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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 11, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claims 1, 2, 5, and 6 the applicant argues the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 is improper over Koehler et al. US 2018/0228455 because Koehler fails to teach: (1) “storing a plurality of correction curves generated at positions in a direction perpendicular to a grating direction in which the plurality of gratings extend” and “correcting the first dark field image by using the correction curves corresponding to the positions” because Koehler does teach the curves being indexed by position and producing a position-dependent curve, and (2) “each of the correction curved represents an assignment relation between values that relate to X-ray absorption of the subject and values that relate to X-ray scattering of the subject at corresponding one of the positions” Koehler does not correlate absorption to scattering by any curve. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., (1) indexing the curves by position and (2) correlating absorption to scattering by any curve) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Therefore, the examiner maintains the rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Koehler et al. US 2018/0228455.
Regarding claim 1, Koehler discloses a phase contrast X-ray imaging apparatus (fig. 1) comprising: an X-ray source (XR); an X-ray detector for detecting the X-rays for irradiation from the X-ray source (D); a plurality of gratings arranged between the X-ray source and the X-ray detector (G-0, G1, G3); an image processor (SPS; fig. 2) for generating a phase contrast X-ray image including a first dark field image, which is a dark field image of a subject, based on an intensity distribution of the X-rays detected by the X-ray detector (para. 0036, 0044), a storage (para. 0080-0087) for storing a plurality of correction curves (para. 0046; fitted curves in fig. 4) generated at positions in a direction perpendicular to a grating direction in which the plurality of gratings extend (para. 0044-0045); and a controller (SPM) for correcting the first dark field image by using the correction curves corresponding to the positions (para. 0051-0057), wherein each of the plurality of correction curves represents an assignment relation between values that relate to X-ray absorption of the subject and values that relate to X-ray scattering of the subject at corresponding one of the positions (para. 0046-0051; “The respective signals (dark field, along with phase and absorption signal) can be extracted in an algorithmic “dark-field retrieval/extraction” (commonly referred to as “phase retrieval” if phase imaging is of interest) operation which is essentially a curve fitting operation”).
Regarding claim 2, Koehler discloses the phase contrast X-ray imaging apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the image processor generates a first absorption image of the subject, which is an absorption image of the subject, in addition to the first dark field image (para. 0046); and the controller is configured to access, for each of the positions, corresponding one of the correction curves, to specify values that relate to the X-ray scattering and are assigned to values that relate to the X-ray absorption in the first absorption image, and to correct the first dark field image by using the specified values, which relate to the X-ray scattering (para. 0049-0067; the logarithmic curves, see fig. 4, are used to derive energy weights [values] which are used to correct the image).
Regarding claim 5, Koehler discloses an X-ray image processing apparatus comprising: an image acquirer (SPS; fig. 2) for acquiring a phase contrast X- ray image including a first dark field image, which is a dark field image of a subject (para. 0036, 0044); a storage (para. 0080-0087) for storing a plurality of correction curves (para. 0046; fitted curves in fig. 4) generated at positions in a direction perpendicular to a grating direction in which a plurality of gratings extend (para. 0044-0045); and a controller (SPM) for correcting the first dark field image by using the correction curves corresponding to the positions (para. 0051-0057), wherein each of the plurality of correction curves represents an assignment relation between values that relate to X-ray absorption of the subject and values that relate to X-ray scattering of the subject at corresponding one of the positions (para. 0046-0051; “The respective signals (dark field, along with phase and absorption signal) can be extracted in an algorithmic “dark-field retrieval/extraction” (commonly referred to as “phase retrieval” if phase imaging is of interest) operation which is essentially a curve fitting operation”).
Regarding claim 6, Koehler discloses an X-ray image processing method comprising: acquiring a phase contrast X-ray image including a first dark field image, which is a dark field image of a subject (para. 0036, 0044); storing a plurality of correction curves (para. 0046; fitted curves in fig. 4) generated at positions in a direction perpendicular to a grating direction in which a plurality of gratings extend (para. 0044-0045); and correcting the first dark field image by using the correction curves corresponding to the positions (para. 0051-0057), wherein each of the plurality of correction curves represents an assignment relation between values that relate to X-ray absorption of the subject and values that relate to X-ray scattering of the subject at corresponding one of the positions (para. 0046-0051; “The respective signals (dark field, along with phase and absorption signal) can be extracted in an algorithmic “dark-field retrieval/extraction” (commonly referred to as “phase retrieval” if phase imaging is of interest) operation which is essentially a curve fitting operation”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4 and 7-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 3, the prior art of record does not disclose or suggest wherein the storage is configured to store the plurality of correction curves to associate the plurality of correction curves to materials of subjects; and the controller is configured to correct the first dark field image by selecting, in accordance with a material of the subject, corresponding ones of the plurality of correction curves, and by using the selected ones of the plurality of correction curves, along with other claim limitations.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art of record does not disclose or suggest wherein the storage is configured to store the plurality of correction curves to associate the plurality of correction curves to imaging conditions; and the controller is configured to correct the first dark field image by selecting, in accordance with one of the imaging conditions, corresponding ones of the plurality of correction curves, and by using the selected ones of the plurality of correction curves, along with other claim limitations.
Regarding claim 7, Daerr et al. US 2019/0298294 teaches using a phantom device in generating a dark field image to improve alignment (para. 0045). However, the prior art of record does not disclose or suggest acquiring a second dark field image, which is a dark field image of a correction phantom, by capturing an image of the correction phantom by using a phase contrast X-ray imaging apparatus including a plurality of gratings; acquiring a second absorption image, which is an absorption image of the correction phantom; and generating the plurality of correction curves at positions in the direction perpendicular to the grating direction in which the plurality of gratings extend by using the second dark field image and the second absorption image, along with other claim limitations.
Claims 8-9 are dependent on claim 7 so they are allowable for the same reason.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Richard Toohey whose telephone number is (703)756-5818. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 7:30am – 5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, the applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Uzma Alam can be reached on (571)272-2995. The fax number for the organization where this application or processing 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.
/RICHARD O TOOHEY/Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights