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 .
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.
Claims 11, 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ruchala (US 20180140272 A1; May 24, 2018).
Regarding claim 11, Ruchala teaches a non-uniform phantom for a photon counting computed tomography (PCCT) system, comprising:
a base material (Paragraph 27, Figure 2 Element 32); and
one or more known composition features embedded in the base material (Paragraph 27, Figure 3 Element 36), the one or more known composition features comprising a different material than the base material, wherein the one or more known composition features comprise clinically relevant object sizes and contrasts (Paragraph 27), and
wherein the base material and the one or more known composition features are selected based on one or more of a calibration method, a clinical purpose, and a research purpose (Paragraph 21).
Regarding claim 13, Ruchala teaches the non-uniform phantom of claim 11. Ruchala further teaches wherein the one or more known composition features comprise one or more of a hole, slot, recess, or bore in the base material (Paragraph 27, Seen in Figure 2).
Regarding claim 14, Ruchala teaches the non-uniform phantom of claim 13. Ruchala further teaches wherein the hole, slot, recess, or bore comprise a filler material (Paragraph 27).
Regarding claim 15, Ruchala teaches the non-uniform phantom of claim 14. Ruchala further teaches wherein the hole, slot, recess, or bore and the filler material comprise a standardized size, and wherein the filler material is interchangeable to assemble different material combinations (Paragraph 30).
Regarding claim 16, Ruchala teaches the non-uniform phantom of claim 11. Ruchala further teaches wherein the base material is air (Paragraph 31).
Regarding claim 17, Ruchala teaches the non-uniform phantom of claim 11. Ruchala further teaches wherein the non-uniform phantom comprises a cylindrical or elliptical base material and the one or more known composition features comprise micro or sub-micro scale beads of various materials and densities (Paragraph 31).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ruchala (US 20180140272 A1; May 24, 2018) in view of Wang (US 2024/0346716 A1; October 17, 2024).
Regarding claim 12, Ruchala teaches the non-uniform phantom of claim 11, but does not teach wherein the calibration method comprises correcting for one or both of charge sharing and detector crosstalk.
Wang teaches wherein the calibration method comprises correcting for one or both of charge sharing and detector crosstalk (Paragraph 92-93).
Therefore, from the teaching of Wang, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to specify the abovementioned limitations in order to ensure increased efficiency of the detector system by ensuring it is properly calibrated.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 and 18-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, none of the prior art of record specifies or makes obvious a method for a photon counting computed tomography (PCCT) system, the method comprising:
during a calibration of the PCCT system:
generating a detector response prediction for one or more known composition features of a non-uniform phantom;
performing a calibration scan of the non-uniform phantom at a plurality of positions between an X-ray source and a detector of the PCCT system;
measuring an actual detector response at each of the plurality of positions;
generating a correction factor based on the detector response prediction and the actual detector response at each of the plurality of positions; and
adjusting a calibration algorithm based on the correction factor.
Regarding claim 18, none of the prior art of record specifies or makes obvious a photon counting computed tomography (PCCT) system, comprising:
an X-ray source that emits a beam of X-rays toward a subject to be imaged;
a photon counting detector that receives the beam of X-rays attenuated by the subject;
a non-uniform phantom; and
a data acquisition system (DAS) operably connected to the photon counting detector and configured to:
during a calibration of the PCCT system,
generate a detector response prediction for one or more known composition features of the non-uniform phantom;
perform a calibration scan of the non-uniform phantom at a plurality of positions between the X-ray source and the photon counting detector of the PCCT system;
measure an actual detector response at each of the plurality of positions;
generate a correction factor based on the detector response prediction and the actual detector response at each of the plurality of positions; and
adjust one or more calibration algorithms based on the correction factor.
References such as Zhan teaches (US 20220296202 A; September 22, 2022) a calibration method comprising: acquiring sinogram data by scanning a symmetrical phantom using a plurality of detector channels; generating mirror-copied sinogram data by mirror-copying at least one of first sinogram data and second sinogram data of the acquired sinogram data, wherein the first sinogram data and the second sinogram data are generated by dividing the sinogram data at a center detector channel of the plurality of detector channels; outputting a first reconstructed image by reconstructing the mirror-copied sinogram data; and determining a calibration parameter based on the first reconstructed image. (Claim 1)
Additionally, references such as Gilat-Schmidt (WO 2023/044114A1; March 23, 2023) teaches a methods and systems are provided for downsampling detector data in a computed tomography imaging system. In an example, a method for a photon-counting computed tomography (PCCT) system includes, during a scan of an imaging subject, obtaining detector data from a photon-counting detector of the PCCT system, the detector data comprising, for each pixel or detector element of the photon-counting detector, photon counts partitioned into a plurality of energy bins based on an energy imparted by each photon on the photon-counting detector, applying a bin factor to the plurality of energy bins for each pixel to downsample the plurality of energy bins into a reduced number of energy bins, and reconstructing one or more images from the reduced number of energy bins. (Abstract)
Lastly, references such as Dafni ( US 2010/0195804 A1; August 5, 2010) teaches a method for calibration of a CT scanner having an x-ray source and a detector having an axial extent in the scanner, the source being rotatable about an epicenter between the source and detector, the method comprising: sequentially positioning a phantom having a non-circular cross section and a length commensurate with the extent of the detector at a plurality of positions between the X ray source and detector array of said CT scanner or sequentially positioning a plurality of phantoms each having a non-circular cross section and a length commensurate with the extent of the detector at a plurality of positions between the X ray source and detector array of said CT scanner; acquiring calibration attenuation data for X rays that have been attenuated by traversing the phantom positioned at each of said plurality of positions; and calculating calibration corrections for CT scanner scan data from said calibration attenuation data (Claim 1).
However, none of the prior art of record specifies or makes obvious the abovementioned limitations.
However, none of the prior art of record specifies or makes obvious the abovementioned limitations.
The balance of claims are allowable for at least the abovementioned reasons.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GISSELLE GUTIERREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4672. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5:00PM.
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, Uzma Alam, can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/GISSELLE GUTIERREZ/
Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884