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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 12/26/2025 was entered. The initial claims 1 – 3 were canceled and new claims 4 – 6 were drafted. Claims 4 – 6 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) to new claims 4 - 6 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.
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.
Claim(s) 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boardman et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0322327 A1) in view of Slinger (US Pub. No. 2009/0016481 A1).
Boardman teaches a coded mask capable of modulating both gamma-rays and neutrons, with different mask regions dedicated to blocking gamma-rays versus blocking neutrons [0040] (Fig. 11). Boardman further teaches using high Z masking materials for gamma attenuation (e.g., tungsten, lead) and neutron-modulating / neutron absorbing materials (e.g., boron-doped, hydrogen-rich) for neutron radiation, including combinations for modulating both particle types [0037] – [009] Boardman also discloses shielding around the mask/detector assembly [0025] (Figs. 1–2).
Slinger teaches a coded aperture imaging system wherein a detector array is arranged to receive radiation from a scene via a coded aperture mask (Abstract). Slinger further teaches providing a plurality of distinct coded aperture arrays at different locations on the mask (i.e., spatially separated coded regions), each producing coded information at the detector array [0011] – [0012].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement Boardman’s dual particle coded aperture mask assembly using a detector array positioned behind the mask assembly as taught by Slinger, because detector arrays were a known substitution in coded aperture imagers for improving sensitivity, spatial sampling, and imaging speed while maintaining predictable coded aperture reconstruction and further, for improvements in sensitivity/resolution.
With regards to claim 6, Boardman discloses radiation shielding surrounding the mask/detector assembly [0025] (Figs. 1–2) and illustrates additional top and bottom shields (Fig. 2). Slinger likewise contemplates coded aperture mask structures having radiation-blocking portions [0006] – [0007]. Arranging shielding on the non-forward faces (top/bottom/left/right/rear) while leaving the forward coded field of view unobstructed is a design choice that reduces background radiation while preserving the geometry of the coded transmission pattern.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to arrange the shielding layers/sections of the combined Boardman and Slinger systems on at least the top, bottom, left, right, and rear sides to shield gamma rays and neutrons from non-forward directions while preserving the geometry of the coded transmission patterns in the forward field of view.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boardman et al. (US Pub. No. 2017/0322327 A1) and Slinger (US Pub. No. 2009/0016481 A1) in view of Zhang, (“A flexible new technique for camera calibration," in IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 22, no. 11, pp. 1330-1334, Nov. 2000).
With regards to claim 5, Boardman teaches overlaying a reconstructed gamma-ray image (and neutron image) with an optical image registered to the same field of view [0054].
Zhang teaches camera calibration and explicitly provides the homography/projective transformation relationship between a planar model and its image (Sec. 2.2, Eq. (2)) (s·m = H·M), which is a known mathematical tool for computing projective mappings used to align imagery across sensors/cameras.
It would have been obvious to use Zhang’s known geometric calibration and homography techniques to implement Boardman’s registered overlay as an automated (i.e.., including real time) image fusion module, because alignment/registration of images from different imaging modalities is a conventional problem with well-established solutions, and Zhang provides a standard calibration pipeline yielding a projective transform for alignment with predictable results.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DJURA MALEVIC whose telephone number is (571)272-5975. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (9-5).
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, Dave Porta can be reached at (571) 272-2444. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DJURA MALEVIC/Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884