Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/789,034

A DETECTOR RESPONSE CORRECTION METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR A PHOTON COUNTING X-RAY IMAGING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jul 30, 2024
Examiner
GAWORECKI, MARK R
Art Unit
2884
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Canon Medical Systems Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allow Rate
1025 granted / 1128 resolved
+22.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
1151
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.7%
-34.3% vs TC avg
§103
35.8%
-4.2% vs TC avg
§102
24.4%
-15.6% vs TC avg
§112
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1128 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 11, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhan et al. (US 2022/0296202 A1). With respect to claims 1, 11, and 20, Zhan discloses an apparatus and method of use for performing detector response correction in an X-ray imaging system having a photon-counting detector (par. [0017-0018]), the apparatus comprising: processing circuitry configured to obtain calibration data stored in a calibration data storage, where the calibration data is generated during a calibration procedure performed with the X-ray imaging system at a first time (slab is scanned, material composition data is stored based on scan, par. [0025]), acquire air scan data generated through an air scan performed with the X-ray imaging system at a second time, where the second time is after the first time (air scan is performed subsequent to the material decomposition data being generated, par. [0025]), perform, with the X-ray imaging system, an object scan on an imaging object at a third time to generate object scan data (patient scan, step S650), where the third time is after the second time, perform, using the generated object scan data, detector response correction based on the acquired air scan data and the obtained calibration data, and reconstruct, based on the performed detector response correction, an image of the imaging object (“The decomposition calibration tables, air calibration tables, and patient/object scans can then be used in S660 for phantom/object scan processing”, par. [0098]). With further respect to claim 20, Zhan discloses programming and hardware for performing the disclosed method (par. [0152]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-10 and 12-19 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With respect to claims 2 and 12, the cited prior art does not appear to disclose or reasonably suggest: calculating, based on the obtained calibration air scan data and the acquired air scan data, an air scan correcting ratio in a pixel-by-pixel, energy-bin-by-energy-bin manner, for a plurality of pixels and a plurality of energy bins, correcting the generated object scan data based on the calculated air scan correcting ratios, and using the corrected object scan data to generate a line-integral sinogram, based on the obtained calibration table, and the reconstructing step further comprises reconstructing the image of the imaging object, based on the generated line-integral sinogram. With respect to claims 3 and 13, the cited prior art does not appear to disclose or reasonably suggest: obtaining calibration air scan data and calibration slab scan data stored in the calibration data storage, wherein the calibration air scan data is generated through a calibration air scan performed during the calibration procedure, and the calibration slab scan data is generated through a calibration slab scan performed during the calibration procedure, the step of performing the detector response correction further comprises: calculating, based on the obtained calibration air scan data and the acquired air scan data, an air scan correcting ratio in a pixel-by-pixel, energy-bin-by-energy-bin manner, for a plurality of pixels and a plurality of energy bins, correcting the obtained calibration slab scan data based on the calculated air scan correcting ratios, generating a calibration table based on the obtained calibration air scan data and the corrected calibration slab scan data, and using the generated object scan data to generate a line-integral sinogram, based on the generated calibration table, and the reconstructing step further comprises reconstructing the image of the imaging object, based on the generated line-integral sinogram. With respect to claims 4-8 and 14-18, the cited prior art does not appear to disclose or reasonably suggest: obtaining calibration air scan data, calibration slab scan data, and a calibration table stored in the calibration data storage, wherein the calibration air scan data is generated through a calibration air scan performed during the calibration procedure, and the calibration slab scan data is generated through a calibration slab scan performed during the calibration procedure, the step of the performing detector response correction further comprises: calculating, based on the obtained calibration air scan data and the acquired air scan data, an air scan correcting ratio in a pixel-by-pixel, energy-bin-by-energy-bin manner, for a plurality of pixels and a plurality of energy bins, calculating, for each specific air scan correcting ratio of the calculated air scan correcting ratios, a corresponding attenuation scan correcting ratio, based on the specific air scan correcting ratio, the obtained calibration air scan data, and the obtained calibration slab scan data, correcting the generated object scan data based on the calculated attenuation scan correcting ratios, and using the corrected object scan data to generate a line-integral sinogram, based on the obtained calibration table, and the reconstructing step further comprises reconstructing the image of the imaging object, based on the generated line-integral sinogram. With respect to claims 9 and 19, the cited prior art fails to disclose or reasonably suggest: obtaining calibration air scan data and calibration slab scan data stored in the calibration data storage, wherein the calibration air scan data is generated through a calibration air scan performed during the calibration procedure, and the calibration slab scan data is generated through a calibration slab scan performed during the calibration procedure, the step of performing the detector response correction further comprises: calculating, based on the obtained calibration air scan data and the acquired air scan data, an air scan correcting ratio in a pixel-by-pixel, energy-bin-by-energy-bin manner, for a plurality of pixels and a plurality of energy bins, calculating, for each specific air scan correcting ratio of the calculated air scan correcting ratios, a corresponding attenuation scan correcting ratio, based on the specific air scan correcting ratio, the obtained calibration air scan data, and the obtained calibration slab scan data, correcting the obtained calibration slab scan data based on the calculated air scan correcting ratios, generating a calibration table based on the obtained calibration air scan data and the corrected calibration slab scan data, and using the generated object scan data to generate a line-integral sinogram, based on the generated calibration table, and the reconstructing step further comprises reconstructing the image of the imaging object, based on the generated line-integral sinogram. With respect to claim 10, the cited prior art fails to disclose or reasonably suggest: acquiring the air scan data generated through the air scan that is performed upon a predefined criterion being met, and the predefined criterion is met when a predefined time period has elapsed since the calibration procedure, when a difference between a condition under which the X-ray imaging system operates and the condition under which the calibration procedure is performed is larger than or equal to a predetermined threshold, and/or when a scan protocol to be applied with the X-ray imaging system is different from a scan protocol that is applied when the calibration procedure is performed. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK R GAWORECKI whose telephone number is (571)272-8540. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 AM-6 PM. 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, DAVID MAKIYA can be reached at 571-272-2273. 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. /MARK R GAWORECKI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884 19 February 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 30, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603266
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR HIGH POWER-DENSITY THERMIONIC ENERGY CONVERSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597581
X-RAY GENERATION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591075
RADIATION DETECTOR, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING RADIATION DETECTOR, AND IMAGING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586672
INTELLIGENT TREATABLE SECTORS FOR RADIATION THERAPY PLAN GENERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582317
DETECTING DEVICE AND MEASURING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
91%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+6.6%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1128 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month