Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-10, filed 4/17/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Gupta et al (US 20170196522 A1) and De Man et al (US 20210378619 A1).
Response to Amendment
The amendment submitted 4/17/2026 has been accepted and entered. Claims 1-10, 12, 14-20 are amended. No claims are cancelled. No new claims are added. Thus, claims 1-20 are examined.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 10-15, 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gupta et al (US 20170196522 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Gupta et al discloses regarding a computed tomography system (100) comprising: an annular x-ray source (104) having partial x-ray sources around an examination region in the form of a first circle or a first part-circle; and a detector annulus (102) having x-ray detectors (106) around the examination region in the form of a second circle or a second part-circle, wherein the computed tomography system being configured to, activate at least some of the partial x-ray sources individually during a computed tomography scan, both the annular x-ray source and the detector annulus being static (coupled therein in a stationary fashion) (paragraph [0028]), generate absorption profiles of an object in the examination region from a plurality of directions using the x-ray detectors (110) (energy discriminating detectors) (paragraph [0029]), and at least one of, generate at least a first x-ray spectrum using a first group of the partial x-ray sources and a second x-ray spectrum using a second group of the partial x-ray sources the second x-ray spectrum being distinguishable from the first x-ray spectrum, and the at least the first x-ray spectrum and the second x-ray spectrum being generated during the computed tomography scan, or record an x-ray signal in a spectrally distinguishable manner using the x-ray detectors (performing dual-energy CT – alternatively placing two kins of x-ray chips operating at different tube voltages (paragraph [0054]).
Regarding claim 2, Gupta et al discloses wherein the computed tomography system is configured to: generate the first x-ray spectrum by applying a first acceleration voltage (high-voltage) at the first group of the partial x-ray sources; and generate the second x-ray spectrum by applying a second acceleration voltage at the partial of the second group of the partial x-ray sources (paragraphs [0043], [0051], [0054]).
Regarding claim 3, Gupta et al discloses wherein the annular x-ray source (104) comprises: a first voltage connection to generate the first acceleration voltage; and a second voltage connection to generate the second acceleration voltage (paragraphs [0027], [0043], [0051], [0054]).
Regarding claim 4, Gupta et al discloses wherein the computed tomography system is configured to alternately activate at least one of the first group of the partial x-ray sources and at least one of the second group of the partial x-ray sources (paragraph [0054]).
Regarding claim 5, Gupta et al discloses wherein the partial x-ray sources (104) are on the annular x-ray source such that a partial x-ray source of the first group and a partial x-ray source of the second group are arranged alternately in a circumferential direction (paragraph [0054]).
Regarding claim 6, Gupta et al discloses wherein the computed tomography system is configured to activate the partial x-ray sources in a sequence of the partial x-ray sources along a circular circumference (paragraphs [0007], [0009], [0028]).
Regarding claim 10, Gupta et al discloses wherein the computed tomography system is configured to generate one or more third x-ray spectra via one or more third groups of the partial x-ray sources during the computed tomography scan (paragraphs [0025], [0041], [0046]).
Regarding claim 11, Gupta et al discloses wherein the detector annulus comprises photon-counting detectors configured to distinguish between at least two energy thresholds (paragraphs [0029],
Regarding claim 12, Gupta et al discloses wherein the x-ray detectors include detector pairs, at least one of the detector pairs including a first x-ray detector and a second X ray detector; the first x-ray detector is configured to absorb lower-energy x-radiation; and the second x-ray detector is configured to absorb higher energy x-radiation (multi-energy capabilities) (paragraph [0027]).
Regarding claim 13, Gupta et al discloses wherein the annular X- ray source and the detector annulus are partial annuli which are opposite each other such that the examination region is between the annular x-ray source and the detector annulus (See Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 14, Gupta et al discloses wherein the annular x-ray source and the detector annulus are distributed over a complete annulus (paragraph [0049]).
Regarding claim 15, Gupta et al discloses a method for operating a computed tomography system (100) having partial x-ray sources (104) and x-ray detectors (106), each of the partial x-ray sources and the x-ray detectors being operated in a positionally fixed manner and surrounding an examination region, and the method comprising: first activating a first partial x-ray source among the partial x-ray sources or a first subgroup of the partial x-ray sources to generate first x-radiation directed at the examination region, the first x-radiation having a first x-ray spectrum; second activating a second partial x-ray source among the partial x-ray sources or a second subgroup of the partial x-ray sources to generate second x-radiation directed at the examination region, the second x-radiation having a second x-ray spectrum different than the first x-ray spectrum; and detecting x-ray beams of the first x-ray spectrum and the second x-ray spectrum which passed through the examination region via the x-ray detectors (performing dual-energy CT – alternatively placing two kins of x-ray chips operating at different tube voltages (paragraph [0054]).
Regarding claim 17, Gupta et al discloses wherein the computed tomography system is configured to alternately activate at least one of the first group of the partial x-ray sources and at least one of the second group of the partial x-ray sources (performing dual-energy CT – alternatively placing two kins of x-ray chips operating at different tube voltages (paragraph [0054]).
Regarding claim 18, Gupta et al discloses wherein the partial x-ray sources are on the annular x-ray source in such a way that a partial x-ray source of the first group and a partial x-ray source of the second group are arranged alternately in a circumferential direction (paragraph [0054]).
Regarding claim 19, Gupta et al discloses wherein the computed tomography system is configured to activate the partial x-ray sources in a sequence corresponding to an arrangement of the partial x-ray sources on a circular circumference (paragraphs [0007], [0009], [0028]).
Regarding claim 20, Gupta et al discloses wherein the first activating and the second activating are performed in a time-staggered manner (time-varying fashion) (paragraphs [0007], [0041]).
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(s) 7-9, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al (US 20170196522 A1) in view of De Man et al (US 20210378619 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Gupta et al discloses all of the limitations of parent claim 1, as described supra however Gupta et al is silent with regards to filters as claimed. De Man et al discloses a system (100) and method for stationary CT imaging system comprising: wherein the computed tomography system is configured to generate a second x-ray spectrum by adapting x-radiation generated by a second group of the partial x-ray sources using first x-ray filters (129) (paragraph [0099]). Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Gupta et al with the teaching of De Man et al, so as to enable spectral separation.
Regarding claim 8, Gupta et al in view of De Man et al discloses wherein the computed tomography system is configured to generate the first x-ray spectrum by adapting x-radiation generated by the first group of the partial x-ray sources using further second x-ray filters and the further optionally differ from the of the second group in of their filter properties (paragraphs [0099]-[0100]). Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Gupta et al with the teaching of De Man et al so as to improve material differentiation in tissues by simultaneously generating, filtering and analyzing two distinct x-ray energy spectrums.
Regarding claim 9, Gupta et al in view of De Man et al discloses wherein at least one of; the annular x-ray source comprises includes filter slots configured to receive x- ray filters, the filter slots being at least in front of the second group of the partial x-ray sources, or the annular x-ray source comprises includes x-ray filters at least in front of the second group of the partial x-ray sources (paragraph [0100]).
Regarding claim 16, Gupta et al in view of De Man et al discloses wherein the second x-ray filters have different filter properties than the first x-ray filters (paragraph [0100]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Besson et al (US 2016/0310086 A1) discloses a three-dimensional perspective of a dual-ring multi-source CT system per the present invention, wherein the detector is configured to be stationary and substantially mounted on the interior surface of the vacuum envelope tori 510. In one embodiment, the radiation detector covers an azimuthal angle substantially equal to 360 degrees. In one embodiment, the radiation detector is split into two annular surfaces 1522 and 1524 presenting an aperture between them (with respect to z) substantially coinciding with X-ray window 634 and lateral support elements. This aperture allows X-ray beams associated to the plurality of radiation sources to pass through with minimal additional filtration and to image the patient or object placed in the CT system.
PNG
media_image1.png
446
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FANI POLYZOS BOOSALIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2447. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-3:30 PM.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at Uzma.Alam@USPTO.GOV. 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.
/F.P.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights