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 .
Response to Arguments
In view of the amendments, the 112(b) Rejection is withdrawn.
In view of the amendments, the 101 Rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the previous combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. In view of the amendments, further consideration has resulted in a modified combination of references for an updated 103 Rejection.
Applicant asserts that the Nordgren reference does not disclose or suggest a “TGC control module…comprising a plurality of enlarged regions…each further comprising a plurality of touch sensors located on opposite sides of an enlarged region…wherein the plurality of enlarged regions are wider and higher than intermediate areas of the TGC control module”. Under broadest reasonable interpretation of figures 3 and 4 of the Nordgren reference, the TCG slider 326 are enlarged regions that are wider and higher in dimension than the layers (sealing layer 420, capacitive touch layer 410, and support layer 415).
PNG
media_image1.png
586
486
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
495
557
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Looking at figure 3, the TGC sliders 326 is not shown as one continuous control module and therefore the individual modules 326 clearly have space in between or (some intermediate layer) which is lower in height and not as wide as the enlarged regions 326 . Figures 3 and 4 therfore represent the individual regions or “enlarged regions” 326 relative to the base or the layers (420, 415, 410) of figure 4.
“A faux slider 326 may be configured to sense the application of a touch, or touch with pressure along a side of the control to mimic the sliding motion of a real (e.g., electro-mechanical) slider without necessitating actual movement of the faux slider. For example, pushing on one side or the other of the knobs with fingers (or a hand) could be sensed by the knob via projected capacitance or a force sensor and be distinguished as an increase or a decrease of time gain compensation (TGC). A tap on the top, or a touch on both sides could “center” the gain. Tactile and/or audible feedback may be utilized to provide user feedback along with that given on an imaging display or touch panel display. As such, a faux slider may be implemented below a continuous sealing layer to enable a sealed control panel that does not include openings such as may otherwise be required to accommodate the input shaft of a real slider” [0032].
Therefore, the the knobs 326 include touch sensor where pushing on one side or the other of the knobs with fingers or hand could be sensed and can be distinguished as an increase or decrease of TGC. Therefore, under broadest reasonble interpretation, the reference reads on the TGC control module as claimed with the plurality of enlarged regions with touch sensors incorporate as part of the enlarged regions 326 which are wider and higher in height relative to the base (420, 415, 410) of the intermediate region or the space in between or around the modules.
Additionally, the reference teaches of the layer structures for control panels with captcitive touch layer 610a and sealing layer 620a (fig. 6) and separating the supprt layer into components 615a-1, 615a-2, 615 a-3 improves touch detection by isolating one user control from another [0047, 0048]. Looking at figure 6a/b, there are intermediate areas such as 615a-2 (region (rectangle) below figure) between the enlarged regions (region (circles) figure below) where the enlargred regions are wider and higher than the intermediate areas.
PNG
media_image3.png
746
654
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, while the Nordgren reference does teach appear to teach elements of claimed TGC modules (in different embodiments as presented below with respect to figures 5, 6, and 10), the Poland refernece is added in view of the amendments to provide further support for the claimed TGC control modules with the enalarged regions/intermediate areas arrangement. A modified 103 Rejection is set forth below in view of the amendments.
In view of inaccuracy in claim numbering dependency, claims 16-20 are rejected below under 112(b).
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 16-20 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.
Claims 16-20 refer to the method of claim 1. Since claim 1 is a system claim, it is suggested that the claims be modified to the “method of claim 15”.
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(s) 1-4, 7-12, 14-16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nordgren et al. (2019/0380683) in view of Poland (2008/0161688).
With respect to claims 1 and 15, Nordgren et al. teach of an ultrasound based system and method with control panel for use with the medical diagnostic equipment where the control panel 300 includes a plurality of user control areas 306 at fixed location along a control surface of the control panel 300 including a plurality of separate or discrete capacitive touch sensors forming the capacitive touch layer [0027, 0031]. Nordgren et al. teach of topographic features or surface features in the form of raised bars or surfaces 350a, bumps 350b, for a specific control including depressions, holes, raised bars, bumps to aid in locating a specific control [0033]. Nordgren et al. teach of TGC sliders 326 configured to sense the application of a touch or touch with pressure along a side of the control to mimic the sliding motion of a real slider and pushing on one side or the other of the knobs with fingers could be sensed by a force sensor and be distinguished as an increase or decrease of time gain compensation and tap on the top or a touch on both side could center the gain where the tactile and/or audible feedback may be used to provide user feedback along with that given on an imaging display or touch panel [0031, 0032].
Under broadest reasonable interpretation of figures 3 and 4 of the Nordgren reference, the TCG slider 326 are enlarged regions that are wider and higher in dimension than the layers (sealing layer 420, capacitive touch layer 410, and support layer 415).
PNG
media_image1.png
586
486
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
495
557
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Looking at figure 3, the TGC sliders 326 is not shown as one continuous control module and therefore the individual modules 326 clearly have space in between or (some intermediate layer) which is lower in height and not as wide as the enlarged regions 326 . Figures 3 and 4 therfore represent the individual regions or “enlarged regions” 326 relative to the base or the layers (420, 415, 410) of figure 4.
Additionally, figure 5 shows sealing layer 520a with protursion 522a, 524a to enable the user to locate a specific one of a plurality of similarity shaped controls [0041, 0042, 0045]. Figure 5 shows the protrusions or the enlargred areas (region in circle figure below) relative to the intermediate areas (region in rectangle below figure) of the control module where the enlarged regions or protrusions can be wider and higher than the intermediate areas of the TGC control module or the upper surface 532.
PNG
media_image4.png
780
714
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Additionally, the reference teaches of the layer structures for control panels with captcitive touch layer 610a and sealing layer 620a (fig. 6) and separating the support layer into components 615a-1, 615a-2, 615 a-3 improves touch detection by isolating one user control from another [0047, 0048]. Looking at figure 6a/b, there are intermediate areas such as 615a-2 (region (rectangle) below figure) between the enlarged regions (region (circles) figure below) where the enlargred regions are wider and higher than the intermediate areas.
PNG
media_image3.png
746
654
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, the the knobs 326 include touch sensor where pushing on one side or the other of the knobs with fingers or hand could be sensed and can be distinguished as an increase or decrease of TGC. Therefore, under broadest reasonble interpretation, the reference reads on the TGC control module as claimed with the plurality of enlarged regions with touch sensors incorporate as part of the enlarged regions 326 which are wider and higher in height relative to the base (420, 415, 410) of the intermediate region or the space in between or around the modules.
Therefore, while the Nordgren reference does teach appear to teach of a control panel with modules with increased height and width relative to the base layer, the structure of the specific TGC control module with respect to the two different regions is not explicitly clear. Therefore, the Poland refernece is added in view of the amendments to provide further support for the claimed arrangement. In a related field of endeavor Poland teaches of an ultrasonic diagnostic system for producing ultrasound images [0014] adjusted for depth-dependent ultrasound attenuation by TGC control [0024] comprising TGC amplifiers located in a receive echo signal path of the imaging system [0034]. Poland teaches of a source of TGC gain characteristic [0036] and a TGC control module or TGC slider 84 of the control panel [0027, fig. 5A] to enable adjustment of the TGC gain characteristic such as the profile curve which may be touched or clicked on to drag portions of the curve to the left or right to change the characteristic of a TGC function , fig. 5D. Poland therefore teaches of the TGC control module to comprise a plurality of enlarged regions for adjusting a segment of TGC gain characteristic and comprising touch sensors relative to the enlarged regions. Looking at fig 5D, under broadest reasonable interpretation, any region of the touch sensor is interpreted to be “enlarged” with touch sensor on the side of the enlarged region. Poland further teaches of TGC gain processor, responsive to the touch sensors and the to the TGC gain characteristic, adapted to apply TGC gain to the amplifiers [0027, 0034].
PNG
media_image5.png
572
560
media_image5.png
Greyscale
As shown in figure 3 of Poland reference, the TGC control sliders 84 of the control panel provide support for enlarged regions (as represented by the oval in the figure above) with intermediate areas around the enlarged regions. Poland therefore teaches of making adjustments of the TGC gain characteristic such as the profile curve which may be touched or clicked on to drag portions of the curve to the left or right to change the characteristic of a TGC function and more effectively make adjustments to the image depth. It would have therefore been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the teaching by Poland to modify Nordgren et al. to compensate for signal attenuation at greater depths and ensuring uniform image brightness [Poland, 0024].
With respect to claims 2 and 16, Nordgren et al. in view of Poland teach of an image display adapted to display an ultrasound image and a curve of the TGC gain characteristic [Nordgren 0032] but does not explicitly teach of the curve of the TGC gain characteristics. Poland teaches of an image display adapted to display an ultrasound image [0025] and a curve of the TGC gain characteristic [00247, profile curve 188, fig. 5D]. It would have therefore been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the teaching by Poland to modify Nordgren et al. to provide a profile of the TGC characteristic and image depth as needed [Poland, 0027].
With respect to claims 3, 4, 19, and 20, Nordgren et al. in view of Poland teach of the use of capacitive touch sensor or capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducers [Nordgren, 0027, 0055, 0056]. Nordgren et al. also teach of the use of a force-sensitive resistive device for detecting applied force to the control [0056].
With respect to claim 7, Nordgren et al. do not explicitly teach of the claimed elements. Poland teaches of the ultrasound signals being received by the transducer elements of the probe and are microbeamformed and amplified and coupled through the transmit/receive switches 250 to TGC amplification stages 248 which are digitized by ADSs 244 and coupled digitally to the FPGA over lines 226. Poland teaches of the final beamforming of the sixteen or thirty-two channels may be performed by FPGA 220 when programmed for configuration a sixteen-channel or thirty-two channel receive beamformer [0034, 0035]. It would have therefore been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the teaching by Poland to modify Nordgren et al. to compensate for signal attenuation at greater depths and ensuring uniform image brightness [Poland, 0024].
With respect to claim 8, Nordgren et al. in view Poland teach of the system comprising a light associated with the one or more enlarged regions such as an LED [Nordgren, 0028, 0029] that would allow displayed graphics to be visible through the sealing layer of the enlarged regions and provide indication of the TGC gain characteristic [0032].
With respect to claims 9-11, Nordgren et al. in view of Poland teach of the source of a TGC gain characteristic to further comprise a TGC memory [Nordgren, 0071]. Nordgren et al. do not explicitly teach of the TGC profile curve. Polalnd teaches of the profile curve 188 that may be touched or clicked on to drag portion of the curve to the left or right to change the characteristic of a corresponding TGC function [0027, fig. 5D]. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, Poland therefore teaches of a nominal initial TGC characteristic at the beginning of the ultrasound procedure (as shown in the curve) and then the TGC may be adjusted during the procedure with the touch or click of portions of the curve to the left or right and therefore it would have been obvious to use the teaching by Poland to modify Nordgren et al. to effectively change the characteristic of a corresponding TGC function [Poland, 0027].
With respect to claims 12-14, Nordgren et al. in view of Poland teach of a control panel for use with medical diagnostic equipment where the control panel 300 includes a plurality of user control areas 306 at fixed location along a control surface of the control panel 300 including a plurality of separate or discrete capacitive touch sensors forming the capacitive touch layer [Nordgren, 0027, 0031]. Nordgren et al. teach of TGC sliders 326 configured to sense the application of a touch or touch with pressure along a side of the control to mimic the sliding motion of a real slider and pushing on one side or the other of the knobs with fingers could be sensed by a force sensor and be distinguished as an increase or decrease of time gain compensation and tap on the top or a touch on both side could center the gain where the tactile and/or audible feedback may be used to provide user feedback along with that given on an imaging display or touch panel [0031, 0032]. Nordgren et al. therefore teach of the touch sensors being adapted to provide different amounts of TGC gain adjustment by increasing/decreasing or tapping on the top sides to center the gain. Nordgren et al. also teach of the elongated structure or the capacitive touch layer 510c with periodically space enlarged regions 522c-1, 552c-2 (fig. 5C), or later 610a/b with enlarged regions 615b-1 (fig. 6B), or layer 710 with regions 760 (fig. 7). Nordgren et al. teach of the similar configuration in figures 9C and figure 10 with layer 1010 and spaced enlarged regions 1004 and would be obvious for the enlarged regions to match the number of TGC depth zones to be controlled to effectively make adjustments to the TGC gain characteristic. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, if the touch sensors are located lower on the enlarged region, this would provide better contact and pressure with respect to the elongated structure and provide greater TGC gain adjustment than touch sensors located higher on the enlarged region and away from the elongated structure where, as pressure is sensed on the slider and pushing on one side or the other of the knobs with fingers could be sensed by the knob and be distinguished as an increase or decrease of TGC [0032]. Therefore, under broadest reasonable interpretation, pushing on one side or the other of the knobs with respect to the touch sensors with fingers would allow the TGC gain to be increased/decreased.
With respect to claim 18, Nordgren et al. in view of Poland teach of the touch sensor being adapted to provide different amounts of TGC gain adjustment where adjustment of the knobs could be sensed by the know via touch sensor to distinguish as an increase or decrease of time gain compensation [Nordgren, 0032].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim Objections
Claims 5, 6, and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 17 is not rejected under 103 Rejection. However, the claim does stand rejected under 112(b) (as presented above).
Conclusion
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 BAISAKHI ROY whose telephone number is (571)272-7139. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-3 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, Christopher Koharski can be reached at 571-272-7230. 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.
BR
/BAISAKHI ROY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights