CTNF 18/861,896 CTNF 91804 DETAILED ACTION 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. 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claims 1 – 13, 15 are presented for examination. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-13 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 1 recites “determine, per a photodetector pixel a group of photodetector pixels” in L5 and recites “compare, per the photodetector pixel or the group of photodetector pixels” in L8. It is unclear if the limitation is directed to “a photodetector pixel” or “a group of photodetector pixel” which renders the claim indefinite. Claims 2-13 are rejected on the same basis as claim 1 for dependency reasons. Claims 1 & 15 recite “temporarily adapt the counting threshold for use in the comparison in one or future detection (more subsequent integration time periods based) on the energy of the detected event. It is unclear how one can adapt the counting threshold based on future detection. Claims 2-13 are rejected on the same basis as claim 1 for dependency reasons. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-2, 5-6, 8-9, 13, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daerr et al. (US 2016/0377745 A1; pub. Dec. 29, 2016) in view of Goederer et al. (US 2021/0186439 A1; pub. Jun. 24, 2021) . Regarding claim 1, Daerr et al. disclose: A photon counting detector, comprising: a scintillator (para. [0052]) configured to convert incident gamma radiation into optical photons (para. [0016]) ; a pixelated photodetector (para. [0052]) configured to detect the flux of optical photons; circuitry configured to determine, per a photodetector pixel a group of photodetector pixels, a photon count by accumulating a number of optical photons detected by the respective photodetector pixel during an integration time period (para. [0076], [0078]) ; compare, per the photodetector pixel or the group of photodetector pixels, a single photon count or multiple photon counts with a counting threshold (para. [0076], [0078]) ; detect an event if, per the photodetector pixel or the group of photodetector pixels, the one or more photon counts exceed the counting threshold (para. [0076], [0078]) ; Daerr et al. disclose: temporarily adapt the counting threshold for use in the comparison in one or more subsequent integration time periods based on the energy of the detected event. In a similar field of endeavor Goederer et al. disclose: temporarily adapt the counting threshold for use in the comparison in one or more subsequent integration time periods based on the energy of the detected event (para. [0091], [0176], [0184]) motivated by the benefits for a pixelated photon counter with improved counting accuracy. In light of the benefits for a pixelated photon counter with improved counting accuracy, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teachings of Goederer et al. to modify the apparatus of Daerr et al. Regarding claim 2, Goederer et al. disclose: the circuitry is configured to temporarily adapt the counting threshold only if a predetermined energy threshold is exceeded by the detected event (para. [0091], [0093], [0095]) motivated by the benefits for a pixelated photon counter with improved counting accuracy. Regarding claim 5, Goederer et al. disclose: the circuitry is configured to temporarily adapt, the counting threshold depending on the amount or percentage, by which a predetermined energy threshold is exceeded by the detected event (para. [0091], [0093], [0095]) motivated by the benefits for a pixelated photon counter with improved counting accuracy. Regarding claim 6, Goederer et al. disclose: the circuitry is configured to temporarily increase the counting threshold based on the energy of the detected event by a preset value or a value that is higher the more the predetermined energy threshold is exceeded by the detected event (para. [0091], [0093], [0095]) motivated by the benefits for a pixelated photon counter with improved counting accuracy. Regarding claim 8, Goederer et al. disclose: the circuitry is configured to temporarily increase the counting threshold and to control the counting threshold to decrease over time to a baseline counting threshold value after the increase (para. [0176], [0220] teach the threshold can both increased and lowered, therefore, adjusting the threshold to desired level would be obvious to one of ordinary skill) . Regarding claim 9, Goederer et al. disclose: the circuitry is configured to control the counting threshold to decrease over time to the baseline counting threshold value within a time interval in the range of a fraction of the scintillator decay time or in the range of 5 to 200 ns, in particular in the range of 10 to 100 ns, or until a next detected event triggers a new temporary adaptation of the counting threshold (para. [0091], [0093], [0095], [0176]) motivated by the benefits for a pixelated photon counter with improved counting accuracy. Regarding claim 13, the combined references are silent about: the circuitry is configured to limit the temporary increase of the counting threshold to a maximum counting threshold value in the range of 25 % to 50 % of the sampled energy. However, Goederer et al. disclose: a lower & higher energy threshold (para. [0095]) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the teachings of Goederer et al. to have: the circuitry is configured to limit the temporary increase of the counting threshold to a maximum counting threshold value in the range of 25 % to 50 % of the sampled energy since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955). Regarding claim 15, the combination of Daerr et al. and Goederer et al. disclose: A photon counting method, comprising: determining, per a photodetector pixel or a group of photodetector pixels of a pixelated photodetector that is configured to detect a flux of optical photons converted by a scintillator from incident gamma radiation, a photon count by accumulating a number of optical photons detected by the respective photodetector pixel during an integration time period; comparing, per the photodetector pixel or the group of photodetector pixels, a single photon count or multiple photon counts with a counting threshold; detecting an event if, per the photodetector pixel or the group of photodetector pixels, the one or more photon counts exceed the counting threshold; and temporarily adapting the counting threshold for use in the comparison in one or more subsequent integration time periods based on the energy of the detected event (the claim contains the same substantive limitations as claim 1, therefore, the claim is rejected on the same basis) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 3-4, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daerr et al. (US 2016/0377745 A1; pub. Dec. 29, 2016) in view of Goederer et al. (US 2021/0186439 A1; pub. Jun. 24, 2021) and further in view of Herrmann (US 8,746,566 B2; pub. Aug. 29, 2017) . Regarding claim 3, the combined references are silent about: the counting detector as claimed in claim 2, wherein the circuitry is configured to temporarily adapt the counting threshold only if a predetermined energy threshold is exceeded, by the detected event or average event, by at least an amount of 30 keV comprising a range of 60 keV to 120 keV, or by at least a percentage of 50 % comprising a range of 100 % to 200 %. In a similar field of endeavor Herrmann discloses: the counting detector as claimed in claim 2, wherein the circuitry is configured to temporarily adapt the counting threshold only if a predetermined energy threshold is exceeded, by the detected event or average event, by at least an amount of 30 keV comprising a range of 60 keV to 120 keV, or by at least a percentage of 50 % comprising a range of 100 % to 200 % (col.7 L22-40) motivated by the benefits for a more accurate detection of photons arriving at the detector ( Herrmann col.5 L20-22). In light of the benefits for a more accurate detection of photons arriving at the detector as taught by Herrmann , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teachings of Herrmann to modify the apparatus of Daerr et al. and Goederer et al. Regarding claim 4, Herrmann discloses: the circuitry is configured to use one of multiple predetermined energy thresholds and/or to adapt the counting threshold based on the used predetermined energy threshold and/or the energy of the detected event (fig.3) motivated by the benefits for a more accurate detection of photons arriving at the detector ( Herrmann col.5 L20-22). Regarding claim 7, the combination of Daerr et al. , Goederer et al. and Herrmann disclose: the circuitry is configured to temporarily increase the counting threshold by at least an amount in range of 30 keV to 60 keV, or by at least a percentage in the range of 25 % to 50% (the claim is rejected on the same basis as claim 3) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daerr et al. (US 2016/0377745 A1; pub. Dec. 29, 2016) in view of Goederer et al. (US 2021/0186439 A1; pub. Jun. 24, 2021) and further in view of Herrmann et al. (US 2010/0193700 A1; pub. Aug. 5, 2010) . Regarding claim 10, the combined references are silent about: the circuitry is configured to determine the temporary increase by multiplying a predetermined factor with one of: the energy of the detected event; the number photon counts of the detected event; and the average energy of the energy bin, to which the detected event has been assigned. In a similar field of endeavor Herrmann et al. disclose: the circuitry is configured to determine the temporary increase by multiplying a predetermined factor with one of: the energy of the detected event; the number photon counts of the detected event; and the average energy of the energy bin, to which the detected event has been assigned (para. [0022]) motivated by the benefits for improving photon counting accuracy. In light of the benefits for improving photon counting accuracy, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teachings of Herrmann et al. to modify the apparatus of Daerr et al. and Goederer et al. Regarding claim 11, the combined references are silent about: the circuitry is configured to temporarily increase the counting threshold by adding an offset to a baseline counting threshold value, wherein the offset is computed or taken from a look-up table based on the energy of the detected event. In a similar field of endeavor Herrmann et al. disclose: the circuitry is configured to temporarily increase the counting threshold by adding an offset to a baseline counting threshold value, wherein the offset is computed or taken from a look-up table based on the energy of the detected event (para. [0022]) motivated by the benefits for improving photon counting accuracy. In light of the benefits for improving photon counting accuracy, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teachings of Herrmann et al. to modify the apparatus of Daerr et al. and Goederer et al . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daerr et al. (US 2016/0377745 A1; pub. Dec. 29, 2016) in view of Goederer et al. (US 2021/0186439 A1; pub. Jun. 24, 2021) and further in view of Harris et al. (US 2020/0393576 A1; pub. Dec. 17, 2020) . Regarding claim 12, the combined references are silent about: the circuitry is configured to limit the temporary increase of the counting threshold to a maximum counting threshold value to a maximum percentage, or to half of the maximum photon energy of the detected event. In a similar field of endeavor Harris et al. disclose: the circuitry is configured to limit the temporary increase of the counting threshold to a maximum counting threshold value to a maximum percentage, or to half of the maximum photon energy of the detected event (para. [0066]) motivated by the benefits for providing a more accurate estimate of the detected photon energy when the charge cloud is distributed over more than one pixel ( Harris et al. para. [0025]). In light of the benefits for providing a more accurate estimate of the detected photon energy when the charge cloud is distributed over more than one pixel as taught by Harris et al. , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teachings of Harris et al. to modify the apparatus of Daerr et al. and Goederer et al. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAMADOU FAYE whose telephone number is (571)270-0371. The examiner can normally be reached Mon – Fri 9AM - 6PM . 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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995 . 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. /MAMADOU FAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 2884 /UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884 Application/Control Number: 18/861,896 Page 2 Art Unit: 2884 Application/Control Number: 18/861,896 Page 3 Art Unit: 2884 Application/Control Number: 18/861,896 Page 4 Art Unit: 2884 Application/Control Number: 18/861,896 Page 5 Art Unit: 2884 Application/Control Number: 18/861,896 Page 6 Art Unit: 2884 Application/Control Number: 18/861,896 Page 8 Art Unit: 2884 Application/Control Number: 18/861,896 Page 9 Art Unit: 2884
Prosecution Insights