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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of the application’s status as a continuation of EP 21201838.6
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 04/08/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Status
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-9, 11-14, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bronstein (US 20140129200 A1).
Claim(s) 3 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bronstein (US 20140129200 A1) in view of Weistrand (US 20150363937 A1).
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bronstein (US 20140129200 A1) in view of Asakimori (US 20070283253 A1).
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)(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.
(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) 1-2, 4-9, 11-14, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bronstein (US 20140129200 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Bronstein discloses [Claim 1: A device for enhanced segmentation (¶16 “the apparatus further comprises a segmentation unit”) via an interface, comprising: (¶21 “provide the reduced segmentation to a secondary data processing (18) for further processing to generate secondary data.”)
a processor configured to: (¶82 “FIG. 4 further depicts…a computer processor 64,” )]
[Claim 14: A method for enhanced segmentation, the method comprising: (¶16 “the segmentation unit being configured for segmenting the organ in the 3D medical image to a plurality of areas,”)]
provide a base segmentation of a region of interest of a subject, wherein the base segmentation comprises a base plurality of information; (¶64 “triangle mesh is computed from the raw 3D data array of the HU values…The triangle mesh is used for surface construction of segments in the 3D medical image”)
generate a reduced segmentation from the base segmentation, wherein the reduced segmentation comprises a reduced plurality of information that comprises less information than the base plurality of information; and (¶64 “an additional decimation processing stage is carried out, in which the mesh is coarsened and the level of surface approximation of the segments is reduced.”)
provide the reduced segmentation to a secondary data processing for further processing to generate secondary data. (¶16 “the segmentation unit being configured for segmenting the organ in the 3D medical image to a plurality of areas, the segmented organ image being used for generating the 3D anatomical model.”)
Regarding claim 2, Bronstein discloses wherein to provide the base segmentation, the processor is further configured to: (¶61 “Preferably, the anatomy-model generation unit 3 comprises a 3D image segmentation unit that is used for segmenting the received 3D medical image into anatomical structures.”)
provide base image data of the region of interest of the subject; and (¶61 “The received 3D medical image is forwarded to the anatomy-model generation unit 3”)
generate a segmentation from the base image data as the base segmentation. (¶61 “Preferably, the anatomy-model generation unit 3 comprises a 3D image segmentation unit that is used for segmenting the received 3D medical image into anatomical structures.”)
Regarding claim 4, Bronstein discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: (¶82 “FIG. 4 further depicts…a computer processor 64,” )
Receive secondary data from the secondary data processing, (¶15 “a simulating unit configured for simulating an image-guided procedure planned for the patient according to the 3D anatomical model.”) which secondary data is generated by the secondary data processing based on the reduced segmentation; (¶78 “The segmented 3D medical image or an array representing segments in the 3D medical image is forwarded to the simulating unit 4.”)
provide a primary data processing combining the secondary data with the base segmentation to generate primary data relating to the region of interest; and (¶81 “The simulation module 55 has also the functions of receiving the segmented 3D medical image from the anatomy-model generation unit 3, wherein the received segmented 3D medical image is already translated to a 3D model that simulates the organ that is depicted in the segmented 3D medical image.” Bronstein discloses using the segmented image data and 3D anatomical model to create a 3D model that simulates an organ to be operated on)
provide the primary data (¶85 “The simulation module 55, through the processor, is utilized to prepare simulated organ visual images as displayed on the screen during the operative image-guided procedure.” Bronstein discloses “primary data” as the simulated organ that is produced)
Regarding claims 5 and 20, Bronstein discloses wherein [Claim 5: the processor is further configured to: (¶82 “FIG. 4 further depicts…a computer processor 64,” )]
provide the base segmentation as a base mesh; and (¶64 “triangle mesh is computed from the raw 3D data array of the HU values…The triangle mesh is used for surface construction of segments in the 3D medical image”)
reduce the base mesh based on pre-determined boundary conditions. (¶64 “an additional decimation processing stage is carried out, in which the mesh is coarsened and the level of surface approximation of the segments is reduced.”)
Regarding claims 6 and 21, Bronstein discloses wherein to generate the reduced segmentation, the processor is further configured to at least one of: (¶64 “an additional decimation processing stage is carried out, in which the mesh is coarsened and the level of surface approximation of the segments is reduced.”)
transform the base segmentation into a reduced segmentation that contains only a pre-determined relevant anatomical subregion; and (¶65 “An example for such decimation is depicted in FIGS. 2B and 2C that respectively depict a schematic illustration a segmented femur bone and a coarsened variant of the segmented femur bone that has been generated by applying the aforementioned decimation processing.”)
reduce a set of anatomical labels assigned to the base mesh. (¶66 “Preferably, the segmentation procedure is adapted to segment the anatomy that is depicted in the received 3D medical image. Different anatomic parts have different characteristics that affect segmentation.” Bronstein disclose different segmented anatomic parts contain their own characteristics. ¶65 discloses meshes pertaining to specific anatomic parts are reduced)
Regarding claim 7, Bronstein discloses wherein the mesh comprises a set of vertices and a set of triangles; and (¶64 “triangle mesh is computed from the raw 3D data array of the HU values…The triangle mesh is used for surface construction of segments in the 3D medical image”. Fig. 2C discloses vertices present throughout the model of the femur bone mesh)
wherein, to generate the reduced segmentation, the processor is further configured to at least one of: (¶64 “an additional decimation processing stage is carried out, in which the mesh is coarsened and the level of surface approximation of the segments is reduced.”)
reduce the triangle related information; and (¶64 “ a triangle mesh is computed from the raw 3D data array of the HU values…an additional decimation processing stage is carried out, in which the mesh is coarsened and the level of surface approximation of the segments is reduced.”)
select a subset of vertices of the set of vertices (¶65 “An example for such decimation is depicted in FIGS. 2B and 2C that respectively depict a schematic illustration a segmented femur bone and a coarsened variant of the segmented femur bone that has been generated by applying the aforementioned decimation processing.” Bronstein discloses a remaining subset of points)
Regarding claim 8, Bronstein discloses wherein to select the subset of vertices, the processor is configured to at least one of: (¶65 “An example for such decimation is depicted in FIGS. 2B and 2C that respectively depict a schematic illustration a segmented femur bone and a coarsened variant of the segmented femur bone that has been generated by applying the aforementioned decimation processing.” Bronstein discloses a remaining subset of points)
select different types of subsets of vertices for different subject, but a same type of set of vertices being used for multiple requests on the same subject, and (¶65 “An example for such decimation is depicted in FIGS. 2B and 2C that respectively depict a schematic illustration a segmented femur bone and a coarsened variant of the segmented femur bone that has been generated by applying the aforementioned decimation processing.” Bronstein discloses one subject where the same type of vertices is used)
use different orders for the vertices for different subjects, but the same order being used for multiple requests on the same subject. (¶65 “An example for such decimation is depicted in FIGS. 2B and 2C that respectively depict a schematic illustration a segmented femur bone and a coarsened variant of the segmented femur bone that has been generated by applying the aforementioned decimation processing.” Bronstein discloses one subject where the same order of vertices is used)
Regarding claim 9, Bronstein discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: (¶82 “FIG. 4 further depicts…a computer processor 64,” )
Identify at least one parameter relating to the secondary data processing, the at least one parameter comprising at least one of: type of planned intervention, type of data processing procedure, and anatomical parts needed for the secondary data processing; and (¶81 “transferring them to the display device 58 and to the force feedback mechanism 54. The simulation module 55 has also the functions of receiving the segmented 3D medical image from the anatomy-model generation unit 3, wherein the received segmented 3D medical image is already translated to a 3D model that simulates the organ that is depicted in the segmented 3D medical image.” Bronstein discloses a predetermined process of creating a 3D model simulation)
Generate a reduced segmentation depending on the identified at least one parameter (¶65 “An example for such decimation is depicted in FIGS. 2B and 2C that respectively depict a schematic illustration a segmented femur bone and a coarsened variant of the segmented femur bone that has been generated by applying the aforementioned decimation processing.”)
Regarding claim 11, Bronstein discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: (¶82 “FIG. 4 further depicts…a computer processor 64,” )
obtain image data of the region of interest of the subject to the data processor; and (¶15 “The apparatus comprises an input for receiving a three-dimensional (3D) medical image depicting an organ of a patient,”)
generate the base segmentation based on the provided image data. (¶64 “triangle mesh is computed from the raw 3D data array of the HU values…The triangle mesh is used for surface construction of segments in the 3D medical image”)
Regarding claim 12, Bronstein discloses wherein A system for enhanced segmentation, the system comprising: (¶16 “the apparatus further comprises a segmentation unit”)
the device for enhanced segmentation according to claim 1; and (¶16 “the apparatus further comprises a segmentation unit”)
a further medical image data handling device comprising a further processor, the further processor configured to: (¶82 “FIG. 4 further depicts…a computer processor 64,” )
receive the reduced segmentation; and (¶78 “The segmented 3D medical image or an array representing segments in the 3D medical image is forwarded to the simulating unit 4.”)
provide the secondary data processing for further processing to generate the secondary data (¶81 “The simulation module 55 has also the functions of receiving the segmented 3D medical image from the anatomy-model generation unit 3, wherein the received segmented 3D medical image is already translated to a 3D model that simulates the organ that is depicted in the segmented 3D medical image.”)
Regarding claim 13, Bronstein discloses wherein an imaging system for segmentation, the system comprising: (¶16 “the apparatus further comprises a segmentation unit”)
an imaging device configured to generate image data of a region of interest of the subject; and (¶58 “The input unit 2 preferably allows the system for simulating image-guided procedure 1 to fetch the 3D medical image from a medical images server such as a picture archiving communication system (PACS) before being accessed by the physicians”)
the device for enhanced segmentation according to claim 1; (¶16 “the apparatus further comprises a segmentation unit”)
wherein the imaging device is configured to provide the image data as a basis for the base segmentation (¶64 “The triangle mesh is used for surface construction of segments in the 3D medical image.”)
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) 3 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bronstein (US 20140129200 A1) in view of Weistrand (US 20150363937 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Bronstein discloses wherein the secondary data processing is provided as an external data processing procedure; and (Bronstein: ¶78 “The segmented 3D medical image or an array representing segments in the 3D medical image is forwarded to the simulating unit 4.”)
wherein, to generate the secondary data, the further processing comprises at least one of:
(Bronstein: ¶78 “The segmented 3D medical image or an array representing segments in the 3D medical image is forwarded to the simulating unit 4.”)
Bronstein fails to specifically disclose registration of further image data to the reduced segmentation; and
pre-alignment of model data to the reduced segmentation
In related art, Weistrand discloses registration of further image data to the reduced segmentation; and (Weistrand: ¶5 “One approach is to register multiple different atlases with the patient image and select the one that yields the best match for segmentation.” Need to motivate in a 103)
pre-alignment of model data to the reduced segmentation (Weistrand: ¶11 “said atlas images being acquired from different atlases comprising one or more segmented regions of interest”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the registering and pre-aligning an atlas image to a segmented region of interest disclosed by Weistrand into the method of segmentation and reducing the initial segmentation disclosed by Bronstein to use supplemental image data aid in segmenting the image as motivated by ¶79 of Bronstein.
Regarding claim 16, Bronstein discloses provide a base segmentation of a region of interest of a subject, wherein the base segmentation comprises a base plurality of information; (Bronstein: ¶64 “triangle mesh is computed from the raw 3D data array of the HU values…The triangle mesh is used for surface construction of segments in the 3D medical image”)
generate a reduced segmentation from the base segmentation, wherein the reduced segmentation comprises a reduced plurality of information that comprises less information than the base plurality of information; and (¶64 “an additional decimation processing stage is carried out, in which the mesh is coarsened and the level of surface approximation of the segments is reduced.”)
provide the reduced segmentation to a secondary data processing for further processing to generate secondary data. (Bronstein: ¶16 “the segmentation unit being configured for segmenting the organ in the 3D medical image to a plurality of areas, the segmented organ image being used for generating the 3D anatomical model.”)
Bronstein fails to specifically disclose A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored a computer program comprising instruction which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to:
In related art, Weistrand discloses A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored a computer program comprising instruction which, (Weistrand: ¶88 “The computer program 97 can also be stored on a non-transitory computer readable medium”) when executed by a processor, cause the processor to: (Weistrand: ¶88 “the computer-readable instructions will perform a method as illustrated in FIG. 1 for segmenting ROIs in a patient image.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the non-transitory computer readable storage medium disclosed by Weistrand into the method of segmentation and reducing the initial segmentation disclosed by Bronstein to implement the claimed invention as a computer program that can be stored and executed by a computer.
Regarding claim 17, Bronstein, as modified by Weistrand, disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to: (Bronstein: ¶82 “FIG. 4 further depicts…a computer processor 64,” )
provide the base segmentation as a base mesh; and (Bronstein: ¶64 “triangle mesh is computed from the raw 3D data array of the HU values…The triangle mesh is used for surface construction of segments in the 3D medical image”)
reduce the base mesh based on pre-determined boundary conditions (Bronstein: ¶64 “an additional decimation processing stage is carried out, in which the mesh is coarsened and the level of surface approximation of the segments is reduced.”)
Regarding claim 18, Bronstein, as modified by Weistrand, disclose wherein, to generate the reduced segmentation, (Bronstein: ¶64 “the mesh is coarsened and the level of surface approximation of the segments is reduced.”) the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to at least one of: (Bronstein: ¶82 “FIG. 4 further depicts…a computer processor 64,” )
transform the base segmentation into a reduced segmentation that contains only a pre-determined relevant anatomical subregion; and (Bronstein: ¶65 “An example for such decimation is depicted in FIGS. 2B and 2C that respectively depict a schematic illustration a segmented femur bone and a coarsened variant of the segmented femur bone that has been generated by applying the aforementioned decimation processing.”)
reduce a set of anatomical labels assigned to the base mesh (Bronstein: ¶66 “Preferably, the segmentation procedure is adapted to segment the anatomy that is depicted in the received 3D medical image. Different anatomic parts have different characteristics that affect segmentation.” Bronstein disclose different segmented anatomic parts contain their own characteristics. ¶65 discloses meshes pertaining to specific anatomic parts are reduced)
Regarding claim 19, Bronstein, as modified by Weistrand, disclose wherein the mesh comprises a set of vertices and a set of triangles; and (Bronstein: ¶64 “triangle mesh is computed from the raw 3D data array of the HU values…The triangle mesh is used for surface construction of segments in the 3D medical image”. Fig. 2C discloses vertices present throughout the model of the femur bone mesh)
wherein, to generate the reduced segmentation, the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to at least one of: (Bronstein: ¶64 “an additional decimation processing stage is carried out, in which the mesh is coarsened and the level of surface approximation of the segments is reduced.”)
reduce the triangle related information; and (Bronstein: ¶64 “ a triangle mesh is computed from the raw 3D data array of the HU values…an additional decimation processing stage is carried out, in which the mesh is coarsened and the level of surface approximation of the segments is reduced.”)
select a subset of vertices of the set of vertices (Bronstein: ¶65 “An example for such decimation is depicted in FIGS. 2B and 2C that respectively depict a schematic illustration a segmented femur bone and a coarsened variant of the segmented femur bone that has been generated by applying the aforementioned decimation processing.” Bronstein discloses a remaining subset of points)
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bronstein (US 20140129200 A1) in view of Asakimori (US 20070283253 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Bronstein discloses wherein the identification comprises at least one of: (Bronstein: ¶81 “The simulation module 55 has also the functions of receiving the segmented 3D medical image from the anatomy-model generation unit 3, wherein the received segmented 3D medical image is already translated to a 3D model that simulates the organ that is depicted in the segmented 3D medical image.”)
the reduced segmentation (Bronstein: ¶65 “An example for such decimation is depicted in FIGS. 2B and 2C that respectively depict a schematic illustration a segmented femur bone and a coarsened variant of the segmented femur bone that has been generated by applying the aforementioned decimation processing.”)
Bronstein fails to specifically disclose authentication of the secondary data processing; and
authentication of an external party that requests the reduced segmentation, which external party is configured to provide the secondary data processing.
In related art, Asakimori discloses authentication of the secondary data processing; and (Asakimori: ¶43 “then the manager is notified of the difference and requested to be authenticated, thereby preventing a person (or a user) other than the manager from using the image forming apparatus 7.”)
authentication of an external party that requests, which external party is configured to provide the secondary data processing. (Asakimori: ¶43 “In response to authorization of the change (difference) in configuration by the manager, the module configuration information stored in the configuration information comparison part 72 is updated, and the system is normally booted (started).” ¶42 “The image forming apparatus 7 includes multiple application modules that perform processing such as scanning, printing, and copying images”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate requesting authentication prior to secondary processing disclosed by Asakimori into the method of segmentation and reducing the initial segmentation disclosed by Bronstein to bolster security of the invention by ensuring the invention is used by medical professionals conducting a simulated image-guided medical procedure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Chen (US 20190197691 A) discloses A computer-implemented method for generating one or more segmented 3-D teeth models obtains a 3-D mesh model of a patient's dentition and executes a first segmentation procedure on the obtained 3-D mesh model, displaying one or more segmented teeth from the 3-D mesh model. At least one of the one or more segmented teeth is recorded according to operator instruction and removed from the 3-D mesh model to form a modified 3-D mesh model. A repeating sequence identifies a modified segmentation procedure, executes the modified segmentation procedure on the modified 3-D mesh model, displays one or more segmented teeth from the modified 3-D mesh model, records at least one of the one or more segmented teeth, and removes the recorded at least one tooth from the modified 3-D mesh model. Recorded segmentation results are displayed, stored, or transmitted.
Wu (US 20140086465 A1) discloses Multiple object segmentation is performed for three-dimensional computed tomography. The adjacent objects are individually segmented. Overlapping regions or locations designated as belonging to both objects may be identified. Confidence maps for the individual segmentations are used to label the locations of the overlap as belonging to one or the other object, not both. This re-segmentation is applied for the overlapping local, and not other locations. Confidence maps in re-segmentation and application just to overlap locations may be used independently of each other or in combination.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL KIM MAIDEN whose telephone number is (703)756-1264. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 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, Stephen Koziol can be reached at 4089187630. 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.
/MICHAEL KIM MAIDEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2665
/BOBBAK SAFAIPOUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2665