DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is responsive to communications filed on 05/08/2026. Claims 1-2, 7-6, and 11-12 have been amended. Claim 10 is canceled. Presently, Claims 1-9 and 11-12 remain pending and are hereinafter examined on the merits.
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 Arguments
Previous rejections under 35 USC § 112(b) with regard to claim 1 is withdrawn in view of the amendments filed on 05/08/2026.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) under 35 USC § 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on Hancock (US 2016/0104267 A1) under 35 USC § 102 applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The new grounds of rejection now relies on Hancock (US 2016/0104267 A1) in view of Yen et al (US 2009/0141957 A1).
Examiners Notes
In the Applicant’s remarks filed on 11/18/2025 the Applicant states that term “Number” as recited in claim 4, and 11 refers to in the specification ¶0050: ‘An ultrasound transducer array of ultrasound imaging device includes an array of acoustic elements configured to emit ultrasound energy and receive echoes corresponding to the emitted ultrasound energy. In some instances, the array may include any number of ultrasound transducer elements. For example, the array can include between 2 acoustic elements and 10000 acoustic elements, including values such as 2 acoustic elements, 4 acoustic elements, acoustic elements, 64 acoustic elements, 128 acoustic elements, 500 acoustic elements, 812 acoustic elements, 3000 acoustic elements, 9000 acoustic elements, and/or other values both larger and smaller. In some instances, the transducer elements of the array may be arranged in any suitable configuration, such as a linear array, a planar array, a curved array, a curvilinear array, a circumferential array, an annular array, a phased array, a matrix array, a one-dimensional (1D) array, a 1.x dimensional array (e.g., a 1.5D array), or a two-dimensional (2D) array. The array of transducer elements (e.g., one or more rows, one or more columns, and/or one or more orientations) can be uniformly or independently controlled and activated. The array can be configured to obtain one-dimensional, two-dimensional, and/or three-dimensional images of patient anatomy.’
Based on the Applicant’s own admission in remarks filed on 11/18/2025, ¶0050, that ascertaining of this “Number N”, “may represent any number of “transducer elements””, [see page 5 of the Applicant’s remarks filed on 11/18/2025]. Accordingly, the “Number N” only requires nominal skill in the art, in that any one of ordinary skill in the art can determine this. Therefore, it can be broadly interpreted that the “Number N” can be any number in view of the Applicant’s own admission.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 2: recites:
“wherein the subset comprises a center axis located halfway between a first end of the subset and an opposite, second end of the subset, wherein the amplitudes are determined based on an anqle of arrival,
wherein the ultrasound echoes are off-axis when the angle of arrival measured between the center axis and a direction in which the ultrasound echoes are received is non-zero,
wherein the ultrasound echoes are on-axis when the angle of arrival is zero.”
The claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for lack of written description. There is a lack of written description for the amplitudes to be determined based on the angle of arrival.
See ¶0076 & ¶0079, discusses the angle of acceptance, this is the angle between the radial center line of an individual receiving element and the direction of the received ultrasonic energy. The acoustic elements have a directional sensitivity to signals received at different angles, which means the amplitude of the generated signal changes depending on this angle of acceptance.
See ¶0077 discusses the angle of arrival, this is the angle measured between the center axis of the entire active aperture and the direction of the received energy.
Rather than determining the amplitude of individual elements, the angle of arrival is used to classify whether the received ultrasound echoes are on-axis or off-axis, if the angle of arrival is zero, the echoes are on-axis, and if its non-zero, the echoes are off-axis.
Hence, the amplitude of a signal generated by an element changes depending on the angle of acceptance, not the angle of arrival.
Consequently, one of ordinary skill in the art would not deem the instant specification having sufficient detail so that they could understand how the inventor intended to achieve said aforementioned claimed feature. Since the instant specification fails to provide written description for the phrase above in claim 2, the aforementioned claims 2 fail to meet the written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
The dependent claims of the above rejected claims are rejected due to their dependency.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 6-7, 9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hancock (US 2016/0104267 A1), in view of Yen et al (US 20090141957 A1).
Claim 1: Hancock discloses, An apparatus, (FIG. 1 & 4, ¶Abstract) comprising:
an intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) catheter configured to be positioned inside a blood vessel of a patient and comprising a circumferential array (108, FIG. 1) arranged around the IVUS catheter; and (¶0002, ‘The present disclosure relates generally to intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) imaging and, in particular, to receiving and focusing ultrasound information to produce an image. In various embodiments, the focusing system receives information from an array of ultrasound transducers, such as piezoelectric zirconate transducers (PZTs)…The focusing system processes the data to produce an ultrasound image and may also perform various clutter reduction techniques to remove ultrasound artifacts. The system is suitable for use in a variety of applications including intravascular ultrasound. For example, some embodiments of the present disclosure provide an IVUS imaging system particularly suited to imaging a human blood vessel.’)
a processor (PIM 114) configured for communication with the circumferential array of transducer elements, wherein the processor is configured to: (FIG. 6, ¶0028, ‘The PIM 112 facilitates communication of signals between the IVUS console 114 and the elongate member 102 to control the operation of the scanner assembly 106. This includes generating control signals to configure the scanner, generating signals to trigger the transmitter circuits, and/or forwarding echo signals captured by the scanner assembly 106 to the IVUS console 114. With regard to the echo signals, the PIM 112 forwards the received signals and, in some embodiments, performs preliminary signal processing prior to transmitting the signals to the console 114. In examples of such embodiments, the PIM 112 performs amplification, filtering, and/or aggregating of the data. In an embodiment, the PIM 112 also supplies high- and low-voltage DC power to support operation of the circuitry within the scanner assembly 106. The PIM 112 may also perform some, all, or none, of the functions attributed to the IVUS console 114 such as processing the echo data to create an ultrasound image.’; ¶0029, ‘The IVUS console 114 receives the echo data from the scanner assembly 106 by way of the PIM 112 and performs any remaining processing of the data to create an image of the tissue surrounding the scanner assembly 106. The console 114 may also display the image on the monitor 116.’; ¶0033, ‘the IVUS console 114 aggregates and assembles the received echo data to create an image of the vessel 104 for display on the monitor 116.’)
activate a subset of the circumferential array by activating a transmit-receive transducer element pairs in a pre-defined sequence, wherein a first transducer element of each transmit-receive transducer element pair transmits ultrasound energy, and a second transducer element of each transmit-receive transducer element pair receives ultrasound echoes, (¶0035, ¶0037, ¶0039, The activating subset of the array (i.e., apertures) during the ultrasound firing, some transducers 108 of an aperture 402 will emit an ultrasound waveform, while some transducer 108 of the aperture will listen for echoes. The groupings of emitting and receiving transducers are referred to as A-lines. The processor activates these pairs/groupings (e.g., a forward walk or backward walked) specifying the order in which the A-lines collect data.)
wherein the subset comprises a first group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs and a second group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs; (¶0039, The aperture (i.e., the subset) comprises multiple A-lines (i.e., transmit-receive pairs/groupings), and the transmit and receive process is repeated for each A-line (i.e., for each emitter/receiver combination) of the aperture. The system evaluates signals emitted by the first transducer and received by the another pair and can substitute them with reciprocal A-line pairs. Therefore, the subject contains multiple groups of transmit-receive pairs.)
generate a circumferential IVUS image based on the determination of the ultrasound echoes that are off-axis and the ultrasound echoes that are on-axis; and (¶0010, ‘An ultrasound image is formed from the clutter-reduced A-line data.’; ¶0033, ‘Referring to block 208 of FIG. 2, the reflections are received by the transducers within the scanner assembly 106 and are amplified for transmission via the cable 118. The echo data is placed on the cable 118 and sent to the PIM 112. The PIM 112 amplifies the echo data and/or performs preliminary pre-processing, in some instances. Referring to block 210, the PIM 112 retransmits the echo data to the IVUS console 114. Referring to block 212, the IVUS console 114 aggregates and assembles the received echo data to create an image of the vessel 104 for display on the monitor 116.’; ¶0041, ‘Focusing improves image quality by adjusting and combining data collected from the A-line transducer groups.’; ¶0045, ‘an apodization function is applied to the data signal before and/or after the time-of-flight adjustment of block 312. Apodization is a specific type of amplitude weighting and may be used to reduce grating and side lobe effects and other artifacts from the imaging process.’; ¶0068, ‘an ultrasound image is obtained from a set of clutter-filtered A-line data values. By generating the image based on the clutter-filtered data, embodiments of the present disclosure can reduce or remove visual artifacts from the final image thereby providing a clearer picture of the vasculature and surrounding structures.’)
output the circumferential IVUS image to a display in communication with the processor. (FIG. 1, ¶0033, ‘Referring to block 208 of FIG. 2, the reflections are received by the transducers within the scanner assembly 106 and are amplified for transmission via the cable 118. The echo data is placed on the cable 118 and sent to the PIM 112. The PIM 112 amplifies the echo data and/or performs preliminary pre-processing, in some instances. Referring to block 210, the PIM 112 retransmits the echo data to the IVUS console 114. Referring to block 212, the IVUS console 114 aggregates and assembles the received echo data to create an image of the vessel 104 for display on the monitor 116.’)
Hancock fails to disclose:
determine amplitudes for the ultrasound echoes received by the first group and the ultrasound echoes received by the second group;
compare the amplitudes of the first group to the amplitudes of the second group to determine the ultrasound echoes that are off-axis and the ultrasound echoes that are on-axis;
However, Yen in the context of sidelobe suppression in ultrasound imaging using dual apodization with cross-correlation discloses: determine amplitudes for the ultrasound echoes received by the first group and the ultrasound echoes received by the second group; (¶0046, ¶0048-0050, Yen provides the process of acquiring and evaluating two separate sets of ultrasound data, an aperture transmits a focused beam and upon receive, the system applies two different apodization (i.e., weighting) schemes to the received echoes to create two separate datasets, referred to as RX1 and RX2. The echoes are processed, and the system evaluates the magnitude (i.e., amplitudes) of these two datasets to combine them. The combined RF data can be obtained by “taking the minimum magnitude of RX1 and RX2”-¶0046. The min function can be used to select the minimum magnitude at each sample between the two data sets RX1 and RX2, ¶0050.)
compare the amplitudes of the first group to the amplitudes of the second group to determine the ultrasound echoes that are off-axis and the ultrasound echoes that are on-axis; (¶0005-0006, ¶0039-0043, ¶0046, the two datasets are compared to allow the system to distinguish between desired on-axis signals and undesired off-axis signals. First, off-axis echoes are (i.e., sidelobes and clutter) while on-axis echoes are the mainlobe data. To determine which echoes are on-axis and which are off-axis, the DAX method compares the two datasets (RX1 and RX2) by using normalized cross-correlation and magnitude functions. Using the two apodization functions, the system creates two point spread functions that provide similar mainlobe signals and very different clutter patterns. The system compares the two groups of signals using the cross-correlator which evaluates the similarlity between eh amplitudes and waveforms of the RF data segments. Via this comparison, the origin of the echoes are determined, “In the cross correlation matrix, the high cross correlation close to 1 implies the main lobe signal and the low or negative cross correlation means clutter region. Utilizing this property, the threshold can be set to zero or an arbitrary value close to zero to suppress undesired clutter.”-¶0035. As previously discussed, the DAX method compares the groups sample-by-sample using the min function to directly select the lowest amplitude between the RX1 and RX2. By evaluating the amplitudes and phase relationships between these two receiving groups, the system creates an image-dependent weighting matrix that passes main lobe dominated signals and attenuates clutter dominated signals, ¶0042.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the determination of Hancock to incorporate the teachings of Yen. The motivation to do this yields predictable results such as to improve contrast-to-noise ratio to reduce sidelobe and clutter levels by applying a weighting allowing for easier detection of low contrast targets such as breast and prostate lesions and for allowing for easier visualization of anechoic cysts and blood vessels, as suggested by Yen ¶Abstract, ¶0006, & ¶0033.
Claim 3: Modified Hancock discloses all the elements above in claim 1, Hancock discloses, wherein the transducer elements of the subset are immediately adjacent to one another such that the subset comprises an arc-shaped portion of the circumferential array. (FIG. 3, the transducer elements of the subset are considered to be immediately adjacent to one another such that the subset comprises an arc-shaped portion of the circumferential array.)
Claim 6: Modified Hancock discloses all the elements above in claim 1, Hancock discloses, wherein the processor is configured to generate a clutter reduction mask based on the determination of the ultrasound echoes that are off-axis and the ultrasound echoes that are on-axis (¶0012, ‘the ultrasound data as measured between different A-lines of an aperture to determine the prevalence of side lobe, grating lobe, and other artifacts. Many types of artifacts are characterized by incoherence across A-lines, and in some embodiments, focused ultrasound data with a relatively high degree of incoherence undergoes a clutter-reduction technique. The clutter-reduction technique determines an amount to adjust focused ultrasound values based on a set of coherence metrics referred to as a clutter map.’; ¶0012, ‘The adjustment amount may be further modified based on the magnitude of the focused ultrasound value being adjusted. In an embodiment, the adjustment amount is directly proportional to the magnitude of the focused ultrasound data to which it is to be applied’; ¶0033, ‘Referring to block 208 of FIG. 2, the reflections are received by the transducers within the scanner assembly 106 and are amplified for transmission via the cable 118. The echo data is placed on the cable 118 and sent to the PIM 112. The PIM 112 amplifies the echo data and/or performs preliminary pre-processing, in some instances. Referring to block 210, the PIM 112 retransmits the echo data to the IVUS console 114. Referring to block 212, the IVUS console 114 aggregates and assembles the received echo data to create an image of the vessel 104 for display on the monitor 116.’; ¶0041, ‘Focusing improves image quality by adjusting and combining data collected from the A-line transducer groups.’; ¶0045, ‘an apodization function is applied to the data signal before and/or after the time-of-flight adjustment of block 312. Apodization is a specific type of amplitude weighting and may be used to reduce grating and side lobe effects and other artifacts from the imaging process.’; ¶0062, ‘The clutter map is used to adjust the focused A-line data values in order to suppress the clutter effects in the focused data.’)
Claim 7: Modified Hancock discloses all the elements above in claim 6, Hancock discloses, wherein the processor is configured to smooth the clutter reduction mask. (¶0012, ‘The clutter-reduction technique determines an amount to adjust focused ultrasound values based on a set of coherence metrics referred to as a clutter map. The adjustment amount may be further modified based on the magnitude of the focused ultrasound value being adjusted.’; ¶0062, ‘The adjustment amount may be determined by applying a weighting function to the clutter metrics to condition the clutter map. ¶0063, ‘In particular, overly aggressive clutter reduction can result in sparse images that lack tissue speckle used to distinguish tissue from other structures or empty space. Selective clutter reduction may better preserve conventional tissue appearance.)
Claim 9: Modified Hancock discloses all the elements above in claim 6, Hancock discloses, wherein the clutter reduction mask is configured to reduce an appearance of image artifacts resulting from the ultrasound echoes that are off-axis. (¶Abstract, ‘identifying and removing artifacts in ultrasound data due to side lobes, grating lobes, and/or other effect.’; ¶0002, ‘The focusing system processes the data to produce an ultrasound image and may also perform various clutter reduction techniques to remove ultrasound artifacts.’; ¶0051, ‘a clutter-reduction technique may be performed on the ultrasound data before and/or after focusing. An exemplary clutter-reduction technique is described with reference to FIGS. 7-8. In some embodiments, the clutter-reduction technique recognizes differences in signal qualities that are characteristic of clutter and produces a clutter map that quantifies the effect on focused A-line data values at a number of positions relative to the scanner assembly. The clutter map is then used to compensate the focused data to reduce the clutter.’; ¶0060, ‘the normalized sign value total for a focused A-line data value obtained by a main lobe reflection of the point scatterer would be either +100% or −100%, and the normalized sign value total for a focused A-line data value produced by clutter would be 0%. However, in most applications, a vessel 104 will include enough reflective structures that each focused A-line data value will have some main lobe ultrasound data and some clutter effects. Accordingly, the coherence metric may be considered a measure of the extent to which the focused A-line data value is due to clutter artifacts.’;
Claim 12: Modified Hancock discloses all the elements above in claim 1, Hancock discloses, wherein a portion of transmit-receive transducer element pairs are in both the first group of the transmit- receive transducer element pairs and the second group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs. (FIG. 4)
-The assembly of Hancock features an array of ultrasound transducers, ¶0035, “array of transducers 108” are grouped into apertures. The transducers controllers select transducer sets for both transmitting an ultrasound pulse and receiving the echo signal, ¶0005. These transducers are organized into apertures and during an ultrasound firing, a subset of transducers within an aperture emit ultrasound energy while another subset (or the same subset) receives the echoes, ¶0035. Examples of a “pre-defined sequence include a forward walk which advances transducers in a first direction (e.g., from transducer 108a to 108b to 108c, and a backward walk, which advances them in the opposite direction. ¶0039. In addition, Hancock discloses, that a transducer may be designed as both an emitting and receiving transducer, ¶0037. This transmit-receive process is then repeated for each A-line (emitter/receiver combination) of the aperture according to the walk pattern, ¶0039.
Claims 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hancock (US 2016/0104267 A1) in view of Yen et al (US 20090141957 A1), as applied to claim 3 above, alternatively, in further view of Vilkomerson (US 5,669,388).
Claim 4: Modified Hancock discloses all the elements above in claim 3, Hancock discloses,
wherein the subset comprises transducer element 1 to transducer element Number N, wherein the first group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs with the transmit performed by the transducer element 1 to transducer element Number N/2,wherein the second group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs with the receive performed by the transducer element Number N/2 to the transducer element Number N.
(The claim is generically defined such that an array can be divided into these subsets. The claim focuses purely on a structural definition of subsets, without any requirements for the subsets to perform specific functions. Accordingly, FIG. 4 of Hancock discloses, the apertures comprise transducer elements 1 to N respectively. wherein transducer elements that are physically located on the left side of a respective center axis is characterized as transducer elements 1 to N/2, wherein the transducer elements that are physically located on the right side of the respective center axis comprises transducer elements N/2+1 to N.)
Alternatively, Vilkomerson in context of placements of transducers discloses, wherein the subset comprises transducer element 1 to transducer element Number N, wherein the first group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs with the transmit performed by the transducer element 1 to transducer element Number N/2,wherein the second group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs with the receive performed by the transducer element Number N/2 to the transducer element Number N. (Col. 4 l.49-52, ‘If a whole number remains (N is evenly dividable by 2), then the array is divided into a first half of N/2 transducers, from 1 to N/2, and a second half of N/2 transducers, from ((N/2)+1) to N’)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the subset of modified Hancock such that the subset comprises transducer element 1 to transducer element Number N, wherein the first group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs with the transmit performed by the transducer element 1 to transducer element Number N/2,wherein the second group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs with the receive performed by the transducer element Number N/2 to the transducer element Number N. as taught by Vilkomerson. The motivation to do this yields predictable results such as comparing the strength of the signal provided, Col. 4 of Vilkomerson.
Claim 11: Modified Hancock (or alternatively modified Hancock) discloses all the elements of claim 4, Hancock discloses, wherein the first group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs with the receive performed by the transducer element 1 to the transducer element Number N, wherein the second group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs with the transmit performed by the transducer element 1 to the transducer element Number N.
The claim is generically defined such that an array can be divided into these subsets. The claim focuses purely on a structural definition of subsets, without any requirements for the subsets to perform specific functions. Accordingly, FIG. 4 of Hancock discloses, the apertures comprise transducer elements 1 to Number N respectively. The transmission and receiving is performed by the transducer elements 1 to the transducer element Number N, wherein the first group is seen as being directed to the transmit and the second group is seen as being directed to the receiving. The claim merely amounts to transmitting and receiving wherein the transmitted signals are the first group and the receiving echoes are the second group.
-The assembly of Hancock features an array of ultrasound transducers, ¶0035, “array of transducers 108” are grouped into apertures. The transducers controllers select transducer sets for both transmitting an ultrasound pulse and receiving the echo signal, ¶0005. These transducers are organized into apertures and during an ultrasound firing, a subset of transducers within an aperture emit ultrasound energy while another subset (or the same subset) receives the echoes, ¶0035. Examples of a “pre-defined sequence include a forward walk which advances transducers in a first direction (e.g., from transducer 108a to 108b to 108c, and a backward walk, which advances them in the opposite direction. ¶0039. In addition, Hancock discloses, that a transducer may be designed as both an emitting and receiving transducer, ¶0037. This transmit-receive process is then repeated for each A-line (emitter/receiver combination) of the aperture according to the walk pattern, ¶0039.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hancock (US 2016/0104267 A1) in view of Yen et al (US 20090141957 A1), as applied to claim 3 above, in further view of Jeong et al (US 2017/0052250 A1).
Claim 5: Modified Hancock discloses all the elements above in claim 3, Hancock fails to disclose,
wherein the subset comprises a mean spatial frequency, wherein the first group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs associated with a mean spatial frequency less than the mean spatial frequency of the subset, wherein the second group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs associated with a mean spatial frequency greater than the mean spatial frequency of the subset.
However, Jeong in the context of estimation and suppression of sidelobes in a medical ultrasound imaging system discloses, wherein the subset comprises a mean spatial frequency, wherein the first group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs associated with a mean spatial frequency less than the mean spatial frequency of the subset, wherein the second group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs associated with a mean spatial frequency greater than the mean spatial frequency of the subset. (FIG. 2A, ¶0004, ‘close look at ultrasonic field in the ultrasonic focusing system, we can see that a main lobe is formed with respect to the scan line direction (i.e., axial direction) of ultrasonic image and that side lobes are formed at both sides of the main lobe due to leakage of ultrasonic signals. When the echoes from the target in the main lobe direction are received, signals from the target in the side lobe directions are also received with the result that the signals of the reflector in the side lobe act as noise in ultrasonic images and lower the resolution of the ultrasonic images.’; ¶0026, ‘the side lobe computation module 22 serves to compute a waveform of a side lobe signal using a spatial frequency characteristic of side lobe signal components included in the channel signals delayed for focusing by a method to be described below.’; ¶0033, ‘Here, the CPA refers to a spatial frequency of a signal periodically appearing across the aperture of a transducer array’; ¶0034, ‘the spatial frequency of the sinusoid appearing on the receiving element of the transducer whose size is D varies in accordance with the incident angle θ.’; ¶0035, ‘Signals simultaneously incident on a receive channel from various directions may be modeled as a sum of sinusoids having various spatial frequencies in accordance with an incident angle.’)
-The mean spatial frequency of the received ultrasonic signals is characterized from the various directions as a sum of sinusoids with different spatial frequencies, which includes contributions from both the main lobe and sidelobes. The total spectrum represents would characterize a mean spatial frequency distribution of the aperture response.
Referring to FIG. 2A, the main lobe signals are associated with low spatial frequency because they represent signals arriving at transducer elements of the aperture with minimal phase difference.
Referring to FIG. 2A, the sidelobe signals considered as off-axis directions having higher spatial frequency, corresponding to signals arriving at transducer elements with varying phase shifts.
The difference allows for the filtering methods of Jeong to distinguish the main lobe signals from sidelobe signals by analyzing the spatial frequencies content of the received signals. The mean spatial frequency of the sidelobes is greater than the mean spatial frequency of the full aperture because the sidelobes contributions are concentrated in the higher spatial frequency range, whereas the mean spatial frequency of the main lobe is less than the mean spatial frequency of the full aperture because the main lobe contributions are concentrated in the lower spatial frequency range. Therefore, Jeong discloses, wherein the transducer elements with a mean spatial frequency less than the mean spatial frequency of the subset as whole, wherein the transducer elements with a mean spatial frequency greater than the mean spatial frequency of the subset as whole.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second group, respectively, of modified Hancock in further view of Jeon teachings of transducer elements with a mean frequency less than the mean spatial frequency of the full aperture corresponding to the main lobe signals, and transducer elements with a mean frequency greater than the mean spatial frequency of the full aperture corresponding to sidelobes. The motivation to do this yields predictable results such as improving ultrasonic image quality by removing side lobe signals, ¶0016 of Jeong. The modified combination would disclose, wherein the subset comprises a mean spatial frequency, wherein the first group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs associated with a mean spatial frequency less than the mean spatial frequency of the subset, wherein the second group of the transmit-receive transducer element pairs comprises transmit-receive transducer element pairs associated with a mean spatial frequency greater than the mean spatial frequency of the subset.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hancock (US 2016/0104267 A1) in view of Yen et al (US 20090141957 A1), as applied to claim 3 above, in further view of Weiss et al (US 5,740,266).
Claim 8: Modified Hancock as modified discloses all the elements above in claim 6, Hancock discloses,
generate the circumferential IVUS image (¶0002, ‘The present disclosure relates generally to intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) imaging and, in particular, to receiving and focusing ultrasound information to produce an image. In various embodiments, the focusing system receives information from an array of ultrasound transducers, such as piezoelectric zirconate transducers (PZTs)…The focusing system processes the data to produce an ultrasound image and may also perform various clutter reduction techniques to remove ultrasound artifacts. The system is suitable for use in a variety of applications including intravascular ultrasound. For example, some embodiments of the present disclosure provide an IVUS imaging system particularly suited to imaging a human blood vessel.’) (¶0033, ‘Referring to block 208 of FIG. 2, the reflections are received by the transducers within the scanner assembly 106 and are amplified for transmission via the cable 118. The echo data is placed on the cable 118 and sent to the PIM 112. The PIM 112 amplifies the echo data and/or performs preliminary pre-processing, in some instances. Referring to block 210, the PIM 112 retransmits the echo data to the IVUS console 114. Referring to block 212, the IVUS console 114 aggregates and assembles the received echo data to create an image of the vessel 104 for display on the monitor 116.’; ¶0041, ‘Focusing improves image quality by adjusting and combining data collected from the A-line transducer groups.’; ¶0045, ‘an apodization function is applied to the data signal before and/or after the time-of-flight adjustment of block 312. Apodization is a specific type of amplitude weighting and may be used to reduce grating and side lobe effects and other artifacts from the imaging process.’)
Hancock fails disclose, wherein the processor is configured to: generate an unmasked image based on the ultrasound echoes; and apply the clutter reduction mask to the unmasked image to generate the image
However, Weiss in the context of ultrasonic imaging discloses, wherein the processor is configured to: generate an unmasked image based on the ultrasound echoes (FIG. 2- step 101); and apply the clutter reduction mask to the unmasked image to generate the image (Col. 1 l. 47-48, ‘object of the present invention is to remove clutter by the use of masks ‘; Col. 4 l. 9-13, ‘the next step in image processing is the generation of a mask that approximates the shape of the desired object and to use the mask to operate on the image to crop away clutter while retaining the desired portions of the image.’; Col. 7 l.33-35, ‘where the original images have substantial clutter and there is a requirement to obtain a faithful outline of an imaged object.’; Col 7 l.35-39, ‘In the first step 101, a starting image is obtained from imaging system 10 and such an image is shown in FIG. 8. The digitized image of FIG. 8 includes the image of a fetal skull as well as considerable noise and clutter.’; Col. 8 l. 58-60, ‘The new mask 50 is used to crop away clutter in step 114 to obtain an even better image as shown in FIG. 22’)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the generation of the IVUS image of modified Hancock to include generate an unmasked image based on the ultrasound echoes; and apply the clutter reduction mask to the unmasked image to generate the image as taught by Weiss. The motivation to do this yields predictable results such as improving the clutter removal to provide a better estimate of the target object imaged as suggested by Weiss, Col. 4 l.49-62.
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 Nicholas Robinson whose telephone number is (571)272-9019. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM EST.
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, Pascal Bui-Pho can be reached at (571) 272-2714. 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.
/N.A.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3798
/PASCAL M BUI PHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights