Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/630,012

IMAGING SYSTEMS AND METHODS

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Apr 09, 2024
Examiner
GUNBERG, EDWIN C
Art Unit
2884
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Siemens Healthineers International AG
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
481 granted / 618 resolved
+9.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
640
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
51.8%
+11.8% vs TC avg
§102
30.0%
-10.0% vs TC avg
§112
13.0%
-27.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 618 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-4, 6-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Elgart et al. (2018/0099156). Regarding claim 1, Elgart discloses an imaging method for use during radiation treatment comprising: translating a patient support relative to an imager ([0286],[0287]); obtaining a plurality of images while the patient support translates relative to the imager, wherein obtaining the plurality of images comprises collecting image signals from two or more lines of imager elements simultaneously ([0197], note that collection of data from more than one detector unit simultaneously involves collecting image signals from two or more lines of imager elements); and arranging the plurality of images relative to each other to create a composite image of a portion of a patient. ([0113]) Regarding claim 2, Elgart further discloses the patient support is an element of a radiation treatment apparatus and the patient support is translated along an isocenter axis of the radiation treatment apparatus. ([0286]) Regarding claim 3, Elgart further discloses delivering treatment radiation to the patient and the step of obtaining the plurality of images is performed using treatment radiation. ([0107],[0109]; Tomography Detector System discussed at [0204] et seq.) Regarding claim 4, Elgart further discloses the composite image covers the portion of the patient that is at least 100 cm in length. (Whole body system shown Fig. 6A, Fig. 10A etc.) Regarding claim 6, Elgart further discloses the step of obtaining the plurality of images comprises continuously delivering imaging energy while the patient support translates relative to the imager. ([0339]) Regarding claim 7, Elgart further discloses rotating an imager to a second position relative to the patient; obtaining a second plurality of images for the patient while the patient support translates relative to the imager; and arranging the second plurality of images relative to each other to create a second composite image of the patient. (Rotational system disclosed throughout, details begin at [0248]) Regarding claim 8, Elgart further discloses the second composite image comprises an alternate view of the portion of the patient. ([0113]) Regarding claim 10, Elgart further discloses the plurality of images comprises at least 50 images. ([0341]) Claims 11-14, 16-18, and 20 are rejected on the same grounds as claims 1-4, 6-8, and 10, as they have the same substantive limitations. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103 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 5, 15, 21, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 or alternatively under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elgart. Regarding claims 5 and 15, Elgart does not explicitly disclose the plurality of images are obtained at a rate of at least 10 frames per second. However, Elgart discloses taking imagery for every degree of rotation of the rotational gantry, which implies significant rapidity in collection. It is entirely possible that the device of Elgart could obtain a frame rate of more than 10 frames per second. Further, in any real-time imaging system, higher framerates are generally considered a positive trait, as it allows for smoother and more precise 4D data. Thus while the high framerate is not necessarily inherent in Elgart, it nevertheless would be obvious to operate the imager to as high a frame rate as possible to increase the time resolution of the resulting dataset. Regarding claims 21 and 22, Elgard further teaches or renders obvious obtaining the plurality of images comprises generating a first plurality of two-dimensional images for a patient while the patient is supported in a horizontal position by the patient support (Horizontal patient support shown in Figs. 10A, 10B, 13, 14, 15, etc.), the first plurality of two-dimensional images comprising three or more images and having respective centers aligned along a rectilinear path (See Fig. 14, motion possible on x-axis), and the three or more images are generated by collecting the image signals from the two or more lines of the imager elements simultaneously ([0197]). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/30/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. An anticipation reference is sufficient where it contains within it each of the claimed limitations. Additional guidance has been supplied to assist Applicant in identifying those features. 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 EDWIN C GUNBERG whose telephone number is (571)270-3107. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM-5:00PM. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-2995. 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. /EDWIN C GUNBERG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 09, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 22, 2025
Interview Requested
Dec 30, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 25, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 13, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601678
COMPLEX GAS SENSOR, MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF, AND CONTROL METHOD OF COMPLEX GAS SENSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600490
VEHICLE HYDROGEN FIRE DETECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590796
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING DIMENSIONAL DATA RELATING TO AN OBJECT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581210
THERMAL IMAGE SENSOR AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571925
METHOD FOR CALCULATING THE ABSOLUTE DETECTION EFFICIENCY OF THE LABR3(CE) SCINTILLATION DETECTOR WITH RESPECT TO A LARGE-SIZED GLASS FIBRE INSTALLED IN A HIGH VOLUME AIRBORNE SAMPLING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+6.7%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 618 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month