Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-24 of U.S. Application 18/708,455 filed on May 08, 2024 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/08/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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 of this title, 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.
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 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.
Claims 1, 3, 9, 12, 14, 20, 23, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littin et al (USPGPub 20160334480) in view of Abe et al (USPGPub 20190246939).
Regarding claim 1, Littin discloses a device (shown in figs 1-7) for magnetic resonance artifact correction (par 9 discloses compensation for homogeneities), comprising: an array comprising a plurality of shim coils (par 71 discloses the carrier elements 3,37, are arranged on 4) that are sequentially arranged to receive a current (using 5. Par 76 discloses conductor arrangement can be supplied with current independently of one another), wherein a first force on the array arising from an interaction of a magnetic field with the current in any one of the shim coils is balanced by a second force on the array arising from interactions of the magnetic field with the current in all other shim coils (par 41 discloses conductor or carrier have 180degree rotational symmetry. Therefore they balance each other) when the array is operated ( par 42 discloses load reducing effect and free from forces and torque) within an imaging volume of a magnetic resonance system (abstract discloses magnetic resonance tomograph); a frame (3) composed of non-ferromagnetic material positioned proximate to the imaging volume (par 65 discloses is produced from plastic. Therefore, non-ferromagnetic), the frame being configurable to provide selectable positioning of the array (shown in figs 1-7 as in a selectable position) within the imaging volume (par 76 discloses being fitted into a MR tomograph); and, wherein applying the current to the array at the set of coordinates generates a correction field to reduce the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the selected region of the imaging volume (par 76 discloses conductor 5 can be supplied with current independently, thereby creating homogenization of the main magnetic field which is used in shimming). Littin does not fully disclose a signal processor configured to: receive a measurement of a magnetic field inhomogeneity within a selected region of the imaging volume; and using the measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity, determine a current for the shim coils and a set of coordinates for positioning the array within the imaging volume.
However, Abe discloses a signal processor (23) configured to: receive a measurement of a magnetic field inhomogeneity within a selected region of the imaging volume (par 75 discloses using step S7and the calculating unit 24 calculating magnetic field strength); and using the measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity, determine a current for the shim coils and a set of coordinates for positioning the array within the imaging volume (par 9 discloses compensating for inhomogeneities and par 44 discloses adjusting the magnetic field to improve accuracy of a static magnetic field. Therefore, this is used to determine current for the coils and a set of coordinates). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in order to provide an MRI with increase accuracy (Abe par 12).
Regarding claim 3, Littin does not fully disclose wherein the measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the imaging volume is generated using a map of the magnetic field within the imaging volume.
However, Abe discloses wherein the measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the imaging volume is generated using a map of the magnetic field within the imaging volume (par 74 discloses the h vectors having magnetic field values of the magnetic field measurements as elements in distribution B. Therefore, creates a map). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in order to provide an MRI with increase accuracy (Abe par 12).
Regarding claim 9, Littin discloses wherein each of the first and second forces comprise a torque on the array (par 41 discloses the conductor and arrangements have 180 degrees rotational symmetry and claim 17 discloses free from forces and torque. Therefore, they balance each other out).
Regarding claim 12, Littin discloses a magnetic resonance system comprising (par 2 discloses magnetic resonance tomograph): a magnet system configured to provide a substantially homogenous magnetic field over an imaging volume in the absence of ferromagnetic materials proximate to the imaging volume (par 6 discloses a MR tomograph having a magnet) ; a magnetic field gradient system positioned proximate to the imaging volume (par 7 discloses a gradient system for encoding and generating a magnetic field), the magnetic field gradient system being configured to generate spatial encoding in the substantially homogeneous magnetic field (par 7 discloses spatial encoding and setting the coil currents); a radiofrequency (RF) system arranged proximate to the imaging volume and configured to acquire a plurality of MR signals from the imaging volume (par 7 discloses locational information by measuring signals recorded by an RF receiving coil); and a device (shown in figs 1-7) for magnetic resonance artifact correction (par 9 discloses compensation for homogeneities), comprising: an array comprising a plurality of shim coils (par 71 discloses the carrier elements 3,37, are arranged on 4) that are sequentially arranged to receive a current (using 5. Par 76 discloses conductor arrangement can be supplied with current independently of one another), wherein a first force on the array arising from an interaction of a magnetic field with the current in any one of the shim coils is balanced by a second force on the array arising from interactions of the magnetic field with the current in all other shim coils (par 41 discloses conductor or carrier have 180degree rotational symmetry. Therefore they balance each other) when the array is operated ( par 42 discloses load reducing effect and free from forces and torque) within an imaging volume of a magnetic resonance system (abstract discloses magnetic resonance tomograph); a frame (3) composed of non-ferromagnetic material positioned proximate to the imaging volume (par 65 discloses is produced from plastic. Therefore, non-ferromagnetic), the frame being configurable to provide selectable positioning of the array (shown in figs 1-7 as in a selectable position) within the imaging volume (par 76 discloses being fitted into a MR tomograph); and, wherein applying the current to the array at the set of coordinates generates a correction field to reduce the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the selected region of the imaging volume (par 76 discloses conductor 5 can be supplied with current independently, thereby creating homogenization of the main magnetic field which is used in shimming). Littin does not fully disclose a signal processor configured to: receive a measurement of a magnetic field inhomogeneity within a selected region of the imaging volume; and using the measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity, determine a current for the shim coils and a set of coordinates for positioning the array within the imaging volume.
However, Abe discloses a signal processor (23) configured to: receive a measurement of a magnetic field inhomogeneity within a selected region of the imaging volume (par 75 discloses using step S7and the calculating unit 24 calculating magnetic field strength); and using the measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity, determine a current for the shim coils and a set of coordinates for positioning the array within the imaging volume (par 9 discloses compensating for inhomogeneities and par 44 discloses adjusting the magnetic field to improve accuracy of a static magnetic field. Therefore, this is used to determine current for the coils and a set of coordinates). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in order to provide an MRI with increase accuracy (Abe par 12).
Regarding claim 14, Littin does not fully disclose wherein the measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the imaging volume is generated using a map of the magnetic field within the imaging volume.
However, Abe discloses wherein the measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the imaging volume is generated using a map of the magnetic field within the imaging volume (par 74 discloses the h vectors having magnetic field values of the magnetic field measurements as elements in distribution B. Therefore, creates a map). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in order to provide an MRI with increase accuracy (Abe par 12).
Regarding claim 20, Littin discloses wherein each of the first and second forces comprise a torque on the array (par 41 discloses the conductor and arrangements have 180 degrees rotational symmetry and claim 17 discloses free from forces and torque. Therefore, they balance each other out).
Regarding claim 23, Littin discloses wherein the non-ferromagnetic material is also a non-conductive material (par 65 discloses element 3 is produced from plastic. Therefore, non-ferromagnetic and non-conductive material).
Regarding claim 24, Littin discloses wherein the non-ferromagnetic material is also a non-conductive material (par 65 discloses element 3 is produced from plastic. Therefore, non-ferromagnetic and non-conductive material).
Claims 4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littin et al (USPGPub 20160334480) in view of Abe et al (USPGPub 20190246939) in further view of Dannels et al (US Pat No. 20100239151).
Regarding claim 4, Littin in view of Abe does not fully disclose wherein the signal processor further configured to: communicate with an RF system of the magnetic resonance system to receive a plurality of MR signals; and using the plurality of MR signals, generate the map of the magnetic field.
However, Daniels discloses the signal processor further configured to: communicate with an RF system of the magnetic resonance system to receive a plurality of MR signals; and using the plurality of MR signals, generate the map of the magnetic field (par 75 discloses determining B1 and B0 maps from MR data). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in further view of Daniels in order to view images based on the acquired signals.
Regarding claim 15, Littin in view of Abe does not fully disclose wherein the signal processor further configured to: communicate with an RF system of the magnetic resonance system to receive a plurality of MR signals; and using the plurality of MR signals, generate the map of the magnetic field.
However, Daniels discloses the signal processor further configured to: communicate with an RF system of the magnetic resonance system to receive a plurality of MR signals; and using the plurality of MR signals, generate the map of the magnetic field (par 75 discloses determining B1 and B0 maps from MR data). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in further view of Daniels in order to view images based on the acquired signals.
Claims 5 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littin et al (USPGPub 20160334480) in view of Abe et al (USPGPub 20190246939) in view of Dannels et al (US Pat No. 20100239151) in further view of Obara et al (USPGPub 20190346525).
Regarding claim 5, Littin in view of Abe in view of Dannels does not fully disclose wherein the MR signals are acquired using a dual echo ultrashort echo-time MR pulse sequence.
However, Obara discloses wherein the MR signals are acquired using a dual echo ultrashort echo-time MR pulse sequence (par 27 discloses generating images acquired from an object with Ultrashort echo time and par 68 discloses one pulse as in the pulse sequence of dual-echo imaging). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in view of Daniels in further view of Obara in order to improve image quality and reduce unwanted signals when imaging.
Regarding claim 16, Littin in view of Abe in view of Dannels does not fully disclose wherein the MR signals are acquired using a dual echo ultrashort echo-time MR pulse sequence.
However, Obara discloses wherein the MR signals are acquired using a dual echo ultrashort echo-time MR pulse sequence (par 27 discloses generating images acquired from an object with Ultrashort echo time and par 68 discloses one pulse as in the pulse sequence of dual-echo imaging). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in view of Daniels in further view of Obara in order to improve image quality and reduce unwanted signals when imaging.
Claims 7, 8, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littin et al (USPGPub 20160334480) in view of Abe et al (USPGPub 20190246939) in further view of Frustaci et al (USPGPub 20130046354).
Regarding claim 7, Littin in view of Abe does not fully disclose wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the imaging volume arises from a ferromagnetic object proximate to the imaging volume.
However, Frustaci discloses wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the imaging volume arises from a ferromagnetic object proximate to the imaging volume (par 95 discloses ferromagnetic materials saturate in the presence of the main field scanner. Therefore, inhomogeneous occurs when near the scanner). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in further view of Frustaci in order to image an ICD.
Regarding claim 8, Littin in view of Abe does not fully disclose wherein the ferromagnetic object is a component of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator implanted in a patient's chest, wherein the imaging volume comprises the patient's heart.
However, Fustaci discloses wherein the ferromagnetic object is a component of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator implanted in a patient's chest, wherein the imaging volume comprises the patient's heart (abstract discloses implantable defibrillator and par 3 discloses using MRI to diagnose neurological and cardiac disorders). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in further view of Frustaci in order to image an ICD.
Regarding claim 18, Littin in view of Abe does not fully disclose wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the imaging volume arises from a ferromagnetic object proximate to the imaging volume.
However, Frustaci discloses wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the imaging volume arises from a ferromagnetic object proximate to the imaging volume (par 95 discloses ferromagnetic materials saturate in the presence of the main field scanner. Therefore, inhomogeneous occurs when near the scanner).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in further view of Frustaci in order to image an ICD.
Regarding claim 19, Littin in view of Abe does not fully disclose wherein the ferromagnetic object is a component of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator implanted in a patient's chest, wherein the imaging volume comprises the patient's heart.
However, Fustaci discloses wherein the ferromagnetic object is a component of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator implanted in a patient's chest, wherein the imaging volume comprises the patient's heart (abstract discloses implantable defibrillator and par 3 discloses using MRI to diagnose neurological and cardiac disorders). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in further view of Frustaci in order to image an ICD.
Claims 10 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Littin et al (USPGPub 20160334480) in view of Abe et al (USPGPub 20190246939) in further view of Sepponen et al (US Pat No. 5592084).
Regarding claim 10, Littin in view of Abe does not fully disclose wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity is between 0 mT and 0.15 mT, wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity is reduced by the correction field to at most 0.1 mT.
However, Sepponen discloses wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity is between 0 mT and 0.15 mT, wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity is reduced by the correction field to at most 0.1 mT (col 1 lines 2-15 discloses an imaging method based on NMR and col 3 lines 40-46 discloses a suitable value could be .1mT). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in further view of Sepponen in order to accurately determine the values from a user based on applied magnetic field).
Regarding claim 21, Littin in view of Abe does not fully disclose wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity is between 0 mT and 0.15 mT, wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity is reduced by the correction field to at most 0.1 mT.
However, Sepponen discloses wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity is between 0 mT and 0.15 mT, wherein the magnetic field inhomogeneity is reduced by the correction field to at most 0.1 mT (col 1 lines 2-15 discloses an imaging method based on NMR and col 3 lines 40-46 discloses a suitable value could be .1mT). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Littin in view of Abe in further view of Sepponen in order to accurately determine the values from a user based on applied magnetic field).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 6, 11, 13, 17, and 22 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.
Regarding claim 2, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a device for magnetic resonance artifact correction, comprising: the signal processor further configured to provide the set of coordinates to the frame to configure the frame to move the array to the set of coordinates in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 6, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a device for magnetic resonance artifact correction, comprising wherein the signal processor is further configured to: communicate with the RF system to receive a second plurality of MR signals; using the second plurality of MR signals, generate a second magnetic field map within the imaging volume; perform a second measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the imaging volume by using the second magnetic field map; and based on a determination that the magnetic field inhomogeneity is greater than a predefined threshold, determine a second set of coordinates for positioning the array within the imaging volume using the second measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a device for magnetic resonance artifact correction, comprising wherein the device is electrically connected to a damping circuit, said damping circuit comprising a plurality of inductors and diodes arranged to reduce any additional currents induced in any one of the shim coils during operation of the magnetic resonance system while the array is positioned within the imaging volume, said additional currents arising from electromagnetic coupling between the shim coils and at least one of a magnetic field gradient system of the magnetic resonance system and an RF system of the magnetic resonance system in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a magnetic resonance system comprising: the signal processor further configured to provide the set of coordinates to the frame to configure the frame to move the array to the set of coordinates in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 17, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a magnetic resonance system comprising: wherein the signal processor is further configured to: communicate with the RF system to receive a second plurality of MR signals; using the second plurality of MR signals, generate a second magnetic field map within the imaging volume; perform a second measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity within the imaging volume by using the second magnetic field map; and based on a determination that the magnetic field inhomogeneity is greater than a predefined threshold, determine a second set of coordinates for positioning the array within the imaging volume using the second measurement of the magnetic field inhomogeneity in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 22, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a magnetic resonance system comprising: further comprising a damping circuit that is electrically connected to the device, said damping circuit comprising a plurality of inductors and diodes arranged to reduce any additional currents induced in any one of the shim coils during operation of the magnetic resonance system while the array is positioned within the imaging volume, said additional currents arising from electromagnetic coupling between the shim coils and at least one of the magnetic field gradient system and the RF system in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Koch et al (USPGPub 20140062475): discloses systems for shim calculation.
Harris et al (USPGPub 20160313426): discloses an MRI system with multiple shim coils.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC E HAWKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:00pm 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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at (571) 272-2258. 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.
/DOMINIC E HAWKINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858