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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. This application claims foreign priority to application JP2023-149575 filed 09/14/2023.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 12/09/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-15 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 08/29/2025. Moreover, the provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejections set forth in the previous Non-Final Office Action have been withdrawn in view of the amendments made to the instant application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 7, 8, 15 and claims dependent therefrom have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“…as information from an ultrasound diagnostic apparatus that”
should be corrected to:
“…as information from the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus which”
“…applying the first image processing to the raw data and, based on the first image processing information, generates…”
should be corrected to:
“…applying the first image processing to the raw data based on the first image processing information, and generates…”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 8 recites “the header data including the first image processing information and the second image processing information”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim; the header data was not previously recited to include the first image processing information, the header data was only recited to include second image processing information. For purposes of examination, it will be interpreted for the header data to include both first and second image processing information.
Claims 9-14 are rejected by virtue of dependency on rejected claim 8.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Halmann (US20120157844) in view of Matsumoto (US20240148364) and Matsunaga (US20060098229).
Regarding claim 1, Halmann teaches an ultrasound diagnostic system (100) comprising (Fig. 1, [0014-0015]):
an ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (100; 135, 155) (Fig. 1, [0014-0018], [0020]); and
an image processing apparatus (145, 160) (Fig. 1, [0016-0017], [0019], [0021]),
wherein the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (100; 135, 155) includes
an acquisition unit (120) that acquires raw data by transmitting and receiving ultrasonic waves (Fig. 1, [0015]),
a first image processing unit (135) that generates a first ultrasound image by applying first image processing to the raw data (Fig. 1, [0016], [0018], [0020]),
a first display controller (155) that displays the first ultrasound image generated by the first image processing unit (135) on a first display (165) of the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (100; 135, 155) (Fig. 1, [0018], [0026], [0032]), and
a first information transmission unit (125) that transmits the (a) raw data, to which the first image processing is not applied by the first image processing unit (135), to the image processing apparatus (145, 160) as information (Fig. 1, [0015-0016], [0020]), and
the image processing apparatus (145, 160) includes
a second information reception unit (145) that receives the raw data as information (Fig. 1, [0015-0016], [0020], wherein the second processor 145 receiving ultrasound image data from the beamformer comprises the processor 145 having an information reception unit which receives said data),
a second image processing unit (145) that generates a second ultrasound image different from the first ultrasound image by applying a second image processing to the raw data, the second image processing being different from the first image processing (Fig. 1, Abstract, [0016], [0019], [0020-0021], [0026], [0031-0032]), and
a second display controller (160) that displays the second ultrasound image generated by the second image processing unit (145) on a second display (180) of the image processing apparatus (145, 160) (Fig. 1, [0019], [0026], [0032]).
However, Halmann fails to teach wherein the image processing apparatus is configured to communicate over a network with the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus and wherein the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus is configured to communicate over the network with the image processing apparatus.
In an analogous ultrasound diagnostic system field of endeavor, Matsumoto teaches such a feature. Matsumoto teaches an ultrasound image diagnostic system (100) including an ultrasound image processing apparatus (10) and an ultrasound image diagnostic apparatus (20) (Fig. 1, [0048]). Matsumoto teaches wherein the image processing apparatus (10) and ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) are communicably connected to teach other via a network (NW) (Fig. 1, [0049]). Matsumoto teaches wherein the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) may transmit information to the image processing apparatus (10) and wherein the image processing apparatus (10) may transmit information to the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) (Fig. 2, [0125], [0139]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann to have the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus and the image processing apparatus be configured to communicate with another over a network as taught by Matsumoto (Figs. 1-2, [0049], [0125], [0139]). Having the apparatuses be separate (non-integrated) and communicably connected via network may allow them to be more remote from one another and also allow for a reduced complexity and cost of the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus as image processing is offloaded to the physically separate image processing apparatus.
However, the modified combination noted above fails to teach wherein the first information transmission unit transmits (b) header data including second image processing information for performing second image processing to be executed by the image processing apparatus, and wherein applying the second image processing to the raw data is based on the second image processing information included in the header data.
In an analogous image processing field of endeavor, Matsunaga teaches such a feature. Matsunaga teaches an image processing unit (104) configured to perform a plurality of types of image processing on image data (Fig. 1, Abstract, [0044-0045]). Matsunaga teaches a scanner unit (106) configured to obtain image data and output the data to the image processing unit (104) (Fig. 1, [0047-0048]). Matsunaga teaches wherein a CPU (101) may attach header data to the image data to be transmitted to the image processing unit (104) and wherein the header data includes information specifying image processes to be performed ([0069-0070]). Moreover, Matsunaga teaches wherein the image processing unit includes a header analyzer (602) which extracts and reads the image processing information included in the header for an image processor (603) to perform ([0076-0078]). Matsunaga therefore teaches an information transmission unit configured to transmit header data including image processing information for performing image processing to be executed by an image processing apparatus and wherein applying the image processing to the raw data is based on the image processing information included in the header data. Halmann teaches wherein the image processing includes first and second image processing and wherein they are different.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann to transmit header data including image processing information to be performed and applying the image processing information as taught by Matsunaga ([0069-0070], [0076-0078]). Adding header data to the raw image data indicating an image processing method may allow for the image processing apparatus to automatically recognize how the image data should be handled or processed, thereby removing the need for manual user selection of how the images should be processed. Since Halmann teaches wherein the image processing includes first and second image processing methods and wherein they are different, Halmann modified by the teachings of Matsunaga would predictably result in adding headers indicating both first and second image processing to be executed by corresponding image processors and wherein the application of the image processing is based on the respective image processing information included in the header data.
Regarding claim 2, Halmann in view of Matsumoto and Matsunaga teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1.
Halmann further teaches wherein the second image processing (145) is image processing that is not realized by the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (100; 135, 155) ([0033-0034]).
Regarding claim 5, Halmann in view of Matsumoto and Matsunaga teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1.
Halmann further teaches wherein the second display controller (160) displays, on the second display (180), an image that schematically represents an operation panel provided in the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (155) and that represents a user interface for receiving input of a parameter for displaying an image used for diagnosis or measurement ([0018-0019], wherein both first interface 155 and second interface 160 having touch-screens for receiving an input from a user comprises an image schematically representing an operation panel provided in the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus 155, “…present a graphic display 180 of diagnostic ultrasound images to the patient 106. At least a portion of the interface 160 can include a patient selectable element 185 with touch sensitive portion or touch sensitive technology to receive input from the patient 106…”, [0022], “Each of the user selectable elements 170 or 185 can be operable to receive input of a type of image processing or a desired setup of the type of illustration on each interface 155, 160”).
Regarding claim 7, Halmann teaches an image processing apparatus (145, 160) comprising (Fig. 1, [0016-0017], [0019] [0021]):
an information reception unit (130) that receives, from an ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (100, 120, 125), raw data as information from the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (100, 120, 125) that acquires the raw data through transmission and reception of ultrasonic waves and generates a first ultrasound image (165) by applying first image processing (135) to the raw data (Fig. 1, [0015-0016], “An embodiment of the controller 130 can generally include a first processor 135 in communication with a first memory 140, and a second processor 145 in communication with a second memory 150”, [0018], [0020], [0031-0032], [0020], wherein the controller 130 comprising both processors 135, 145 receiving ultrasound image data from the beamformer 125 comprises the controller 130 having an information reception unit which receives said data);
an image processing unit (145) that generates a second ultrasound image different from the first ultrasound image by applying a second image processing to the raw data, the second image processing being different from the first image processing (Fig. 1, Abstract, [0016], [0019], [0020-0021], [0026], [0031-0032]); and
a display controller (160) that displays the second ultrasound image generated by the image processing unit (145) on a display (180) (Fig. 1, [0019], [0026], [0032]).
However, Halmann fails to teach wherein the image processing apparatus is configured to communicate over a network with the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus.
In an analogous ultrasound diagnostic system field of endeavor, Matsumoto teaches such a feature. Matsumoto teaches an ultrasound image diagnostic system (100) including an ultrasound image processing apparatus (10) and an ultrasound image diagnostic apparatus (20) (Fig. 1, [0048]). Matsumoto teaches wherein the image processing apparatus (10) and ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) are communicably connected to teach other via a network (NW) (Fig. 1, [0049]). Matsumoto teaches wherein the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) may transmit information to the image processing apparatus (10) and wherein the image processing apparatus (10) may transmit information to the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) (Fig. 2, [0125], [0139]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann to have the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus and the image processing apparatus be configured to communicate with another over a network as taught by Matsumoto (Figs. 1-2, [0049], [0125], [0139]). Having the apparatuses be separate (non-integrated) and communicably connected via network may allow them to be more remote from one another and also allow for a reduced complexity and cost of the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus as image processing is offloaded to the physically separate image processing apparatus.
However, the modified combination noted above fails to teach wherein the information reception unit receives, from the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus, header data including second image processing information for performing second image processing to be executed by the image processing apparatus, and wherein applying the second image processing to the raw data is based on the second image processing information included in the header data.
In an analogous image processing field of endeavor, Matsunaga teaches such a feature. Matsunaga teaches an image processing unit (104) configured to perform a plurality of types of image processing on image data (Fig. 1, Abstract, [0044-0045]). Matsunaga teaches a scanner unit (106) configured to obtain image data and output the data to the image processing unit (104) (Fig. 1, [0047-0048]). Matsunaga teaches wherein a CPU (101) may attach header data to the image data to be transmitted to the image processing unit (104) and wherein the header data includes information specifying image processes to be performed ([0069-0070]). Moreover, Matsunaga teaches wherein the image processing unit includes a header analyzer (602) which extracts and reads the image processing information included in the header for an image processor (603) to perform ([0076-0078]). Matsunaga therefore teaches wherein an information reception unit (head analyzer 602) receives header data including image processing formation for performing image processing to be executed by an image processing apparatus (104), and wherein applying the image processing to the data is based on the image processing information included in the header data. Halmann teaches wherein the image processing includes first and second image processing and wherein they are different.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann to receive header data including image processing information to be performed and applying the image processing information as taught by Matsunaga ([0069-0070], [0076-0078]). Adding header data to the raw image data indicating an image processing method and receiving it may allow for the image processing apparatus to automatically recognize how the image data should be handled or processed, thereby removing the need for manual user selection of how the images should be processed. Since Halmann teaches wherein the image processing includes first and second image processing methods and wherein they are different, Halmann modified by the teachings of Matsunaga would predictably result in adding headers indicating both first and second image processing to be executed by corresponding image processors and wherein the application of the image processing is based on the respective image processing information included in the header data.
Claims 3-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Halmann ‘844 (US20120157844) in view of Matsumoto (US20240148364) and Matsunaga (US20060098229) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Halmann ‘690 (US20050113690).
Regarding claim 3, Halmann ‘844 in view of Matsumoto and Matsunaga teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1.
However, Halmann ‘844 fails to explicitly teach wherein the second image processing is image processing of generating an image for which a higher level of calculation capability than in the first image processing is required.
In an analogous ultrasound imaging field of endeavor, Halmann ‘690 teaches such a feature. Halmann ‘690 teaches an ultrasound-imaging device (100) including a first processor (116) for generating and displaying ultrasound images (Fig. 1, [0011-0012]). Halmann ‘690 further teaches a resource extension device (302) able to be coupled to said ultrasound-imaging device (100) (Fig. 3, [0016]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the resource extension device (302) includes a second processor (322) ([0018]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the second processor (322) has higher processing capability relative to the first processor (116) ([0018]). Halmann ‘690 teaches scanning a volume or imaging a target with a second image processing level capability with the resource extension device, the second image processing level capability being greater than the first image processing level capability (Claim 10). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the resource extension device (302) extends the capability of the ultrasound-imaging device (100) ([0016]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the ultrasound imaging-device (100) is limited in capability such that only B-mode processing is performed and requires the resource extension device (302) for color flow, Doppler, b-flow, and codes processing ([0022]). Halmann ‘690 therefore teaches a second image processing for which a higher level of calculation (processing) capability than in the first image processing is required.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann ‘844 to have the second imaging processing method be of higher calculation capability than required by the first image processing method as taught by Halmann ‘690 (Claim 10, [0016], [0018], [0022]). By having higher processing capability be attached to an extender or second processing unit, a cost-effective and reliable means for providing extended resources for a less capable portable ultrasound systems may be provided as recognized by Halmann ‘690 ([0029]). Moreover by having the ultrasound diagnosis device be made portable, the portable device may be used in more locations/scenarios, thereby improving the convenience of the device.
Regarding claim 4, Halmann ‘844 in view of Matsumoto, Matsunaga, and Halmann ‘690 teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 3.
However, Halmann ‘844 fails to explicitly teaches wherein the second image processing is image processing of generating an image for measurement, and the second ultrasound image is the image for measurement.
In an analogous ultrasound imaging field of endeavor, Halmann ‘690 teaches such a feature. Halmann ‘690 teaches an ultrasound-imaging device (100) including a first processor (116) for generating and displaying ultrasound images (Fig. 1, [0011-0012]). Halmann ‘690 further teaches a resource extension device (302) able to be coupled to said ultrasound-imaging device (100) (Fig. 3, [0016]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the resource extension device (302) includes a second processor (322) ([0018]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the second processor (322) has higher processing capability relative to the first processor (116) ([0018]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the resource extension device (302) may be used to process images for color flow, Doppler, and B-flow ([0022]). Color flow, Doppler, and B-flow are all imaging methods/modes which assess blood flow. Halmann ‘690 therefore teaches wherein the images produced by the second imaging processor (322) are for measurement (of blood flow).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann ‘844 to have the second ultrasound images be images for measurement as taught by Halmann ‘690 ([0018], [0022]). By having the ultrasound images be for measurement and comprise ultrasound techniques such as color flow, Doppler, or B-flow as taught by Halmann ‘690 ([0022]), the viewer of said images may predictably evaluate the patient’s or subject’s blood flow and form a diagnosis.
Regarding claim 6, Halmann ‘844 in view of Matsumoto and Matsunaga teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1.
However, Halmann ‘844 fails to teach wherein the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus is a portable ultrasound diagnostic apparatus.
In an analogous ultrasound imaging field of endeavor, Halmann ‘690 teaches such a feature. Halmann ‘690 teaches an ultrasound-imaging device (100) including a first processor (116) for generating and displaying ultrasound images (Fig. 1, [0011-0012]). Halmann ‘690 further teaches a resource extension device (302) able to be coupled to said ultrasound-imaging device (100) (Fig. 3, [0016]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the resource extension device (302) includes a second processor (322) and wherein the resource extension device (302) is an image processing unit ([0018], [0022], [0024]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the ultrasound-imaging device (100) is portable (Abstract, [0002], [0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann ‘844 to have the ultrasound device be portable as taught by Halmann ‘690 (Abstract, [0002], [0016]). Making the ultrasound device be portable predictably allows the device to be more convenient and able to be brought and used in a plurality of locations/scenarios that an otherwise non-portable device may not.
Claims 8-9, 12-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Halmann (US20120157844) in view of Matsumoto (US20240148364), Nakamura (JP2012016480, translation provided), and Matsunaga (US20060098229).
Regarding claim 8, Halmann teaches an ultrasound diagnostic system (100) comprising (Fig. 1, [0014-0015]):
an ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (100; 135, 155) (Fig. 1, [0014-0018], [0020]); and
an image processing apparatus (145, 160) (Fig. 1, [0016-0017], [0019], [0021]),
wherein the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (100; 135, 155) includes
an acquisition unit (120) that acquires raw data by transmitting and receiving ultrasonic waves (Fig. 1, [0015]),
a first image processing unit (135) that generates a first ultrasound image by applying first image processing to the raw data (Fig. 1, [0016], [0018], [0020]),
a first display controller (155) that displays the first ultrasound image generated by the first image processing unit (135) on a first display (165) of the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (100; 135, 155) (Fig. 1, [0018], [0026], [0032]), and
a first information transmission unit (125) that transmits the raw data, to which the first image processing is not applied by the first image processing unit (135), to the image processing apparatus (145, 160) as information (Fig. 1, [0015-0016], [0020]), and
the image processing apparatus (145, 160) includes
a second information reception unit (145) that receives the raw data as information (Fig. 1, [0015-0016], [0020], wherein the second processor 145 receiving ultrasound image data from the beamformer comprises the processor 145 having an information reception unit which receives said data),
a second image processing unit (145) that generates a second ultrasound image different from the first ultrasound image by applying a second image processing to the raw data, the second image processing being different from the first image processing (Fig. 1, Abstract, [0016], [0019], [0020-0021], [0026], [0031-0032]), and
a second display controller (160) that displays the second ultrasound image generated by the second image processing unit (145) on a second display (180) of the image processing apparatus (145, 160) (Fig. 1, [0019], [0026], [0032]).
However, Halmann fails to teach wherein the image processing apparatus is configured to communicate over a network with the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus and wherein the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus is configured to communicate over the network with the image processing apparatus.
In an analogous ultrasound diagnostic system field of endeavor, Matsumoto teaches such a feature. Matsumoto teaches an ultrasound image diagnostic system (100) including an ultrasound image processing apparatus (10) and an ultrasound image diagnostic apparatus (20) (Fig. 1, [0048]). Matsumoto teaches wherein the image processing apparatus (10) and ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) are communicably connected to teach other via a network (NW) (Fig. 1, [0049]). Matsumoto teaches wherein the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) may transmit information to the image processing apparatus (10) and wherein the image processing apparatus (10) may transmit information to the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) (Fig. 2, [0125], [0139]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann to have the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus and the image processing apparatus be configured to communicate with another over a network as taught by Matsumoto (Figs. 1-2, [0049], [0125], [0139]). Having the apparatuses be separate (non-integrated) and communicably connected via network may allow them to be more remote from one another and also allow for a reduced complexity and cost of the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus as image processing is offloaded to the physically separate image processing apparatus.
However, the modified combination noted above fails to teach wherein the first transmission unit transmits first image processing information for performing the first image processing to the image processing apparatus as information, wherein the second information reception unit receives the first image processing information, which is associated with the raw data, as information, wherein the second image processing unit generates the first ultrasound image by applying the first imaging processing to the raw data, and wherein the second display controller displays the first ultrasound image and the second ultrasound image on the second display of the image processing apparatus.
In an analogous image processing of ultrasound images field of endeavor, Nakamura teaches such a feature. Nakamura teaches an ultrasound imaging apparatus (1) which may generate image data ([0012], [0037-0038]). Nakamura also teaches an image processing apparatus (2) which may display a comparison image (Figs. 1-2, [0021-0022], [0035], [0037], [0059]). Nakamura teaches the image processing apparatus (2) includes an image information acquisition means (12) which acquires image information indicating the modality and image processing method of the image from header information (Fig. 2, [0061], [0084]). Nakamura therefore teaches a transmitting unit which transmits information indicating an image processing method in association with data to an image processing apparatus as information and wherein a second information reception unit (12) receives said information. Nakamura teaches displaying a diagnostic object image (71) (first image) and a comparison image (61A) (Fig. 7, [0102-0103]). Nakamura teaches wherein the comparison image may be displayed using a different image processing method ([103], “If the image processing method for the comparison image cannot be the same as that for the diagnostic object image, the comparison image is displayed using a predetermined image processing method”), therefore teaching wherein the comparison image comprises a “second image” different from the first in which a different image processing method is applied. Nakamura therefore further teaches generating a first ultrasound image (71) and displaying it with a second ultrasound image (61A) on a second display (18) and wherein the images may have different image processing methods applied thereto (Fig. 7, [102-0103]). Nakamura also teaches a first display (13) ([0063]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann to include image processing information in the header information of data sent to the image processing apparatus and to generate and display the diagnostic and a comparison images as taught by Nakamura (Figs. 1-2 & 7, [0037-0038], [0059], [0102-0103]). Halmann teaches sending raw data to the image processing apparatus (145) via a beamformer (125) (Fig. 1, [0015-0016]). Nakamura teaches to include image processing information of the first image (71) into the header of data and sending said information to an image processing apparatus (2) having an information reception unit (12) (Fig. 2, [0061], [0084]). Therefore, Halmann modified by Nakamura would predictably result wherein the first transmission unit transmits first information indicating the first image processing in association with the raw data to the image processing apparatus as information and wherein the second information reception unit receives the first information which is associated with the raw data as information. Moreover since Nakamura teaches displaying both the diagnostic first image (71) and the second image (61A) on a second display (18), wherein the images have different image processing methods applied thereto (Fig. 7, [0102-0103]), and Halmann teaches wherein the images are ultrasound images, Halmann modified by Nakamura would further result in wherein the second image processing unit generates the first ultrasound image by applying the first imaging processing indicated by the first information to the raw data, and wherein the second display controller displays the first ultrasound image and the second ultrasound image on the second display of the image processing apparatus. By displaying both images which have different image processing methods applied thereto, a user may predictably compare and analyze both images for diagnosis and/or measurement.
However, the modified combination noted above fails to teach wherein the first information transmission unit transmits header data including the first image processing information and the second image processing information for performing second image processing executed by the image processing apparatus, wherein the second information reception unit receives the header data including the first image processing information and the second information processing information, wherein applying the first image processing to the raw data is based on the first image processing information included in the header data and wherein applying the second image processing to the raw data is based on the second image processing information included in the header data.
In an analogous image processing field of endeavor, Matsunaga teaches such a feature. Matsunaga teaches an image processing unit (104) configured to perform a plurality of types of image processing on image data (Fig. 1, Abstract, [0044-0045]). Matsunaga teaches a scanner unit (106) configured to obtain image data and output the data to the image processing unit (104) (Fig. 1, [0047-0048]). Matsunaga teaches wherein a CPU (101) may attach header data to the image data to be transmitted to the image processing unit (104) and wherein the header data includes information specifying image processes to be performed ([0069-0070]). Moreover, Matsunaga teaches wherein the image processing unit includes a header analyzer (602) which extracts and reads the image processing information included in the header for an image processor (603) to perform ([0076-0078]). Matsunaga therefore teaches wherein an information transmission unit (CPU 101) transmits header data including image processing information for performing image processing to be executed by an image processing apparatus (104), wherein an information reception unit (header analyzer 602) receives the header data including the image processing information, and wherein applying the image processing to the data is based on the image processing information included in the header data. Halmann in view of Nakamura teaches wherein the image processing includes first and second image processing and wherein the second image processing unit applies both the first and second image processing methods, thus the combination would result in the header data to include both the first and second image processing information for respective application to raw data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann in view of Nakamura to transmit header data including image processing information to be performed and applying the image processing information as taught by Matsunaga ([0069-0070], [0076-0078]). Adding header data to the raw image data indicating an image processing method and transmitting it may allow for the image processing apparatus to automatically recognize how the image data should be handled or processed, thereby removing the need for manual user selection of how the images should be processed. Since Halmann teaches wherein the image processing includes first and second image processing methods, Halmann modified by the teachings of Matsunaga would predictably result in adding headers indicating both first and second image processing to be executed by the second image processing unit and wherein the application of the image processing is based on the respective image processing information included in the header data.
Regarding claim 9, Halmann in view of Matsumoto, Nakamura, and Matsunaga teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 8.
Halmann further teaches wherein the second image processing (145) is image processing that is not realized by the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (100; 135, 155) ([0033-0034]).
Regarding claim 12, Halmann in view of Matsumoto, Nakamura, and Matsunaga teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 8.
However, Halmann fails to teach wherein the second display controller displays the first ultrasound image and the second ultrasound image generated by the second image processing unit side by side on the second display.
In an analogous image processing of ultrasound images field of endeavor, Nakamura teaches such a feature. Nakamura teaches an ultrasound imaging apparatus (1) which may generate image data ([0012], [0037-0038]). Nakamura also teaches a first display (13) ([0063]). Nakamura also teaches an image processing apparatus (2) which may display a comparison image (Figs. 1-2, [0021-0022], [0035], [0037], [0059]). Nakamura teaches displaying a diagnostic object image (71) (first image) and a comparison image (61A) (second image) side by side on a second display (18) (Fig. 7, [0102-0104]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann to display the images side by side as taught by Nakamura (Fig. 7, [0102], [0104]). Displaying images side by side on a single display is well-routine and conventional as it allows for quick comparison.
Regarding claim 13, Halmann in view of Matsumoto, Nakamura, and Matsunaga teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 8.
Halmann further teaches wherein the second display controller (160) displays, on the second display (180), an image that schematically represents an operation panel provided in the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (155) and that represents a user interface for receiving input of a parameter for displaying an image used for diagnosis or measurement ([0018-0019], wherein both first interface 155 and second interface 160 having touch-screens for receiving an input from a user comprises an image schematically representing an operation panel provided in the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus 155, “…present a graphic display 180 of diagnostic ultrasound images to the patient 106. At least a portion of the interface 160 can include a patient selectable element 185 with touch sensitive portion or touch sensitive technology to receive input from the patient 106…”, [0022], “Each of the user selectable elements 170 or 185 can be operable to receive input of a type of image processing or a desired setup of the type of illustration on each interface 155, 160”).
Regarding claim 15, Halmann teaches an image processing apparatus (145, 160) comprising (Fig. 1, [0016-0017], [0019], [0021]):
an information reception unit (145) that receives, from an ultrasound diagnostic apparatus, raw data as information from the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (100, 120, 125) that acquires the raw data through transmission and reception of ultrasonic waves and generates a first ultrasound image (165) by applying the first image processing (135) to the raw data (Fig. 1, [0015-0016], [0018], [0031-0032], [0020], wherein the second processor 145 receiving ultrasound image data from the beamformer 125 comprises the processor 145 having an information reception unit which receives said data);
an image processing unit (145) that generates a second ultrasound image different from the first ultrasound image by applying second image processing to the raw data, the second image processing being different from the first image processing (Fig. 1, Abstract, [0016], [0019], [0020-0021], [0026], [0031-0032]); and
a display controller (160) that displays the second ultrasound image generated by the image processing unit (145) on a display (180) (Fig. 1, [0019], [0026], [0032]).
However, Halmann fails to teach wherein the image processing apparatus is configured to communicate over a network with the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus.
In an analogous ultrasound diagnostic system field of endeavor, Matsumoto teaches such a feature. Matsumoto teaches an ultrasound image diagnostic system (100) including an ultrasound image processing apparatus (10) and an ultrasound image diagnostic apparatus (20) (Fig. 1, [0048]). Matsumoto teaches wherein the image processing apparatus (10) and ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) are communicably connected to teach other via a network (NW) (Fig. 1, [0049]). Matsumoto teaches wherein the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) may transmit information to the image processing apparatus (10) and wherein the image processing apparatus (10) may transmit information to the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus (20) (Fig. 2, [0125], [0139]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann to have the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus and the image processing apparatus be configured to communicate with another over a network as taught by Matsumoto (Figs. 1-2, [0049], [0125], [0139]). Having the apparatuses be separate (non-integrated) and communicably connected via network may allow them to be more remote from one another and also allow for a reduced complexity and cost of the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus as image processing is offloaded to the physically separate image processing apparatus.
However, the modified combination noted above fails to teach wherein the information reception unit receives, from the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus, first image processing information for performing first image processing, wherein the image processing unit generates the first ultrasound image by applying the first image processing to the raw data; and wherein the display controller displays the first ultrasound image and the second ultrasound image side by side on the display.
In an analogous image processing of ultrasound images field of endeavor, Nakamura teaches such a feature. Nakamura teaches an ultrasound imaging apparatus (1) which may generate image data ([0012], [0037-0038]). Nakamura also teaches an image processing apparatus (2) which may display a comparison image (Figs. 1-2, [0021-0022], [0035], [0037], [0059]). Nakamura teaches the image processing apparatus (2) includes an image information acquisition means (12) which acquires image information indicating the modality and image processing method of the image from header information (Fig. 2, [0061], [0084]). Nakamura therefore teaches a transmitting unit which transmits information for performing image processing to an image processing apparatus as information and wherein an information reception unit (12) receives said information. Nakamura teaches displaying a diagnostic object image (71) (first image) and a comparison image (61A) (Fig. 7, [0102-0103]). Nakamura teaches wherein the comparison image may be displayed using a different image processing method ([103], “If the image processing method for the comparison image cannot be the same as that for the diagnostic object image, the comparison image is displayed using a predetermined image processing method”), therefore teaching wherein the comparison image comprises a “second image” different from the first in which a different image processing method is applied. Nakamura therefore further teaches generating a first ultrasound image (71) and displaying it with a second ultrasound image (61A) on a second display (18) side by side and wherein the images may have different image processing methods applied thereto (Fig. 7, [102-0103]). Nakamura also teaches a first display (13) ([0063]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann to include image processing information in the header information of data sent to and received by the image processing apparatus and to generate and display the diagnostic and a comparison images side by side as taught by Nakamura (Figs. 1-2 & 7, [0037-0038], [0059], [0102-0103]). Halmann teaches sending raw data to the image processing apparatus (145) via a beamformer (125) (Fig. 1, [0015-0016]). Nakamura teaches to include image processing information of the first image (71) into the header of data and sending said information to an image processing apparatus (2) having an information reception unit (12) (Fig. 2, [0061], [0084]). Therefore, Halmann modified by Nakamura would predictably result wherein the first transmission unit transmits first information indicating the first image processing in association with the raw data to the image processing apparatus as information and wherein the second information reception unit receives the first information which is associated with the raw data as information. Moreover since Nakamura teaches displaying both the diagnostic first image (71) and the second image (61A) side by side on a second display (18), wherein the images have different image processing methods applied thereto (Fig. 7, [0102-0103]), and Halmann teaches wherein the images are ultrasound images, Halmann modified by Nakamura would further result in wherein the second image processing unit generates the first ultrasound image by applying the first imaging processing indicated by the first information to the raw data, and wherein the second display controller displays the first ultrasound image and the second ultrasound image side by side on the second display of the image processing apparatus. By displaying both images side by side which have different image processing methods applied thereto, a user may predictably more easily compare and analyze both images for diagnosis and/or measurement.
However, the modified combination noted above fails to teach wherein the information reception unit receives, from the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus, header data including first image processing information for performing first image processing and second image processing information for performing second image processing executed by the image processing apparatus, and wherein the applying of the first image processing to the raw data is based on the first image processing information and wherein the applying of the second image processing to the raw data is based on the second image processing information included in the header data.
In an analogous image processing field of endeavor, Matsunaga teaches such a feature. Matsunaga teaches an image processing unit (104) configured to perform a plurality of types of image processing on image data (Fig. 1, Abstract, [0044-0045]). Matsunaga teaches a scanner unit (106) configured to obtain image data and output the data to the image processing unit (104) (Fig. 1, [0047-0048]). Matsunaga teaches wherein a CPU (101) may attach header data to the image data to be transmitted to the image processing unit (104) and wherein the header data includes information specifying image processes to be performed ([0069-0070]). Moreover, Matsunaga teaches wherein the image processing unit includes a header analyzer (602) which extracts and reads the image processing information included in the header for an image processor (603) to perform ([0076-0078]). Matsunaga therefore teaches wherein an information transmission unit (CPU 101) transmits header data including image processing information for performing image processing to be executed by an image processing apparatus (104), wherein an information reception unit (header analyzer 602) receives the header data including the image processing information, and wherein applying the image processing to the data is based on the image processing information included in the header data. Halmann in view of Nakamura teaches wherein the image processing includes first and second image processing and wherein the image processing unit applies both the first and second image processing methods, thus the combination would result in the header data to include both the first and second image processing information for respective application to raw data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann in view of Nakamura to transmit header data including image processing information to be performed and applying the image processing information as taught by Matsunaga ([0069-0070], [0076-0078]). Adding header data to the raw image data indicating an image processing method and transmitting it may allow for the image processing apparatus to automatically recognize how the image data should be handled or processed, thereby removing the need for manual user selection of how the images should be processed. Since Halmann teaches wherein the image processing includes first and second image processing methods, Halmann modified by the teachings of Matsunaga would predictably result in adding headers indicating both first and second image processing to be executed by the second image processing unit and wherein the application of the image processing is based on the respective image processing information included in the header data.
Claims 10-11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Halmann ‘844 (US20120157844) in view of Matsumoto (US20240148364), Nakamura (JP2012016480, translation provided), and Matsunaga (US20060098229) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Halmann ‘690 (US20050113690).
Regarding claim 10, Halmann ‘844 in view of Matsumoto, Nakamura, and Matsunaga teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 8.
However, Halmann ‘844 fails to explicitly teach wherein the second image processing is image processing of generating an image for which a higher level of calculation capability than in the first image processing is required.
In an analogous ultrasound imaging field of endeavor, Halmann ‘690 teaches such a feature. Halmann ‘690 teaches an ultrasound-imaging device (100) including a first processor (116) for generating and displaying ultrasound images (Fig. 1, [0011-0012]). Halmann ‘690 further teaches a resource extension device (302) able to be coupled to said ultrasound-imaging device (100) (Fig. 3, [0016]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the resource extension device (302) includes a second processor (322) ([0018]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the second processor (322) has higher processing capability relative to the first processor (116) ([0018]). Halmann ‘690 teaches scanning a volume or imaging a target with a second image processing level capability with the resource extension device, the second image processing level capability being greater than the first image processing level capability (Claim 10). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the resource extension device (302) extends the capability of the ultrasound-imaging device (100) ([0016]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the ultrasound imaging-device (100) is limited in capability such that only B-mode processing is performed and requires the resource extension device (302) for color flow, Doppler, b-flow, and codes processing ([0022]). Halmann ‘690 therefore teaches a second image processing for which a higher level of calculation (processing) capability than in the first image processing is required.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann ‘844 to have the second imaging processing method be of higher calculation capability than required by the first image processing method as taught by Halmann ‘690 (Claim 10, [0016], [0018], [0022]). By having higher processing capability be attached to an extender or second processing unit, a cost-effective and reliable means for providing extended resources for a less capable portable ultrasound systems may be provided as recognized by Halmann ‘690 ([0029]). Moreover by having the ultrasound diagnosis device be made portable, the portable device may be used in more locations/scenarios, thereby improving the convenience of the device.
Regarding claim 11, Halmann ‘844 in view of Nakamura and Halmann ‘690 teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 10.
However, Halmann ‘844 fails to explicitly teach wherein the second image processing is image processing of generating an image for measurement, and the second ultrasound image is the image for measurement.
In an analogous ultrasound imaging field of endeavor, Halmann ‘690 teaches such a feature. Halmann ‘690 teaches an ultrasound-imaging device (100) including a first processor (116) for generating and displaying ultrasound images (Fig. 1, [0011-0012]). Halmann ‘690 further teaches a resource extension device (302) able to be coupled to said ultrasound-imaging device (100) (Fig. 3, [0016]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the resource extension device (302) includes a second processor (322) ([0018]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the second processor (322) has higher processing capability relative to the first processor (116) ([0018]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the resource extension device (302) may be used to process images for color flow, Doppler, and B-flow ([0022]). Color flow, Doppler, and B-flow are all imaging methods/modes which assess blood flow. Halmann ‘690 therefore teaches wherein the images produced by the second imaging processor (322) are for measurement (of blood flow).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann ‘844 to have the second ultrasound images be images for measurement as taught by Halmann ‘690 ([0018], [0022]). By having the ultrasound images be for measurement and comprise ultrasound techniques such as color flow, Doppler, or B-flow as taught by Halmann ‘690 ([0022]), the viewer of said images may predictably evaluate the patient’s or subject’s blood flow and form a diagnosis.
Regarding claim 14, Halmann ‘844 in view of Nakamura teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 8.
However, Halmann ‘844 fails to teach wherein the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus is a portable ultrasound diagnostic apparatus.
In an analogous ultrasound imaging field of endeavor, Halmann ‘690 teaches such a feature. Halmann ‘690 teaches an ultrasound-imaging device (100) including a first processor (116) for generating and displaying ultrasound images (Fig. 1, [0011-0012]). Halmann ‘690 further teaches a resource extension device (302) able to be coupled to said ultrasound-imaging device (100) (Fig. 3, [0016]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the resource extension device (302) includes a second processor (322) and wherein the resource extension device (302) is an image processing unit ([0018], [0022], [0024]). Halmann ‘690 teaches wherein the ultrasound-imaging device (100) is portable (Abstract, [0002], [0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the invention of Halmann ‘844 to have the ultrasound device be portable as taught by Halmann ‘690 (Abstract, [0002], [0016]). Making the ultrasound device be portable predictably allows the device to be more convenient and able to be brought and used in a plurality of locations/scenarios that an otherwise non-portable device may not.
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 TOMMY T LY whose telephone number is (571) 272-6404. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12:00pm-8:00pm eastern time.
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, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-4963. 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.
/TOMMY T LY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/SERKAN AKAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797