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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 12 are amended. No claims are cancelled. No claims are newly added. Claims 1-12 remain pending.
Response to Remarks
Claim Interpretations – 35 USC § 112(f)
In light of the amendment to claim 1, the previous interpretation of the phrase “one or more lock fixing units” under 112(f) is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections– 35 USC § 112(b)
In light of the amendment to claim 1, the previous rejection of the phrase “one or more lock fixing units” for lack of clarity is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections– 35 USC §§ 102 & 103
In the REMARKS filed 06/08/2026, the Applicant argues that SADAMARU (JP 2011147652 A) fails to disclose the features of “a rotation frame on which the plurality of components are mounted and which rotates, wherein the rotation frame includes one or more lock mechanisms including a fixing shaft and a support member that movably supports the fixing shaft”, and “a support frame that supports the rotation frame, wherein the support frame is a fixing frame, the support frame includes one or more fixing holes engageable with the fixing shaft of the rotation frame” of claim 1 (REMARKS, page 7).
After further consideration of the newly added subject matter to claim 1, a new rejection is made under 35 USC § 103 in view of SADAMARU (JP 2011147652 A).
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, 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) 1-5, 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SADAMARU et al. (JP 2011147652 A, e.f.d. 2011-08-04).
Regarding claim 1, SADAMARU discloses an X-ray CT apparatus (FIG 2) comprising:
a plurality of components including an X-ray source and an X-ray detector (x-ray tube 51 and detector 56; [0022]);
a rotation frame on which the plurality of components are mounted and which rotates (gantry 100 houses rotating disk 102 including a rotating frame 40 having x-ray source 51 and detector 56 mounted thereon; [0022]); and
a support frame that supports the rotation frame, wherein the support frame is a fixing frame (FIG. 3 shows gantry 100 having stand 10, main frame 30 and a side frame 301; [0027]),
wherein the support frame includes one or more lock mechanisms including a fixing shaft and a support member that movably supports the fixing shaft (fixing bar unit 5 includes bar 503 inserted into fixing hole 402, and arm 501 supporting bar 503 at the tip, FIG 5, [0036]), and support frame includes fixing holes 402 which operate as a lock fixing units engaging with bar 503; FIG 6), and
the lock mechanism switches between a locked state in which rotation of the rotation frame is restricted and an unlocked state in which the rotation of the rotation frame is allowed (locked enables maintenance without risk to stability and unlocked state supports normal imaging operation; [0034]).
SADAMARU does not specify (1) wherein the rotation frame includes one or more lock mechanisms including a fixing shaft and a support member that movably supports the fixing shaft, or (2) wherein the support frame includes one or more fixing holes engageable with the fixing shaft of the rotation frame. However, the basic elements of the one or more lock mechanisms including (a) a fixing shaft and (b) a fixing hole removably supporting the fixing shaft. The reversal or rearrangement of parts of an invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing. See In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955) and In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Further see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(A)-(C).
Regarding claim 2, SADAMARU discloses wherein in the locked state in which the fixing shaft of the lock mechanism and the lock fixing unit engage with each other, any one of the plurality of components is positioned at a position below a rotation axis of the rotation frame (FIG 3 shows fixing hole 402 positioned at a plurality of locations about the gantry enabling positioning of the source or detector below a rotation axis; FIG 3).
Regarding claim 3, SADAMARU discloses any one of the plurality of components is the X-ray source (x-ray source 51; FIG 3).
Regarding claim 4, SADAMARU discloses wherein the one or more lock fixing units include a plurality of lock fixing units (FIG 3 shows a plurality of fixing holes 402 surrounding the gantry; abstract).
Regarding claim 5, SADAMARU discloses wherein any component of the plurality of components is positioned at a predetermined position depending on a combination of locked states in which one of the plurality of lock fixing units and the fixing shaft of the lock mechanism engage with each other (FIG 3 shows x-ray source 51 and detector 56 have fixed positions relative to the frame 401 and thus predetermined positions depending on the locked state in which one of the plurality of lock fixing units engages. See also FIG 7 for locked state).
Regarding claim 6, SADAMARU discloses the lock mechanism 5 but does not specify a plurality of lock mechanisms. Duplicating the known elements of a device (lock mechanism) where the results are predictable (redundancy for safety during maintenance) would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. See MPEP 2144.04(VI).
Regarding claim 7, SADAMARU discloses wherein any component of the plurality of components is positioned at a predetermined position depending on a combination of locked states in which the fixing shaft of one lock mechanism of the plurality of lock mechanisms and the lock fixing unit engage with each other (FIG 3 shows x-ray source 51 and detector 56 have fixed positions relative to the frame 401 and thus predetermined positions depending on the locked state in which one of the plurality of lock fixing units engages).
Regarding claim 8, SADAMARU discloses the fixing shaft is disposed to be offset from the support member (bar 503 is offset at an end of arm 501; FIG 5-6).
Regarding claim 9, SADAMARU discloses the lock mechanism includes an indicator indicating whether the support member is at a position where the rotation frame is locked or at a position where the rotation frame is unlocked (bar 503 inserting into fixing hole 402 provides a visual indication of a locked state, wherein bar occupies a retracted position when unlocked and an extended position when engaged; FIG 5-7).
Regarding claim 10, SADAMARU discloses the lock mechanism includes an elastic member that biases the support member to a position where the rotation frame is in the unlocked state (tension spring 504 biases arm 501 to an unlocked position; FIG 5).
Regarding claim 11, SADAMARU further discloses the invention comprising: a motor that rotates the rotation frame (rotating belt 31 is driving by rotation drive device (not shown) which includes a motor; [0027]), and turning off power of the motor in a case where the rotation frame is in the locked state ([0046]). SADAMARU further discloses a system control device 124 for managing various devices of the system such as the gantry control device, but does not specify a processor configured to control power to the rotation frame. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention to provide a processor for controlling the configuration of power supply to the motor during a locked stated, in order to facilitate electronic control of the electrically-powered devices of the system, a step well known in the art.
Regarding claim 12, SADAMARU discloses the fixing shaft engages with the lock fixing unit to maintains the rotation frame in the locked state, but does not describe against a maximum output of the motor. However, such a design would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention in order to reduce risk of injoury during maintenance.
References Cited
QU et al. (CN 115251968 A) discloses a PET device comprising a sliding locking mechanism, which is set between the arc guide plate and the annular detection assembly, for locking and fixing the annular detection assembly and the arc guide plate.
HOGAN (US 4217064) discloses an x-ray arm with a rotational locking mechanism.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASEY BRYANT whose telephone number is (571)270-7329. The examiner can normally be reached M-F // 7-3P EST.
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.
CASEY BRYANT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/CASEY BRYANT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights