CTNF 18/827,833 CTNF 66123 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SATO et al (US 20130243282) . As per claim 1, Sato teaches the claimed “ultrasound diagnostic system” comprising: “an ultrasound diagnostic apparatus that generates image data based on reception data” ( Sato, [0003] - The medical image imaging device herein includes, for example, an ultrasound diagnostic apparatus , an X-ray diagnostic apparatus, an MRI apparatus (Magnetic Resonance Imaging), an X-ray CT apparatus, etc. ); “an external information processing apparatus connected to the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus” ( Sato, [0003] - When sharing image processing between a plurality of servers , the maximum throughput is predicted based on the predicted number of reserved scans using a scanning apparatus (the number of reserved scans) and the predicted amount of image data to be acquired, after which the number of servers to be installed is determined in correspondence with this maximum throughput ); “an application program (AP) group provided in the external information processing apparatus or provided across the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus and the external information processing apparatus, and composed of a plurality of APs for processing the image data” ( Sato, [0043] - For example, the image processing of classification M11 with the image processing classification C15 shows that the image classification C21 will carry out process 1, process 2, and process 3 with respect to the MOD1 image data ); and “a management unit that manages selection of an AP set from the AP group and manages an operation of the AP set, wherein the AP set consists of a plurality of APs that operate together during an ultrasound examination” ( Sato, [0043] - the processing content C22 shows the list of processes carried out. For example, the image processing of classification M11 with the image processing classification C15 shows that the image classification C21 will carry out process 1, process 2, and process 3 with respect to the MOD1 image data; [0075] - For example, the image process classification of examination (test) d is classification M31, and "process 6," "process 7," and "process 8" are carried out in this order as the processing content of the image processing. Accordingly, the information showing "process 6," "process 7" and "process 8" are input into the processing information E14 in this order. The request destination E142 shows the request destination to request the execution of the corresponding process. Moreover, the return destination E143 shows the return destination to which the image data is returned following the process ). It is noted that Sado does not explicitly teach the managing of selection and operating of an AP set “are based on management information representing interrelationships between the plurality of APs constituting the AP group” as claimed. However, Sato’s processing category ( Sato, Figure 5, [0043] - Moreover, the processing content C22 shows the list of processes carried out. For example, the image processing of classification M11 with the image processing classification C15 shows that the image classification C21 will carry out process 1, process 2, and process 3 with respect to the MOD1 image data ; [0075] - Accordingly, the information showing "process 6," "process 7" and "process 8" are input into the processing information E14 in this order ; Figure 8 – e.g., test a contains, the serial process of processing 1, 2, and 3 in which the output of processing 1 inputs to the processing 2 ) suggests the selection and operation of the AP set (e.g., Sato’s category M11) based on the interrelationships between the AP applications or processes. The motivation is to represent the result of the ultrasound diagnostic corresponding to the selected AP applications or processes. Claim 2 adds into claim 1 “wherein the management information includes one or a plurality of pieces of proper combination information, and each piece of the proper combination information includes information for specifying the plurality of APs that operate together” ( Sado, [0101] - Next, the image processor 21 successively reads the process E141, the request destination E142, and the return destination E143 in order from the first row and carries out the process setup to the process E141 of the read row… Accordingly, the image processor 21 operates "process 6," "process 7," and "process 8" in this order ). Claim 3 adds into claim 2 “wherein each piece of the proper combination information further includes a designation of a parallel operation or a designation of a serial operation, and the management unit causes the plurality of APs constituting the AP set to perform the parallel operation in accordance with the designation of the parallel operation” ( Sato, [0064] - For example, in the time width Wa1, only the image processing of "examination (test) a" is carried out. Moreover, in the time width Wa4, each imaging process of examinations (studies) a to d are carried out in parallel , so that the total D of the throughput C43 at this time becomes the predetermined throughput D0 or more ), and “causes the plurality of APs constituting the AP set to perform the serial operation in accordance with the designation of the serial operation” ( Sato, [0043] - The image classification C21 shows the image data classification (modality) subject to processing of the series of image processes shown in the image processing classification C15. Moreover, the processing content C22 shows the list of processes carried out. For example, the image processing of classification M11 with the image processing classification C15 shows that the image classification C21 will carry out process 1, process 2, and process 3 with respect to the MOD1 image data ; [0075] - Accordingly, the information showing "process 6," "process 7" and "process 8" are input into the processing information E14 in this order ). Claim 4 adds into claim 3 “wherein the proper combination information including the designation of the serial operation includes information indicating a connection order of the plurality of APs constituting the AP set, and the management unit connects the plurality of APs constituting the AP set in series in accordance with the information indicating the connection order” ( Sato, [0043] - The image classification C21 shows the image data classification (modality) subject to processing of the series of image processes shown in the image processing classification C15. Moreover, the processing content C22 shows the list of processes carried out. For example, the image processing of classification M11 with the image processing classification C15 shows that the image classification C21 will carry out process 1, process 2, and process 3 with respect to the MOD1 image data ; [0075] - Accordingly, the information showing "process 6," "process 7" and "process 8" are input into the processing information E14 in this order ). Claim 5 adds into claim 2 “wherein the management information has a matrix structure, the matrix structure includes a plurality of cells corresponding to a plurality of AP pairs, which are a plurality of combinations defined based on the AP group, and the plurality of cells consist of one or a plurality of valid cells associated with the one or the plurality of pieces of proper combination information and one or a plurality of invalid cells other than the one or the plurality of valid cells” ( Sato, [0143] - Next, the request destination specifying part 132 specifies the supporting server capable of carrying out the process for each specified process . In the case of the configuration illustrated in FIG. 14, the request destination specifying part 132 specifies "server 2C" as the request destination of "process 6," and specifies "server 2D" as the request destination of "process 7" and "process 8." The request destination specifying part 132 associates each process with the request destinations specified regarding each process to be a pair and associates the respective pairs with the return destination C18 of the image data to be one group ; [0041]-[0043] - the processing content C22 shows the list of processes carried out. For example, the image processing of classification M11 with the image processing classification C15 shows that the image classification C21 will carry out process 1, process 2, and process 3 with respect to the MOD1 image data ). Sato’s supporting server which is identified as capable of carrying out the AP group for specified processes implies the valid or invalid of application program AP group or combinations of processes (i.e., Sato’s category M11, M12, …, M31 of TBL20 of Figure 5 which combines supporting processes); furthermore, Sato’s test running schedule (e.g., figure 8) of the AP applications shows the serial orders and/or parallel running of the AP applications or processes. It would have been obvious, based on Sato’s serial or parallel running of the AP applications or processes, to show them on a table of serial/parallel running relationship of each pair of AP applications, or processes. The motivation is to selectively and properly assign the works of AP applications, or processes to the external information processing apparatus or servers. Claim 6 adds into claim 5 “wherein the matrix structure has a first axis to which a plurality of AP candidates to be selected earlier are assigned and a second axis to which a plurality of AP candidates to be selected later are assigned, and the management unit identifies a specific cell based on an AP selected earlier and an AP selected later in the matrix structure and refers to information associated with the specific cell” ( Sato, [0143] - Next, the request destination specifying part 132 specifies the supporting server capable of carrying out the process for each specified process . In the case of the configuration illustrated in FIG. 14, the request destination specifying part 132 specifies "server 2C" as the request destination of "process 6," and specifies "server 2D" as the request destination of "process 7" and "process 8." The request destination specifying part 132 associates each process with the request destinations specified regarding each process to be a pair and associates the respective pairs with the return destination C18 of the image data to be one group ; [0041]-[0043] - the processing content C22 shows the list of processes carried out. For example, the image processing of classification M11 with the image processing classification C15 shows that the image classification C21 will carry out process 1, process 2, and process 3 with respect to the MOD1 image data ). Sato’s supporting server which is identified as capable of carrying out the AP group for specified processes implies the valid or invalid of application program AP group or combinations of processes (i.e., Sato’s category M11, M12, …, M31 of TBL20 of Figure 5 which combines supporting processes); furthermore, Sato’s test running schedule (e.g., figure 8) of the AP applications shows the serial orders and/or parallel running of the AP applications or processes. It would have been obvious, based on Sato’s serial or parallel running of the AP applications, or processes, to show them on a 2D table (i.e., corresponding for each pair of applications) of serial (i.e., earlier or later running) /parallel (i.e., simultaneous running) relationship of each pair of AP applications, or processes. The motivation is to selectively and properly assign the works of AP applications, or processes to the external information processing apparatus or servers. Claim 7 adds into claim 1 “wherein the management unit connects, in controlling a serial operation of the plurality of APs constituting the AP set, the plurality of APs constituting the AP set in series in an order according to the management information so that a processing result output from an i-th AP is input to an i+1-th AP” ( Sato, [0043] - Moreover, the processing content C22 shows the list of processes carried out. For example, the image processing of classification M11 with the image processing classification C15 shows that the image classification C21 will carry out process 1, process 2, and process 3 with respect to the MOD1 image data ; [0075] - Accordingly, the information showing "process 6," "process 7" and "process 8" are input into the processing information E14 in this order ; Figure 8 – e.g., test a contains, the serial process of processing 1, 2, and 3 in which the output of processing 1 inputs to the processing 2 ). Claim 8 adds into claim 7 “wherein the ultrasound diagnostic apparatus includes the management unit, and the management unit receives processing result data output from the i-th AP and transfers the processing result data to the i+1-th AP” (Sato, Figure 8 – e.g., test a contains, the serial process of processing 1, 2, and 3 in which the output of processing 1 inputs to the processing 2 ). Claim 9 adds into claim 7 “wherein the external information processing apparatus includes a buffer memory, and the management unit manages an operation of the external information processing apparatus such that, in a case in which the i-th AP and the i+1-th AP belong to the external information processing apparatus, the processing result data output from the i-th AP is written into the buffer memory and the processing result data read from the buffer memory is input to the i+1-th AP” which is obvious in the performance of the selected processes, or AP group, in the assigned external information processing server containing working buffer memory. The motivation is allowing a proper data management for process by a combination of the AP applications. Claim 10 adds into claim 1 “a selection image generation unit that generates a selection image for selecting the AP set from the AP group, based on the management information” ( Sato, [0043] - the processing content C22 shows the list of processes carried out. For example, the image processing of classification M11 with the image processing classification C15 shows that the image classification C21 will carry out process 1, process 2, and process 3 with respect to the MOD1 image data; [0075] - For example, the image process classification of examination (test) d is classification M31, and "process 6," "process 7," and "process 8" are carried out in this order as the processing content of the image processing. Accordingly, the information showing "process 6," "process 7" and "process 8" are input into the processing information E14 in this order. The request destination E142 shows the request destination to request the execution of the corresponding process. Moreover, the return destination E143 shows the return destination to which the image data is returned following the process ). Claim 11 adds into claim 10 “wherein the selection image includes one or a plurality of display elements indicating one or a plurality of AP candidates that are currently selectable, and a content of the selection image changes in a stepwise manner in a process of selecting a plurality of APs from the AP group in a stepwise manner” ( Sato, [0143] - Next, the request destination specifying part 132 specifies the supporting server capable of carrying out the process for each specified process . In the case of the configuration illustrated in FIG. 14, the request destination specifying part 132 specifies "server 2C" as the request destination of "process 6," and specifies "server 2D" as the request destination of "process 7" and "process 8." The request destination specifying part 132 associates each process with the request destinations specified regarding each process to be a pair and associates the respective pairs with the return destination C18 of the image data to be one group ; [0041]-[0043] - the processing content C22 shows the list of processes carried out. For example, the image processing of classification M11 with the image processing classification C15 shows that the image classification C21 will carry out process 1, process 2, and process 3 with respect to the MOD1 image data ). Claims 13 and 14 claim an apparatus and a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program based on the method of claim 1; therefore, they are rejected under a similar rationale . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SATO et al (US 20130243282) in view of LEUNG et al (Three ‐ dimensional extended imaging: a new display modality for three ‐ dimensional ultrasound examination) . Sato does not teach, but Leung teaches the claim 12, which adds into claim 1 “a display controller that controls display of a plurality of pieces of processing result data output from the plurality of APs constituting the AP set, wherein the display controller displays the plurality of pieces of processing result data in a juxtaposed manner in a case in which a juxtaposed display mode is selected, and displays the plurality of pieces of processing result data in a composite manner in a case in which a composite display mode is selected” ( Leung, Figure 1(b) - The fetal face at 27 weeks' gestation showing orbits (o), nose (n), upper lip (ul), alveolus (al), palate (p), tongue (t), and lower lip (11) ). Thus, it would have been obvious, in view of Leung, to configure Sato’s method as claimed by displaying the plurality of pieces of processing result data in a juxtaposed manner. The motivation is allowing the user to visually review multiple components of the captured object. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHU K NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7645. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5pm. 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, Daniel F. Hajnik can be reached at (571) 272-7 642 . 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. /PHU K NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2616 Application/Control Number: 18/827,833 Page 2 Art Unit: 2616 Application/Control Number: 18/827,833 Page 3 Art Unit: 2616 Application/Control Number: 18/827,833 Page 4 Art Unit: 2616
Prosecution Insights