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
Claim objections and interpretations under 35 USC 112(f) are withdrawn.
Rejections under 35 USC 112(b) are withdrawn except for those recited below.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites “and the appropriate gamma curve decided based on the specified texture parameter is appropriate for the user” is grammatically incorrect. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5 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 1-5 recite one or both of the following indefinite terms: “texture parameter” and “gamma curve”. Both terms have different interpretations in the art, rendering it unclear what particular definition is being relied upon in the claims. Accordingly, the Specification is being relied upon to interpret these terms, and the claims require amendment to clarify what exactly is meant by these terms.
The “texture parameter” is being interpreted in view of Paragraph 45: “In the present embodiment, the texture parameter includes a parameter indicating a ratio of the clutter signal CS (the integrated value of the clutter signal CS in a dynamic range D in FIG. 2 ) included in the dynamic range D defined by the gamma curve GC to the blood flow signal BF (the integrated value of the entire blood flow signal BF in FIG. 2 ), and a parameter (in other words, a blood flow signal cutoff value BFC) indicating a range of the blood flow signal BF to be included in the dynamic range D.”)
The “gamma curve” is being interpreted in view of Paragraphs 8-9 and 65 and Figure 8 as a function that defines a dynamic range between cluster suppression cutoff value and a blood flow signal cutoff value.
Claim 2 contains the following antecedence issues: “the gamma curve set by a user” (interpreted as a new element) and “the texture parameter appropriate for the user” (interpreted as the predicted texture parameter appropriate for the user).
Claim 3 is rejected as dependent on claim 2.
Claim 4 recites the following antecedence issue: “the gamma curves stored in advance” which is being interpreted as a new element.
Claim 5 is rejected as dependent on claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 USC 112(b) and claim 2 is additionally objected to, but the claims would be allowable if amended to overcome these rejections and objection. Note that this notice of Allowable Subject Matter is issued in view of the claim interpretations outlined in the 35 USC 112(b) rejections above. In particular, see the interpretations of “texture parameter” and “gamma curve” described above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With respect to claim 1, in addition to other limitations in the claims the Prior Art of Record fails to teach, disclose or render obvious the applicant' s invention as claimed, in particular:
Claim 1 recites: “An ultrasound image processing apparatus comprising a processor and a program storage device tangibly embodying a program of instructions executable by the processor to perform a method comprising:
(a) inputting target power distribution information to be processed to a trained learning model trained using, as training data, a combination including (a) training power distribution information indicating a power distribution of a Doppler signal obtained by transmitting and receiving an ultrasound wave to and from a subject, and (b) a training texture parameter indicating a gamma curve, which indicates a relationship between power of the Doppler signal and a pixel value in a Doppler image and is appropriate for the power distribution information, and specifying a specified texture parameter appropriate for the target power distribution information;
(b) deciding on an appropriate gamma curve that is appropriate for the target power distribution information, based on the specified texture parameter;
and (c) forming a Doppler image in which the power of the Doppler signal is shown, based on the target power distribution information and the appropriate gamma curve.”
Mo teaches a Doppler signal generation method that includes determining noise level and peak value amplitude, setting a dynamic range, and applying the dynamic range to a Doppler image for display. Loupas teaches the calculation and use of a gain adjustment based on spectral Doppler in medical ultrasound. Finlayson teaches a neural network that refines an input histogram to define a tone map to be used for image enhancement. Mo2 teaches neural network processing for adjustment Doppler signal inputs. Lee teaches color Doppler image generation wherein ultrasound data is acquired and a clutter filtering process is performed in addition to blending using velocity, power, and a calculated qualification curve. However, none of these references disclose the bolded limitations above, in particular, the use of the texture parameters and gamma curves as interpreted under 35 USC 112(b).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 AARON JOSEPH SORRIN whose telephone number is (703)756-1565. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 5pm.
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, Sumati Lefkowitz can be reached at (571) 272-3638. 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.
/AARON JOSEPH SORRIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2672
/SUMATI LEFKOWITZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2672
