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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) was/were submitted on 30 June 2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-7, 9-13, 15-16, 19, and 21-22 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 9, 12-13, 15-16, 19, 21-22, and 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pionteck et al. (US 2021/0030474 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 13, and 19, Pionteck discloses a method using a CRM in a three-dimensional structure reconstruction system comprising: at least one processor [Pionteck: ¶ [0040]: processor] configured to: receive a plurality of X-ray images of an object, wherein the plurality of X-ray images of the object are captured from different poses [Pionteck: ¶ [0039]: It comprises an element called a C-arm 110, allowing X-ray images to be taken of the body of a patient. The C-arm is able to turn about different axes in order to capture images of a stationary patient at different angles]; project an estimated three-dimensional structure into projected two-dimensional images using projection parameters [Pionteck: ¶ [0103] Thus, the angle r.sub.x′ can be modified iteratively, and at each iteration the position difference, for each marker, between the projection of its 3D position in the model on the 2D image and its image taken by X-ray can be calculated]; determine a loss function based on: the estimated three-dimensional structure, and the plurality of X-ray images of the object [Pionteck: ¶ [0103]: If several markers are used, the absolute values of the position differences can be added together or taken separately. Thus, the values of the angles r.sub.x′ can be determined iteratively in order to minimize the position differences between the projections of the 3D positions and the images of the one or more markers on the 2D imaging], wherein determining the loss function comprises comparing a gradient of at least one of the two-dimensional images with a gradient of at least one of the plurality of X-ray images [Pionteck: ¶ [0103]: for example by way of a gradient descent algorithm in stochastic methods, or any other algorithm by which it is possible to identify a global minimum of the differences between the projections of the 3D positions of the markers and their images, as a function of the intrinsic rotation r.sub.x′]; and determine a reconstructed three-dimensional structure by minimizing the loss function [Pionteck: ¶ [0103]: minimize the position differences].
Regarding Claims 3, 15, and 21, Pionteck disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 1, 13, and 19, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Pionteck discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to determine reconstructed projection parameters by minimizing the loss function [Pionteck: ¶ [0103]].
Regarding Claims 4, 16, and 22, Pionteck disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 1, 13, and 19, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Pionteck discloses wherein the projection parameters and the reconstructed three-dimensional structure are determined together temporally [Pionteck: ¶ [0021]: the method can be carried out in about thirty seconds on standard calculation means, which allows the deployment of the endoprosthesis to be modelled almost in real time].
Regarding Claims 5 and 17, Pionteck disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 1 and 13, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Pionteck discloses wherein the projection parameters correspond with the different poses from which the plurality of X-ray images are captured [Pionteck: ¶ [0103]: at each iteration the position difference].
Regarding Claims 6, Pionteck disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Pionteck discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to determine the projection parameters without using information derived from a positional sensor or a fiducial marker [Pionteck: ¶ [0062] the central line of the artery is extracted using the Voronoi diagram method, introduced for example by Antiga, L. (2002). Patient-specific modeling of geometry and blood flow in large arteries. Politecnico di Milano; [0063] the central line is implemented in a finite element model based on beam elements. This can be done in different ways. Duriez, C. (2013). Real-time haptic simulation of medical procedures involving deformations and device-tissue interactions (Doctoral dissertation, Université des Sciences et Technologie de Lille-Lille I) provides an example of implementation of the central line of the aorta via a finite element model; [0064] a first 2D/2D non-rigid registration is performed between the perioperative images and the projection of the central line extracted in the preceding step. This non-rigid registration is composed of a rigid registration then an interpolation; [0065] the 2D information items concerning the position of the aorta or of the tools during surgery are then implemented in the finite element model. The matrix of projection of the perioperative images is assumed to be known. By this means, it is possible to calculate the back-projection lines of each of the characteristic points identified on the 2D images. These information items are then implemented in the mechanical model in the form of boundary conditions, the points of the 3D model being forced to move along the back-projection lines. Thus, the mechanical model calculates the deformations that are not contained in the plane of projection of the perioperative 2D image in order to reach a state of equilibrium; [0066] the volume of the aorta is then recreated around the updated central line].
Regarding Claims 7 and 18, Pionteck disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 1 and 13, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Pionteck discloses wherein the loss function defines a difference between the projected two-dimensional images and the plurality of X-ray images [Pionteck: ¶ [0103]: Thus, the angle r.sub.x′ can be modified iteratively, and at each iteration the position difference, for each marker, between the projection of its 3D position in the model on the 2D image and its image taken by X-ray can be calculated].
Regarding Claim 9, Pionteck disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Pionteck discloses wherein minimizing the loss function comprises using a coarse-to-fine optimization [Pionteck: ¶ [0066]: updated central line; and ¶ [0103]: each iteration].
Regarding Claim 12, Pionteck disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Pionteck discloses the projection parameters initially comprise angular positions distributed along a trajectory [Pionteck: ¶ [0103]].
Regarding Claims 25, Pionteck disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Pionteck discloses wherein determining the reconstructed three-dimensional structure by minimizing the loss function comprises updating, based on a gradient of the loss function, at least one of (i) the estimated three-dimensional structure or (ii) the projection parameters [Pionteck: ¶ [0103]].
Regarding Claims 26, Pionteck disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Pionteck discloses wherein the projection parameters are determined without using information derived from either a positional sensor or a fiducial marker [Pionteck: ¶ [0062-[0066]].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pionteck as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Razeto (US 2008/0117209 A1).
Regarding Claims 10, Pionteck discloses all the limitations of Claims 9, respectively, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Pionteck may not explicitly disclose wherein an initial three-dimensional structure comprises a resolution of 50 or less voxels and a subsequent three-dimensional structure generated using the coarse- to-fine optimization comprises a resolution of 200 or more voxels.
However, Razeto discloses wherein an initial three-dimensional structure comprises a resolution of 50 or less voxels and a subsequent three-dimensional structure generated using the coarse- to-fine optimization comprises a resolution of 200 or more voxels [Razeto: ¶ [0027]: The first step may include classifying voxels in connected regions having a volume less than a threshold number of voxels as not belonging to the colon. This is useful in removing artefacts such as those associated with air pockets in the patient's clothes or body. For a typical scan resolution, the threshold number of voxels may for example be from a few tens, e.g. around 20 or 30, to a few hundred, e.g. around 200 or 300 voxels. For example a number of voxels selected from the group consisting of 50, 100, 150, 200, 250 and 300 may be used].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the scan resolution variation of Razeto with the process of Pionteck in order to provide well-known resolution processing for improving image clarity.
Regarding Claims 11, Pionteck in view of Razeto discloses all the limitations of Claims 10, respectively, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Pionteck in view of Razeto discloses wherein the estimated three- dimensional structure initially comprises voxels having random or zero intensity [Razeto: ¶ [0063]: Voxels classified as not belonging to the colon have their flags set to false (e.g. a numerical value of zero)].
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 JONATHAN R MESSMORE whose telephone number is (571)272-2773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 EST/EDT.
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, Chris Kelley can be reached at 571-272-7331. 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.
/JONATHAN R MESSMORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights