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 § 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.
Claims 1-4, 7-14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Choi (US 2022/0039874 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Choi discloses a system for determining a location of a subject or a surgical tool, the system comprising: an X-ray device (see Figure 2 provided herein showing device #10) comprising a plurality of X-ray sources configured to irradiate the subject with X-rays (see transmissive surfaces #21 and #31 configure as the a plurality of X-ray sources in source #14) and an X-ray detector configured to detect X-rays transmitted through the subject (see detector
PNG
media_image1.png
698
530
media_image1.png
Greyscale
#16); a memory storing respective location coordinates of the plurality of X-ray sources and the X-ray detector in a first coordinate system of the system; and a processor configured to (memory and processor as discusses in paragraph 0032): obtain a three-dimensional medical image of the subject from an external device (Abstract); obtain a plurality of first X-ray images of the subject using the X-ray device (see paragraph 0008 discussing multiple images using X-ray device #10); match a second coordinate system of the three-dimensional medical image to the first coordinate system based on the respective location coordinates of the plurality of X-ray sources and the X-ray detector in the first coordinate system, the plurality of first X-ray images, and the three-dimensional medical image; determine location coordinates of the subject in the first coordinate system based on the matching result (see paragraphs 0008-0010); obtain a plurality of second X-ray images of the surgical tool comprising an electrode using the X-ray device; and determine location coordinates of the surgical tool in the first coordinate system based on the plurality of second X-ray images (see paragraphs 0011 and 0048).
With respect to claims 2 and 12, Choi discloses the processor is configured to: obtain a plurality of projection images by projecting the three-dimensional medical image onto a two-dimensional plane (see paragraph 0009); compare the plurality of projection images with the plurality of first X-ray images; determine a projection image having a highest similarity to the plurality of first X-ray images from among the plurality of projection images; and match the second coordinate system of the three-dimensional medical image to the first coordinate system based on the plurality of first X-ray images and the determined projection image (see paragraph 0009).
With respect to claims 3 and 13, Choi discloses the plurality of X-ray sources are disposed on a same plane (see Figure 2 showing transmissive surfaces #21 and #31 on a same plane).
PNG
media_image2.png
485
514
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claims 4 and 14, Choi discloses the plurality of X-ray sources are disposed on a straight line at equal intervals, and wherein the plurality of X-ray sources irradiate the subject with X-rays at different angles from each other (see Figure 1 showing straight line rays A and B from source apparatus #102; labeled by the examiner herein; each at different angles).
With respect to claims 7 and 17, Choi discloses the X-ray device further comprises a marker attached to a predetermined location (see markers #22 and #32 in Figure 2), wherein the system further comprises a tracking sensor configured to track a location of the marker, wherein the memory is configured to store a first coordinate conversion relationship between the plurality of X-ray sources and the X-ray detector and a second coordinate conversion relationship between the plurality of X-ray sources and the marker (see paragraphs 0025-0028 and 0032), and wherein the processor is configured to: obtain location coordinates of the marker in the first coordinate system from the tracking sensor; obtain respective location coordinates of the plurality of X-ray sources and the X-ray detector in the first coordinate system based on the location coordinates of the marker; and store the respective location coordinates of the plurality of X-ray sources and the X-ray detector in the first coordinate system in the memory (see paragraph 0032).
With respect to claims 8 and 18, Choi discloses a connection member connected to the plurality of X-ray sources and the X-ray detector (see frame #12 connecting source #14 and a detector #16 as the connecting member as seen in Figure 2); a first rotation unit in which the plurality of X-ray sources are disposed and configured to rotate around a first rotation axis; and a second rotation unit connected to the connection member and configured to rotate around a second rotation axis (see actuator #18 as the rotation unit for rotation and translation of frame #12; wheels as seen on Figure 1, to rotate the x-ray as a different unit to rotate the scanner around the patient).
With respect to claims 9 and 19, Choi discloses the marker is attached to a designated location of the connection member of the X-ray device, and wherein the designated location is located within a field of view of the tracking sensor (see paragraphs 0025-0028 and 0032).
With respect to claims 10 and 20, Choi discloses the marker is attached to a designated location of the first rotation unit of the X-ray device, and wherein the designated location is located within a field of view of the tracking sensor (see paragraphs 0025-0028 and 0032).
With respect to claim 11, Choi discloses a method for determining a location of a subject or a surgical tool of a system comprising an X-ray device that comprises a plurality of X-ray sources configured to irradiate the subject with X-rays and an X-ray detector configured to detect X-rays transmitted through the subject, a memory, and a processor, the method comprising: receiving a three-dimensional medical image of the subject from an external device; obtaining a plurality of first X-ray images of the subject using the X-ray device (Abstract); matching a second coordinate system of the three-dimensional medical image to a first coordinate system based on respective location coordinates of the plurality of X-ray sources and the X-ray detector in the first coordinate system of the system (see paragraphs 0008-0010), which are stored in the memory, the plurality of first X-ray images, and the three-dimensional medical image; determining location coordinates of the subject in the first coordinate system based on the matching result; obtaining a plurality of second X-ray images of a surgical tool comprising an electrode using the X-ray device; and determining location coordinates of the surgical tool in the first coordinate system based on the plurality of second X-ray images (see paragraphs 0011 and 0048).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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.
Claims 5-6 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2022/0039874 A1) in view of Zhou et al. (US 20210/0353238 A1).
With respect to claims 5 and 15, Choi discloses the claimed invention as stated above except for specifying that the plurality of X-ray sources are X-ray sources using carbon nanotubes. However, Zhou discloses the plurality of X-ray sources are X-ray sources using carbon nanotubes (see paragraph 0048; see Figure 1 showing multiple sources #612 in Figure 6 within in emitter #310 of Figure 1). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in art at the time the invention was made to have use X-ray sources are X-ray sources using carbon nanotubes for emitting radiation as taught by Zhou with Choi’s emitters for the purpose of disclosing a preferred material according to its suitability between all the known materials to form an emitter that performs the function of emitting radiation as intended and known by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
With respect to claims 6 and 16, Choi discloses the claimed invention as stated above except for the X-ray device further comprises one power supply unit configured to supply high voltage to the plurality of X-ray sources. However, Zhoe discloses the X-ray device further comprises one power supply unit configured to supply high voltage to the plurality of X-ray sources (see paragraph 0016). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to power supply unit configured to supply high voltage to the plurality of X-ray sources as taught by Zhou in combination with Choi’s system for the purpose of being capable of operating the device by providing the means to have energy that will facilitate the device operation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additional prior art cited in the PTO 892 not relied upon discloses X-ray devices with multiples ray sources and with multiple rotational axis.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIXOMARA VARGAS whose telephone number is (571)272-2252. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-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, Raymond Keith 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.
/DIXOMARA VARGAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights