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 .
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claims status: amended claims: 1, 10, 14-15; the rest is unchanged.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 04/16/2026, with respect to the allowable subject matter have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, upon further consideration, the previous allowed subject matter has been withdrawn and a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of a newly found reference as shown in the rejection below.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 10, 12, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muraoka et al. (US 2012/0130238 A1; pub. May 24, 2012) in view of Nogami et al. (US 2021/0281899 A1; pub. Sep. 9, 2021).
Regarding claim 1, Muraoka et al. disclose in a first embodiment: A mobile radiographic imaging apparatus (para. [0062]), comprising: a hardware processor that acquires a moving image composed of a series of frames from (para. [0007]) an imaging part that captures the moving image by irradiating a subject with radiation (para. [0040]-[0041]); and
a display part that displays a display image based on the moving image (para. [0067]),
In the first embodiment Muraoka et al. are silent about:
the display part displays a first specific frame in a former portion of the series of frames and a second specific frame in a latter portion of the series of frames as still images and the imaging part transfers images of the series of frames in capturing order during the capturing of the moving image, and stops transferring the images in the capturing order and transfers an image of the second specific frame in the latter portion based on completion of the capturing of the moving image.
In a further embodiment Muraoka et al. disclose: the display part displays a first specific frame in a former portion of the series of frames and a second specific frame in a latter portion of the series of frames as still images (para. [0123], [0126] teaches the operator can set the first & last frame) motivated by the benefits for adaptable diagnostics.
In light of the benefits for adaptable diagnostics, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the two embodiments of Muraoka et al.
In a similar field of endeavor Nogami et al. discloses: the imaging part transfers images of the series of frames in capturing order during the capturing of the moving image, and stops transferring the images in the capturing order and transfers an image of the second specific frame in the latter portion based on completion of the capturing of the moving image (para. [0128]-[0130], the para. teach the frames can be transferred in the captured order or in a non-captured order, additionally, transferring of frames can be delayed or stopped at any time) motivated by the benefits for improved network bandwidth management.
In light of the benefits for improved network bandwidth management, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Muraoka et al. with the teachings of Nogami et al.
Regarding claim 2, Muraoka et al. disclose: the first specific frame in the former portion is a m-th frame from a beginning, where m is a natural number, and the second specific frame in the latter portion is a n-th frame from an end, where n is a natural number (obvious in view of the teachings of para. [0123], [0126] because para. [0126] teaches the operator can select the order of the frames).
Regarding claim 3, Muraoka et al. disclose: m = 1 and n= 1 (para. [0126]).
Regarding claim 4, Muraoka et al. disclose: the display part displays the first specific frame in the former portion and the second specific frame in the latter portion on a same screen (fig.7).
Regarding claim 5, Muraoka et al. disclose: the display part displays the first specific frame in the former portion and the second specific frame in the latter portion one at a time on a screen by switching between the first specific frame in the former portion and the second specific frame in the latter portion (para. [0123], [0126] teaches the operator can set the first & last frame & fig.7).
Regarding claim 7, Muraoka et al. disclose: the display part displays the first specific frame in the former portion and the second specific frame in the latter portion after completion of the capturing of the moving image (para. [0125]-[0126]).
Regarding claim 8, Muraoka et al. disclose: the display part displays frames in a capturing order from a first frame during the capturing of the moving image, and displays the first specific frame in the former portion and the second specific frame in the latter portion when the capturing of the moving image is completed (para. [0060], [0125]-[0126]).
Regarding claim 10, Nogami et al. disclose: the imaging part resumes transferring the images in the capturing order after the transfer of the image of the second specific frame in the latter portion is completed (para. [0128]-[0130], the para. teach the frames can be transferred in the captured order or in a non-captured order, additionally, transferring of frames can be delayed or stopped at any time) motivated by the benefits for improved network bandwidth management.
Regarding claim 12, Muraoka et al. disclose: the hardware processor determines whether to display the first specific frame in the former portion and the second specific frame in the 1 latter portion on the display part based on at least one of a frame rate of the moving image, an image size of the moving image, or a speed of wireless communication used (para. [0125]-[0126]).
Regarding claim 14, Muraoka et al. and Nogami et al. disclose: A display method performed by a mobile radiographic imaging apparatus, comprising; acquiring a moving image composed of a series of frames from an imaging part that captures the moving image by irradiating a subject with radiation; and displaying a display image based on the moving image by a display part, wherein, in the displaying, a first specific frame in a former portion of the series of frames and a second specific frame in a latter portion of the series of frames are displayed as still images by the display part and the imaging part transfers images of the series of frames in capturing order during the capturing of the moving image, and stops transferring the images in the capturing order and transfers an image of the second specific frame in the latter portion based on completion of the capturing of the moving image (the claim contains the same substantive limitations as claim 1, the claim is therefore rejected on the same basis).
Regarding claim 15, Muraoka et al. and Nogami et al. disclose: A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program that causes a computer of a mobile radiographic imaging apparatus to function as: an image acquirer that acquires a moving image composed of a series of frames from an imaging part that captures the moving image by irradiating a subject with radiation; and a display part that displays a display image based on the moving image, wherein the display part displays a first specific frame in a former portion of the series of frames and a second specific frame in a latter portion of the series of frames as still images and the imaging part transfers images of the series of frames in capturing order during the capturing of the moving image, and stops transferring the images in the capturing order and transfers an image of the second specific frame in the latter portion based on completion of the capturing of the moving image (the claim contains the same substantive limitations as claim 1, the claim is therefore rejected on the same basis).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muraoka et al. (US 2012/0130238 A1; pub. May 24, 2012) in view of Nogami et al. (US 2021/0281899 A1; pub. Sep. 9, 2021) and further in view of Jabri et al. (US 2009/0136111 A1; pub. May 28, 2009).
Regarding claim 6, the combined references are silent about: the display part further displays a key image that is a frame satisfying a predetermined condition among the series of frames.
In a similar field of endeavor Jabri et al. disclose: the display part further displays a key image that is a frame satisfying a predetermined condition among the series of frames (para. [0044], claim 2) motivated by the benefits for improved diagnostic (Jabri et al. para. [0044]).
In light of the benefits for improved diagnostic as taught by Jabri et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Muraoka et al. and Nogami et al. with the teachings of Jabri et al.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muraoka et al. (US 2012/0130238 A1; pub. May 24, 2012) in view of Nogami et al. (US 2021/0281899 A1; pub. Sep. 9, 2021) and further in view of Tezuka (US 2020/0018710 A1; pub. Jan. 16, 2020).
Regarding claim 11, the combined references are silent about: the hardware processor notifies a user of whether there is a frame among the series of frames constituting the moving image that has not been transferred from the imaging part or transfer of all the series of frames has been completed.
In a similar field of endeavor Tezuka discloses: the hardware processor notifies a user of whether there is a frame among the series of frames constituting the moving image that has not been transferred from the imaging part or transfer of all the series of frames has been completed (para. [0082]-[0083]) motivated by the benefits for improved imaging (Tezuka para. [0061]).
In light of the benefits for improved imaging as taught by Tezuka, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Muraoka et al. and Nogami et al. with the teachings of Tezuka.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muraoka et al. (US 2012/0130238 A1; pub. May 24, 2012) in view of Nogami et al. (US 2021/0281899 A1; pub. Sep. 9, 2021) and further in view of Muraoka et al. (1) (US 2016/0350923 A1; pub. Dec. 16, 2016).
Regarding claim 13, the combined references are silent about: an image processor that, when the first specific frame in the former portion and the second specific frame in the latter portion are displayed by the display part, performs image processing on the first specific frame in the former portion and the second specific frame in the latter portion, the image processing being different from image processing performed on the series of frames when the moving image is displayed by the display part.
In a similar field of endeavor Muraoka et al. (1) disclose: an image processor that, when the first specific frame in the former portion and the second specific frame in the latter portion are displayed by the display part, performs image processing on the first specific frame in the former portion and the second specific frame in the latter portion, the image processing being different from image processing performed on the series of frames when the moving image is displayed by the display part (para. [0143]) motivated by the benefits for improving diagnostic accuracy based on analysis results of dynamic images (Muraoka et al. (1) para. [0006]).
In light of the benefits for improving diagnostic accuracy based on analysis results of dynamic images as taught by Muraoka et al. (1), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Muraoka et al. and Nogami et al. with the teachings of Muraoka et al. (1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAMADOU FAYE whose telephone number is (571)270-0371. The examiner can normally be reached Mon – Fri 9AM-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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/MAMADOU FAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights