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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/17/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, 7, 9, 11-14, 17, & 19have 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for determining the area elongation using the specific formula of Relation 7 as identified in applicants spec [0097], does not reasonably provide enablement for applicants claimed area elongation being obtained according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle as identified in Claim 1. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to determine any other variation of area elongation that the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for determining the horizontal elongation using the specific formula of Relation 5 as identified in applicants spec [0088], does not reasonably provide enablement for applicants claimed vertical elongation being obtained according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle as identified in Claim 7. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to determine any other variation of horizontal elongation that the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for determining the vertical elongation using the specific formula of Relation 6 as identified in applicants spec [0093], does not reasonably provide enablement for applicants claimed vertical elongation being obtained according to a vertical image range and the effective length of the needle as identified in Claim 9. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to determine any other variation of vertical elongation that the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for determining the area elongation using the specific formula of Relation 7 as identified in applicants spec [0097], does not reasonably provide enablement for applicants claimed area elongation being obtained according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle as identified in Claim 1. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to determine any other variation of area elongation that the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for determining the horizontal elongation using the specific formula of Relation 5 as identified in applicants spec [0088], does not reasonably provide enablement for applicants claimed vertical elongation being obtained according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle as identified in Claim 7. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to determine any other variation of horizontal elongation that the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for determining the vertical elongation using the specific formula of Relation 6 as identified in applicants spec [0093], does not reasonably provide enablement for applicants claimed vertical elongation being obtained according to a vertical image range and the effective length of the needle as identified in Claim 9. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to determine any other variation of vertical elongation that the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
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 applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4, 7, 9, 11-14, 17, & 19 are 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 the limitation “the second grayscale color is arranged after the first marking area” which renders the claim unclear. There is no spatial reference for the term “after” it is unclear whether it means it is more proximal or distal.
Claim 1 also recites “an ultrasound generator, configured to form an ultrasound field of view based on a measuring object” which renders the claim unclear. An ultrasound probe generate the view while an ultrasound generator transmits the ultrasonic waves.
Claim 1 also recites “the feature points number is a positive integer greater than or equal to 2” which renders the claim unclear. As described in applicants spec [0041] there is precisely 1 feature point between a first marking area and a second marking area. It is unclear how there can be a minimum of 2 feature points declared in the claim when the claim only has a first marking area and a second marking area.
Claim 1 also recites “the width of the range prediction interval related to the feature points number” which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear what relationship the width has with respect to the feature points number.
Claim 1 also recites ”obtaining an area elongation according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle” which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear what defines an area elongation. For the purposes of this examination this is interpreted as any area being determined based on horizontal image data, vertical image data, and object image data.
Claim 1 also recites “the effective length of the needle is greater than or equal to a sum of a first length of the first marking area and a second length of the second marking area” which renders the claim unclear. The spec defines the effective length in [0087-0088] as being determined based on a total length of the needle minus the needle length remaining in the field of view (Relation 4); however the above claim limtitaion recites a completely different categorization. For the purposes of this examination any length of the needle with 2 echogenic marking areas are viewed as the effective length.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “according to at least one of the linear regression algorithm and a bending relational expression” which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear whether one or both expressions are required. It is also unclear in view of the specification if either algorithm or expression is different from one another according to [0043] the linear regression algorithm is based on Relation 1 while in [0058] the bending relation expression is also based on Relation 1.
Claim 4 also recites “the bending relational expression has a distance error mean value”; an expression cannot have a value it can calculate one or use one as input. It is unclear what the relation is here.
Claim 4 also recites “setting a bending threshold according to the bending relational expression” which renders the claim unclear as to how the threshold is set in reference to the expression. Applicants spec [0060] discloses the threshold as being 1.5 pixels or being related to the length of the needle.
Claim 4 also recites “when the distance error mean value smaller than the bending threshold, it is determined that the needle approaches the straight line” which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear how the needle “approaches” a straight line. A verb is also missing in between “distance error mean value smaller”.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “obtaining a horizontal elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle.” Which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear what constitutes a horizontal elongation. For the purposes of this examination it is interpreted as any horizontal distance determined by the imaging system
Claim 9 recites the limitation “obtaining a vertical elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle.” Which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear what constitutes a vertical elongation. For the purposes of this examination it is interpreted as any vertical distance determined by the imaging system.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “the second grayscale color is arranged after the first marking area” which renders the claim unclear. There is no spatial reference for the term “after” it is unclear whether it means it is more proximal or distal.
Claim 11 also recites “forming an ultrasound field of view based on a measuring object by an ultrasound generator” which renders the claim unclear. An ultrasound probe generate the view while an ultrasound generator transmits the ultrasonic waves.
Claim 11 also recites “the feature points number is a positive integer greater than or equal to 2” which renders the claim unclear. As described in applicants spec [0041] there is precisely 1 feature point between a first marking area and a second marking area. It is unclear how there can be a minimum of 2 feature points declared in the claim when the claim only has a first marking area and a second marking area.
Claim 11 also recites “the width of the range prediction interval related to the feature points number” which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear what relationship the width has with respect to the feature points number.
Claim 11 also recites ”obtaining an area elongation according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle” which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear what defines an area elongation. For the purposes of this examination this is interpreted as any area being determined based on horizontal image data, vertical image data, and object image data.
Claim 11 also recites “the effective length of the needle is greater than or equal to a sum of a first length of the first marking area and a second length of the second marking area” which renders the claim unclear. The spec defines the effective length in [0087-0088] as being determined based on a total length of the needle minus the needle length remaining in the field of view (Relation 4); however the above claim limtitaion recites a completely different categorization. For the purposes of this examination any length of the needle with 2 echogenic marking areas are viewed as the effective length.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “according to at least one of the linear regression algorithm and a bending relational expression” which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear whether one or both expressions are required. It is also unclear in view of the specification if either algorithm or expression is different from one another according to [0043] the linear regression algorithm is based on Relation 1 while in [0058] the bending relation expression is also based on Relation 1.
Claim 14 also recites “the bending relational expression has a distance error mean value”; an expression cannot have a value it can calculate one or use one as input. It is unclear what the relation is here.
Claim 14 also recites “setting a bending threshold according to the bending relational expression” which renders the claim unclear as to how the threshold is set in reference to the expression. Applicants spec [0060] discloses the threshold as being 1.5 pixels or being related to the length of the needle.
Claim 14 also recites “when the distance error mean value smaller than the bending threshold, it is determined that the needle approaches the straight line” which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear how the needle “approaches” a straight line. A verb is also missing in between “distance error mean value smaller”.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “obtaining a horizontal elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle.” Which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear what constitutes a horizontal elongation. For the purposes of this examination it is interpreted as any horizontal distance determined by the imaging system
Claim 19 recites the limitation “obtaining a vertical elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle.” Which renders the claim unclear. It is unclear what constitutes a vertical elongation. For the purposes of this examination it is interpreted as any vertical distance determined by the imaging system
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, 7, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Najafi et al (M. Najafi, P. Abolmaesumi, and R. Rohling, “Single-camera closed-form real-time needle tracking for ultrasound-guided needle insertion,” Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, vol. 41, no. 10, pp. 2663–2676, Oct. 2015.; hereinafter referred to as Najafi) in view of Zhao et al (US20100168562A1; hereinafter referred to as Zhao), and further in view of Campbell et al (US20140049560A1; hereinafter referred to as Campbell).
Regarding Claim 1, Najafi teaches an augmented reality system (“a needle insertion procedure with ultrasound guidance, real-time calculation and visualization of the needle trajectory can help to guide the choice of puncture site and needle angle to reach the target depicted in the ultrasound image” [Abstract]) comprising:
a needle (“Epidural needle with 1-cm markings is projected into the camera plane using the standard camera model.” [Mathematical Framework], comprising:
a first marking area, wherein the first marking area has a first grayscale color ; and a second marking area, wherein the second marking area has a second grayscale color, the first grayscale color and the second grayscale color are different from each other, and the second grayscale color is arranged after the first marking area (“the first grayscale color and the second grayscale color are different from each other,” [Mathematical Framework], as seen in Fig. 1 there is alternating grey marking areas on the needle with both having different gray colors);
PNG
media_image1.png
908
1295
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1
a camera (“The camera was an FL2G-13S2M-C (Point Grey Research, Richmond, BC, Canada) with a DF6HA-1B lens (Fujifilm Group, Fujinon, Saitama, Japan). The camera had a mono 1.3-MP Sony ICX204 CCD, 1/3-in., 4.65-μm sensor. The frame rate was 30 FPS and the image size was 1,288 × 964 pixels.” [Methods]) ;
an ultrasound generator, configured to form an ultrasound field of view based on a measuring object (“A SonixTOUCH ultrasound machine (Ultrasonix Medical, Richmond, BC, Canada) was used for ultrasound imaging. An L14-5 transducer with 7.2-MHz center frequency was used for ultrasound imaging.” [Methods];
a memory, configured to store a plurality of commands; a processor, configured to perform following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory (“The algorithm was implemented in both MATLAB and C++. In the C++ implementation, the OpenCV library was used, and the overall method runs in real time (50 ms) on a standard computer workstation with a Core 2 Duo CPU at 2.93 GHz and 4 GB of RAM.” [Real-time Implementation]:
capturing the first marking area, and the second marking area of the needle to perform positioning or a marking pose estimation by the camera (“To estimate the pose of the needle, marking edge points should be extracted from each image of the needle. These edge points are defined as the intersection of the centerline of the needle with the marking edge lines (Fig. 4a). The accuracy of the pose estimation is directly related to the accuracy of this segmentation procedure.” [Automatic feature extraction], see Figure 2 for the captured marking areas;
PNG
media_image2.png
265
677
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2
confirming the first marking area and the second marking area of the needle are located on a straight line for a feature pose estimation according to a linear regression algorithm (“To estimate the pose of the needle, marking edge points should be extracted from each image of the needle. These edge points are defined as the intersection of the centerline of the needle with the marking edge lines (Fig. 4a). The accuracy of the pose estimation is directly related to the accuracy of this segmentation procedure.” [Automatic feature extraction] “The algorithm starts with an initial estimate for the needle centerline. The estimate can come from the previous frame, if the current frame is not the first frame. For the first frame, the estimate is provided by the Hough transform (using the Canny edge detector). Then, random lines are generated around this estimate by adding random variables to the slope and line intercept. Pixel values on each line are examined to determine if it is an “on-the-needle” line. In that case, the intersection points of the line with the marking edges will be stored.” [Collecting marking edge points]);
comparing the first marking area, the second marking area, and a matching template to confirm a direction of the needle (“A novel mathematical–geometrical formulation is devised here for needle trajectory calculation using the centimeter-spaced black markings on many needles,” [Single Camera Pose Estimation]);
obtaining a feature points number according to the first marking area and the second marking area in the needle, wherein the feature points number is a positive integer greater than or equal to 2 (“The feature extraction procedure, described in the next section, finds the projected points in the image, and is calculated in the camera calibration procedure. Actual marker distances are assumed to be known. For an epidural needle, in particular, the marking distances are all equal. However, the proposed method is not limited to the equal spacing constraint and can be generalized for needles with non-equal marking spacings.” [Mathematical framework]);
obtaining a range prediction interval of the ultrasound field of view according to the feature points number of the needle, wherein the processor projects the needle into the ultrasound field of view according to the feature points number, and a projection range in the ultrasound field of view of the needle is the range prediction interval, wherein the range prediction interval has a width, and the width of the range prediction interval related to the feature points number (“To measure the effect of various parameters such as depth, needle tilt angle, needle yaw angle and number of edge points on accuracy, a sensitivity analysis test was performed by simulating the pose estimation process. The mathematical formulation of the system and the standard camera model was used with a noise source model as input. As discussed under Precision of the Feature Extraction, the root mean squared segmentation error was measured as 2.2 pixels, and hence, here, the noise was modeled as a normal random variable with a standard deviation of 2.5 pixels For the base case, the needle's pose and the other parameters were chosen similar to those in the Overall System Accuracy section. The angle between the needle and the ultrasound image plane was 45°, the intersection depth was 20 mm and three edge points were used… Finally, the number of edge points was varied from 3 to 7 to investigate if using more edge points increases the accuracy because of the averaging effect. Results illustrated in Figure 12d confirm that the estimation error decreases by using more edge points.” [Sensitivity analysis of the needle pose estimation], Najafi discloses an estimation error (range prediction interval) between the projected needle on the ultrasound vs the actual coordinates of the needle, this estimation error is dependent on multiple factors; however, when the number of edge points (feature points) is increased the estimation error is shown to decrease in size (width) as seen in Fig. 12 D below);
PNG
media_image3.png
570
677
media_image3.png
Greyscale
determining the feature points number is greater than a feature points number threshold , and reducing the width of the range interval (“Finally, the number of edge points was varied from 3 to 7 to investigate if using more edge points increases the accuracy because of the averaging effect. Results illustrated in Figure 12d confirm that the estimation error decreases by using more edge points.” [Sensitivity analysis of the needle pose estimation]);
and the effective length of the needle is greater than or equal to a sum of a first length of the first marking area and a second length of the second marking area (“To measure the accuracy of the overall system, an out-of-plane needle insertion experiment was performed in a water bath. The needle was partially immersed in water so that the intersection of the ultrasound plane with the needle could be seen as a point in the ultrasound image. Part of the needle that was out of the water was visible with the camera and was used for estimating the pose of the needle. A 20-cm-long needle was used for this experiment.” [Overall system accuracy]).
Najafi does not specifically teach a location code; and capturing the location code; wherein the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining an area elongation according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle, wherein the horizontal image range is obtained according to a horizontal viewing angle of the camera and a depth of field length between the camera and the measuring object, and the vertical image range is obtained according to a vertical viewing angle and the depth of field length of the camera.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Zhao teaches systems, methods, and tools for tool tracking using image-derived data from one or more tool-located reference features. [Abstract].
Zhao also teaches a location code; and capturing the location code (“One-dimensional (1-D) markers can be used to determine instrument pose. A 1-D marker includes primitive features arranged in one dimension. Some of the features can serve as localizer features, and the rest of the features can serve as identification features. Similar to 2-D markers, localizer features can be used to provide positional or orientation information to determine the pose/alignment of the marker, and identification features can be used to differentiate different markers. Identification features can follow a coding scheme and can include redundant information for error checking and/or correction. For example, FIGS. 22A, 22B, and 22C illustrate 1-D markers, which employ dots, or a combination of circles and dots. FIG. 22A illustrates a 1-D marker 240 that includes dots forming a straight line. While it is appreciated that different colors can be used to convey information, marker 240 employs dots that are either present (i.e., set to “1”) or absent (i.e., set to “0”). Marker 240 includes a start pattern 242, an end pattern 244, and a center portion 246 having 12 data bits. These 12 data bits can be used in a variety of ways, such as by using some of the data bits as identification bits and some of the data bits as error checking/correction bits, which can include one or more checksum data bits.” [0130])
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Najafiri as outlined above with a location code; and capturing the location code as taught by Zhao, because it can be used to determine instrument pose [0130].
Najafiri in view of Zhao does not specifically teach that the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining an area elongation according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle, wherein the horizontal image range is obtained according to a horizontal viewing angle of the camera and a depth of field length between the camera and the measuring object, and the vertical image range is obtained according to a vertical viewing angle and the depth of field length of the camera.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Campbell teaches a device that comprises an input, a marker detector and a failure boundary calculation processor [Abstract].
Campbell also teaches that the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining an area elongation according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle (“an embodiment of the present invention, the entertainment device tests for whether one or more of the following failure cases are imminent: a marker becoming too small due to its angle with respect to the camera; a marker becoming too small due to its distance from the camera; and a marker becoming clipped by the viewing frustrum (i.e. exiting the field of view of the camera).” [0105],” Consequently it is preferable to assume that if the fiduciary marker centre is within d/2 (radius of the marker) of one of the clipping planes of the frustrum, then detection will fail. A more conservative assumption is if the fiduciary marker is within 0.71d of the clipping frame, to account for diametric positioning with respect to the frustrum. Again, which threshold to use may be selected by a designer.” [0129], “the limits of movement within the viewing frustrum can be defined in terms of the x,y position in the viewing plane, where (0,0) is the centre of the plane, as follows: maxXDisp(d, v); maxYDisp(d, v)” [0130], “These functions define the maximum distance the fiduciary marker can move in x and y from the centre of the viewing plan before hitting the clipping planes.” [0133]),
wherein the horizontal image range is obtained according to a horizontal viewing angle of the camera and a depth of field length between the camera and the measuring object, and the vertical image range is obtained according to a vertical viewing angle and the depth of field length of the camera (“ the size of the viewing plane may be computed. Hence for the example of the Sony PlayStation Eye®, the vertical field of view can be vfov=49.4°.” [0115], “One can then calculate verticalFieldOfViewComponent, c, which is the height of the viewing plane in metres at 1 metre away from the camera.” [0116], “the limits of movement within the viewing frustrum can be defined in terms of the x,y position in the viewing plane, where (0,0) is the centre of the plane, as follows: maxXDisp(d, v); maxYDisp(d, v)” [0130]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Najafiri in view of Zhao as outlined above with the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining an area elongation according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle, wherein the horizontal image range is obtained according to a horizontal viewing angle of the camera and a depth of field length between the camera and the measuring object, and the vertical image range is obtained according to a vertical viewing angle and the depth of field length of the camera as taught by Campbell, it is desirable to reduce the occasions upon which such estimates cannot be reliably made [0014].
Regarding Claim 2, Najafi teaches a length of the first marking area is smaller than a length of the second marking area (“The feature extraction procedure, described in the next section, finds the projected points in the image, and is calculated in the camera calibration procedure. Actual marker distances are assumed to be known. For an epidural needle, in particular, the marking distances are all equal. However, the proposed method is not limited to the equal spacing constraint and can be generalized for needles with non-equal marking spacings.” [Mathematical framework]).
Regarding Claim 3, Najafi teaches a length of the first marking area is smaller than a length of the second marking area (“The feature extraction procedure, described in the next section, finds the projected points in the image, and is calculated in the camera calibration procedure. Actual marker distances are assumed to be known. For an epidural needle, in particular, the marking distances are all equal. However, the proposed method is not limited to the equal spacing constraint and can be generalized for needles with non-equal marking spacings.” [Mathematical framework]).
Regarding Claim 7, Najafi in view of Zhao teaches all limitations noted above except that the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a horizontal elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Campbell teaches the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a horizontal elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle (“the size of the viewing plane may be computed. Hence for the example of the Sony PlayStation Eye®, the vertical field of view can be vfov=49.4°.” [0115], “One can then calculate verticalFieldOfViewComponent, c, which is the height of the viewing plane in metres at 1 metre away from the camera.” [0116], “the limits of movement within the viewing frustrum can be defined in terms of the x,y position in the viewing plane, where (0,0) is the centre of the plane, as follows: maxXDisp(d, v); maxYDisp(d, v)” [0130]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Najafi in view of Zhao as outlined above with the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a horizontal elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle as taught by Campbell, because it is desirable to reduce the occasions upon which such estimates cannot be reliably made [0014].
Regarding Claim 9, Najafi in view of Zhao teaches all limitations noted above except that the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a vertical elongation according to the vertical image range and the effective length of the needle.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Campbell teaches the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a vertical elongation according to the vertical image range and the effective length of the needle (“the size of the viewing plane may be computed. Hence for the example of the Sony PlayStation Eye®, the vertical field of view can be vfov=49.4°.” [0115], “One can then calculate verticalFieldOfViewComponent, c, which is the height of the viewing plane in metres at 1 metre away from the camera.” [0116], “the limits of movement within the viewing frustrum can be defined in terms of the x,y position in the viewing plane, where (0,0) is the centre of the plane, as follows: maxXDisp(d, v); maxYDisp(d, v)” [0130]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Najafi in view of Zhao as outlined above with the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a horizontal elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle as taught by Campbell, because it is desirable to reduce the occasions upon which such estimates cannot be reliably made [0014].
Claims 4 & 11-14, 17 & 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Najafi in view of Zhao and further in view of Campbell as applied to Claim 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Crawford et al (US20220061921A1; hereinafter referred to as Crawford).
Regarding Claim 4, Najafi in view of Zhao and further in view of Campbell teaches all limitations noted above except that the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: confirming the first marking area and the second marking area of the needle are located on the straight line for a needle bending detection according to at least one of the linear regression algorithm and a bending relational expression, wherein the bending relational expression has a distance error mean value; setting a bending threshold according to the bending relational expression; and when the distance error mean value smaller than the bending threshold, it is determined that the needle approaches the straight line.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Crawford teaches a camera tracking system for computer assisted navigation during surgery [Abstract].
Crawford also teaches the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: confirming the first marking area and the second marking area of the needle are located on the straight line for a needle bending detection according to at least one of the linear regression algorithm and a bending relational expression (“Some other embodiments are directed to identifying when an instrument (e.g. tool) is bent, when reference array is not properly attached to the instrument, and/or when one or more markers or other objects of the reference array are not properly attached and/or are improperly arranged (e.g., bent structure). Operations may generate a safety notification to a user based on a determination of at least a threshold deviation between the array template identifying coordinates of the physical objects and coordinates of the physical objects that are determined in the video frames.” [0216], “A clinical workflow/procedure for automatically verifying the accuracy of a tracked object while generating a more accurate template may include the following operations:3. An updated array template including relative datum point locations is generated and then used for tracking objects and/or is used to verify an instrument verification such as to determine if an instrument passes or fails verification due to being deformed, e.g., bent.” [0188]),
wherein the bending relational expression has a distance error mean value (“A process for automatically verifying and generating templates for constrained arrays can include the following operations: 1. The reference array is detected in tracking imagery (video frames in streams from the tracking cameras) and a 6 DOF pose is obtained for the pre-existing nominal marker array template, which may be performed in a conventional manner for navigated surgery. 2. A stored 3D model of the instrument or object associated with the reference array including critical datum point(s) is retrieved from a local memory or remote database. This 3D model can represent the entire tracked object (e.g., reference array and instrument). 3. Critical regions of interest (ROIs) (e.g., 1830 and 1840 in FIG. 18) are projected around all markers and critical object datum points in each 2D camera image (video frame) using the 6DOF pose and tracker calibration. 4. All markers (1820 in FIG. 18) and critical datum points (1840 in FIG. 18) are measured as a series of XYZ coordinate points relative to one another using a combination of individual marker and datum point tracking algorithms. 5. Additional frames are collected and processed in the same predetermined coordinate system for comparison and analysis. 6. When data collection completes, the system averages the measured point locations (coordinates) and may determine whether the instrument passed or failed verification and/or may generate a new and more accurate array template in the appropriately constrained coordinate system.” [0196]);
setting a bending threshold according to the bending relational expression (“Some other embodiments are directed to identifying when an instrument (e.g. tool) is bent, when reference array is not properly attached to the instrument, and/or when one or more markers or other objects of the reference array are not properly attached and/or are improperly arranged (e.g., bent structure). Operations may generate a safety notification to a user based on a determination of at least a threshold deviation between the array template identifying coordinates of the physical objects and coordinates of the physical objects that are determined in the video frames.” [0216]);
and when the distance error mean value smaller than the bending threshold, it is determined that the needle approaches the straight line (“A clinical workflow/procedure for automatically verifying the accuracy of a tracked object while generating a more accurate template may include the following operations:3. An updated array template including relative datum point locations is generated and then used for tracking objects and/or is used to verify an instrument verification such as to determine if an instrument passes or fails verification due to being deformed, e.g., bent.” [0188]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Najafi in view of Zhao and further in view of Campbell as outlined above with the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: confirming the first marking area and the second marking area of the needle are located on the straight line for a needle bending detection according to at least one of the linear regression algorithm and a bending relational expression, wherein the bending relational expression has a distance error mean value; setting a bending threshold according to the bending relational expression; and when the distance error mean value smaller than the bending threshold, it is determined that the needle approaches the straight line as taught by Crawford, because there is a need to improve the tracking accuracy of navigation systems [0003].
Regarding Claim 11, Najafi teaches an augmented reality method, comprising: forming an ultrasound field of view based on a measuring object by an ultrasound generator (“a needle insertion procedure with ultrasound guidance, real-time calculation and visualization of the needle trajectory can help to guide the choice of puncture site and needle angle to reach the target depicted in the ultrasound image” [Abstract], “A SonixTOUCH ultrasound machine (Ultrasonix Medical, Richmond, BC, Canada) was used for ultrasound imaging. An L14-5 transducer with 7.2-MHz center frequency was used for ultrasound imaging.” [Methods]);
a first marking area, and a second marking area of a needle to perform positioning or a marking pose estimation by a camera, wherein the first marking area has a first grayscale color, the second marking area has a second grayscale color, the first grayscale color and the second grayscale color are different from each other, and the second grayscale color is arranged after the first marking area (“Epidural needle with 1-cm markings is projected into the camera plane using the standard camera model.” [Mathematical Framework], “the first grayscale color and the second grayscale color are different from each other,” [Mathematical Framework], “The camera was an FL2G-13S2M-C (Point Grey Research, Richmond, BC, Canada) with a DF6HA-1B lens (Fujifilm Group, Fujinon, Saitama, Japan). The camera had a mono 1.3-MP Sony ICX204 CCD, 1/3-in., 4.65-μm sensor. The frame rate was 30 FPS and the image size was 1,288 × 964 pixels.” [Methods], “To estimate the pose of the needle, marking edge points should be extracted from each image of the needle. These edge points are defined as the intersection of the centerline of the needle with the marking edge lines (Fig. 4a). The accuracy of the pose estimation is directly related to the accuracy of this segmentation procedure.” [Automatic feature extraction], as seen in Fig. 1 there is alternating grey marking areas on the needle with both having different gray colors, see Figure 2 for the captured marking areas)
PNG
media_image1.png
908
1295
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
265
677
media_image2.png
Greyscale
);
confirming the first marking area and the second marking area of the needle are located on a straight line for a feature pose estimation by a processor according to a linear regression algorithm (“To estimate the pose of the needle, marking edge points should be extracted from each image of the needle. These edge points are defined as the intersection of the centerline of the needle with the marking edge lines (Fig. 4a). The accuracy of the pose estimation is directly related to the accuracy of this segmentation procedure.” [Automatic feature extraction] “The algorithm starts with an initial estimate for the needle centerline. The estimate can come from the previous frame, if the current frame is not the first frame. For the first frame, the estimate is provided by the Hough transform (using the Canny edge detector). Then, random lines are generated around this estimate by adding random variables to the slope and line intercept. Pixel values on each line are examined to determine if it is an “on-the-needle” line. In that case, the intersection points of the line with the marking edges will be stored.” [Collecting marking edge points]);
comparing the first marking area, the second marking area, and a matching template to confirm a direction of the needle (“A novel mathematical–geometrical formulation is devised here for needle trajectory calculation using the centimeter-spaced black markings on many needles,” [Single Camera Pose Estimation]);
obtaining a feature points number according to the first marking area and the second marking area in the needle, wherein the feature points number is a positive integer greater than or equal to 2 (“The feature extraction procedure, described in the next section, finds the projected points in the image, and is calculated in the camera calibration procedure. Actual marker distances are assumed to be known. For an epidural needle, in particular, the marking distances are all equal. However, the proposed method is not limited to the equal spacing constraint and can be generalized for needles with non-equal marking spacings.” [Mathematical framework]);
obtaining a range prediction interval of the ultrasound field of view according to the feature points number of the needle, wherein the processor projects the needle into the ultrasound field of view according to the feature points number, and a projection range in the ultrasound field of view of the needle is the range prediction interval, wherein the range prediction interval has a width, and the width of the range prediction interval related to the feature points number (“To measure the effect of various parameters such as depth, needle tilt angle, needle yaw angle and number of edge points on accuracy, a sensitivity analysis test was performed by simulating the pose estimation process. The mathematical formulation of the system and the standard camera model was used with a noise source model as input. As discussed under Precision of the Feature Extraction, the root mean squared segmentation error was measured as 2.2 pixels, and hence, here, the noise was modeled as a normal random variable with a standard deviation of 2.5 pixels For the base case, the needle's pose and the other parameters were chosen similar to those in the Overall System Accuracy section. The angle between the needle and the ultrasound image plane was 45°, the intersection depth was 20 mm and three edge points were used… Finally, the number of edge points was varied from 3 to 7 to investigate if using more edge points increases the accuracy because of the averaging effect. Results illustrated in Figure 12d confirm that the estimation error decreases by using more edge points.” [Sensitivity analysis of the needle pose estimation], Najafi discloses an estimation error (range prediction interval) between the projected needle on the ultrasound vs the actual coordinates of the needle, this estimation error is dependent on multiple factors; however, when the number of edge points (feature points) is increased the estimation error is shown to decrease in size (width) as seen in Fig. 12 D below);
PNG
media_image3.png
570
677
media_image3.png
Greyscale
determining the feature points number is greater than a feature points number threshold , and reducing the width of the range interval (“Finally, the number of edge points was varied from 3 to 7 to investigate if using more edge points increases the accuracy because of the averaging effect. Results illustrated in Figure 12d confirm that the estimation error decreases by using more edge points.” [Sensitivity analysis of the needle pose estimation]);
and the effective length of the needle is greater than or equal to a sum of a first length of the first marking area and a second length of the second marking area (“To measure the accuracy of the overall system, an out-of-plane needle insertion experiment was performed in a water bath. The needle was partially immersed in water so that the intersection of the ultrasound plane with the needle could be seen as a point in the ultrasound image. Part of the needle that was out of the water was visible with the camera and was used for estimating the pose of the needle. A 20-cm-long needle was used for this experiment.” [Overall system accuracy]).
Najafi does not specifically teach a location code; and capturing the location code; wherein the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining an area elongation according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle, wherein the horizontal image range is obtained according to a horizontal viewing angle of the camera and a depth of field length between the camera and the measuring object, and the vertical image range is obtained according to a vertical viewing angle and the depth of field length of the camera.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Zhao teaches systems, methods, and tools for tool tracking using image-derived data from one or more tool-located reference features. [Abstract].
Zhao also teaches a location code; and capturing the location code (“One-dimensional (1-D) markers can be used to determine instrument pose. A 1-D marker includes primitive features arranged in one dimension. Some of the features can serve as localizer features, and the rest of the features can serve as identification features. Similar to 2-D markers, localizer features can be used to provide positional or orientation information to determine the pose/alignment of the marker, and identification features can be used to differentiate different markers. Identification features can follow a coding scheme and can include redundant information for error checking and/or correction. For example, FIGS. 22A, 22B, and 22C illustrate 1-D markers, which employ dots, or a combination of circles and dots. FIG. 22A illustrates a 1-D marker 240 that includes dots forming a straight line. While it is appreciated that different colors can be used to convey information, marker 240 employs dots that are either present (i.e., set to “1”) or absent (i.e., set to “0”). Marker 240 includes a start pattern 242, an end pattern 244, and a center portion 246 having 12 data bits. These 12 data bits can be used in a variety of ways, such as by using some of the data bits as identification bits and some of the data bits as error checking/correction bits, which can include one or more checksum data bits.” [0130])
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Najafiri as outlined above with a location code; and capturing the location code as taught by Zhao, because it can be used to determine instrument pose [0130].
Najafiri in view of Zhao does not specifically teach that the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining an area elongation according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle, wherein the horizontal image range is obtained according to a horizontal viewing angle of the camera and a depth of field length between the camera and the measuring object, and the vertical image range is obtained according to a vertical viewing angle and the depth of field length of the camera.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Campbell teaches a device that comprises an input, a marker detector and a failure boundary calculation processor [Abstract].
Campbell also teaches that the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining an area elongation according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle (“an embodiment of the present invention, the entertainment device tests for whether one or more of the following failure cases are imminent: a marker becoming too small due to its angle with respect to the camera; a marker becoming too small due to its distance from the camera; and a marker becoming clipped by the viewing frustrum (i.e. exiting the field of view of the camera).” [0105],” Consequently it is preferable to assume that if the fiduciary marker centre is within d/2 (radius of the marker) of one of the clipping planes of the frustrum, then detection will fail. A more conservative assumption is if the fiduciary marker is within 0.71d of the clipping frame, to account for diametric positioning with respect to the frustrum. Again, which threshold to use may be selected by a designer.” [0129], “the limits of movement within the viewing frustrum can be defined in terms of the x,y position in the viewing plane, where (0,0) is the centre of the plane, as follows: maxXDisp(d, v); maxYDisp(d, v)” [0130], “These functions define the maximum distance the fiduciary marker can move in x and y from the centre of the viewing plan before hitting the clipping planes.” [0133]),
wherein the horizontal image range is obtained according to a horizontal viewing angle of the camera and a depth of field length between the camera and the measuring object, and the vertical image range is obtained according to a vertical viewing angle and the depth of field length of the camera (“ the size of the viewing plane may be computed. Hence for the example of the Sony PlayStation Eye®, the vertical field of view can be vfov=49.4°.” [0115], “One can then calculate verticalFieldOfViewComponent, c, which is the height of the viewing plane in metres at 1 metre away from the camera.” [0116], “the limits of movement within the viewing frustrum can be defined in terms of the x,y position in the viewing plane, where (0,0) is the centre of the plane, as follows: maxXDisp(d, v); maxYDisp(d, v)” [0130]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Najafiri in view of Zhao as outlined above with the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining an area elongation according to a horizontal image range, a vertical image range, and an effective length of the needle, wherein the horizontal image range is obtained according to a horizontal viewing angle of the camera and a depth of field length between the camera and the measuring object, and the vertical image range is obtained according to a vertical viewing angle and the depth of field length of the camera as taught by Campbell, it is desirable to reduce the occasions upon which such estimates cannot be reliably made [0014].
Najafiri in view of Zhao and further in view of Campbell do not specifically teach confirming the first marking area and the second marking area of the needle are located on the straight line for a needle bending detection by the processor according to at least one of the linear regression algorithm and a bending relational expression.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Crawford teaches confirming the first marking area and the second marking area of the needle are located on the straight line for a needle bending detection by the processor according to at least one of the linear regression algorithm and a bending relational expression (“Some other embodiments are directed to identifying when an instrument (e.g. tool) is bent, when reference array is not properly attached to the instrument, and/or when one or more markers or other objects of the reference array are not properly attached and/or are improperly arranged (e.g., bent structure). Operations may generate a safety notification to a user based on a determination of at least a threshold deviation between the array template identifying coordinates of the physical objects and coordinates of the physical objects that are determined in the video frames.” [0216], “A clinical workflow/procedure for automatically verifying the accuracy of a tracked object while generating a more accurate template may include the following operations:3. An updated array template including relative datum point locations is generated and then used for tracking objects and/or is used to verify an instrument verification such as to determine if an instrument passes or fails verification due to being deformed, e.g., bent.” [0188])
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Najafi in view of Zhao and further in view of Campbell as outlined above with confirming the first marking area and the second marking area of the needle are located on the straight line for a needle bending detection by the processor according to at least one of the linear regression algorithm and a bending relational expression as taught by Crawford, because there is a need to improve the tracking accuracy of navigation systems [0003].
Regarding Claim 12, Najafi teaches a length of the first marking area is smaller than a length of the second marking area (“The feature extraction procedure, described in the next section, finds the projected points in the image, and is calculated in the camera calibration procedure. Actual marker distances are assumed to be known. For an epidural needle, in particular, the marking distances are all equal. However, the proposed method is not limited to the equal spacing constraint and can be generalized for needles with non-equal marking spacings.” [Mathematical framework]).
Regarding Claim 13, Najafi teaches a length of the first marking area is smaller than a length of the second marking area (“The feature extraction procedure, described in the next section, finds the projected points in the image, and is calculated in the camera calibration procedure. Actual marker distances are assumed to be known. For an epidural needle, in particular, the marking distances are all equal. However, the proposed method is not limited to the equal spacing constraint and can be generalized for needles with non-equal marking spacings.” [Mathematical framework]).
Regarding Claim 14, Najafi in view of Zhao and further in view of Campbell teaches all limitations noted above except setting a bending threshold according to the bending relational expression; wherein the bending relational expression has a distance error mean value; and when the distance error mean value smaller than the bending threshold, it is determined that the needle approaches the straight line.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Crawford teaches setting a bending threshold according to the bending relational expression (“Some other embodiments are directed to identifying when an instrument (e.g. tool) is bent, when reference array is not properly attached to the instrument, and/or when one or more markers or other objects of the reference array are not properly attached and/or are improperly arranged (e.g., bent structure). Operations may generate a safety notification to a user based on a determination of at least a threshold deviation between the array template identifying coordinates of the physical objects and coordinates of the physical objects that are determined in the video frames.” [0216]);
wherein the bending relational expression has a distance error mean value (“A process for automatically verifying and generating templates for constrained arrays can include the following operations: 1. The reference array is detected in tracking imagery (video frames in streams from the tracking cameras) and a 6 DOF pose is obtained for the pre-existing nominal marker array template, which may be performed in a conventional manner for navigated surgery. 2. A stored 3D model of the instrument or object associated with the reference array including critical datum point(s) is retrieved from a local memory or remote database. This 3D model can represent the entire tracked object (e.g., reference array and instrument). 3. Critical regions of interest (ROIs) (e.g., 1830 and 1840 in FIG. 18) are projected around all markers and critical object datum points in each 2D camera image (video frame) using the 6DOF pose and tracker calibration. 4. All markers (1820 in FIG. 18) and critical datum points (1840 in FIG. 18) are measured as a series of XYZ coordinate points relative to one another using a combination of individual marker and datum point tracking algorithms. 5. Additional frames are collected and processed in the same predetermined coordinate system for comparison and analysis. 6. When data collection completes, the system averages the measured point locations (coordinates) and may determine whether the instrument passed or failed verification and/or may generate a new and more accurate array template in the appropriately constrained coordinate system.” [0196]);
and when the distance error mean value smaller than the bending threshold, it is determined that the needle approaches the straight line (“A clinical workflow/procedure for automatically verifying the accuracy of a tracked object while generating a more accurate template may include the following operations:3. An updated array template including relative datum point locations is generated and then used for tracking objects and/or is used to verify an instrument verification such as to determine if an instrument passes or fails verification due to being deformed, e.g., bent.” [0188]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Najafi in view of Zhao and further in view of Campbell as outlined above with setting a bending threshold according to the bending relational expression; wherein the bending relational expression has a distance error mean value; and when the distance error mean value smaller than the bending threshold, it is determined that the needle approaches the straight line as taught by Crawford, because there is a need to improve the tracking accuracy of navigation systems [0003].
Regarding Claim 17, Najafi in view of Zhao teaches all limitations noted above except that the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a horizontal elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Campbell teaches the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a horizontal elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle (“the size of the viewing plane may be computed. Hence for the example of the Sony PlayStation Eye®, the vertical field of view can be vfov=49.4°.” [0115], “One can then calculate verticalFieldOfViewComponent, c, which is the height of the viewing plane in metres at 1 metre away from the camera.” [0116], “the limits of movement within the viewing frustrum can be defined in terms of the x,y position in the viewing plane, where (0,0) is the centre of the plane, as follows: maxXDisp(d, v); maxYDisp(d, v)” [0130]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Najafi in view of Zhao as outlined above with the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a horizontal elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle as taught by Campbell, because it is desirable to reduce the occasions upon which such estimates cannot be reliably made [0014].
Regarding Claim 19, Najafi in view of Zhao teaches all limitations noted above except that the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a vertical elongation according to the vertical image range and the effective length of the needle.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Campbell teaches the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a vertical elongation according to the vertical image range and the effective length of the needle (“the size of the viewing plane may be computed. Hence for the example of the Sony PlayStation Eye®, the vertical field of view can be vfov=49.4°.” [0115], “One can then calculate verticalFieldOfViewComponent, c, which is the height of the viewing plane in metres at 1 metre away from the camera.” [0116], “the limits of movement within the viewing frustrum can be defined in terms of the x,y position in the viewing plane, where (0,0) is the centre of the plane, as follows: maxXDisp(d, v); maxYDisp(d, v)” [0130]).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Najafi in view of Zhao as outlined above with the processor is further configured to perform the following steps according to the plurality of commands of the memory: obtaining a horizontal elongation according to the horizontal image range and the effective length of the needle as taught by Campbell, because it is desirable to reduce the occasions upon which such estimates cannot be reliably made [0014].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN MALDONADO whose telephone number is 703-756-1421. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am-4:00 pm PST M-Th 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, Christopher Koharski can be reached on (571) 272-7230. 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.
/Steven Maldonado/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/JOSEPH M SANTOS RODRIGUEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights