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
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant arguments/remarks, filed 08/28/2026, with respect to the previous claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous claim objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant arguments/remarks, filed 08/28/2026, with respect to the previous 112 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous 112 rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 06/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that claim has been amended to clarify that the required radio-frequency transmission parameter comprises a required radio-frequency transmit power or a representative parameter used to represent the required radio-frequency transmit power. Wang does not anticipate every feature of Claim 1 since it at least fails to disclose the claimed controller configured to output a control signal according to a required radio-frequency transmit power or a representative parameter used to represent the required radio-frequency transmit power. In rejecting Claim 2, the Office Action cites paragraphs 15, 20 and 43-46 of Wang. Office Action, p. 4. However, the cited portions do not disclose the controller outputting a control signal according to a required radio-frequency transmit power or a representative parameter thereof as recited in Claim 2. Rather, the cited portions describe measuring the load impedance ZL and adjusting amplifier operation (e.g., the division of the radio-frequency input signal, bias voltages, and current contribution) in response to the measured impedance. Claim 1, however, recites a control signal generated according to a required radio-frequency transmit power or its representative parameter, which represents a target radio-frequency transmission level. Thus, Wang fails to teach the claimed controller configuration, and therefore does not anticipate Claim 1.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims as currently written disclose:
“a controller configured to output a control signal according to a required radio-frequency transmission parameter or a scan parameter corresponding to the radio- frequency transmission parameter, so as to adjust a control parameter of the auxiliary amplifier,
wherein the required radio-frequency transmission parameter comprises a required radio- frequency transmit power or a representative parameter used to represent the required radio- frequency transmit power.”
Therefore, the controller either depend on the “required radio-frequency transmission parameter” that comprises a required radio- frequency transmit power or a representative parameter used to represent the required radio- frequency transmit power OR a scan parameter corresponding to the radio- frequency transmission parameter. Wang does disclose that the control signals are based on the load impedance. Wang also discloses that the load impedance is based on the size and weight of the patient [¶0011, ¶0044.]. The applicant’s own specification discloses “the scan parameter may include information about a scan subject, for example, the height, body weight, gender, age, etc., of the subject described above” [¶0058 of applicant’s specification]. Therefore, Wang still teaches the limitations of amended claim 1 because Wang teaches “a controller configured to output a control signal according to a required radio-frequency transmission parameter or a scan parameter corresponding to the radio- frequency transmission parameter, so as to adjust a control parameter of the auxiliary amplifier” [See load impedance. See ¶0011, ¶0044 for load impedance being based on size and weight of patient.].
Additionally, the examiner also believes Wang also teaches a required radio-frequency transmission parameter, wherein the required radio-frequency transmission parameter comprises a required radio- frequency transmit power or a representative parameter used to represent the required radio- frequency transmit power [¶0007, it is an object of the invention to provide a new RF power module, which is automatically adapted to various load conditions to deliver the desired Output power level in a more efficient fashion. See also rest of reference.]. Therefore, the whole RF power module is based on delivering the desired output power (i.e. RF transmission power) and the controller will therefore control the RF power module corresponding to the desired output level.
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.
Claims 1, 3-8, 10-12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang (US 2019/0049532).
Regarding claim 1, Wang teaches a radio-frequency power amplification module for a magnetic resonance system, comprising:
a power synthesizer [signal combiner 207], a main amplifier [first amplifier 203], and an auxiliary amplifier [second amplifier 203], wherein output ends of the main amplifier and the auxiliary amplifier both are connected to the power synthesizer [See Fig. 2, wherein the output ends of the amplifiers are connected to the signal combiner. See also rest of reference.]; and
a controller configured to output a control signal according to a required radio-frequency transmission parameter or a scan parameter corresponding to the radio- frequency transmission parameter, so as to adjust a control parameter of the auxiliary amplifier [¶0015, ¶0020, ¶0043-0046 where the controller 211 controls the current of the first and second amplifiers according to the measured impedance. See ¶0011, ¶0044 for load impedance being based on size and weight of patient. See also rest of reference.],
wherein the required radio-frequency transmission parameter comprises a required radio- frequency transmit power or a representative parameter used to represent the required radio- frequency transmit power [¶0007, it is an object of the invention to provide a new RF power module, which is automatically adapted to various load conditions to deliver the desired Output power level in a more efficient fashion. See also rest of reference.]. Therefore, the whole RF power module is based on delivering the desired output power (i.e. RF transmission power) and the controller will therefore control the RF power module corresponding to the desired output level. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 3, Wang further teaches wherein the representative parameter comprises a radio-frequency transmit gain [The alternative “scan parameter” limitation is disclosed. See also ¶0042-0046. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 4, Wang further teaches wherein the radio-frequency transmission parameter is determined by pre-scanning a scan subject via the magnetic resonance system [The alternative “scan parameter” limitation is disclosed. See also ¶0015, ¶0020, ¶0043-0046 where the controller 211 controls the current of the first and second amplifiers according to the measured impedance. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 5, Wang further teaches wherein the scan parameter comprises the type of a selected transmit coil or a scan site [¶0011 and ¶0044. The load impendence depends on where the RF coil is located (See Fig. 1). Therefore, the load impedance depends on the scan site. Further, the load impedance depends on the type of coil used. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 6, Wang further teaches wherein the scan parameter comprises information about a scan subject [¶0011 and ¶0044. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 7, Wang further teaches wherein the controller is configured to output the control signal on the basis of a predetermined correspondence, and the correspondence comprises correspondences between different radio-frequency transmission parameters and different control signals [¶0049 and equation 3, wherein the equation will show different correspondences. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 8, Wang further teaches wherein the correspondences are obtained by acquiring the maximum linear power under different control signals, and the controller determines corresponding maximum linear power on the basis of the required radio-frequency transmission parameter or the scan parameter, and determines a corresponding control signal on the basis of the determined maximum linear power [¶0049 and equation 3, wherein the equation will show different correspondences. See, ZOP is the impedance that corresponds to the maximum power. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 10, Wang further teaches wherein the control parameter comprises a gate-source voltage of the auxiliary amplifier [¶0048, ¶0054. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 11, Wang further teaches wherein the auxiliary amplifier receives the gate-source voltage via a power supply unit, and the controller is connected to the power supply unit and provides the control signal to the power supply unit to control the gate-source voltage provided by the power supply unit [¶0045. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 12, Wang further teaches wherein the control parameter comprises a quiescent current of the auxiliary amplifier [¶0050 and ¶0055. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 18, Wang further teaches wherein the power synthesizer, the main amplifier, and the auxiliary amplifier are connected to become a Doherty amplifier [¶0043-0046.].
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Wang, in view of Liu (US 2021/0320627).
Regarding claim 9, Wang teaches the limitations of claim 7, which this claim depends from.
Wang is silent in teaching wherein the correspondences are stored as a lookup table or a curve chart.
Liu, which is also in the field of RF amplifiers, teaches wherein the correspondences are stored as a lookup table or a curve chart [See Figs. 4-5. See also lookup table. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wang and Liu because both references are in the field of RF amplifiers for MRI and because Liu teaches that it is known in the art that the amplifier to account for working voltages when determining efficiencies of the RF amplifier [Liu - See Figs. 4-5. See also lookup table. See also rest of reference.].
Claims 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Wang, in view of Staudinger (US 2015/0097623).
Regarding claim 13, Wang teaches the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends from.
Wang further teaches wherein when radio-frequency transmit power corresponding to the radio-frequency transmission parameter or the scan parameter is greater than a high value [¶0015, ¶0020, ¶0043-0046 where the controller 211 controls the current of the first and second amplifiers according to the measured impedance. See also rest of reference.].
However, Wang is silent in teaching the controller adjusts the auxiliary amplifier to the same type as the main amplifier, the high value being greater than (P-1) dB, wherein P is the rated maximum power.
Staudinger, which is also in the field of amplifiers, teaches the controller adjusts the auxiliary amplifier to the same type as the main amplifier, the high value being greater than (P-1) dB, wherein P is the rated maximum power [¶0092-0096. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wang and Staudinger because both references are in the field of RF amplifiers and Staudinger teaches it is known in the art to transition amplifiers to a different class to result in a smoother gain and phase response, thereby enabling improved linearizability of the amplifier [Staudinger - ¶0092-0096. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 14, Wang and Staudinger teach the limitations of claim 13, which this claim depends from.
Wang and Staudinger further teach wherein a quiescent current of the auxiliary amplifier is equal to a quiescent current of the main amplifier [Wang - ¶0050 and ¶0055. Staudinger - ¶0093. See also rest of references.].
Regarding claim 15, Wang teaches the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends from.
Wang further teaches wherein when radio-frequency transmit power corresponding to the radio-frequency transmission parameter or the scan parameter is less than a high value and greater than a low value [¶0015, ¶0020, ¶0043-0046 where the controller 211 controls the current of the first and second amplifiers according to the measured impedance. See also rest of reference.].
However, Wang is silent in teaching the controller adjusts the auxiliary amplifier to a class C adjustable amplifier, the high value being greater than (P-1) dB, and the low value being less than (P-6) dB, wherein P is the rated maximum power.
Staudinger, which is also in the field of amplifiers, teaches the controller adjusts the auxiliary amplifier to a class C adjustable amplifier, the high value being greater than (P-1) dB, and the low value being less than (P-6) dB, wherein P is the rated maximum power [¶0092-0096. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wang and Staudinger because both references are in the field of RF amplifiers and Staudinger teaches it is known in the art to transition amplifiers to a different class to result in a smoother gain and phase response, thereby enabling improved linearizability of the amplifier [Staudinger - ¶0092-0096. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 16, Wang and Staudinger teach the limitations of claim 15, which this claim depends from.
Wang is silent in teaching wherein the controller is configured to output a control signal according to the required radio-frequency transmission parameter or the scan parameter corresponding to the radio-frequency transmission parameter, so as to adjust a control parameter of the class C adjustable amplifier.
Staudinger further teaches wherein the controller is configured to output a control signal according to the required radio-frequency transmission parameter or the scan parameter corresponding to the radio-frequency transmission parameter, so as to adjust a control parameter of the class C adjustable amplifier [¶0092-0096. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wang and Staudinger because both references are in the field of RF amplifiers and Staudinger teaches it is known in the art to transition amplifiers to a different class to result in a smoother gain and phase response, thereby enabling improved linearizability of the amplifier [Staudinger - ¶0092-0096. See also rest of reference.].
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Wang, in view of Zeng (WO 2017108874 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Wang teaches the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends from.
Wang teaches wherein when radio-frequency transmit power corresponding to the radio-frequency transmission parameter or the scan parameter is less than a low value [¶0015, ¶0020, ¶0043-0046 where the controller 211 controls the current of the first and second amplifiers according to the measured impedance. See also rest of reference.].
However, Wang is silent in teaching the controller turns off the auxiliary amplifier, the low value being less than (P-6) dB, wherein P is the rated maximum power.
Zeng, which is also in the field of amplifiers, teaches wherein when radio-frequency transmit power corresponding to the radio-frequency transmission parameter or the scan parameter is less than a low value, the controller turns off the auxiliary amplifier, the low value being less than (P-6) dB, wherein P is the rated maximum power [See Page 11, lines 3-19. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wang and Zeng because both references are in the field of RF amplifiers and because Zeng teaches it is known to turn off auxiliary amplifiers to see increased load impedance, which leads to a peak efficiency of the main amplifiers before it delivers maximum output power [Zeng - See Page 11, lines 3-19. See also rest of reference.].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 19, the closest prior art is considered previously cited Wang. However, Wang is silent in teaching an imaging method based on a magnetic resonance system, the magnetic resonance system comprising the radio-frequency power amplification module according to claim 1, and the method comprising: adjusting the auxiliary amplifier to the same type as the main amplifier on the basis of a selected transmit coil being a body coil; performing a pre-scan; determining the radio-frequency transmission parameter or the scan parameter on the basis of the pre-scan; and outputting the control signal on the basis of the radio-frequency transmission parameter or the scan parameter.
Claim 20 is considered above the relevant prior art for depending on claim 19.
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 RISHI R PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-4385. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7 a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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.
/RISHI R PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights