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 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “output ends” in line 3 of the claim should be “wherein output ends”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the quiescent current” in line 2 of the claim should be “a quiescent current”. 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.
Regarding claim 1, the claim first discloses “a power synthesizer” and then discloses “a power synthesis unit”. It is unclear if these elements related to the same component or are separate components based on the claim language. Therefore, claim 1 is considered indefinite.
Claims 2-20 are rejected for depending on claim 1.
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 1-8, 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], output ends of the main amplifier and the auxiliary amplifier being both connected to a power synthesis unit [See Fig. 2, wherein the output ends of the amplifiers are connected to the signal combiner. See also rest of reference.]; and
a controller, the controller being 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 also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 2, Wang further teaches wherein the radio-frequency transmission parameter comprises radio-frequency transmit power or a representative parameter used to represent the radio-frequency transmit power [¶0015, ¶0020, ¶0043-0046. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 3, Wang further teaches the representative parameter comprising a radio-frequency transmit gain [¶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 [¶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. 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 the 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 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2022/0365152 also teaches a RF amplifier for use in MRI which is relevant to the current application.
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, Jessica Han can be reached at 571-272-2078. 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 2896
Prosecution Insights