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 Amendment
The amendment filed 11/26/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-4, 7-11, and 14-17 remain pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 4, 7-10 and 14-17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 2, the “at least two imaging devices” should read “at least two medical imaging devices”.
In claim 4, line 1, the “method” should read the “system”.
In claims 7 and 14, line 1, “imaging progress information” should read “the imaging progress information”.
In claims 8-9, line 3; claim 10, line 10; claim 15, line 2; claim 16, lines 3 and 6; and claim 17, line 12; “the medical imaging devices” should read “the at least two medical imaging devices”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 1-2, 9-10, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shen et al (US20220399107), hereinafter Shen, in view of Xiang (US 20240023909), hereinafter, Xiang, and Seltzer et al (US 20120109682), hereinafter, Seltzer.
Regarding claim 1, Shen teaches a medical imaging system (100) (200) (300) (600), comprising:
at least two imaging devices (104, 134) (604) configured to image a subject (“each of the medical imaging devices 104 may correspond to a different imaging modality (i.e., X-ray, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound (US), CT, positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission CT (SPECT)” [0031]; Figs. 1-3 and 6);
a memory storing instructions (114, 132); and
at least one processor (102, 130) (316) configured to execute the instructions to:
control the at least two medical imaging devices to perform communication with each other (“Selecting an icon or inputting data causes the processor 130 or the processor 112 to execute computer readable program instructions stored in the system memory 132 or the system memory 114 to perform a task… the user device 106 is in further communication with the imaging devices imaging devices 104. In these embodiments, a user of the user device 106 may use an external device 136 to select a “start” icon or the like which causes the processor 130 to control a medical imaging device 104 to begin an imaging procedure.” [0034]; the IAPS 102 may be configured to interface with the imaging devices 104, such that the IAPS 102 may be configured to select an imaging device 104 corresponding to an appropriate imaging modality for a given scanner level protocol.” [0035]; Fig. 1);
generate an imaging protocol (710) (804) for different sites to be imaged of the subject, the imaging protocol (“Referring now to FIG. 7, a flow chart of a method 700 for automating the selection of medical imaging protocols is shown in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. Various aspects of the method 700, 800, 900, 1000, 1100, and 1200 depicted in FIGS. 7-12 may be carried out by a “configured processor.” [0067] “At 710, in response to determining the physician does not need to further review the physician order, the configured processor generates a radiologist level protocol and, in some embodiments, outputs the generated radiologist level protocol to a display. A radiologist level protocol may include an imaging modality, a region to be imaged, an imaging order/direction, and a patient position.” [0075]), the imaging protocol comprising an allocation of the different sites to be imaged in the at least two medical imaging devices (“At 1006, the configured processor identifies a plurality of protocol tags for the selected protocol…The plurality of protocol tags may uniquely identify a plurality of attribute values corresponding to an imaging modality, a plurality of body regions (i.e., three body regions), a modality modifier, and a pharmaceutical indicator. For example, the imaging modality may be “CT,” the plurality of body regions may be “abdomen,” “pelvis,” and “lower extremity,” [0103] “each of the subsets may include protocol tags corresponding to the same attributes (i.e., imaging modality, body regions,” [0114]);
send the imaging protocol to each of the at least two medical imaging devices (718) (814) (“when executed, the IAPP 116 causes the IAPS 102 to generate a radiologist level protocol as a function of received medical information, select one or more scanner level protocols as a function of a radiologist level protocol and output the radiologist level protocol and/or the selected scanner level protocol(s) to a display.” [0030] “At 718, the configured processor selects a scanner level protocol and a medical imaging device 104.” [0081]; “At 1208, in response to determining at least one section count of a received scanner level protocol exceeds the threshold, the configured processor outputs the at least one scanner level protocol to a display.” [0125]. The imaging protocol is sent to a display, which is one of the at least two medical imaging devices, and to a scanner(s) to execute a scanner level protocol); and
control operation of the at least two medical imaging devices based on the imaging protocol (724) (820) (“a series of executed medical imaging protocols" [0040]; “Accordingly, scanner level protocol may therefore be assigned to the imaging device 104 corresponding to a given imaging modality and thus the selected imaging device 104 is configured to execute the selected scanner level protocol." [0082]. “At 724, in response to determining the technologist has confirmed a scanner level protocol or in response to a user supplying a protocol, the configured processor initiates an imaging procedure at the selected medical imaging device 104 based on confirmed scanner level protocol. Specifically, configured processor may translate the confirmed scanner level protocol to a scanner level protocol executable, which may then be executed by the medical imaging as the scan medical imaging procedure." [0085]; Figs. 7-8).
Shen does not teach the controlling operation of the at least two medical imaging devices based on the imaging protocol to simultaneously image the subject;
receiving imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices; and automatically updating, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices.
However, in the medical scanning systems field of endeavor, Xiang discloses systems, devices, and methods for scanning parameter determination, which is analogous art. Xiang teaches the controlling operation of the at least two medical imaging devices (PET-CT, PET-MRI) based on the imaging protocol to simultaneously image the subject (“The multi-modality scanner may perform multi-modality imaging simultaneously ... For example, the PET-CT device may generate structural X-ray CT image data and functional PET image data simultaneously ... The PET-MRI device may generate MRI data and PET data simultaneously ...” [0038]).
Therefore, based on Xiang’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Shen to have the controlling operation of the at least two medical imaging devices based on the imaging protocol to simultaneously image the subject, as taught by Xiang, in order to facilitate multi-modality imaging of a patient thereby reducing the overall imaging time.
Shen modified by Xiang does not teach receiving imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices; and automatically updating, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices.
However, in the ultrasound systems field of endeavor, Seltzer discloses a method and system for managing ultrasound operations using machine learning and/or non-GUI interactions, which is analogous art. Seltzer teaches receiving imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices (“the current status of the imaging procedure.” [0040]; “the imaging procedure has been performed.” [0042]; The orchestrator 114 can communicate with the various scanners, determine their … availability based on … load protocols,” [0064]); and
automatically updating, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices (“The imaging workflow can be updated to reflect the current status of the imaging procedure.” [0040]. “At 924, the patient is scanned. This includes performing one or more scans (e.g., one or multi-slice) using one or more imaging modalities. The imaging workflow can be updated to indicate that the imaging procedure has been performed.” [0042] “Turning to FIG. 4, the machine(s) 106 includes various imaging scanners such as computer tomography (CT) 402, positron emission tomography (PET) 404, single photon emission tomography (SPECT) 406, ultrasound (US) 408, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) 410, x-ray 412, and/or other scanners. The orchestrator 114 can communicate with the various scanners, determine their capabilities and availability based on an electronic calendar, load protocols, and/or otherwise communicate with the scanners.” [0064]).
Therefore, based on Seltzer’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Shen and Xiang to receive imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices; and automatically update, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices, as taught by Seltzer, in order to facilitate the multi-modality imaging of the patient thereby reducing the overall imaging time.
Regarding claim 2, Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer teaches the medical imaging system according to claim 1, wherein Shen teaches that the at least two medical imaging devices comprises a scanning device (104) (204) and a display device (134) (602, 604), the scanning device being configured to scan at least one site to be imaged of the subject to obtain imaging data comprising information of the at least one site to be imaged (“a CT scan of the abdomen" [0023]), and the display device being configured to receive and display a signal from the at least one processor (“The one or more devices 604 may include components of the medical imaging system 100, the CT system 200, and the CT system 300. One or more nodes 602 may communicate with the devices 604 thereby allowing the computing devices 602 to provide software services to the devices 604" [0066]; Figs. 1-3, 6 “Each of the scanner level protocols and the medical imaging device 104 may either be automatically selected by the configured process and confirmed by the technologist, or one or both of the scanner level protocol and the medical imaging device 104 may instead be manually confirmed/selected by the technologist.” [0086]).
Regarding claim 9, Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer teaches the medical imaging system according to claim 1, wherein Shen teaches that the communication comprises:
controlling the medical imaging devices to perform communication with each other based on a predetermined communication protocol (“a same network” [0028]); or,
selecting a communication protocol from among at least two communication protocols for the medical imaging devices to perform communication with each other (“the IAPS 102, the imaging devices 104, the user device 106, the IT systems 108, and the global protocol library 110 may be connected to a network (i.e., a wide area network (WAN), a local area network (LAN), a public network (the Internet), etc.) which allows the IAPS 102, the imaging devices 104, the user device 106, the IT systems 108, and the global protocol library 110 to communicate with one another when connected to a same network. In some embodiments, the network may be regarded as a private network connection and may include, for example, a virtual private network or an encryption or other security mechanism employed over the public Internet.” [0028]; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, Shen teaches a medical imaging method (700) (800) (“Referring now to FIG. 7, a flow chart of a method 700 for automating the selection of medical imaging protocols is shown in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. Various aspects of the method 700, 800, 900, 1000, 1100, and 1200 depicted in FIGS. 7-12 may be carried out by a “configured processor.” [0067]), characterized by comprising:
controlling at least two imaging devices (104, 134) (604) to perform communication with each other (“a same network” [0028]) (“the user device 106 is in further communication with the imaging devices imaging devices 104…a user of the user device 106 may use an external device 136 to select a “start” icon or the like which causes the processor 130 to control a medical imaging device 104 to begin an imaging procedure.” [0034]; “the IAPS 102 may be configured to interface with the imaging devices 104, such that the IAPS 102 may be configured to select an imaging device 104 corresponding to an appropriate imaging modality for a given scanner level protocol.” [0035]; Fig. 1. “The one or more devices 604 may include components of the medical imaging system 100, the CT system 200, and the CT system 300. One or more nodes 602 may communicate with the devices 604 thereby allowing the computing devices 602 to provide software services to the devices 604" [0066]; Figs. 1-3, 6. “Each of the scanner level protocols and the medical imaging device 104 may either be automatically selected by the configured process and confirmed by the technologist, or one or both of the scanner level protocol and the medical imaging device 104 may instead be manually confirmed/selected by the technologist.” [0086]);
generating an imaging protocol (710) (804) for different sites to be imaged of a same subject to be imaged (“Referring now to FIG. 7, a flow chart of a method 700 for automating the selection of medical imaging protocols is shown in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. Various aspects of the method 700, 800, 900, 1000, 1100, and 1200 depicted in FIGS. 7-12 may be carried out by a “configured processor.” [0067] “At 710, in response to determining the physician does not need to further review the physician order, the configured processor generates a radiologist level protocol and, in some embodiments, outputs the generated radiologist level protocol to a display. A radiologist level protocol may include an imaging modality, a region to be imaged, an imaging order/direction, and a patient position.” [0075]), the imaging protocol comprising an allocation of the different sites to be imaged in the at least two medical imaging devices (“At 1006, the configured processor identifies a plurality of protocol tags for the selected protocol…The plurality of protocol tags may uniquely identify a plurality of attribute values corresponding to an imaging modality, a plurality of body regions (i.e., three body regions), a modality modifier, and a pharmaceutical indicator. For example, the imaging modality may be “CT,” the plurality of body regions may be “abdomen,” “pelvis,” and “lower extremity,” [0103] “each of the subsets may include protocol tags corresponding to the same attributes (i.e., imaging modality, body regions,” [0114]);
controlling operation of the at least two medical imaging devices based on the imaging protocol (724) (820) (“a series of executed medical imaging protocols" [0040]; “Accordingly, scanner level protocol may therefore be assigned to the imaging device 104 corresponding to a given imaging modality and thus the selected imaging device 104 is configured to execute the selected scanner level protocol." [0082]. “At 724, in response to determining the technologist has confirmed a scanner level protocol or in response to a user supplying a protocol, the configured processor initiates an imaging procedure at the selected medical imaging device 104 based on confirmed scanner level protocol. Specifically, configured processor may translate the confirmed scanner level protocol to a scanner level protocol executable, which may then be executed by the medical imaging as the scan medical imaging procedure." [0085]; Figs. 7-8).
Shen does not teach the controlling operation of the at least two medical imaging devices based on the imaging protocol to simultaneously image the subject;
receiving imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices; and automatically updating, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices.
However, in the medical scanning systems field of endeavor, Xiang discloses systems, devices, and methods for scanning parameter determination, which is analogous art. Xiang teaches the controlling operation of the at least two medical imaging devices (PET-CT, PET-MRI) based on the imaging protocol to simultaneously image the subject (“The multi-modality scanner may perform multi-modality imaging simultaneously ... For example, the PET-CT device may generate structural X-ray CT image data and functional PET image data simultaneously ... The PET-MRI device may generate MRI data and PET data simultaneously ...” [0038]).
Therefore, based on Xiang’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Shen to have the controlling operation of the at least two medical imaging devices based on the imaging protocol to simultaneously image the subject, as taught by Xiang, in order to facilitate multi-modality imaging of a patient thereby reducing the overall imaging time.
Shen modified by Xiang does not teach receiving imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices; and automatically updating, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices.
However, in the ultrasound systems field of endeavor, Seltzer discloses a method and system for managing ultrasound operations using machine learning and/or non-GUI interactions, which is analogous art. Seltzer teaches receiving imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices (“the current status of the imaging procedure.” [0040]; “the imaging procedure has been performed.” [0042]; The orchestrator 114 can communicate with the various scanners, determine their … availability based on … load protocols,” [0064]); and
automatically updating, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices (“The imaging workflow can be updated to reflect the current status of the imaging procedure.” [0040]. “At 924, the patient is scanned. This includes performing one or more scans (e.g., one or multi-slice) using one or more imaging modalities. The imaging workflow can be updated to indicate that the imaging procedure has been performed.” [0042] “Turning to FIG. 4, the machine(s) 106 includes various imaging scanners such as computer tomography (CT) 402, positron emission tomography (PET) 404, single photon emission tomography (SPECT) 406, ultrasound (US) 408, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) 410, x-ray 412, and/or other scanners. The orchestrator 114 can communicate with the various scanners, determine their capabilities and availability based on an electronic calendar, load protocols, and/or otherwise communicate with the scanners.” [0064]).
Therefore, based on Seltzer’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Shen and Xiang to receive imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices; and automatically update, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices, as taught by Seltzer, in order to facilitate the multi-modality imaging of the patient thereby reducing the overall imaging time.
Regarding claim 16, Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer teaches the medical imaging method according to claim 10, wherein Shen teaches that the communication comprises:
controlling the medical imaging devices to perform communication with each other based on a predetermined communication protocol (“a same network” [0028]); or,
selecting a communication protocol from among at least two communication protocols for the medical imaging devices to perform communication with each other (“the IAPS 102, the imaging devices 104, the user device 106, the IT systems 108, and the global protocol library 110 may be connected to a network (i.e., a wide area network (WAN), a local area network (LAN), a public network (the Internet), etc.) which allows the IAPS 102, the imaging devices 104, the user device 106, the IT systems 108, and the global protocol library 110 to communicate with one another when connected to a same network. In some embodiments, the network may be regarded as a private network connection and may include, for example, a virtual private network or an encryption or other security mechanism employed over the public Internet.” [0028]; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Shen teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium (114, 132), having a computer program stored therein, wherein the computer program has at least one code segment, and the at least one code segment is executable by a machine (“Selecting an icon or inputting data causes the processor 130 or the processor 112 to execute computer readable program instructions stored in the system memory 132 or the system memory 114 to perform a task… a user of the user device 106 may use an external device 136 to select a “start” icon or the like which causes the processor 130 to control a medical imaging device 104 to begin an imaging procedure.” [0034]; “Various aspects of the method 700, 800, 900, 1000, 1100, and 1200 depicted in FIGS. 7-12 may be carried out by a “configured processor.” [0067]; Figs. 1, 3, and 6) to cause the machine to:
control at least two medical imaging devices (104, 134) (604) (“each of the medical imaging devices 104 may correspond to a different imaging modality (i.e., X-ray, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound (US), CT, positron emission tomography (PET), single-photon emission CT (SPECT)” [0031]; Figs. 1-3 and 6) to perform communication with each other (“Selecting an icon or inputting data causes the processor 130 or the processor 112 to execute computer readable program instructions stored in the system memory 132 or the system memory 114 to perform a task… the user device 106 is in further communication with the imaging devices imaging devices 104. In these embodiments, a user of the user device 106 may use an external device 136 to select a “start” icon or the like which causes the processor 130 to control a medical imaging device 104 to begin an imaging procedure.” [0034]; the IAPS 102 may be configured to interface with the imaging devices 104, such that the IAPS 102 may be configured to select an imaging device 104 corresponding to an appropriate imaging modality for a given scanner level protocol.” [0035]; Fig. 1);
generate an imaging protocol (710) (804) for different sites to be imaged of the subject, the imaging protocol (“Referring now to FIG. 7, a flow chart of a method 700 for automating the selection of medical imaging protocols is shown in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. Various aspects of the method 700, 800, 900, 1000, 1100, and 1200 depicted in FIGS. 7-12 may be carried out by a “configured processor.” [0067] “At 710, in response to determining the physician does not need to further review the physician order, the configured processor generates a radiologist level protocol and, in some embodiments, outputs the generated radiologist level protocol to a display. A radiologist level protocol may include an imaging modality, a region to be imaged, an imaging order/direction, and a patient position.” [0075]), the imaging protocol comprising an allocation of the different sites to be imaged in the at least two medical imaging devices (“At 1006, the configured processor identifies a plurality of protocol tags for the selected protocol…The plurality of protocol tags may uniquely identify a plurality of attribute values corresponding to an imaging modality, a plurality of body regions (i.e., three body regions), a modality modifier, and a pharmaceutical indicator. For example, the imaging modality may be “CT,” the plurality of body regions may be “abdomen,” “pelvis,” and “lower extremity,” [0103] “each of the subsets may include protocol tags corresponding to the same attributes (i.e., imaging modality, body regions,” [0114]);
send the imaging protocol to each of the at least two medical imaging devices (718) (814) (“when executed, the IAPP 116 causes the IAPS 102 to generate a radiologist level protocol as a function of received medical information, select one or more scanner level protocols as a function of a radiologist level protocol and output the radiologist level protocol and/or the selected scanner level protocol(s) to a display.” [0030] “At 718, the configured processor selects a scanner level protocol and a medical imaging device 104.” [0081]; “At 1208, in response to determining at least one section count of a received scanner level protocol exceeds the threshold, the configured processor outputs the at least one scanner level protocol to a display.” [0125]. The imaging protocol is sent to a display, which is one of the at least two medical imaging devices, and to a scanner(s) to execute a scanner level protocol); and
control operation of the at least two medical imaging devices based on the imaging protocol (724) (820) (“a series of executed medical imaging protocols" [0040]; “Accordingly, scanner level protocol may therefore be assigned to the imaging device 104 corresponding to a given imaging modality and thus the selected imaging device 104 is configured to execute the selected scanner level protocol." [0082]. “At 724, in response to determining the technologist has confirmed a scanner level protocol or in response to a user supplying a protocol, the configured processor initiates an imaging procedure at the selected medical imaging device 104 based on confirmed scanner level protocol. Specifically, configured processor may translate the confirmed scanner level protocol to a scanner level protocol executable, which may then be executed by the medical imaging as the scan medical imaging procedure." [0085]; Figs. 7-8).
Shen does not teach the controlling operation of the at least two medical imaging devices based on the imaging protocol to simultaneously image the subject;
receiving imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices; and automatically updating, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices.
However, in the medical scanning systems field of endeavor, Xiang discloses systems, devices, and methods for scanning parameter determination, which is analogous art. Xiang teaches the controlling operation of the at least two medical imaging devices (PET-CT, PET-MRI) based on the imaging protocol to simultaneously image the subject (“The multi-modality scanner may perform multi-modality imaging simultaneously ... For example, the PET-CT device may generate structural X-ray CT image data and functional PET image data simultaneously ... The PET-MRI device may generate MRI data and PET data simultaneously ...” [0038]).
Therefore, based on Xiang’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Shen to have the controlling operation of the at least two medical imaging devices based on the imaging protocol to simultaneously image the subject, as taught by Xiang, in order to facilitate multi-modality imaging of a patient thereby reducing the overall imaging time.
Shen modified by Xiang does not teach receiving imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices; and automatically updating, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices.
However, in the ultrasound systems field of endeavor, Seltzer discloses a method and system for managing ultrasound operations using machine learning and/or non-GUI interactions, which is analogous art. Seltzer teaches receiving imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices (“the current status of the imaging procedure.” [0040]; “the imaging procedure has been performed.” [0042]; The orchestrator 114 can communicate with the various scanners, determine their … availability based on … load protocols,” [0064]); and
automatically updating, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices (“The imaging workflow can be updated to reflect the current status of the imaging procedure.” [0040]. “At 924, the patient is scanned. This includes performing one or more scans (e.g., one or multi-slice) using one or more imaging modalities. The imaging workflow can be updated to indicate that the imaging procedure has been performed.” [0042] “Turning to FIG. 4, the machine(s) 106 includes various imaging scanners such as computer tomography (CT) 402, positron emission tomography (PET) 404, single photon emission tomography (SPECT) 406, ultrasound (US) 408, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) 410, x-ray 412, and/or other scanners. The orchestrator 114 can communicate with the various scanners, determine their capabilities and availability based on an electronic calendar, load protocols, and/or otherwise communicate with the scanners.” [0064]).
Therefore, based on Seltzer’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Shen and Xiang to receive imaging progress information of at least one of the medical imaging devices; and automatically update, based on the imaging progress information, the imaging protocol for each of the at least two medical imaging devices, as taught by Seltzer, in order to facilitate the multi-modality imaging of the patient thereby reducing the overall imaging time.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer as applied to claim 2, and further in view of Fiegoli et al (US 20230404541), hereinafter, Fiegoli.
Regarding claim 3, Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer teaches the medical imaging system of claim 2.
Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer does not teach that the at least two medical imaging devices comprise an ultrasound imaging device comprising at least one patch probe.
However, in the ultrasound systems field of endeavor, Fiegoli discloses a method and system for managing ultrasound operations using machine learning and/or non-GUI interactions, which is analogous art. Fiegoli teaches the medical imaging device comprising an ultrasound imaging device comprising at least one patch probe (“FIG. 9 shows an example patch that includes an example ultrasound probe in accordance with one or more embodiments of the technology.” [0025]; “the single ultrasound probe may be embodied in a patch that may be coupled to a patient.” [0051]).
Therefore, based on Fiegoli’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the invention of Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer to employ the at least two medical imaging devices that comprise an ultrasound imaging device comprising at least one patch probe, as taught by Fiegoli, in order to facilitate coupling ultrasound probes to a patient.
Claims 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer as applied to claims 1 and 10, and further in view of Nally et al (US 20240115238), hereinafter, Nally.
Regarding claim 4, Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer teaches the medical imaging system of claim 1.
Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer does not teach that the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instruction to: acquire operation information of the at least two medical imaging devices, the operation information comprising at least one of computing power information, health information, and power supply information; and control, based on the operation information, at least one of the at least two medical imaging devices to be a master device.
However, in the display devices field of endeavor, Nally discloses an ultrasound scanner with display interface, which is analogous art. Nally teaches that the at least one processor (“The display device” [0064]) is further configured to execute the instruction to:
acquire operation information of the at least two medical imaging devices, the operation information comprising at least one of computing power information, health information, and power supply information (“a scanner availability, a battery/charge status” [0064]); and
control, based on the operation information, at least one of the at least two medical imaging devices to be a master device (“scanner is suitable to select for an examination.” [0064]) (“the data can be used for communicating a status of the scanner to the display device, e.g., a scanner availability, a battery/charge status, a state of cleanliness, the type of transducer in the scanner, etc. For example, the scanners can be housed in an ultrasound cart, battery charger, etc., and a user can swipe a display device across the scanners. The display device can then display the status data for each of the scanners, and the user and/or display device can determine which scanner is suitable to select for an examination.” [0064]).
Therefore, based on Nally’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the invention of Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer to employ the at least one processor that is further configured to execute the instruction to: acquire operation information of the at least two medical imaging devices, the operation information comprising at least one of computing power information, health information, and power supply information; and control, based on the operation information, at least one of the at least two medical imaging devices to be a master device, as taught by Nally, in order to simplify making appropriate scanner selection thereby reducing the examination time.
Regarding claim 11, Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer teaches the medical imaging method according to claim 10.
Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer does not teach acquiring operation information of the at least two medical imaging devices, the operation information comprising at least one of computing power information, health information, and power supply information; and controlling, based on the operation information, at least one of the at least two medical imaging devices to be a master device.
However, in the display devices field of endeavor, Nally discloses an ultrasound scanner with display interface, which is analogous art. Nally teaches acquiring operation information of the at least two medical imaging devices, the operation information comprising at least one of computing power information, health information, and power supply information (“a scanner availability, a battery/charge status” [0064]); and
controlling, based on the operation information, at least one of the at least two medical imaging devices to be a master device (“scanner is suitable to select for an examination.” [0064]) (“the data can be used for communicating a status of the scanner to the display device, e.g., a scanner availability, a battery/charge status, a state of cleanliness, the type of transducer in the scanner, etc. For example, the scanners can be housed in an ultrasound cart, battery charger, etc., and a user can swipe a display device across the scanners. The display device can then display the status data for each of the scanners, and the user and/or display device can determine which scanner is suitable to select for an examination.” [0064]).
Therefore, based on Nally’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the invention of Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer to employ the steps of acquiring operation information of the at least two medical imaging devices, the operation information comprising at least one of computing power information, health information, and power supply information; and controlling, based on the operation information, at least one of the at least two medical imaging devices to be a master device, as taught by Nally, in order to simplify making appropriate scanner selection thereby reducing the examination time.
Claims 7-8 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer as applied to claims 1 and 10, and further in view of Kawamura et al (US 20130023753), hereinafter, Kawamura.
Regarding claim 7, Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer teaches the medical imaging system of claim 1.
Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer does not teach that the imaging protocol further comprises imaging progress information and/or imaging result information.
However, in the MRI systems field of endeavor, Kawamura discloses magnetic resonance imaging apparatus and SAR adjustment method, which is analogous art. Kawamura teaches that the imaging protocol further comprises imaging progress information (1401) and/or imaging result information (“When the predicted SAR value of the pulse sequence is equal to or greater than the upper SAR limit, the apparatus performs an exchange of pulse sequences or a waiting time insertion automatically, thereby performing the re-editing of the protocol automatically.” [0099]; “during the progress of the protocol, the operator may exchange the pulse sequences in a non-executed portion of the protocol or may insert, edit, and delete a waiting time in a non-executed portion. As an example, in FIG. 14, at the right side of the vertical line 1401 showing the current situation of the protocol progress, imaging has not yet been started in the pulse sequences 4 and 5. Accordingly, an operation of exchanging these pulse sequences is possible. In addition, it is also possible to insert, edit, and delete a waiting time before the pulse sequence 4 or 5." [0137]).
Therefore, based on Kawamura’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the invention of Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer to employ the imaging protocol that further comprises imaging progress information and/or imaging result information, as taught by Kawamura, in order to improve the examination safety by reducing a risk of overexposure to electromagnetic wave energy to the patient.
Regarding claim 14, Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer teaches the medical imaging method according to claim 10.
Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer does not teach that the imaging protocol further comprises imaging progress information and/or imaging result information.
However, in the MRI systems field of endeavor, Kawamura discloses magnetic resonance imaging apparatus and SAR adjustment method, which is analogous art. Kawamura teaches that the imaging protocol further comprises imaging progress information (1401) and/or imaging result information (“When the predicted SAR value of the pulse sequence is equal to or greater than the upper SAR limit, the apparatus performs an exchange of pulse sequences or a waiting time insertion automatically, thereby performing the re-editing of the protocol automatically.” [0099]; “during the progress of the protocol, the operator may exchange the pulse sequences in a non-executed portion of the protocol or may insert, edit, and delete a waiting time in a non-executed portion. As an example, in FIG. 14, at the right side of the vertical line 1401 showing the current situation of the protocol progress, imaging has not yet been started in the pulse sequences 4 and 5. Accordingly, an operation of exchanging these pulse sequences is possible. In addition, it is also possible to insert, edit, and delete a waiting time before the pulse sequence 4 or 5." [0137]).
Therefore, based on Kawamura’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the invention of Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer to employ the imaging protocol that further comprises imaging progress information and/or imaging result information, as taught by Kawamura, in order to improve the examination safety by reducing a risk of overexposure to electromagnetic wave energy to the patient.
Regarding claim 8, Shen modified by Xiang, Seltzer, and Kawamura teaches the medical imaging system of claim 7.
Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer does not teach that the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instruction to: control at least one of the medical imaging devices to display or output the received imaging progress information and/or imaging result information.
However, in the MRI systems field of endeavor, Kawamura discloses magnetic resonance imaging apparatus and SAR adjustment method, which is analogous art. Kawamura teaches the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instruction to:
control at least one of the medical imaging devices to display or output the received imaging progress information (1401) and/or imaging result information (“A waiting time region and other pulse sequence regions may be displayed in different display modes.” [0068] “When the predicted SAR value of the pulse sequence is equal to or greater than the upper SAR limit, the apparatus performs an exchange of pulse sequences or a waiting time insertion automatically, thereby performing the re-editing of the protocol automatically.” [0099]; “during the progress of the protocol, the operator may exchange the pulse sequences in a non-executed portion of the protocol or may insert, edit, and delete a waiting time in a non-executed portion. As an example, in FIG. 14, at the right side of the vertical line 1401 showing the current situation of the protocol progress, imaging has not yet been started in the pulse sequences 4 and 5. Accordingly, an operation of exchanging these pulse sequences is possible. In addition, it is also possible to insert, edit, and delete a waiting time before the pulse sequence 4 or 5." [0137]).
Therefore, based on Kawamura’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the invention of Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer to employ the at least one processor that is further configured to execute the instruction to: control at least one of the medical imaging devices to display or output the received imaging progress information and/or imaging result information, as taught by Kawamura, in order to improve the examination safety by reducing a risk of overexposure to electromagnetic wave energy to the patient.
Regarding claim 15, Shen modified by Xiang, Seltzer, and Kawamura teaches the medical imaging method according to claim 14.
Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer does not teach controlling at least one of the medical imaging devices to display or output the received imaging progress information and/or imaging result information.
However, in the MRI systems field of endeavor, Kawamura discloses magnetic resonance imaging apparatus and SAR adjustment method, which is analogous art. Kawamura teaches controlling at least one of the medical imaging devices to display or output the received imaging progress information (1401) and/or imaging result information (“A waiting time region and other pulse sequence regions may be displayed in different display modes.” [0068] “When the predicted SAR value of the pulse sequence is equal to or greater than the upper SAR limit, the apparatus performs an exchange of pulse sequences or a waiting time insertion automatically, thereby performing the re-editing of the protocol automatically.” [0099]; “during the progress of the protocol, the operator may exchange the pulse sequences in a non-executed portion of the protocol or may insert, edit, and delete a waiting time in a non-executed portion. As an example, in FIG. 14, at the right side of the vertical line 1401 showing the current situation of the protocol progress, imaging has not yet been started in the pulse sequences 4 and 5. Accordingly, an operation of exchanging these pulse sequences is possible. In addition, it is also possible to insert, edit, and delete a waiting time before the pulse sequence 4 or 5." [0137]).
Therefore, based on Kawamura’s teachings, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the invention of Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer to employ the step of controlling at least one of the medical imaging devices to display or output the received imaging progress information and/or imaging result information, as taught by Kawamura, in order to improve the examination safety by reducing a risk of overexposure to electromagnetic wave energy to the patient.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/26/2025 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made over Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer.
Response to the 35 U.S.C. §101 rejection arguments on pages 6-7 of the REMARKS.
Claims 1-4, 7-11, and 14-17
The 101 rejection has been withdrawn based on the claim amendments and applicant’s arguments.
Response to the 35 U.S.C. §102 and §103 rejection arguments on pages 7-9 of the REMARKS.
Claims 1-4, 7-11, and 14-17
The Applicant argues that “any combination of the cited references fails to disclose or make obvious at least the bolded features of claim 1 that are similarly recited in claims 10 and 17.” (Page 8). The Examiner agrees and therefore the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made over Shen modified by Xiang and Seltzer. The dependent claims are not allowable because the independent claims are not allowable and because additional secondary references meet additional limitations of the dependent claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 ALEXEI BYKHOVSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-1556. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday: 8:30am - 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, Pascal Bui Pho can be reached on 571-272-2714. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALEXEI BYKHOVSKI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798