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 .
Comments
The Preliminary Amendment – filed on March 12, 2024 has been entered and made of record.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-7, 9, 12, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Koehler et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0124927).
Re claims 1, 12 and 16: Koehler et al. disclose a (system (i.e., “imaging system 700”, Paragraph [0029]) for tomographic reconstruction of phase contrast or dark-field imagery, comprising: a memory that stores a plurality of instructions (i.e., “computer readable storage medium is encoded with computer readable instructions”, Paragraph [0009]); and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to execute the plurality of instructions to (i.e., “which, when executed by a processor”, Paragraph [0009])/method for tomographic reconstruction of phase contrast or dark-field imagery, comprising/non-transitory computer-readable medium (i.e., “computer readable storage medium is encoded with computer readable instructions”, Paragraph [0009]) for storing executable instructions, which cause a method for tomographic reconstruction of phase contrast or dark-field imagery to be performed, the method comprising:
receive/receiving phase contrast (PC) or dark-field (DF) projection data based on measurements along rays through an image domain (i.e., “radiation source 708 emits a polychromatic incoherent radiation beam, and the source grating, for example, an absorbing mask with transmitting slits, filters the emitted radiation beam, creating the individually coherent sources, which have sufficient spatial coherence for dark field imaging”, Paragraph [0032]), the projection data acquired in a scan operation by an X-ray imaging apparatus (i.e., “The examination region includes a field of view 716 configured for scanning a human body 715 and/or an object”, paragraph [0029]; and “radiation source 708 (e.g., an X-ray tube)”, Paragraph [0030]); and
perform/performing a data processing operation, including a reconstruction operation, to reconstruct the PC or DF imagery in image domain based on the projection data (i.e., “reconstructor 728 reconstructs the signal based on a reconstruction algorithm(s) 730, generating volumetric image data”, Paragraph [0036]),
wherein the data processing operation includes a weighting (i.e., “the dark field signal is weighted”, Paragraph [0067]),
the weighting based at least on a sensitivity of a mean of the measurements along the respective ray (i.e., linear diffusion coefficient dependent on average of the direct measurement m (e.g., ray 1200) and the complementary measurement m', Paragraph [0046]).
Re claim 2: Koehler et al. disclose wherein the weight per ray depends on a fan angle for the respective ray (i.e., diffusion coefficient dependent on ɸ a fan angle of a measured sample, Paragraphs [0047]-[0048]).
Re claim 3: Koehler et al. disclose wherein the mean sensitivity further relates to a measurement along a ray complementary to the ray (i.e., “EQUATION 14 requires acquisition of the complementary ray”, Paragraph [0045]).
Re claim 4: Koehler et al. disclose wherein the weight represents the mean of measurements along the ray, halfway between the two locations of the imaging apparatus’s radiation source on the ray, the two locations assumable by the radiation source in the scan operation (i.e., “EQUATION 14 represents an average of the direct measurement m (e.g., ray 1200) and the complementary measurement m' (e.g., ray 1300) and is applied to the entire 360 degree acquisition”, Paragraph [0046]).
Re claim 5: Koehler et al. disclose wherein the imaging apparatus includes at least one imaging facilitator (i.e., “phase grating 718 and an analyzer grating 720”, Paragraph [0031]) component operable to facilitate conversion of radiation intensities detectable at a detector of the imaging apparatus into DF of PC signals as the DF or PC projection data, wherein the image domain is located between the detector and the at least one imaging facilitator component (See for example, FIG. 7, Paragraph [0029]).
Re claim 6: Koehler et al. disclose wherein the imaging facilitator component is an interferometric grating or a coded aperture structure (i.e., “phase grating 718 and an analyzer grating 720”, Paragraph [0031]).
Re claim 7: Koehler et al. disclose wherein the processor implements a tomographic reconstruction algorithm of the filtered-back-projection type (i.e., “the resulting sinogram reconstructed using a conventional filtered back projection reconstruction algorithm”, Paragraph [0046]).
Re claim 9: Koehler et al. disclose wherein the processor implements a tomographic reconstruction algorithm of the iterative type to process the reconstructed imagery as initial data to reconstruct a second DF or the PC imagery (i.e., “reconstructor 728 can employ a reconstruction algorithm that takes magnification of the object 715 into account. An example reconstruction algorithm is an algebraic reconstruction technique (ART) reconstruction algorithm, which is an iterative reconstruction algorithm”, Paragraph [0040]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koehler et al. in view of Koehler (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0192098), hereinafter Koehler ‘098. The teachings of Koehler et al. have been discussed above.
As to claim 8, Koehler et al. does not explicitly disclose further comprising two modes, wherein one mode reconstructs DF imagery and another mode reconstructs PC imagery using the same back-projection operation.
Koehler ‘098 teaches two modes, wherein one mode reconstructs DF imagery and another mode reconstructs PC imagery using the same back-projection operation
(i.e., “The interferometric projection data is reconstructed into cross-sectional images of the object by using a preferably iterative reconstruction algorithm. The iterative reconstruction algorithm fits three image variables, one for each of the three data channels (phase contrast, attenuation, and dark field imaging) to the measured projection data to arrive at the cross sectional images for each of the channels”, Paragraph [0062]).
Koehler et al. and Koehler ‘098 are analogous art because they are from the field of digital image processing for X-ray imaging.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Koehler et al. by incorporating the two modes, one mode reconstructs DF imagery and another mode reconstructs PC imagery using the same back-projection operation, as taught by Koehler ‘098.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to increase robustness while reducing artifacts.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Koehler ‘098 with Koehler et al. to obtain the invention as specified in claim 8.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koehler et al. in view of Chabior et al. (“Grating-based phase-contrast computed tomography of thick samples”, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research A 693 (2012) pp. 138-142). The teaching of Koehler et al. have been discussed above.
As to claim 10, Koehler et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein, in a back-projection operation, a contribution of rays from radiation source positions 360° apart from each other are normalized to ½.
Chabior et al. teaches in a back-projection operation, a contribution of rays from radiation source positions 360° apart from each other are normalized to ½ (See for example, “artifact free reconstruction”, factor ½, 3.2. Sample position between G1 and G2, p. 140).
Koehler et al. and Chabior et al. are analogous art because they are from the field of digital image processing for X-ray image reconstruction.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Koehler et al. by incorporating the in a back-projection operation, a contribution of rays from radiation source positions 360° apart from each other are normalized to ½, as taught by Chabior et al.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to reconstruct artifact free images.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Chabior et al. with Koehler et al. to obtain the invention as specified in claim 10.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE M TORRES whose telephone number is (571)270-1356. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM EST.
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, Jennifer Mehmood can be reached at 571-272-2976. 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.
/JOSE M TORRES/Examiner, Art Unit 2664
01/09/2026