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 .
The present rejection(s) reference specific passages from cited prior art. However, Applicant is advised that the rejections are based on the entirety of each cited prior art. That is, each cited prior art reference “must be considered in its entirety”. (See MPEP 2141.02(VI)) Therefore, Applicant is advised to review all portions of the cited prior art if traversing a rejection based on the cited prior art.”
DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim 4 and dependent claims 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.
Claim 4 recites “… determines the degree of intestinal tract washing to each region of a large intestine”, but the regions of the large intestine has not been define and is therefore indefinite. It will be interpreted as any portion or amount of the large intestine, include the whole thereof.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Yu WO2020/215593.
Yu discloses for claim 1, “An information processing device comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions (image reporting system operating the pre-trained model – the platform where the program is stored; 0032-0035); and
a processor configured to execute the instructions (image reporting system executing platform; 0033-0035) to:
acquire a captured image by an endoscope (0033);
acquire positional information of the endoscope (0010, 0025 describes automatically identifying the digestive tract site and identifying location features as positional information);
detect a lesion from the captured image (0034 describes identifying lesions);
determine a degree of intestinal tract washing from the captured image (0045, 0047 describes intestinal preparation success rate);
determine that the endoscope reaches a cecum from the captured image (0045, 0047 describes enteroscope cecum intubation rate which requires a determination of reaching a cecum);
determine an end timing of an examination by the endoscope (0017, 0045 describes colonoscopy withdrawal time);
calculate an observation time based on a timing that the endoscope reaches the cecum and the end timing (0045, 0047 describes the colonoscopy withdrawal time along with information about reaching a cecum); and
generate an examination report including the observation time, the degree of intestinal tract washing, a presence or absence of reaching the cecum of the endoscope, and a detection result of the lesion including the positional information of the lesion (0029 describes providing comprehensive reports of procedural metrics disclosed above)”.
Yu discloses for claim 2, “The information processing device according to claim 1,
wherein the processor is further configured to determine an examination reliability based on the observation time, the degree of intestinal tract washing, and the presence or absence of reaching the cecum of the endoscope (0045 wherein providing the disclosed metrics in and of itself provides a reliability metric),
wherein the examination report includes the examination reliability (0029 describes providing comprehensive reports of procedural metrics disclosed above)”.
Yu discloses for claim 3, “The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the processor determines that the endoscope has reached the cecum when at least one of an ileocecal valve and an appendiceal orifice is detected in the captured image (0045, 0047 describes enteroscope cecum intubation rate which requires a determination of reaching a cecum, where ileocecal valve and appendiceal orifice are anatomical structures of the cecum)”.
Yu discloses for claim 4, “The information processing device according to claim 1,
wherein the processor determines the degree of intestinal tract washing for each region of a large intestine (0045, 0047 describes intestinal preparation success rate), and
wherein the examination report includes the degree of intestinal tract washing for each region of the large intestine (0045, 0047 describes intestinal preparation success rate)”.
Yu discloses for claim 5, “The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the processor calculates the observation time by subtracting a treatment time in which a treatment for the lesion is performed, from the time from a timing that the endoscope reaches the cecum to the end timing (0017, 0045, 0047 describes the colonoscopy withdrawal time along with information about reaching a cecum, including subtracting treatment time)”.
Yu discloses for claim 6, “The information processing device according to claim 5, wherein the processor calculates the treatment time based on the captured image (0014, 0017 describes taking into account treatment time in the time calculations)”.
Yu discloses for claim 7, “The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the processor determines a timing at which the endoscope is pulled out of the large intestine based on the captured image as the end timing of the examination (0017 describes the calculation of colonoscopy time considered to include the timing for the large intestine)”.
Yu discloses for claim 9, “An information processing method comprising:
acquiring a captured image by an endoscope (0033);
acquiring positional information of the endoscope (0010, 0025 describes automatically identifying the digestive tract site and identifying location features as positional information);
detecting a lesion from the captured image (0034 describes identifying lesions);
determining a degree of intestinal tract washing from the captured image (0045, 0047 describes intestinal preparation success rate);
determining that the endoscope reaches a cecum from the captured image (0045, 0047 describes enteroscope cecum intubation rate which requires a determination of reaching a cecum);
determining an end timing of an examination by the endoscope (0017, 0045 describes colonoscopy withdrawal time);
calculating an observation time based on a timing that the endoscope reaches the cecum and the end timing (0017, 0045 describes colonoscopy withdrawal time); and
generating an examination report including the observation time, the degree of intestinal tract washing, a presence or absence of reaching the cecum of the endoscope, and a detection result of the lesion including the positional information of the lesion (0029 describes providing comprehensive reports of procedural metrics disclosed above)”.
Yu discloses for claim 10, “A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program, the program causing a computer to execute processing of:
acquiring a captured image by an endoscope (0033);
acquiring positional information of the endoscope (0010, 0025 describes automatically identifying the digestive tract site and identifying location features as positional information);
detecting a lesion from the captured image (0034 describes identifying lesions);
determining a degree of intestinal tract washing from the captured image (0045, 0047 describes intestinal preparation success rate);
determining that the endoscope reaches a cecum from the captured image (0045, 0047 describes enteroscope cecum intubation rate which requires a determination of reaching a cecum);
determining an end timing of an examination by the endoscope (0017, 0045 describes colonoscopy withdrawal time);
calculating an observation time based on a timing that the endoscope reaches the cecum and the end timing (0017, 0045 describes colonoscopy withdrawal time); and
generating an examination report including the observation time, the degree of intestinal tract washing, a presence or absence of reaching the cecum of the endoscope, and a detection result of the lesion including the positional information of the lesion (0029 describes providing comprehensive reports of procedural metrics disclosed above)”.
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) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Koizumi US 20210219817.
Yu does not disclose for claim 8, “The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the processor determines a timing at which an instruction of ending the examination is inputted as the end timing of the examination”.
Koizumi teaches in the same field of endeavor, a user issued examination end instruction for colonoscopy (0048). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the modification of Koizumi into the invention of Yu in order to configure the information processing device e.g. as claimed because it allows increased user control of the endoscopy procedure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAE K WOO whose telephone number is (571)272-0837. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-2:30p, 6p-9p.
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, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached at (571) 272-4963. 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.
/Jae Woo/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/ANH TUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
3/3/26