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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 10-17, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gagnon et al (US 20200170590 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Gagnon et al discloses an imaging system (See Fig. 1) comprising: a processor (40) (See Fig. 2 and paragraph [0072) coupled with the imaging system; and memory (44) (See Fig. 2) coupled with the processor and storing data thereon that, when executed by the processor, enable the processor to: perform a scan process of a patient anatomy according to an extended width mode of capture (See Fig. 9 and paragraphs [0062], [0095], [0109]); generate a fused localization image of the patient anatomy based on performing the scan process (See Fig. 9 – step 940, and paragraph [0111]); and capture an image volume (See Fig. 9 – step 950, and paragraph [0111]) comprising at least a portion of the patient anatomy based on one or more target boundaries associated with the fused localization image (See Fig. 6 and paragraphs [0109], [0103]-[0104]).
Regarding claim 2, Gagnon et al discloses wherein the data executable to perform the scan process according to the extended width mode of capture is further executable to: capture a set of localization images ((MW scan (922)) and a kV scan (932)) associated with the patient anatomy in association with the extended width mode of capture; and merge the set of localization images, wherein: the fused localization image is generated based on merging the set of localization images; and the portion of the patient anatomy is comprised in one or more localization images of the set of localization images (See Fig. 9 (920) and paragraph [0111]).
Regarding claim 4, Gagnon et al discloses wherein the data is further executable by the processor to establish one or more boundaries associated with the fused localized image based on: a first boundary associated with a first localization image of the set of localizing images; and a second boundary associated with a second localization image of the set of localization images (See Fig. 6, (638)(639) and paragraphs [0103]-[0104]).
Regarding claim 10, Gagnon et al discloses wherein: a subject comprising the patient anatomy is positioned along an isocenter of the imaging system; and a virtual isocenter (1637’) associated with capturing the image volume is different from the isocenter of the imaging system (See Fig. 17 and paragraph [0128]).
Regarding claim 11, Gagnon et al discloses wherein the data is further executable by the processor to: generate a multiple field of view representation of the patient anatomy based on the one or more target boundaries associated with the fused localization image, image data comprised in the fused localization image, and the image volume, wherein the multiple field of view representation comprises a preview representation of the image volume (MV and KV generate multiple FOVs) (See Fig. 10 and paragraphs [0112]-[0013]).
Regarding claim 12, Gagnon et al discloses wherein capturing the image volume is in response to at least one of: a user input associated with the fused localization image; and a second user input associated with a multiple field of view representation of the patient anatomy, wherein the multiple field of view representation comprises a preview representation of the image volume (paragraph [0090]).
Regarding claim 13, Gagnon et al discloses wherein the fused localization image comprises a two-dimensional image (paragraphs [0095], [0097]-[0099]).
Regarding claim 14, Gagnon et al discloses wherein the image volume is based on two-dimensional system coordinates of the imaging system (paragraphs [0095], [0097]-[0099]).
Regarding claim 15, Gagnon et al discloses wherein a width of the fused localization image is equal to or less than 80 centimeters (i.e. a wide transverse view about 40 cm at the isocenter) (paragraphs [0060]-[0061], [0142]).
Regarding claim 16, Gagnon et al discloses a system (See Fig. 1) comprising: an imaging device; a processor (40) (See Fig. 2 and paragraph [0072); and memory (44) (See Fig. 2) coupled with the processor and storing data thereon that, when executed by the processor, enable the processor to: perform a scan process of a patient anatomy according to an extended width mode of capture (See Fig. 9 and paragraphs [0062], [0095], [0109]); generate a fused localization image of the patient anatomy based on performing the scan process (See Fig. 9 – step 940, and paragraph [0111]); and capture an image volume comprising at least a portion of the patient anatomy based on one or more target boundaries associated with the fused localization image (See Fig. 6 and paragraphs [0109], [0103]-[0104]).
Regarding claim 17, Gagnon et al discloses wherein the data executable to perform the scan process according to the extended width mode of capture is further executable to: capture a set of localization images ((MW scan (922)) and a kV scan (932)) associated with the patient anatomy in association with the extended width mode of capture; and merge the set of localization images, wherein: the fused localization image is generated based on merging the set of localization images; and the portion of the patient anatomy is comprised in one or more localization images of the set of localization images (See Fig. 9 (920) and paragraph [0111]).
Regarding claim 19, Gagnon et al discloses a method comprising: performing, at an imaging system, a scan process of a patient anatomy according to an extended width mode of capture (See Fig. 9 and paragraphs [0062], [0095], [0109]); generating, at the imaging system, a fused localization image of the patient anatomy based on performing the scan process (See Fig. 9 – step 940, and paragraph [0111]); and capturing, at the imaging system, an image volume (See Fig. 9 – step 950, and paragraph [0111]) comprising at least a portion of the patient anatomy based on one or more target boundaries associated with the fused localization image (See Fig. 6 and paragraphs [0109], [0103]-[0104]).
Regarding claim 20, Gagnon et al discloses wherein performing the scan process according to the extended width mode of capture comprises: capturing a set of localization images ((MW scan (922)) and a kV scan (932)) associated with the patient anatomy in association with the extended width mode of capture; and merging the set of localization images, wherein: the fused localization image is based on merging the set of localization images; and the portion of the patient anatomy is comprised in one or more localization images of the set of localization images (See Fig. 9 (920) and paragraph [0111]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gagnon et al (US 20200170590 A1) in view of Bai et al (US 20230017353 A1) and Amiri et al (US 20190320995 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Gagnon et al discloses all of the limitations of claim 2, as described supra however, Gagnon et al is silent with regards to different localization images from different positions. Bai et al discloses a multimodal radiation apparatus and method comprising: obtaining localization images (paragraph [0102]). Amiri et al discloses a system and method for producing real-time calibrated stereo long radiographic view of patient comprising: data executable to capture the image volume is further executable to compensate for parallax (i.e. adjust the transformed images for parallax by steps comprising: displaying first and second long views respectively corresponding to first and second ones of the anatomical planes on the display; based on corresponding points on anatomical structures of the patient's anatomy in each of the first and second long views, determining a depth of the anatomical structure relative to the first and second anatomical planes; and recalculating coordinates of pixels in the transformed images using the determined depth of the anatomical structure) (paragraph [0129]). Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Gagnon et al with the teaching of Bai et al and Amiri et al so as to enable parallax correction.
Claim(s) 5-9, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gagnon et al (US 20200170590 A1) in view of Deshpande et al (EP 4159129 A1).
Regarding claims 5, 18, Gagnon et al discloses wherein the data is further executable by the processor to: generate movement data associated with positioning or orienting at least one of a radiation source, a detector, and a rotor of the imaging system in association with capturing the image volume as claimed. Deshpande et al disclose analyzing survey imaging data comprising: determining a second scan protocol based on spatial coordinates of the volume data (pages 6-7). Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Gagnon et al with the teaching Deshpande et al so as to enable a complete field of view.
Regarding claim 6, Gagnon et al in view of Deshpande et al disclose wherein the data is further executable by the processor to: display guidance information associated with capturing the image volume at a user interface (32) associated with the imaging system, wherein the guidance information comprises at least one of the movement data and the spatial coordinates (pages 6-8, 13).
Regarding claim 7, Gagnon et al in view of Deshpande et al disclose wherein the data is further executable by the processor to: control movement of at least one of the radiation source (108), the detector (110), and the rotor based on the movement data (page 11).
Regarding claim 8, Gagnon et al in view of Deshpande et al disclose wherein generating the movement data is based on: the one or more target boundaries associated with the fused localization image; orientation information associated with the fused localization image; and a system geometry associated with the imaging system (page 11).
Regarding claim 9, Gagnon et al in view of Deshpande et al disclose wherein the data is further executable by the processor to generate one or more settings associated with capturing the image volume based on: the one or more target boundaries associated with the fused localization image; target coordinates associated with the fused localization image; and image data associated with the fused localization image (second scan parameters for 3D volume image) (page 11).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FANI POLYZOS BOOSALIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2447. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-3:30 PM.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at Uzma.Alam@USPTO.GOV. 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.
/F.P.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights