DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is responsive to communications filed on 11/18/2025. Claims 1, 4, 11 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/18/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Previous rejections under 35 USC § 112(b) with regard to claim 1 is withdrawn in view of the amendments filed on 11/18/2025.
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) in view of Yen et al (US 2009/0141957 A1) 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) under 35 USC § 102.
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 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-9, 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1:
line 7-8: it is unclear what the phrase activate a subset of the circumferential array to perform a plurality of transmit-receive pairs in a pre-defined sequence, means in the context of the claim. The transmit-receive pairs are physical pairings of elements, not actions. For examination purposes, the Examiner assumes activate a subset of the circumferential array comprising a plurality of transmit-receive pairs in a pre-defined sequence. Appropriate correction is required.
line 7-8: “a plurality of transmit-receive pairs” vs line 6: “transducer elements”. It is unclear if the plurality of transmit-receive pairs refers to or is separate from the transducer elements. For examination purposes, the Examiner assumes the pairs refer to the transducer elements, but the claim throughout the claim [emphasis added] there is no direct link. Appropriate correction is required.
line 12: “the other transducer element”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as required by MPEP 2173.05(e). Accordingly, proper antecedent basis is required.
line 18-19: “distinguish between the ultrasound echoes that are off-axis and the ultrasound echoes that are on-axis based on a comparison between a first group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs and a second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs, wherein the first group and the second group are distinct from the pre-defined sequence” renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear if there is a sequence of firing or ultrasound echoes, or the physical order of the first and second group, distinct from the pre-define sequence. Furthermore, this phrase renders the claim internally inconsistent. For instance, the claim states in lines 7-10: “activate a subset of the circumferential array to perform a plurality of transmit-receive pairs in a pre-defined sequence,”. This establishes that the transmit-receive pairs occur in a predefined sequence. Second, then in lines 15-18, “distinguish between the ultrasound echoes that are off-axis and the ultrasound echoes that are on-axis based on a comparison between a first group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs and a second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs”. The groups are subsets of the previously define plurality of transmit-receive pairs. Third, in lines 18-19, “wherein the first group and the second group are distinct from the pre-defined sequence”. If the plurality of transmit-receive pairs are performed in a pre-defined sequence, then any “first group” and “second group” drawn from that plurality are, by definition, part of that pre-defined sequence. The recitation directed to the first group and second group being “distinct” from that pre-defined sequence directly contradicts the earlier limitations because it is unclear if there is an additional activation or transmission step of the first and second groups that is distinct from the pre-defined sequence or there is merely a step of distinguishing between of ultrasound echoes’ of the groups from the pre-defined sequence based on a comparison to identify ultrasound echoes that are on-axis and off-axis. For examination purposes, the Examiner assumes distinguish ultrasound echoes between a first group and a second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs from the pre-defined sequence based on a comparison between the first group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs and the second group of the plurality of transmit receive pairs to identify ultrasound echoes that are off-axis and ultrasound echoes that are on-axis. Appropriate correction is required.
The dependent claims of the above rejected claims are rejected due to their dependency.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, 9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hancock (US 2016/0104267 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 to perform a plurality of transmit-receive pairs in a pre-defined sequence, wherein one transducer element of each of the transmit-receive pair in the plurality of transmit-receive pairs transmit ultrasound energy and the other transducer element of each transmit-receive pair in the plurality of transmit-receive pairs receives ultrasound echoes;
-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.
distinguish between the ultrasound echoes that are off-axis and the ultrasound echoes that are on-axis based on a comparison between a first group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs and a second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs, wherein the first group and the second group are distinct from the pre-defined sequence;
-Based on the 35 USC § 112(b), under the broadest reasonable interpretation the above claim recitation is interpreted as distinguish ultrasound echoes between a first group and a second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs from the pre-defined sequence based on a comparison between the first group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs and the second group of the plurality of transmit receive pairs to identify ultrasound echoes that are off-axis and ultrasound echoes that are on-axis.
-Note: the term “based on” is ambiguous and lacks precision. The term “based on” is a broad and ambiguous term that doesn’t clearly define the extent or nature of the relationship that claimed invention is intended to present. As such, the term “based on” implies that the claim invention is derived from or closely related to a comparison between a first group and a second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs. Additionally, the claimed phrase of “based on” is further coupled to another ambiguous and precision lacking term “a comparison”, generically recited in the claim. The claim does not define the extent or any details of the comparison other than between the first group and a second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs.
-The recitation merely amounts to distinguishing between ultrasound echoes that are off-axis (clutter/artifacts) and ultrasound echoes that are on-axis (main lobe data) based on a comparison.
-On-axis (main lobe data) is characterized by being coherent across A-lines, meaning that the signals of the raw A-line data are uniform, or the phase angles after time-of-flight (TOF) adjustments exhibit a minimal sum or variance across A-lines, ¶0012, ¶0053-0055. Off-axis (side lobes, grating lobs, and other clutter data) is characterized by being incoherent across A-lines, meaning that the signs of the raw A-line data vary or the phrase angles after TOF adjustment shows a greater sum or variance across A-lines, ¶0012, ¶0053-0055.
-The distinction is made by the coherence unit which analyzes the A-line data for coherence between A-lines, ¶0058, ‘the coherency unit 802 analyzes the A-line data for coherency between A-lines, and based on the analysis, produces a coherence metric for each focused A-line data value. In some exemplary embodiments, the coherency unit 802 uses sign information of the raw A-line data to determine the coherence metric. In some such embodiments, the coherency unit 802 includes an accumulator that accumulates a running total of signs of the raw A-line data. As explained above, the sign of an A-line data value represents whether the transducer is experiencing compression or rarefaction and may be expressed by a polarity of a data signal, a variance from a reference voltage, and/or any other suitable representation.’. The distinction involves comparing sign values, phase angles. The coherence unit accumulates a running total of the signs of the raw A-line data. For main lobe reflections from an ideal single point scatter, the normalized sign value would either be +100% or -100% while for clutter its 0%, ¶0054, ¶0057-0061 (i.e., a coherence metric used to differentiate between main lobe reflection and clutter, hence a comparison that satisfies the claim language of a comparison between a first group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs and a second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs). The claim does not further constitute any specifics or further narrow define the comparison. Furthermore, after a TOF adjustment, the phase angles of unfocused baseband A-line data values are summed. A smaller phase angle sum indicates coherent (main lobe data), while greater phrase angle sums indicate increasing incoherence (clutter), ¶0055, ¶0061.
generate a circumferential IVUS image based on the distinguishing between 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.’)
Claim 2: Hancock discloses all the elements above in claim 1, Hancock discloses,
wherein the subset comprises a center axis located halfway between a first end of the subset and an opposite, second end of the subset, (¶0035, FIG. 1 & 4, -the circumferential array is lopped arrangement of transducers. Each subset would have center axis located halfway between a first end of the subset and an opposite, second end of the subset. For instance, a subset including transducers spanning an arc of an array would have a midpoint of the arc which would be considered a center.)
wherein the ultrasound echoes are off-axis when an angle of arrive measured between the center axis and a direction in which the ultrasound echoes are received is non-zero,
-The ultrasound pressure waves radiate outward in many directions rather than being confined to a narrow beam result in detecting echoes from structures at oblique angles, ¶0006. These oblique angles imply a non-zero angle of arrive relative to the intended direction of the ultrasound beam. Side lobes, grating lobes, and/or other effects are clutter artifacts. Clutter artifacts are defined as “any ultrasound data greater than or less than that produced by the tissue or structures directly in line with the ideal focused A-line.”, ¶0050. This indicates that data not directly aligned with the intended “center axis” or “ideal focused A-line” is considered off-axis clutter.
wherein the ultrasound echoes are on-axis when the angle of arrival is zero.
-Clutter artifacts are defined as “any ultrasound data greater than or less than that produced by the tissue or structures directly in line with the ideal focused A-line.”, ¶0050. This indicates that data not directly aligned with the intended “center axis” or “ideal focused A-line” is considered off-axis clutter.
-Furthermore, the apodization functions emphasize, “the response during the peak of the window, which may be more likely to be produced by a main lobe of an ultrasound signal rather than a grating lobe or side lobe”, ¶0045. The “main lobe” refers to the on-axis portion of the ultrasound beams and its corresponding echoes. Given that “off-axis” echoes are described as arriving from “oblique angles”, which are not “directly in line with the ideal focused A-line”, ¶0050. It logically follows that on-axis echoes are those that are directly in line with the ideal focused A-line corresponding to zero angle of arrival relative to the center axis of the beam, and are associated with the main lobe. The claimed recitations merely amounts to the definition of off-axis and on-axis ultrasound echoes.
Claim 3: 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: 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 distinguishing between 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: 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: 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: Hancock discloses all the elements above in claim 1, Hancock discloses, wherein a portion of transmit-receive pairs are in both the first group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs and the second group of the plurality of transmit-receive 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), as applied to claim 3 above, alternatively, in further view of Vilkomerson (US 5,669,388).
Claim 4: 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 plurality of transmit-receive pairs comprises transmit-receive pairs with the transmit performed by the transducer element 1 to transducer element Number N/2, wherein the second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs comprises transmit- receive 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 N, wherein the first group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs comprises transmit-receive pairs with the transmit performed by the transducer element 1 to transducer element N/2, wherein the second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs comprises transmit- receive pairs with the receive performed by the transducer element N/2 to the transducer element 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 elements 1 to Number N, wherein the transducer elements that are physically located on the left side of the center axis comprises transducer elements 1 to Number N/2, wherein the transducer elements that are physically located on the left side of the center axis comprises transducer elements Number N/2 to 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: Hancock (or alternatively modified Hancock) discloses all the elements of claim 4, Hancock discloses, wherein the first group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs comprises transmit- receive pairs with the receive performed by the transducer element 1 to the transducer element Number N, wherein the second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs comprises transmit- receive 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), as applied to claim 3 above, in further view of Jeong et al (US 2017/0052250 A1).
Claim 5: 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 plurality of transmit-receive pairs comprises transmit-receive pairs associated with a mean spatial frequency less than the mean spatial frequency of the subset,
wherein the second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs comprises transmit-receive 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 plurality of transmit-receive pairs comprises transmit-receive pairs associated with a mean spatial frequency less than the mean spatial frequency of the subset, wherein the second group of the plurality of transmit-receive pairs comprises transmit-receive 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 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 as a whole comprises a mean spatial frequency, wherein the transducer elements that are physically located on the left side of the center axis comprises the transducer elements with a mean spatial frequency less than the mean spatial frequency of the subset as a whole, wherein the transducer elements that are physically located on the right side of the center axis comprises the transducer elements with a mean spatial frequency greater than the mean spatial frequency of the subset as a whole.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hancock (US 2016/0104267 A1), as applied to claim 3 above, in further view of Weiss et al (US 5,740,266).
Claim 8: 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 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
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