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 § 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 21-40 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.
Claims 21, 39 and 40 all recite “determining, based on the transforming relationship, the first position. It is unclear which version of the first position this refers to. Does the first position refer to the first position in the imaging device coordinate system or the first position in the second coordinate system. For examination purposes, the examiner assumes the first position is the first position in the second coordinate system.
Claims 22-38 are rejected because the inherit the deficiencies of claim 21, by nature of their dependency on claim 21.
Claim 29 is rejected because it recites determining a target calibration image matched with the image from the calibration images. The term “the calibration images” lacks antecedent basis. Additionally, Claim 29 depends from Claim 21, and Claim 21 does not recite the term calibration, let alone calibration images. Therefore, it is unclear what images are being compared, especially since Claim 21 only recites one image.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 21, 39, and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because:
The claims are analyzed in accordance with the two step analysis as outlined in MPEP 2106 and subsections thereof.
Statutory Category (Step 1): Claim 21 recites a system with at least one storage device and one processor, this reads on a machine. Claim 39 recites a method, which would read on a process. Claim 40 recites a non-transitory computer readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, direct the at least one processor to perform a method, which would read on a machine.
Step 2A, prong 1: Claims 21, 39, and 40 all recite obtaining a transforming relationship between a first coordinate system applied to the image and a second coordinate system applied to the medical radiation device, the transforming relationship including a transforming ratio of a number of pixels in the image to a corresponding distance in the second coordinate system; determining, based on the transforming relationship and the image, the first position of the couch in the second coordinate system; determining a position of a scanning range of the subject in the image; and determining, based on the transforming relationship, the first position, and the position of the scanning range of the subject in the image, a second position of the couch. The obtaining a transforming relationship , determining the first position of the couch based on the transforming relationship and determining the second position based on the transforming relationship are all mathematical type abstract ideas. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that such steps involves the determining the matrix relationship between two different coordinate system and based on the relationship, converting between the first coordinate system to the second coordinate system. The additional determination of the position of the scanning range in the image is a mental type abstract idea of evaluating the image and determining where the scan range should be.
Additional Elements Considerations (for integration into a practical application analysis, Step 2A, prong 2; and for inventive concept/significantly more/well-understood, routine, and conventional analysis, Step 28):
Claims 21, 39, and 40 recite a storage device, medium or a non-transitory computer readable medium and at least one processor. These elements amount to a generic computer. Additionally, claims 21, 39, and 40 all recite obtaining an image of a subject on a couch, which would read on pre-solution activity of data gathering. A generic computer with pre-solution activity of data gathering does not integrate the abstract ideas into a practical application, and cannot be an inventive concept or amount to significantly more. The claims are recited at such a general level, that it amounts to using a computer to apply the abstract ideas to gathered data. Nothing is used with the data after being processed using the abstract idea by the generic computer. Therefore, Claims 21, 39, and 40 are not patent eligible.
Claims 22-38 recite additional elements that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The examiner notes that although claim 38 recites moving the couch to the second position, claim 38 is dependent on claim 21, with the very general claims. There is no suggestion or recitation within the claim 38 of why the couch is moving to the second position. Therefore, this is interpreted as an extra-solution activity. Therefore claims 22-28 are not patent eligible.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 21 and 38-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2009/0285357 to Khamene et al. “Khamene”, in view of US2016/0012611 to Wexler et al. “Wexler”.
Regarding claim 21, Khamene teaches a system, comprising:
at least one storage device including a set of instructions (scanning program stored in memory, wherein the scanning program includes executable process steps, Paragraph 0033); and at least one processor (Paragraph 0033-0035, CT computer controller; processor 1000, Paragraph 0049) configured to communicate with the at least one storage device, wherein when executing the set of instructions, the at least one processor is configured to direct the system to perform operations (Paragraphs 0033-0035, 0049) including:
obtaining an image of a subject on a couch of a medical radiation device, the image being acquired by an imaging device when the couch is at a first position (Paragraph 0050, with the patient 400 on the table 300, (Step 402) the process scans the patient 400 with the 3D optical imaging system 200 to obtaining optical energy intensity data and depth data over a field of view of the 3D optical scanning system 200 and depth data over a field of view of the 3D optical scanning system 200; the first image acquired in step 404, would read on the table being at the first position);
obtaining a transforming relationship between a first coordinate system applied to the image and a second coordinate system applied to the medical radiation device (Paragraph 0048 and Fig. 3, step 312: generate a coordination transformation between a coordinate system used by the optical system 500 and a coordinate system used by the radiological imaging apparatus 200);
determining a position of a scanning range of the subject in the image (Paragraphs 0049-051, the radiologist specifies a scan range in the coordinate system of the imaging device, Paragraph 005, wherein the process is carried out using the obtained image(s), Paragraphs 0049-0050) and
determining, based on the transforming relationship, the first position, and the position of the scanning range of the subject in the image, a second position of the couch (Paragraph 0051, determining the position signal for table 300, which is based on the scan range in the coordinate system of the imaging device, i.e. the scan range in the image, and the coordinate transformation terms, which reads on the transforming relationship, and since the generated position signal for the table is for moving the table in response to the position signal, it is inherent that the movement signal would be based on the first position).
However, Khamene does not explicitly teach determining, based on the transforming relationship and the image, the first position of the couch in the second coordinate system.
Khamene does teach generating the position signal for the table based on the specified scan range (Paragraph 0051), wherein the position signal is for moving the table 300 relative to the radiographic equipment 200 (which reads on the second coordinate frame/system) in response to positioning signals (Paragraph 0049).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, wherein in calculating the positioning signal for the moving the table, determining the first position of the table in the second coordinate system is inherent since a movement/positioning instruction for the table has to be relative to some initial point (i.e. the first position of the table), and since the positioning signal is relative to the radiographic equipment (Paragraph 0049), which reads on the second coordinate frame/system, it would be obvious that the first/initial position of the table prior to the movement would be in the same coordinate system. Additionally, the determining of the first position table would be based on the transforming relationship and the image, since that is the basis of the calibration/registration procedure established in Figs. 3 and 4 (Paragraph 0049).
However, Khamene does not disclose the transforming relationship includes a transforming ratio of a number of pixels in the image to a corresponding distance in the second coordinate system. Wexler teaches in similar field of measuring distances related to a target object depicted in an image (abstract). Wexler teaches a method of inverse mapping which is the projective transform that maps points in an image plane or camera coordinate system onto points in a plane or world coordinate system (Paragraph 0124, 0171-0179). Wexler teaches scaling the inverse mapping by determining a pixel per physical unit ratio (Paragraph 0177), which would read on a ratio of a number of pixels and a corresponding distance.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Khamene’s invention, wherein the transforming relationship includes a transforming ratio of a number of pixels in the image to a corresponding distance in the second coordinate system, as taught by Wexler, in order to allow the image to physical transform to convert the original image taken by the imaging device into an image in which distances within the plane of the reference object are measure in pixel units and are directly proportional to physical distance (Wexler, Paragraph 0177), and allowed other objects in the image scene to be located (Wexler, Paragraph 0179).
Regarding claim 38, the modifications of Khamene and Wexler disclose all the features of claim 21 above.
As disclosed in the claim 1 rejection above, Khamene discloses generating a position signal for the table 300 after the radiologist specifies the scan range in the imaging device coordinate system (Paragraph 0051), wherein in response to the position signal, the table 300 moves relative to the radiographic equipment. Therefore, this infers that the with the position signal, the table will start moving based on the set scan range, and will ultimately end at the end of the scan range, i.e. the second position of the table.
Regarding claims 39 and 40, Khamene discloses a method (a method is provided for positioning a patient relative to radiographic equipment with a patient positioning system, Paragraph 0014) implemented on a computing device including at least one processor and storage medium; and a computer readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, direct the at least one processor to perform a method (scanning program stored in memory, wherein the scanning program includes executable process steps/method, Paragraph 0033; Paragraph 0033-0035, CT computer controller; processor 1000, Paragraph 0049; wherein the CT computer controller or processor 1000 implement the steps, Paragraphs 0033-0035, 0049), the method comprising:
obtaining an image of a subject on a couch of a medical radiation device, the image being acquired by an imaging device when the couch is at a first position (Paragraph 0050, with the patient 400 on the table 300, (Step 402) the process scans the patient 400 with the 3D optical imaging system 200 to obtaining optical energy intensity data and depth data over a field of view of the 3D optical scanning system 200 and depth data over a field of view of the 3D optical scanning system 200; the first image acquired in step 404, would read on the table being at the first position);
obtaining a transforming relationship between a first coordinate system applied to the image and a second coordinate system applied to the medical radiation device (Paragraph 0048 and Fig. 3, step 312: generate a coordination transformation between a coordinate system used by the optical system 500 and a coordinate system used by the radiological imaging apparatus 200);
determining a position of a scanning range of the subject in the image (Paragraphs 0049-051, the radiologist specifies a scan range in the coordinate system of the imaging device, Paragraph 005, wherein the process is carried out using the obtained image(s), Paragraphs 0049-0050) and
determining, based on the transforming relationship, the first position, and the position of the scanning range of the subject in the image, a second position of the couch (Paragraph 0051, determining the position signal for table 300, which is based on the scan range in the coordinate system of the imaging device, i.e. the scan range in the image, and the coordinate transformation terms, which reads on the transforming relationship, and since the generated position signal for the table is for moving the table in response to the position signal, it is inherent that the movement signal would be based on the first position).
However, Khamene does not explicitly teach determining, based on the transforming relationship and the image, the first position of the couch in the second coordinate system.
Khamene does teach generating the position signal for the table based on the specified scan range (Paragraph 0051), wherein the position signal is for moving the table 300 relative to the radiographic equipment 200 (which reads on the second coordinate frame/system) in response to positioning signals (Paragraph 0049).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, wherein in calculating the positioning signal for the moving the table, determining the first position of the table in the second coordinate system is inherent since a movement/positioning instruction for the table has to be relative to some initial point (i.e. the first position of the table), and since the positioning signal is relative to the radiographic equipment (Paragraph 0049), which reads on the second coordinate frame/system, it would be obvious that the first/initial position of the table prior to the movement would be in the same coordinate system. Additionally, the determining of the first position table would be based on the transforming relationship and the image, since that is the basis of the calibration/registration procedure established in Figs. 3 and 4 (Paragraph 0049).
However, Khamene does not disclose the transforming relationship includes a transforming ratio of a number of pixels in the image to a corresponding distance in the second coordinate system. Wexler teaches in similar field of measuring distances related to a target object depicted in an image (abstract). Wexler teaches a method of inverse mapping which is the projective transform that maps points in an image plane or camera coordinate system onto points in a plane or world coordinate system (Paragraph 0124, 0171-0179). Wexler teaches scaling the inverse mapping by determining a pixel per physical unit ratio (Paragraph 0177), which would read on a ratio of a number of pixels and a corresponding distance.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Khamene’s invention, wherein the transforming relationship includes a transforming ratio of a number of pixels in the image to a corresponding distance in the second coordinate system, as taught by Wexler, in order to allow the image to physical transform to convert the original image taken by the imaging device into an image in which distances within the plane of the reference object are measure in pixel units and are directly proportional to physical distance (Wexler, Paragraph 0177), and allowed other objects in the image scene to be located (Wexler, Paragraph 0179).
Claim(s) 22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khamene, in view of Wexler, as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of US2018/0184997 Tsukagoshi et al. “Tsukagoshi”.
Regarding claim 22, the modifications of Khamene and Wexler disclose all the features of claim 21 above.
However, Khamene and Wexler do not explicitly disclose obtaining data associated with the scanning range of the subject and determining, based on the data associated with the scanning range of the subject, the position of the scanning range of the subject in the image.
Tsukagoshi teaches obtaining data associated with a scanning range of a subject (Paragraph 0094 and Fig. 15, setting a scanning region such as a chest, and the system receiving the pre-set scan range R1, and is illustrated in the virtual body image, wherein the scan range r1 is a range box and would read on defining a first starting position corresponding to a first anatomical location of the subject, and a first ending position corresponding to a second anatomical location of the subject);
determining, based on the first starting position and the first end position, a position of the scanning range of the subject in the image (Paragraph 0094, setting scan range R11 in the position determining image, Fig. 15, right image, wherein the ends of the range box as seen in corresponds to the same first and second anatomical locations as in range, R1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Khamene and Wexler, wherein the system include obtaining data associated with the scanning range of the subject and determining, based on the data associated with the scanning range of the subject, the position of the scanning range of the subject in the image, as taught by Tsukagoshi, in order to set the scan range for patient imaging based on a target site (Paragraph 0094).
Regarding claim 23, the modifications of Khamene, Wexler, and Tsukagoshi disclose all the features of claim 22 above.
Tsukagoshi discloses wherein the obtaining data associated with the scanning range of the subject includes: obtaining the data associated with the scanning range of the subject according to an input of a user (Tsukagoshi discloses pressing a button on the interface, such as “CHEST”, see Fig. 15, which a pre-set protocol is obtained that sets a scan range, R1, Paragraph 0094).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Khamene, Wexler, and Tsukagoshi, wherein the system include obtaining the data associated with the scanning range of the subject according to an input of a user, as taught by Tsukagoshi, in order to set the scan range for patient imaging based on a target site (Paragraph 0094).
Regarding claim 24, the modifications of Khamene, Wexler, and Tsukagoshi disclose all the features of claim 22 above.
Tsukagoshi discloses wherein the obtaining data associated with the scanning range of the subject includes: causing a display device to present a user interface including multiple operating controls (See Fig. 15, plurality of buttons in the interface that correspond to different anatomical regions); and determining the data associated with the scanning range of the subject in response to receiving an input of a user through the multiple operating controls (Tsukagoshi discloses pressing a button on the interface, such as “CHEST”, see Fig. 15, and a pre-set protocol for that selected region is obtained that sets a scan range, R1, Paragraph 0094).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Khamene, Wexler, and Tsukagoshi, wherein the system include causing a display device to present a user interface including multiple operating controls, and determining the data associated with the scanning range of the subject in response to receiving an input of a user through the multiple operating controls, as taught by Tsukagoshi, in order to set the scan range for patient imaging based on a target site (Paragraph 0094).
Regarding claim 25, the modifications of Khamene, Wexler, and Tsukagoshi disclose all the features of claim 24 above.
Tsukagoshi further teaches wherein the user interface is used to configure a scanning protocol (GUI as seen in Fig. 15 is part of a protocol pre-set selecting operation, Paragraph 0089), and includes a human anatomical structure map that includes multiple anatomical locations each of which corresponds to one of the multiple operating controls (See Fig. 15, virtual patient image rendering an entire human body, Paragraph 0094, wherein the rendering corresponds to locations of the buttons in the GUI, Paragraph 0094), and
the determining the data associated with the scanning range of the subject in response to receiving an input of the user through the multiple operating controls includes: receiving an operation of the user on one or more of the multiple operating controls (receives the setting of the scan range which uses the buttons representing the different anatomical regions, Paragraph 0094, Fig. 15); determining, based on the operation of the user on one or more of the multiple operating controls, a configuration of the scanning range in the scanning protocol (each of the buttons include a preset, including the scan range, Paragraph 0094, therefore selecting a button would include determining a configuration of the scanning range in the scanning protocol); and determining, based on the configuration of the scanning range, the data associated with the scanning range of the subject ("as a result of the scan range R1 being set in the virtual patient image, the position matching function 37 b transforms the scan range R1 into coordinate information expressed in the position determining image so as to set a scan range R11", Paragraph 0094).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Khamene, Wexler, and Tsukagoshi, wherein the user interface is used to configure a scanning protocol, and includes a human anatomical structure map that includes multiple anatomical locations each of which corresponds to one of the multiple operating controls, and the determining the data associated with the scanning range of the subject in response to receiving an input of the user through the multiple operating controls includes: receiving an operation of the user on one or more of the multiple operating controls; determining, based on the operation of the user on one or more of the multiple operating controls, a configuration of the scanning range in the scanning protocol; and determining, based on the configuration of the scanning range, the data associated with the scanning range of the subject, as taught by Tsukagoshi, in order to set the scan range for patient imaging based on a target site or desired anatomical location (Paragraph 0094).
Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khamene, in view of Wexler, as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of US2017/0189719 to Liu et al. “Liu”.
Regarding claim 35, the modifications of Khamene and Wexler disclose all the features of claim 21 above.
However, the modifications of Khamene and Wexler do not disclose determining, based on the depth information, a body thickness of the subject; determining the second position of the couch in a horizontal plane parallel to the couch; determining, based on the body thickness of the subject, the second position of the couch in a vertical direction perpendicular to the horizontal plane; and causing the couch to move to the second position.
Liu teaches determining, based on the depth information, a body thickness of the subject, determining the second position of the couch in a horizontal plane parallel to the couch, determining, based on the body thickness of the subject, the second position of the couch in a vertical direction perpendicular to the horizontal plane; and causing the couch to move to the second position determining the second position of the couch in a horizontal plane parallel to the couch, and determining, based on the body thickness of the subject, the second position of the couch in a vertical direction perpendicular to the horizontal plane; and causing the couch to move to the second position (adjusting the patient support based on the different depths of the target areas of the patient, it is inherent that the depths of the target areas are determined which equates to a thickness of the patient in the target area, and in the adjusting of the patient support, it is inherent that a target adjustment coordinate, which reads on a second position, is determined in order to make the adjustment, See Paragraph 0096).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method as described by Khamene and Wexler, wherein the method includes determining, based on the depth information, a body thickness of the subject; determining the second position of the couch in a horizontal plane parallel to the couch; determining, based on the body thickness of the subject, the second position of the couch in a vertical direction perpendicular to the horizontal plane; and causing the couch to move to the second position, as taught by Liu, in order to in order to ensure that the beam from the radiation head radiates the target area (Paragraph 0096).
Claim(s) 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khamene, in view of Wexler, and further in view of Tsukagoshi, as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of US2005/0234327 to Saracen et al. “Saracen”.
Regarding claim 36, the modifications of Khamene and Wexler disclose all the features of claim 21 above.
However, the modifications of Khamene and Wexler do not disclose outputting, through a user interface, the second position to a terminal of a user.
Tsukagoshi discloses outputting, through a user interface, the second position to a terminal of a user (See Fig. 15 or 19, right image).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Khamene and Wexler, wherein the operations include outputting, through a user interface, the second position to a terminal of a user as taught by Tsukagoshi, in order to all the user to visualize the scan range on a virtual patient image (Tsukagoshi, Paragraph 0094).
However, the modifications of Khamene, Wexler, Tsukagoshi does not explicitly disclose receiving an adjustment instruction for adjusting the second position provided by the user through the user interface; and causing, based on the adjustment instruction, the couch to move.
Saracen teaches receiving an adjustment instruction for adjusting the second position provided by the user through the user interface; and causing, based on the adjustment instruction, the couch to move (Paragraph 0103, graphical user interface wherein the user is allowed to modify one or more of the pre-specified limits, wherein the limits is the translation of the patient couch, allowing the user to verify through the interface the translations, and then activating the system; the movement to the radiation device would read on adjusting the second position).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Khamene, Wexler, Tsukagoshi, wherein the system includes receiving an adjustment instruction for adjusting the second position provided by the user through the user interface; and causing, based on the adjustment instruction, the couch to move, as taught by Saracen, in order to be able to allow the user to verify the adjustment of the couch (Paragraph 0103).
Claim(s) 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khamene, in view of Wexler, as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of US2020/0258243 to Chang et al. “Chang”.
Regarding claim 37, the modifications of Khamene and Wexler disclose all the features of claim 21 above.
However, the modifications of Khamene and Wexler do not disclose wherein the determining a position of the scanning range of the subject in the image includes: determining, based on data associated with the scanning range, the position of the scanning range of the subject in the image by inputting the data associated with the scanning range and the image into using a trained machine learning model
Chang teaches estimating the scan range (Paragraph 0026). Machine learning is used to train a network to estimate body markers from surface data, Paragraph 0005, which is then used to determine the position of the scan range, based on the estimated body regions (Paragraph 0095).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system as described by Khamene and Wexler, wherein the position of the scanning range is determined using a trained machine learning model, as taught by Chang, in order to automate patient positioning process, which can be time consuming, costly, and require operators to spend time away from other tasks (Paragraph 0003).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 26-28, 30-34 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 29 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, and also 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Milton Truong whose telephone number is (571)272-2158. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 5PM, MON-FRI.
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, Keith Raymond can be reached at (571) 270-1790. 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.
/MT/Examiner, Art Unit 3798
/KEITH M RAYMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3798