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 .
Election/Restriction
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-13, drawn to ultrasonic applications on bones (skull), classified in G01N29/04 (solid).
II. Claims 14-20, drawn to ultrasonic applications on blood vessels with microbubbles, classified in A61B5/02007 (evaluating blood vessel condition).
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II are related as subcombinations disclosed as usable together in a single combination. The subcombinations are distinct if they do not overlap in scope and are not obvious variants, and if it is shown that at least one subcombination is separately usable. In the instant case, subcombination I has separate utility such as ultrasonic application on bones (skull) without the consideration of microbubbles in blood vessels. See MPEP § 806.05(d).
The examiner has required restriction between subcombinations usable together. Where applicant elects a subcombination and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification.
the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter.
the inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes /subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
During a telephone conversation with Ryan A. Schneider (404-885-2773) (#45,083) on 1/4/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention I, claims 1-13. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cretin (US. Pub. No. 2015/0122028 A1; hereinafter “CRETIN”) in view of Kraeutner et al. (US. 6,130,641; “KRAEUNTER”).
Regarding claim 1, CRETIN teaches a method comprising:
providing a first set of ultrasound waves through an arbitrarily heterogenous media and to a region of interest propagating at a first sound speed (see CRETIN, fig. 2a,2b, oscillator 24, fig. 3, pair 25, SOS soft, para. [0044-46,49]);
providing a second set of ultrasound waves through the arbitrarily heterogenous media and to the region of interest propagating at a second sound speed being different than the first sound speed (see CRETIN, fig. 4a,4b, para. [0056-62], SOS bone);
calculating an angular spectrum of signals emanating from the region of interest and through the arbitrarily heterogenous media, the angular spectrum at least in part based on the first sound speed and the second sound speed (see CRETIN, para. [0115]); and
generating an echo image for display with the angular spectrum (see CRETIN, para. [0116]).
CRETIN is silent to teaching that wherein generating a pixel intensity field.
In the same field of endeavor, KRAEUNTER teaches a method comprising generating a pixel intensity field (see KRAEUNTER, fig. 3A, 328, backscatter to image, col. 9, lines 58-65).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of CRETIN with the teaching of KRAEUNTER in order to provide better and improve image resolution for acoustic imaging (see KRAEUNTER, col. 3, lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of CRETIN and KRAEUNTER teaches the method of claim 1 further comprising phase correcting the angular spectrum based at least in part on the first sound speed and the second sound speed (see CRETIN, para. [0022-23,66]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of CRETIN and KRAEUNTER teaches the method of claim 1 further comprising:
dividing the angular spectrum into a first angular spectrum and a second angular spectrum; wherein the first angular spectrum is calculated based at least in part on the first sound speed; and wherein the second angular spectrum is calculated based at least in part on the second sound speed (see CRETIN, para. [0022-23,66]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of CRETIN and KRAEUNTER teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the arbitrarily heterogenous media comprises bone (see CRETIN, fig. 2, bone 10).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of CRETIN and KRAEUNTER teaches the method of claim 1, wherein:
providing the first set of ultrasound waves comprises providing, by a transducing platform comprising at least one transducer, the first set of ultrasound waves (see CRETIN, fig. 1, oscillator 24, fig. 2(a), para. [0043]);
providing the second set of ultrasound waves comprises providing, by the transducing platform, the second set of ultrasound waves (see CRETIN, fig. 4(a), para. [0056]);
the method further comprises:
receiving, at a receiving platform comprising at least one receiver, a first set of signals emanating from the region of interest (see CRETIN, fig. 2(b) reflected waves); and
receiving, at the receiving platform, a second set of signals emanating from the region of interest (see CRETIN, fig. 4(b), para. [0057]);
calculating the angular spectrum comprises calculating the angular spectrum of the first set of signals and the second set of signals (see CRETIN, para. [0115]); and
the first set of the signals and the second set of the signals correspond to radio frequency data associated with a scatterer (see CRETIN, para. [0046-50], reflected waves, fig. 2(b), 4(b)).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of CRETIN and KRAEUNTER teaches the method of claim 5, wherein:
the first set of the signals comprises a plurality of frequencies (see CRETIN, para. [0080-82]);
the pixel intensity field is populated based at least in part on a desired frequency (see KRAEUNTER, col. 9, lines 55-65]); and
the method further comprises selecting the desired frequency from the plurality of frequencies in which to populate the pixel intensity field (see KRAEUNTER, col. 9, lines 55-65]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of CRETIN and KRAEUNTER teaches the method of claim 5 further comprising:
phase correcting the angular spectrum based at least in part on the first sound speed and the second sound speed, thereby creating a phase-corrected angular spectrum (see CRETIN, para. [0022-23,66]);
determining, based at least in part on the phase-corrected angular spectrum, a desired pressure level and desired delay in which to provide a third set of ultrasound waves through the arbitrarily heterogenous media to target a point source within the region of interest (see CRETIN, fig. 5, S113,S114, para. [0105-6], looped back); and
providing, by the transducing platform, the third set of ultrasound waves through the arbitrarily heterogenous media and to the point source (see CRETIN, fig. 1, transducer 24).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of CRETIN and KRAEUNTER teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the scatterer is selected from the group consisting of tissue and microbubbles (see CRETIN, fig. 2, soft tissue 11).
Regarding claim 11, CRETIN teaches a system comprising:
a transducing platform comprising at least one transducer, the transducing platform configured to provide ultrasound waves (see CRETIN, fig. 1, transducer 24, transmission 34);
a receiving platform comprising at least one receiver, the receiving platform configured to receive signals emanating from a region of interest resulting from the ultrasound waves interacting with a scatterer (see CRETIN, fig. 1, transducer 24, reception 33, fig. 2b, 4b);
a processing platform comprising at least one processor, the processing platform in communication with the transducing platform and the receiving platform (see CRETIN, fig. 1, computer 35); and
a memory in communication with the processing platform and storing instructions that, when executed (see CRETIN, para. [0041]), cause the system to:
provide, by the transducing platform, a first set of ultrasound waves through an arbitrarily heterogenous media and to the region of interest, the first set of ultrasound waves being provided through a first section of the arbitrarily heterogenous media, the first set of ultrasound waves propagating through the first section of the arbitrarily heterogenous media at a first sound speed (see CRETIN, fig. 2a,2b, oscillator 24, fig. 3, pair 25, SOS soft, para. [0044-46,49]);
provide, by the transducing platform, a second set of ultrasound waves through the arbitrarily heterogenous media and to the region of interest, the second set of ultrasound waves being provided through a second section of the arbitrarily heterogenous media, the second set of ultrasound waves propagating through the second section of the arbitrarily heterogenous media at a second sound speed, the second sound speed being different than the first sound speed (see CRETIN, fig. 4a,4b, para. [0056-62], SOS bone);
calculate, by the processing platform, an angular spectrum of the signals at least in part based on the first sound speed and the second sound speed (see CRETIN, para. [0115]); and
generate, by the processing platform, an echo image for display with the angular spectrum (see CRETIN, para. [0116]).
CRETIN is silent to teaching that configured to generate a pixel intensity field.
In the same field of endeavor, KRAEUNTER teaches a device configured to generate a pixel intensity field (see KRAEUNTER, fig. 3A, 328, backscatter to image, col. 9, lines 58-65).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of CRETIN with the teaching of KRAEUNTER in order to provide better and improve image resolution for acoustic imaging (see KRAEUNTER, col. 3, lines 1-5).
Regarding claims 12 and 13, the dependent claims are interpreted and rejected for the same reasons as set forth above in claims 2 and 3, respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 10 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shi et al. (US. Pub. No. 2012/0165670) and Robert (2021/0196238) teach ultrasound systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEN WU HUANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7852. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10-6.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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.
/WEN W HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648