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 Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 1 recites “The processing device of claim 6, wherein” which should be amended to recite “The processing device of claim 6, wherein:”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim 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 recites the limitation " the system" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim is not drawn to nor does prior recite “a system”. Therefore, it is unclear to what system applicant refers to in line 5 of the claim.
Further, claim 1 recites “obtaining imaging data associated with a region of interest (ROI) of an object, the imaging data corresponding to a plurality of time-series images of the ROI”, “obtaining a reconstruction instruction of reconstructing one or more target images of the plurality of time-series images” and “reconstructing the target image based on the spatial basis and the one or more temporal basis sub-sets” in lines 7-9, 14-15 and 19-20, which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what functional meaning applicant meant to impart in the claim when reciting that the imaging data as being associated with the ROI of the object and the imaging data corresponding to the a plurality of time-series images of the same ROI.
Oxford Learner’s Directionary defines the term “associated” to mean “if one thing is associated with another, the two things are connected because they happen together or one thing causes the other” and the term “corresponding” to mean “to be the same as or match something”. Therefore, it appears, although it is unclear, that applicant meant to recite the imaging data as comprised of/comprising or including or is a plurality of time-series images of the ROI. Applicant is advised to amend the limitation under present discussion to cancel the term “corresponding” and to amend the claim to instead recite one of the above referenced terms or phrases “comprised of/comprising”; or alternatively “including”; or alternatively “is”.
It is unclear what structure the reconstruction instruction is obtained from. It is also unclear if the reconstruction instruction is part of the set of instructions recited earlier in the claim or if it is a separate instruction from the set of instructions executed by the processor. If the latter, it is additionally unclear what structure “obtains” the reconstruction instruction and if, either the step of obtaining or the act of the output of the reconstruction instruction are performed by a human user. If so, the claim would not be patent-eligible under 35 USC 101.
Applicant is advised to amend the claim to recite specific structure which has been specifically configured for performing the corresponding structure to avoid a rejection under 35 USC 101 in subsequent office actions.
It is also unclear if the singularly recited target image that is reconstructed based on the spatial basis and the one or more temporal basis sub-sets is included in the one or more target images of the plurality of time-series image for which the reconstruction instruction recited earlier in the claim and also to the each of the one or more target images the present limitation under discussion is recited as being a step performed for. If the singular target image is one of the one or more target images of the plurality of time-series image, applicant is advised to amend the limitation of the claim (and applicable corresponding claims) to recite either:
“reconstructing the target image based on the spatial basis and the one or more temporal basis sub-sets, wherein the target image is one of the one or more target images of the plurality of time-series image”;
or
“reconstructing -a corresponding target image based on the spatial basis and the one or more temporal basis sub-sets”.
Claims 2-4, 14-17, and 20 are also rejected for reciting the same and/or limitations outlined above.
All dependent claims are also rejected by the nature of their dependency.
Claim 5 recites “storing…at least a portion of the data set into the at least one storage device or a storage device connected to the processing device” in lines 3-5, which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the portion of the data set which is stored in the at least one storage device or a storage device connected to the processing device is only a portion of the spatial basis or the one or more temporal bases for each time-series image of the plurality of time-series images of the ROI, or for only a some of time-series images of the plurality of time-series images of the ROI of the imaging data on which the determination of the data set is based. And it is unclear how which portion of the data set it is determined or selected to be stored. It is also unclear if the storage device connected to the processing device is meant to refer to the or be included in the at least one storage device of which the processing device is in part comprised of as recited in parent claim 1, on which claim 5 is dependent or if the storage device connected to the processing device is not meant to be the at least one storage device in parent claim 1. If the latter, it is unclear how the storage device connected to the processing device differs from one storage device of the at least one storage device recited in claim 1, as the at least one storage device of parent claim 1 is recited as being part of/comprising part of the processing device. One of skill in the art of computer electronics would recognize that if at least one storage device is a subcomponent of the processing device, then the at least one storage device is connected to the processing device by nature of the constructure or manufacture of the processing device.
Claim 10, 18 is also rejected for reciting the same and/or limitations outlined above.
Claim 11 recites “a variation of values of one of a plurality of parameters over time, the plurality of parameters being configured to acquire the imaging data” in lines 3-4, which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how the values of one of a plurality of parameters functionally is determined to be a “vary[iation]” over time and if this is determined for each singular value of the one of a plurality of parameters, or if the variation and the plural reciting of values is meant to refer to a summation or aggregate of all of the values of one of a plurality of parameters as varying over time. It is also unclear how a plurality of numerical, quantitative, values, are capable of performing the acquisition of the imaging data. Nor are the plurality of numerical, quantitative, values, which have no inherent structure nor are recited as being used by or implemented by a physical imaging device to perform the acquisition of image data.
All dependent claims are also rejected by the nature of their dependency.
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) 1-4, 6-9, 11-17, 19, and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)as being anticipated by Li et al. (US20180306882, hereafter “Li”).
Regarding claims 1, 14, and 20, Li teaches a processing device and a method implemented by a processing device (see [0086]), and a non-transitory computer readable medium (see [0086]), comprising a set of instructions (see [0086]), wherein when executed by at least one processor (see [0086]), the set of instructions direct the at least one processor to effectuate a method, comprising:
at least one storage device including a set of instructions (106, see [0089]); and
at least one processor in communication with the at least one storage device (101, see [0089]), wherein when executing the set of instructions, the at least one processor is directed to cause the system to perform operations including:
obtaining imaging data associated with a region of interest (ROI) of an object, the imaging data corresponding to a plurality of time-series images of the ROI ([0086] the processor uses the MRI scanner to apply readout pulses to acquire imaging data from the ROI continuously, and (c) obtaining raw data from the scanner);
determining, based on the imaging data, a data set including a spatial basis and one or more temporal bases ([0072], claim 11), the spatial basis including spatial information of the imaging data ([0072] the factor matrix contains L0 spatial basis functions (or basis images) with voxels), the one or more temporal bases including temporal information of the imaging data ([0072] each factor matrix contains Li basis functions for the ith time dimension ti (e.g., Ut 1 ∈
PNG
media_image1.png
38
25
media_image1.png
Greyscale
K×L 1contains L1 temporal basis functions of length K);
obtaining a reconstruction instruction of reconstructing one or more target images of the plurality of time-series images ([0086], [0090] the processor execute instruction to perform the image reconstruction via a receiver of the processor to execute a sequence encoded on the non-transitory computer-readable medium for performing the image reconstruction);
for each of the one or more target images,
determining one or more temporal basis sub-sets of the one or more temporal bases based on the reconstruction instruction ([0074]-[0075] the instructed methodology for sampling and reconstruction of the image tensor includes a subset of imaging data from a portion of k-space which include a correspond subset of temporal characteristics/basis); and
reconstructing the target image based on the spatial basis and the one or more temporal basis sub-sets ([0074]-[0080], [0089] the set of instructions execute image reconstruction methods, claim 1, the image tensor for the region of interest is reconstructed by taking the product of the estimated spatial factor matrix and the temporal factor tensor).
Regarding claims 2 and 15, Li teaches wherein the reconstruction instruction includes a value of at least one of a plurality of parameters* corresponding to each of the one or more target images (FIG. 3a and [0095], see the CMR multitasking yields finely resolved contrast variation along the inversion time dimension, which acquires the cardiac-resolved T1 image maps), and
for each of the one or more target images, the one or more temporal basis sub-sets of the one or more temporal bases are determined based on the value of the at least one of the plurality of parameters* corresponding to the target image ([0072], [0093]-[0096] each factor matrix contains Li basis functions for the ith time dimension ti (e.g., Ut 1 ∈
PNG
media_image1.png
38
25
media_image1.png
Greyscale
K×L 1contains L1 temporal basis functions of length K), see time series of images in FIG. 3a as being representative of the one or more target images).
*For the purposes of examination, the term “values of one of a plurality of parameters” has been interpreted to may include a cardiac phase, a respiratory phase, an imaging sequence parameter (e.g., an inversion time (TI), a saturation time (TS), etc.), or the like, or any combination thereof as defined by the applicant in [0092] of the specification.
Regarding claims 3 and 16, Li teaches wherein the one or more temporal basis sub-sets of the one or more temporal bases are determined by:
determining, based on the value of the at least one of the plurality of parameters, time information corresponding to the target image ([0074]-[0075] the instructed methodology for sampling and reconstruction of the image tensor includes a subset of imaging data from a portion of k-space which include a correspond subset of temporal characteristics/basis in the target image); and
determining, based on the time information, the temporal basis sub-set of each of the one or more temporal bases ([0074]-[0080] the image tensor for the region of interest is reconstructed by taking the product of the estimated spatial factor matrix and the temporal factor tensor which determines time information).
Regarding claims 4 and 17, Li teaches wherein the reconstruction instruction is received from a user device*, and the operations further include:
transmitting the one or more target images to the user device* ([0090] the user-operable computer 107 includes a display shown in FIG. 40, the computer 107 is illustrated as being connected to the processor 107 and sub-system 108, therefore is capable of receiving the target images for display on the display of the computer 107 by way of the design of the interconnection of the components of the computer).
*For the purposes of examination, the term “user device” has been interpreted under the broadest reasonable interpretation to be inclusive of any device capable of being directly or indirectly used by a user, as known in the electronic computing and electronic engineering arts.
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Li substantially discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention, specifically, Li discloses wherein the spatial basis and the one or more temporal bases relate to a low-rank model that indicates a correlation between the plurality of time-series images ([0068], [0070] the LRT model is enforced in two efficient steps: (a) determine the temporal factors of the model and (b) determine the spatial factors, the correlation between images is described and exploited by modeling this tensor as low-rank).
Regarding claim 7, Li teaches wherein
the spatial basis includes a spatial basis matrix and the one or more temporal bases include a single temporal basis matrix ([0070], [0144] the explicit subspace low-rank matrix imaging was first used to obtain the image I(x,t′) with a single “real-time” dimension t′ matrix with only one time dimension representing elapsed time);
the spatial basis matrix in combination with the temporal basis matrix represents a low-rank matrix corresponding to a collection of the plurality of time-series images ([0066]-[0070] the set of multiple images is the multidimensional tensor modeled as low-rank model which is the product of a small core tensor and N (temporal) +1 (spatial) factor matrices); and and
elements in the spatial basis matrix and the temporal basis matrix are fewer than elements in the low-rank matrix ([0070] model components of the indexing voxel location (i.e., combining the spatial dimensions) and the others indexing N different time dimensions have far fewer elements than the total number of elements in the image).
Regarding claim 8, Li teaches wherein
the data set further includes a core tensor (see [0070] dataset having a small core tensor);
the spatial basis includes a spatial basis matrix and the one or more temporal bases include two or more temporal basis matrices ([0070], includes the plural N temporal basis matrices);
the spatial basis matrix in combination with the two or more temporal basis matrices and the core tensor represents a low-rank multidimensional tensor corresponding to a collection of the plurality of time-series images ([0070] the set of images is the multidimensional tensor modeled as low-rank which is the product of a small core tensor and N (temporal) +1 (spatial) factor matrices); and
elements in the core tensor, the spatial basis matrix, and the two or more temporal basis matrices are fewer than elements in the low-rank multidimensional tensor ([0070] model components of the core tensor, the indexing voxel location, i.e., combination of the spatial dimensions, and the others indexing N different time dimensions have far fewer elements than the total number of elements in the image).
Regarding claim 9, Li teaches wherein the low-rank multidimensional tensor includes:
a spatial dimension corresponding to the spatial basis matrix ([0070] the voxel location is a combination of the spatial dimensions), and
two or more time dimensions each of which corresponds to one of the two or more temporal basis matrices, respectively ([0070] indexing N different time dimensions, each corresponding to a different “task” or dynamic to be imaged, e.g., T1 recovery, T2 decay, cardiac motion, respiratory motion, and/or contrast agent dynamics as the temporal basis matrices).
Regarding claim 11, Li teaches wherein the one or more target images include at least one set of images of the plurality of time-series images that indicate a variation of values of one of a plurality of parameters* over time, the plurality of parameters being configured to acquire the imaging data (FIG. 3a and [0095], see the CMR multitasking yields finely resolved contrast variation along the inversion time dimension, which acquires the cardiac-resolved T1 image maps).
*For the purposes of examination, the term “values of one of a plurality of parameters” has been interpreted to may include a cardiac phase, a respiratory phase, an imaging sequence parameter (e.g., an inversion time (TI), a saturation time (TS), etc.), or the like, or any combination thereof as defined by the applicant in [0092] of the specification.
Regarding claim 12, Li teaches wherein the plurality of parameters relate to at least one* of respiratory motion ([0095]-[0096] the T1 maps were calculated for the end expiration respiratory phases to match the MOLLI motion states).
*For the purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted in the alternative requiring the plurality of parameters relate to cardiac motion, or requiring the plurality of parameters relate to respiratory motion, or requiring the plurality of parameters relate to one imaging sequence parameter, or requiring the plurality of parameters relate to more than one imaging sequence parameters.
Regarding claim 13, Li teaches wherein the plurality of time-series images includes* magnetic resonance (MR) images ([0086] magnetic resonance imaging system acquires the magnetic resonance signal from the target region which is used to reconstruct the image).
*For the purposes of examination, the limitation has been interpreted in the alternative requiring the plurality of timeseries images include magnetic resonance (MR) images, or requiring the plurality of timeseries images include computed tomography (CT) images, or requiring the plurality of timeseries images include ultrasound images, or requiring the plurality of timeseries images include multi-modality images.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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 5, 10, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li, in view of Damadian et al. (US8036730, hereafter “Damadian”).
Regarding claims 5 and 18, Li substantially discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the operations further include: storing the one or more target images and at least a portion of the data set into the at least one storage device*.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Damadian teaches wherein the operations further include:
storing the one or more target images and at least a portion of the data set into the at least one storage device* (column 8 lines 56-59 the digitized images are stored in a memory which is included in the computer along with the processor, therefore as the processor and the memory are both subcomponents of the computer, they are connected, either indirectly or directly connected to one another).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the processing device and method disclosed by Li with the storing the one or more target images and at least a portion of the data set into the at least one storage device as taught by Damadian in order to recover information which provides an array of data elements having data defining one or more parameters related to the chemical composition and physical state of the matter within the voxel (columns 8-9, lines 62-66 and 1-2of Damadian).
*The limitation has been interpreted in the alternative, requiring storing the one or more target images and at least a portion of the data set into the at least one storage device; or requiring storing the one or more target images and at least a portion of the data set into a storage device connected to the processing device.
Regarding claim 10, Li substantially discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention, specifically, Li discloses wherein the operations further include:
the core tensor (see [0070] dataset having a small core tensor), but does not explicitly disclose the step of storing part of the data set, in the at least one storage device*.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Damadian teaches storing, part of the data set, in the at least one storage device (column 8 lines 56-59 the digitized images are stored in a memory which is included in the computer along with the processor, therefore as the processor and the memory are both subcomponents of the computer, they are connected, either indirectly or directly connected to one another).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the processing device disclosed by Li with the storing, part of the data set, in the at least one storage device as taught by Damadian in order to recover information which provides an array of data elements having data defining one or more parameters related to the chemical composition and physical state of the matter within the voxel (columns 8-9, lines 62-66 and 1-2of Damadian).
*The limitation has been interpreted in the alternative, storing the core tensor in the at least one storage device; or requiring storing the core tensor in the at least one storage device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMY SHAFQAT whose telephone number is (571)272-4054. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-5:30PM MST.
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, Keith Raymond can be reached at (571) 270-1790. 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.
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3798
/KEITH M RAYMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3798