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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02 July 2026 was filed after the mailing date of the non-final Office action on 12 January 2026. The submission was in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97(c). Accordingly, the information disclosure statement was considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, a Wi-Fi communication system located in the housing as claimed in claims 25 and 26 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
5. (Proposed Amendments) The x-ray system of claim 4,
wherein the first laser line, the second laser line, the third laser line, and the fourth laser line combine to define a parallelogram when displayed on a surface of the object being scanned, and
wherein the digital image of the object being scanned by the x-ray source includes an entirety of a region of the surface of the object being scanned upon which the parallelogram is displayed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
6. (Proposed Amendments) The x-ray system of claim 5, wherein the digital image of the object being scanned by the x-ray source captured by the camera is displayed in the display in combination with the x-ray image of the object being scanned as captured by the detector panel when the object is scanned using the cone-shaped x-ray beam .
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
7. (Currently Amended) The x-ray system of claim 1, wherein the digital image of the object being scanned by the x-ray source captured .
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 9-11, 20-24, and 26 are objected to because of the following informalities:
9. (Currently Amended) An x-ray system employed for x-ray scanning of an object, the x- ray system comprising:
a detector panel configured to capture an x-ray image of the object being scanned; and
a handheld x-ray instrument including:
a housing configured to provide a protective enclosure;
an x-ray source located in the housing, the x-ray source providing a high energy x-ray output centered on a projection axis;
a collimator located in the housing, the collimator configured to receive the high energy x-ray output and project a cone-shaped x-ray beam along the projection axis, the cone-shaped x-ray beam having a diameter that increases as a distance from the handheld x-ray instrument increases along the projection axis;
a first pair of line lasers located in the housing, the first pair of line lasers including an upper line laser oriented to project a first laser line at a first angle relative to the projection axis, and a lower line laser oriented to project a second laser line at a second angle relative to the projection axis, the second laser line projected parallel to the first laser line, the first angle and the second angle, respectively, selected to provide a first separation distance between the first laser line and the second laser line that is substantially equal to the diameter at any distance along the projection axis, the first pair of line lasers configured to project a parallel set of lines displayed on a surface of the object being scanned;
a camera located in the housing, the camera substantially aligned with the projection axis, the camera configured to capture a digital image of the object being scanned by the x-ray source, the camera configured to capture video imaging of the surface of the object being scanned with the parallel set of lines displayed thereon;
a display housed in the housing, the display configured to display together both the x-ray image of the object being scanned captured by the detector panel and the digital image of the object being scanned by the x-ray source, respectively, the digital image of the object being scanned by the x-ray source captured during a period in which the x-ray source is providing the high energy x-ray output; and
wherein the detector panel and the handheld x-ray instrument are free of any mechanical interconnection between one another such that the detector panel can be moved freely and located on a side of the object opposite a side of the object from which the high energy x-ray output is provided by the x-ray source, independent of a position at which the handheld x-ray instrument is located on the side of the object from which the high energy x-ray output is provided by the x-ray source, and
wherein the handheld x-ray instrument is configured to wirelessly receive, from the detector panel, the x-ray image of the object being scanned.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
10. (Proposed Amendments) The x-ray system of claim 9, wherein the detector panel can be moved freely and located on the side of the object opposite the side of the object from which the high energy x-ray output is provided by the x-ray source, independent of a position at which the position of the handheld x-ray instrument is located, with the handheld x-ray instrument in position to begin an x-ray scan.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
11. (Proposed Amendments) The x-ray system of claim 9, wherein the digital image cone-shaped x-ray beam .
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 26 is objected to because of the following informalities:
26. (Proposed Amendments) The x-ray system of claim 9, wherein the handheld x-ray instrument further includes a Wi-Fi communication system located in the housing, the Wi-Fi communication system configured for a receipt of the x-ray image of the object being scanned as wirelessly transmitted from the detector [[panel]] panel.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover a corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover a corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation is: a Wi-Fi communication system in claims 25 and 26.
Because this claim limitation is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is being interpreted to cover a corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 25 recites a limitation “a Wi-Fi communication system located in the housing, the Wi-Fi communication system configured for a receipt of the x-ray image of the object being scanned as wirelessly transmitted from the detector panel” in lines 2-4. However, the specification does not describe electronic components of the wireless communication system. Therefore, the claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 26 recites a limitation “a Wi-Fi communication system located in the housing, the Wi-Fi communication system configured for a receipt of the x-ray image of the object being scanned as wirelessly transmitted from the detector panel” in lines 2-4. However, the specification does not describe electronic components of the wireless communication system. Therefore, the claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 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 limitation “the Wi-Fi communication system configured for a receipt of the x-ray image of the object being scanned as wirelessly transmitted from the detector panel” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose a corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. However, the specification does not describe electronic components of the Wi-Fi communication system for performing the function in the claim. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses a corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites a corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what a corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4, 8, 18, and 19 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claims 1-8, 18, and 19, Nariyuki (U. S. Patent No. 9,931,089 B2) disclosed an x-ray system employed for x-ray scanning of an object, the x-ray system comprising:
a detector panel (30) configured to capture an x-ray image of the object being scanned; and
a handheld x-ray instrument including:
a housing (11) including a first handle (16) and a second handle (17) located on opposite sides of the housing from one another;
an x-ray source located in the housing, the x-ray source providing a high energy x-ray output centered on a projection axis;
a collimator (14) located in the housing, the collimator configured to receive the high energy x-ray output and project a cone-shaped x-ray beam along the projection axis, the cone-shaped x-ray beam having a diameter that increases as a distance from the handheld x-ray instrument increases along the projection axis;
a camera (13) located in the housing, the camera substantially aligned with the projection axis and configured to capture a digital image of the object being scanned by the x-ray source, the digital image including a camera image of a surface area of the object that faces the x-ray source; and
a display (15) housed in the housing and visible from an exterior of the housing, the display configured to display the digital image of the object being scanned by the x-ray source,
wherein the handheld x-ray instrument is configured to receive, from the detector panel, the x-ray image of the object being scanned (column 8, lines 24-30).
However, the prior art failed to disclose or fairly to suggest that the x-ray system further comprising:
a handheld x-ray instrument further including:
a first line laser and a second line laser, each located in the housing, the first line laser oriented to project a first laser line at a first angle relative to the projection axis, the second line laser oriented to project a second laser line at a second angle relative to the projection axis, the first angle and the second angle, respectively, selected to provide a separation distance between the first laser line and the second laser line that is substantially equal to the diameter at any distance along the projection axis.
With respect to claims 9-11 and 20-24, Nariyuki (U. S. Patent No. 9,931,089 B2) disclosed an x-ray system employed for x-ray scanning of an object, the x-ray system comprising:
a detector panel (30) configured to capture an x-ray image of the object being scanned; and
a handheld x-ray instrument including:
a housing (11) configured to provide a protective enclosure;
an x-ray source located in the housing, the x-ray source providing a high energy x-ray output centered on a projection axis;
a collimator (14) located in the housing, the collimator configured to receive the high energy x-ray output and project a cone-shaped x-ray beam along the projection axis, the cone-shaped x-ray beam having a diameter that increases as a distance from the handheld x-ray instrument increases along the projection axis;
a camera (13) located in the housing, the camera substantially aligned with the projection axis, the camera configured to capture a digital image of the object being scanned by the x-ray source, the camera configured to capture video imaging of the surface of the object being scanned with the parallel set of lines displayed thereon;
a display (15) housed in the housing, the display configured to display together both the x-ray image of the object being scanned captured by the detector panel and the digital image of the object being scanned by the x-ray source, respectively, the digital image of the object being scanned by the x-ray source captured during a period in which the x-ray source is providing the high energy x-ray output; and
wherein the detector panel and the handheld x-ray instrument are free of any mechanical interconnection between one another such that the detector panel can be moved freely and located on a side of the object opposite a side of the object from which the high energy x-ray output is provided by the x-ray source, independent of a position at which the handheld x-ray instrument is located on the side of the object from which the high energy x-ray output is provided by the x-ray source, and
wherein the handheld x-ray instrument is configured to wirelessly receive, from the detector panel, the x-ray image of the object being scanned (column 8, lines 24-30).
However, the prior art failed to disclose or fairly suggested that the x-ray system further comprising:
a handheld x-ray instrument further including:
a first pair of line lasers located in the housing, the first pair of line lasers including an upper line laser oriented to project a first laser line at a first angle relative to the projection axis, and a lower line laser oriented to project a second laser line at a second angle relative to the projection axis, the second laser line projected parallel to the first laser line, the first angle and the second angle, respectively, selected to provide a first separation distance between the first laser line and the second laser line that is substantially equal to the diameter at any distance along the projection axis, the first pair of line lasers configured to project a parallel set of lines displayed on a surface of the object being scanned;
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to the drawings have been fully considered. The objection of the drawings has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to the specification have been fully considered. The objection of the specification has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claims 1-8, 18, 19, and 25 have been fully considered. The objection of claims 1-8, 18, 19, and 25 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claim 3 have been fully considered. The objection of claim 3 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claims 4-6 have been fully considered. The objections of claims 4-6 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claim 6 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 6 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claim 7 have been fully considered. The objection of claim 7 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claims 18 and 19 have been fully considered. The objection of claims 18 and 19 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claim 19 have been fully considered. The objection of claim 19 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claims 9-11, 20-24, and 26 have been fully considered. The objections of claims 9-11, 20-24, and 26 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claim 10 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 10 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claims 20-23 have been fully considered. The objections of claims 20-23 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claim 21 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 21 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claims 22 and 23 have been fully considered. The objections of claims 22 and 23 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claim 23 have been fully considered. The objections of claim 23 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claim 24 have been fully considered. The objection of claim 24 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claims 1-11 and 18-26 have been fully considered. The rejection of claims 1-11 and 18-26 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to claims 1-11 and 18-26 have been fully considered. The rejection of claims 1-11 and 18-26 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 24 April 2026 with respect to the drawings have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of the drawings has been withdrawn.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 24 April 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U. S. Patent No. 12,422,384 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Morton (U. S. Patent No. 10,168,445 B2) disclosed a hand-held portable backscatter inspection system.
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 Allen C. Ho, whose telephone number is (571) 272-2491. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10AM - 6PM.
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, David J. Makiya, can be reached at (571) 272-2273. 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.
Allen C. Ho, Ph.D.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/Allen C. Ho/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884 Allen.Ho@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights