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)(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, 7, 8, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Altman et al. (US PGPUB 2021/0327053).
Regarding claims 1 and 8, Altman disclose a method and apparatus, comprising: a display (e.g. 26); and a processor (e.g. 28), configured to:
acquire data representative of a volume of a cavity of an organ (e.g. ¶ 20);
present, on the display, an electroanatomical (EA) map (e.g. 40) of a surface, generated in response to the data, enclosing the volume (e.g. Fig. 1 and ¶ 24);
receive input from a user, the input comprising a selected section of the EA map (e.g. ¶ 32); and
in response to the user input, lock a portion of the volume to subsequent updates of the data when updating the EA map, the portion of the volume comprising the selected section of the EA map (e.g. ¶ ABSTRACT and ¶ 16).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Altman discloses the organ comprises a heart (e.g. ¶ 23).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2 – 6 and 9 – 13 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altman et al. in view of Chan et al. (US PGPUB 2010/0067755).
Regarding claims 2, 3, 9 and 10, Altman discloses the system and method as discussed above. Altman fails to teach acquiring locations of a set of cavity voxels comprising the volume, and analyzing the locations to determine outer voxels of the set, the outer voxels corresponding to the surface enclosing the volume, and wherein locking the portion of the volume comprises selecting a subset of the outer voxels in response to the user input and not recording locations of the subset when updating the EA map.
Chan teaches it is known to determine outer voxels of a set by acquiring locations of a set of cavity voxels comprising the volume and selecting a subset of the outer voxels (e.g. ¶ 28, 42, 43; the voxels lying inside the structure surface to have a non-zero mask value, such as value 1, while assigning voxels outside the structure surface a mask value of zero). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the acquiring the data as taught by Altman with determining outer voxels as taught by Chan, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of efficiently determining the structure in the volume of interest in the imaging dataset.
Regarding claims 4, 5, 11, and 12, Altman in view of Chan discloses selecting predefined group of voxels as described above, but fails to teach applying a dilation and erosion algorithm to the subset so as to generate a resultant set of the cavity voxels.
Chan does, however, teach using algorithms in order produce the imaging data (e.g. ¶ 3 and 37). The claimed dilation and erosion algorithms are well known in the art of image processing. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the algorithms used for image process as taught by Altman in view of Chan with the well-known dilation and erosion algorithms, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of to better present the voxels of the binary masks.
Regarding claims 6 and 13, Altman in view of Chan discloses the system and method as discussed above. Altman fails to teach that the user delineating a bound surrounding an enclosed two-dimensional (2D) region on a representation of the EA map of the surface, and wherein the predefined group comprises the cavity voxels within a prism having a base as the closed 2D region.
While Chan does not explicitly recite delineating a bound surrounding an enclosed two-dimensional (2D) region on a representation of the EA map of the surface, Chan does teach defining the voxels lying inside the structure surface to have a non-zero mask value (e.g. ¶ 28). By doing this, the user is delineating a bound on the EA map of the surface. Chan teaches using voxels in a 3D binary mask. It is understood that a voxel is a three-dimensional cube, wherein a base of the cube would present a 2D region. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the acquiring the data as taught by Altman with delineating a bound on the EA map as taught by Chan, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of efficiently determining the structure in the volume of interest in the imaging dataset.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Keidar (US PGPUB 2004/0078036) teaches segmenting a mapping volume including the sites into voxels, and designating the indications with respect to respective voxels of the mapping volume.
Qiu et al. (US PGPUB 2024/0339198) teaches a technique for rendering a sheared-volume based medical image.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH M DIETRICH whose telephone number is (571)270-1895. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Jennifer McDonald can be reached at 571-270-3061. 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.
/JOSEPH M DIETRICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796