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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 600, 900, and 908. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
MPEP § 2111.01 states that “… Under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time. The ordinary and customary meaning of a term may be evidenced by a variety of sources, including the words of the claims themselves, the specification, drawings, and prior art. However, the best source for determining the meaning of a claim term is the specification - the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification serves as a glossary for the claim terms …”. Thus under a broadest reasonable interpretation, the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification (e.g., see “… at least one movable examination component may comprise a radiation source (such as an X-ray tube), a detector for receiving rays emitted by the radiation source, or an examination table, etc. …” in paragraph 30) serves as a glossary for the claim term “at least one movable examination component”.
The specification (e.g., see “… acquired in real time" may refer to acquisition at intervals of a predetermined time … real-time position information of the examination component can reflect the latest position information (which may have changed from the initial position of the examination component, or may remain the same as the initial position) of the examination component …” in paragraph 39) serves as a glossary for the claim term “acquiring real-time position information”.
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 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.
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 at the time any inventions covered therein were effectively filed 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 at the time a later invention was effectively filed 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 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) 1-4, 6, 7, 9, 10, and 12-14 is/are rejected under U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Toth et al. (US 2005/0089136).
In regard to claim 1, Toth et al. disclose a filter control method for a medical imaging system that includes at least one examination component operable to align a ray field (e.g., see “… beam of x-rays 106 …” in
PNG
media_image1.png
1311
1704
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and paragraph 45) with a target region of a test subject (e.g., see “… medical patient 112 …” in Fig. 6 and paragraph 45), the method comprising:
(a) acquiring contour information of the test subject and initial position information of the test subject relative to the examination component (e.g., see “… Sensors 140 are positioned within gantry opening 138 to collect patient position and contour data …” in Fig. 6 and paragraph 47);
(b) acquiring real-time position information of the examination component (e.g., “… patient table is raised or lowered … Elevation data is included in the scan data header …” in paragraph 72);
(c) determining a part of the target region that is located in the ray field based on the contour information of the test subject, the initial position information of the test subject relative to the examination component, and the real-time position information of the examination component (e.g., “… the point of reference may be the center of the medical imaging device or the center of the bore of the medical imaging device, or any other stationary point that is readily identifiable. Additionally, it is contemplated that the point of reference may be a map of an ideally positioned imaging subject with similar physical features. In any case, the distance of the centroid from the point of reference is used to geometrically calculate an x and y centering error for the patient relative to a reference position 304 …” in paragraph 61);
(d) determining a target attitude of a filter in a collimator assembly of the medical imaging system based on said part (e.g., “… projects a beam of x-rays 106 through a filter assembly 105 … Casing 164 is designed such that most generated x-rays 184 are blocked from emission except through window 182 … dynamic calibration and correction of the moving bowtie during patient scanning … bowtie filter is moved toward isocenter. Conversely, if the flux at the edge relative to the center flux is below the selected range, an associated filter segment of the bowtie filter is moved away from isocenter. However, if it is determined that the maximum edge x-ray flux is inside the selected range 218, the bowtie filter is not adjusted …” in paragraphs 45, 49, 52, and 53); and
(e) controlling the filter to move toward the target attitude (e.g., “… dynamic calibration and correction of the moving bowtie during patient scanning …” in paragraph 52).
In regard to claim 2 which is dependent on claim 1, Toth et al. also disclose that the step of determining a part of the target region that is located in the ray field based on the contour information of the test subject, the initial position information of the test subject relative to the examination component, and the real-time position information of the examination component, comprises: determining a virtual system model of the medical imaging system at least based on the contour information of the test subject, the initial position information of the test subject relative to the examination component, and the real-time position information of the examination component, the virtual system model comprising a virtual subject model corresponding to the test subject (e.g., “… axis parameters of the elliptical patient model …” in paragraph 83) and a virtual component model corresponding to the examination component (e.g., “… the point of reference may be the center of the medical imaging device or the center of the bore of the medical imaging device, or any other stationary point that is readily identifiable. Additionally, it is contemplated that the point of reference may be a map of an ideally positioned imaging subject with similar physical features. In any case, the distance of the centroid from the point of reference is used to geometrically calculate an x and y centering error for the patient relative to a reference position 304 …” in paragraph 61); and determining a part of the acquired target region that is located in the ray field based on the virtual system model (e.g., “… medical imaging device … map of an ideally positioned imaging subject … geometrically calculate an x and y centering error for the patient relative to a reference position …” in paragraph 61).
In regard to claim 3 which is dependent on claim 2, Toth et al. also disclose that the step of determining a virtual system model of the medical imaging system at least based on the contour information of the test subject, the initial position information of the test subject relative to the examination component, and the real-time position information of the examination component, comprises: constructing the virtual component model based on an initial position of the examination component (e.g., “… the point of reference may be the center of the medical imaging device or the center of the bore of the medical imaging device, or any other stationary point that is readily identifiable. Additionally, it is contemplated that the point of reference may be a map of an ideally positioned imaging subject with similar physical features. In any case, the distance of the centroid from the point of reference is used to geometrically calculate an x and y centering error for the patient relative to a reference position 304 …” in paragraph 61); constructing the virtual subject model located within the virtual component model at least based on the contour information of the test subject and the initial position information of the test subject relative to the examination component (e.g., “… point of reference may be a map of an ideally positioned imaging subject … axis parameters of the elliptical patient model …” in paragraphs 61 and 83); and updating the virtual component model based on the real-time position information of the examination component (e.g., “… changing optimum elevations depending on … centering/miscentering …” in paragraph 72).
In regard to claim 4 which is dependent on claim 2, Toth et al. also disclose that the virtual subject model is obtained by: acquiring a three-dimensional (3D) contour of the test subject (e.g., “… Sensors 140 are positioned within gantry opening 138 to collect patient position and contour data …” in paragraph 47); acquiring an initial 3D virtual model of the target region (e.g., “… elliptical patient model …” in paragraph 83); and merging the initial 3D virtual model with the 3D contour, to acquire a virtual anatomical model (e.g., “… improved calculations of subject center whereby the centroid (center of mass) is determined from two orthogonal scout projections or estimated from a single scout scan …” in paragraph 57).
In regard to claim 6 which is dependent on claim 1, Toth et al. also disclose that the target attitude comprises a target position and a target orientation, and wherein the step of controlling the filter to move toward the target attitude comprises: controlling the filter to move toward the target position; or controlling the filter to rotate toward the target orientation (e.g., see in Fig. 3, Fig. 4 and Fig. 6).
In regard to claim 7 which is dependent on claim 1, Toth et al. also disclose that, in the target attitude, the filter is positioned at a periphery of the part of the target region that is located in the ray field (e.g., see in Fig. 6).
In regard to claim 9, Toth et al. disclose an imaging method for a medical imaging system, comprising:
(a) using the method to control the filter (the cited prior art is applied as in claim 1 above);
(b) in response to having controlled the filter to move toward the target attitude (e.g., “… bowtie filter is moved toward isocenter. Conversely, if the flux at the edge relative to the center flux is below the selected range, an associated filter segment of the bowtie filter is moved away from isocenter. However, if it is determined that the maximum edge x-ray flux is inside the selected range 218, the bowtie filter is not adjusted …” in paragraph 53), acquiring an actual attitude of the filter (e.g., “… Bowtie position information is collected and included for each projection during the scan …” in paragraph 52); and
(c) in response to determining that a relationship between the actual attitude and the target attitude meets a preset condition (e.g., “… if it is determined that the maximum edge x-ray flux is inside the selected range 218, the bowtie filter is not adjusted …” in paragraph 53), performing imaging of said part of the target region (e.g., “… Once the starting bowtie filter positions have been set 206, scanning begins 208 … dynamic calibration and correction of the moving bowtie during patient scanning …” in paragraph 52).
In regard to claim 10 which is dependent on claim 9, Toth et al. also disclose that the medical imaging system further comprises a ray emitter (e.g., see “… beam of x-rays 106 …” in Fig. 6 and paragraph 45), and wherein the step of performing imaging of said part of the target region in response to determining that a relationship between the actual attitude and the target attitude meets a preset condition, comprises: in response to determining that a relationship between the actual attitude and the target attitude meets a preset condition, determining a conducting state of a ray emission switch of the ray emitter (e.g., “… Control mechanism 116 includes an x-ray controller 118 that provides power and timing signals to an x-ray source 104 …” in paragraph 52); and in response to determining that the ray emission switch is ON, performing imaging of said part of the target region (e.g., “… Once the starting bowtie filter positions have been set 206, scanning begins 208 … dynamic calibration and correction of the moving bowtie during patient scanning …” in paragraph 52).
In regard to claim 12, Toth et al. disclose a filter control apparatus for a medical imaging system that includes at least one examination component operable to align a ray field with a target region of a test subject, the filter control apparatus comprising:
(a) a first acquisition unit configured to acquire contour information of the test subject and initial position information of the test subject relative to the examination component (e.g., “… Sensors 140 are positioned within gantry opening 138 to collect patient position and contour data …” in paragraph 47);
(b) a second acquisition unit configured to acquire real-time position information of the examination component (e.g., “… Sensors 140 are positioned within gantry opening 138 to collect patient position and contour data …” in paragraph 47);
(c) a first determining unit configured to determine a part of the target region that is located in the ray field based on the contour information of the test subject, the initial position information of the test subject relative to the examination component, and the real-time position information of the examination component (e.g., “… the point of reference may be the center of the medical imaging device or the center of the bore of the medical imaging device, or any other stationary point that is readily identifiable. Additionally, it is contemplated that the point of reference may be a map of an ideally positioned imaging subject with similar physical features. In any case, the distance of the centroid from the point of reference is used to geometrically calculate an x and y centering error for the patient relative to a reference position 304 …” in paragraph 61);
(d) a second determining unit configured to determine a target attitude of a filter in a collimator assembly of the medical imaging system based on the part (e.g., “… projects a beam of x-rays 106 through a filter assembly 105 … Casing 164 is designed such that most generated x-rays 184 are blocked from emission except through window 182 … dynamic calibration and correction of the moving bowtie during patient scanning … bowtie filter is moved toward isocenter. Conversely, if the flux at the edge relative to the center flux is below the selected range, an associated filter segment of the bowtie filter is moved away from isocenter. However, if it is determined that the maximum edge x-ray flux is inside the selected range 218, the bowtie filter is not adjusted …” in paragraphs 45, 49, 52, and 53); and
(e) a motion control unit configured to control the filter to move toward the target attitude (e.g., “… dynamic calibration and correction of the moving bowtie during patient scanning …” in paragraphs 47 and 52).
In regard to claim 13, Toth et al. disclose a medical imaging system, comprising: at least one processor; and a memory in communicative connection with the at least one processor, wherein the memory stores a computer program which, when executed by the at least one processor (e.g., “… provides the acquired data to computer 126 to be processed …” in paragraph 47), realizes the method (the cited prior art is applied as in claim 1 above).
In regard to claim 14, Toth et al. disclose a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, wherein the computer program, when executed by a processor (e.g., “… provides the acquired data to computer 126 to be processed …” in paragraph 47), realizes the method (the cited prior art is applied as in claim 1 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 of this title, 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) 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Toth et al. (US 2005/0089136).
In regard to claim 5 which is dependent on claim 1, Toth et al. also disclose that the examination component comprises the collimator assembly (e.g., “… Casing 164 is designed such that most generated x-rays 184 are blocked from emission except through window 182 …” in paragraph 49) and an examination table for carrying the test subject (e.g., “… computer 126 operates a table motor/table centering controller 134 which controls a motorized table 136 to position patient 112 …” in paragraph 47), and wherein the step of acquiring real-time position information of the examination component comprises: acquiring initial position information of the collimator assembly and the examination table; acquiring real-time position information of the collimator assembly and the examination table; and determining real-time position information of the collimator assembly and the examination table based on the initial position information and real-time position information of the collimator assembly and the examination table (e.g., “… once the proper bowtie filter configuration is selected 226, the system is ready for scanning 328. As such, the patient table is raised or lowered dynamically during the execution of a helical CT scan to accommodate the changing optimum elevations depending on patient anatomy and centering/miscentering. Elevation data is included in the scan data header to properly position the views during image reconstruction. If a continuous bowtie is present, the bowtie is positioned dynamically to follow the sineogram of the patient. That is, an attenuation pattern may be utilized that maps a dynamic configuration of the attenuation of the bowtie so as to achieve desired attenuation over time, i.e. during data acquisition …” in paragraph 72). Alternatively it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention “to properly position the views during image reconstruction” of “a helical CT scan” by determining the gantry’s rotation angle for each of “the views” and wherein the position of each component (e.g., collimator assembly) mounted to the gantry is a function of the gantry’s rotation angle.
In regard to claim 8 which is dependent on claim 1, Toth et al. also disclose that in response to having controlled the filter to move toward the target attitude, acquiring an actual attitude of the filter; and in response to determining that a difference between the actual attitude and the target attitude of the filter exceeds a preset permitted range, issuing error prompt information (e.g., “… if the mis-centering is greater than the threshold 308, the operator is notified of the centering error 309 and presented with an auto-correction prompt whereby the operator is prompted to accept or reject 310 the table elevation change … automatically calculated adjustments based on the centroid calculations to compensate for mis-centering are not optimal for the spine study and the operator will choose to manually enter a user-selected centering correction such that recentering is along the mean center of the spine over the scan length 414 … if the location of a ROI is designated 418 via markers 416, the bowtie filter is dynamically positioned to follow the sineogram of the ROI. This positioning obtains improved image quality for the ROI and reduces dose elsewhere…” in paragraph 62, 78, and 80). Alternatively it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that “the operator is notified of the centering error 309” and also the filter’s actual attitude exceeds a preset permitted range from the target attitude when “the operator will choose to manually enter a user-selected centering correction”.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toth et al. (US 2005/0089136) in view of Li et al. (US 2003/0152189).
In regard to claim 11 which is dependent on claim 10, Toth et al. also disclose re-determining a target attitude of the filter in the collimator assembly of the medical imaging system (e.g., “… Bowtie position information is collected and included for each projection … dynamic calibration and correction of the moving bowtie during patient scanning …” in paragraph 52). The method of Toth et al. lacks an explicit description of details of the “… patient scanning …” such as the ray emission switch is turn to OFF. However, “… patient scanning …” details are known to one of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., see “… It is often desirable to use thinner slice thicknesses to improve image quality and to use continuous patient feeding (helical scans) to improve coverage and patient throughput without introducing redundant exposure during CACS tests. This requires turning on the x-rays for the cardiac period when the heart has the least motion and turning off the x-rays for the remainder of the heart cycle during a single, long helical scan …” in paragraph 4 of Li et al.). It should be noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable results”. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 at 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) at 1395 (citing United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39, 40 [148 USPQ 479] (1966)). See MPEP § 2143. In this case, one of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted a known conventional patient scanning (e.g., comprising details such as “turning on the x-rays for the cardiac period when the heart has the least motion and turning off the x-rays for the remainder of the heart cycle during a single, long helical scan”, in order “to improve image quality and to use continuous patient feeding (helical scans) to improve coverage and patient throughput without introducing redundant exposure during CACS tests”) for the unspecified patient scanning of Toth et al. and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a known conventional patient scanning (e.g., comprising details such as in response to determining that the ray emission switch is OFF, re-determining a target attitude of the filter in the collimator assembly of the medical imaging system) as the unspecified patient scanning of Toth et al.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2015/0139395 teaches a tracking collimator.
US 2018/0144842 teaches a multi-leaf collimator.
US 2020/0037972 teaches a tracking collimator.
US 2020/0082527 teaches thermal or visible imaging for automated x-ray imaging.
US 2021/0038181 teaches visible imaging for automated x-ray imaging.
US 2023/0157660 teaches visible imaging for automated x-ray imaging.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shun Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-2439. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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.
/SL/
Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights