element rows 12a-12e of array 10D of Fig. 5B coupled to lens 36).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified an array, as disclosed in Savord in view of Yano, by having lens coupled to the array, as disclosed in Chiao. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to substantially increase the depth of field, providing uniform resolution and contrast over the entire imaging range of the probe, as taught in Chiao (see col. 7, lines 6-9).
Savord in view of Yano and Chiao teaches an array having a center row and outer rows, and inherently teaches operating the array at a frequency, but does not explicitly teach where the center row and outer rows operate at different frequencies.
Whereas, Guo, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches an array having a center row of transducer elements that operate at a first frequency, and two or more outer rows of transducer elements that operate at a second or other frequencies different than the first frequency (see col. 5, lines 61-65 "In a preferred embodiment, the center row 14 of piezoelectric members 28 generates ultrasonic energy at a higher center frequency than the ultrasonic energy that is generated by the two outer rows 12 and 16 of piezoelectric members 26 and 30.").
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the array, as disclosed in Savord in view of Yano and Chiao, by having the center row and outer rows operate at different frequencies, as disclosed in Guo. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow high resolution nearfield imaging in addition to better far field imaging without the need for a 2D transducer array, as taught in Guo (see Abstract).
Furthermore, regarding claims 3 and 22, Guo further teaches wherein the first frequency is twice the second frequency (see col. 6, lines 46-47 "center row transducer elements: 10 MHz; outer row transducer elements: 8 MHz"; see col. 7, lines 30-34 "In addition, although 3.5 MHZ and 10 MHz transducers are referred to, other frequency combinations are possible.").
Furthermore, regarding claims 5 and 23, Yano further teaches wherein the controller controls the array in a plurality of modes in which either the center row of transducer elements or the two or more outer rows of transducer elements is operating or both the center row of transducer elements and the two or more outer rows of transducer elements are operating at the same time based on which mode of the plurality of modes is being used (see col. 5, lines 39-43 "The ultrasonic diagnosis apparatus can be operated to simultaneously acquire tomogram [via central subarray A, center row] and blood flow information [via peripheral subarrays B1 and B2, outer rows] of the object, or to acquire only the tomogram or the blood flow information.").
Furthermore, regarding claim 11, Guo further teaches wherein each of the transducer elements is part of an acoustic stack that includes a backing block through which at least a signal coupled to said each transducer element traverses (Fig. 1; see col. 5, lines 1-2 "The piezoelectric members are in contact with a backing member 32." Where each of the transducer elements is part of an acoustic stack that includes a backing block is inherent and known in the art).
Furthermore, regarding claim 12, Savord further teaches wherein each of the transducer elements is part of an acoustic stack, and stacks associated with transducer elements of the center row have different focal depths and beam characteristics than stacks associated with transducer elements of the two or more outer rows (see para. 0023 – “Scanning is performed by starting reception with the smallest patches 80 in the center, first one or all three, then progressively adding the adjacent patches in symmetrical pairs out from the center to grow the active aperture to the full aperture 36 at the greatest depth of field.” Where each of the transducer elements is part of an acoustic stack is inherent and known in the art).
Furthermore, regarding claim 14, Yano further teaches wherein each of the transducer elements comprises a piezoelectric element (Fig. 2, ultrasonic transducer elements 2; see col. 2, lines 60-63 "The ultrasonic transducer array of the present invention can be manufactured by dicing a piezoelectric material such as ceramic in the same manner as in the conventional ultrasonic transducer array." Where ultrasound transducer elements as piezoelectric elements are known in the art).
The motivation for claims 3, 5, 11, 14, and 22-23 was shown previously in claims 1 and 21.
Claims 6-7 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo, as applied to claim 5 and 23 above, respectively, and in further view of Freiburger et al. (US 20040054285 A1, published March 18, 2004), hereinafter referred to as Freiburger.
Regarding claims 6 and 24, Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo teaches all of the elements disclosed in claim 5 and 23 above, respectively.
Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo teaches operating the center row and the outer rows of transducer elements in a plurality of modes, but does not explicitly teach controlling the center row of transducer elements to perform a receive operation while controlling the two or more outer rows of to perform transmit operations.
Whereas, Freiburger, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches wherein the controller is configured to control the center row of transducer elements and two or more outer rows of transducer elements independently in one of the modes to operate at the same time to obtain signals for performing super broadband harmonic imaging by controlling the center row of transducer elements to perform a receive operation while controlling the two or more outer rows of transducer elements to perform transmit operations (see para. 0033 "Any of various combinations of transmit and receive apertures may be used, such as transmitting from three rows and receiving on the center row and then transmitting from two outer rows and receiving on the two outer rows.").
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified operating the center row and the outer rows of transducer elements in a plurality of modes, as disclosed in Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo, by controlling the center row of transducer elements to perform a receive operation while controlling the two or more outer rows of transducer elements to perform transmit operations, as disclosed in Freiburger. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to compound data frames responsive to different elevation apertures and reduce speckle, as taught in Freiburger (see para. 0005).
Furthermore, regarding claims 7 and 25, Freiburger further teaches wherein the plurality of modes includes:
a first mode in which the controller causes both the center row and the two or more outer rows of transducer elements to perform both transmit and receive operations to provide signals for full aperture imaging on an area of bandwidth produced by both that overlaps (see para. 0019 "The left(i.e. bottom) aperture and right (i.e. top) aperture overlap, both using the center row of elements. Using either a mechanical or electrical focus, both the left and right (i.e. bottom and top) overlapping apertures transmit and receive within the same scan plane.");
a second mode in which the controller causes the center row of transducer elements to perform a receive operation and the two or more outer rows of transducer elements to perform transmit and receive operations to provide signals for Tissue Harmonic Imaging (THI) (see para. 0033 "Any of various combinations of transmit and receive apertures may be used, such as transmitting from three rows and receiving on the center row and then transmitting from two outer rows and receiving on the two outer rows.");
a third mode in which the controller causes both the center row and the two or more outer rows of transducer elements to perform both transmit and receive operations to provide signals for super broadband full aperture THI (see para. 0026 "A large transmit elevation aperture is desired for harmonic imaging.").
The motivation for claims 7 and 25 was shown previously in claims 6 and 24.
Claims 8-10 and 26 are rejected under 35U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo, as applied to claim 5 and 23 above, respectively, and in further view of Adams (US 20110046484A1, published February 24, 2011), hereinafter referred to as Adams.
Regarding claims 8 and 26, Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo teaches all of the elements disclosed in claim 5 and 23 above.
Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo teaches operating the center row and the outer rows of transducer elements in a plurality of modes, but does not explicitly teach a user interface to enable a user to cause the controller to switch between modes of the plurality of modes.
Whereas, Adams, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches a user interface configured to enable a user to cause the controller to switch between modes of the plurality of modes (Fig. 1; see para. 0035 "For example, an operator may turn a dial or interact with a graphical user interface element to indicate to the beamformer controller 18 which transducer elements 38 are to be decoupled or used in the active aperture.").
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified operating the center row and the outer rows of transducer elements in a plurality of modes, as disclosed in Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo, by having a user interface to enable a user to cause the controller to switch between modes of the plurality of modes, as disclosed in Adams. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order improve workflow and efficiency of operating the ultrasound device, as taught in Adams (see para. 0005 0006).
Furthermore, regarding claim 9, Savord teaches a probe enclosure that contains the array (Fig. 1; see para. 0017 – “A probe 10 has a two dimensional array transducer 12…”), and
Adams further teaches wherein the user interface comprises one or more buttons, one or more sensors, one or more switches coupled to the probe enclosure, or voice control to switch between the modes (Fig. 1; see para. 0035 "For example, an operator may turn a dial or interact with a graphical user interface element to indicate to the beam former controller 18 which transducer elements 38are to be decoupled or used in the active aperture.").
Furthermore, regarding claim 10, Adams further teaches wherein the user interface comprises one or more buttons, one or more sensors, or one or more switches coupled to an ultrasound system or voice control communicably coupled to the array to switch between the modes (Fig. 1; see para. 0030 'At step 72, a user mode selection input is received from the user by means of a mode selection Switch 20, graphical user interface, or other input means."; see para. 0035 "For example, an operator may turn a dial or interact with a graphical user interface element to indicate to the beam former controller 18which transducer elements 38 are to be decoupled or used in the active aperture.").
The motivation for claims 9-10 was shown previously in claim 8.
Claim 13 is rejected under35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Zhao et al. (US 20220350022 A1, published November3, 2022 with a priority date of April 29, 2021), hereinafter referred to as Zhao.
Regarding claim 13, Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo teaches all of the elements disclosed in claim 1 above.
Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo teaches operating the center row and the outer rows of transducer elements, but does not explicitly teach a first set of tuning inductors for interfacing signals from the transducer elements of the center row of transducer elements and a second set of tuning inductors for interfacing signals from the transducer elements of the two or more outer rows of transducer elements using tuning inductors with different inductor values than tuning inductors of the first set of tuning inductors.
Whereas, Zhao, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches one or more system connectors to interface signals from each of the transducer elements of the center row of transducer elements and the two or more outer rows of transducer elements to an ultrasound system, the one or more system connectors comprising first and second sets of tuning inductors, the first set of tuning inductors for interfacing signals from the transducer elements of the center row of transducer elements and the second set of tuning inductors for interfacing signals from the transducer elements of the two or more outer rows of transducer elements using tuning inductors with different inductor values than tuning inductors of the first set of tuning inductors (see para. 0077 "In order to compensate for those transducer-to-transducer variations, the first and second tuning modules 1528a-1528b are designed with different settings to minimize the acoustic performance differences between the first and second acoustic transducers 1528a- 1528b. For example, the first acoustic transducer 1518a may use 1.2 uH tuning inductors, and the second acoustic transducer 1518b may use 0.82 pH tuning inductors, or vice versa.").
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified operating the center row and the outer rows of transducer elements, as disclosed in Savord in view of Yano, Chiao, and Guo, by having a first set of tuning inductors for interfacing signals from the transducer elements of the center row of transducer elements and a second set of tuning inductors for interfacing signals from the transducer elements of the two or more outer rows of transducer elements using tuning inductors with different inductor values than tuning inductors of the first set of tuning inductors, as disclosed in Zhao. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to minimize the acoustic performance differences between the first and second acoustic transducers, as taught in Zhao (see para. 0077).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Hatfield et al. (US 5840032 A, published November 24, 1998) discloses the width of the central row is smaller than the combined width of the outer rows (Fig. 8).
Hatfield et al. (US 5865750 A, published February 2, 1999) discloses where unique waveforms and unique gain curves can be used for different focal zones. In particular, the waveform center frequency can be decreased with increasing depth to provide less attenuation and more penetration (Fig. 5-6).
Towfiq et al. (US 20090043206 A1, published February 12, 2009) discloses a 1.5D array have improved elevation slice-thickness performance both in the near- and far-fields, while still using only a single beamformer for both azimuthal and elevation focusing (Fig. 2B).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nyrobi Celestine whose telephone number is 571-272-0129. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 7:00AM - 5:00PM 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, Pascal Bui-Pho can be reached on 571-272-2714. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/N.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3798