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 (IDS) submitted on 12/20/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 20 under the broadest reasonable interpretation may encompass non-statutory subject matter, e.g., a computer program or software per se. The examiner suggests amending claim 20 as follows:
A computer-readable non-transitory stored instructions of the computer software are [is] executed by a processor.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 13 is 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.
Regarding claim 13, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
For the prior art purposes, the limitation following the phrase has been interpreted as part of the claimed invention
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.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to a product that does not have a physical or tangible form, such as a computer program per se (often referred to as "software per se") since the claimed invention is claimed as a product without any structural recitations, such as a non-transitory computer-readable medium on which the product is stored.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) steps of determining a template and minimizing the cost function. These steps fall under the enumerated grouping of abstract idea, i.e., mathematical concepts, because the determining step recites mathematical relationships, e.g., the diffeomorphic deformation for diffeomorphic mapping, and the minimizing step recites mathematical formulas/equations, e.g., the cost function and the regulation function. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because other than the recitation of generic computer components, the claim does not include any other additional elements. The additional limitations appear mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, which is not indicative of integration into a practical application. For the same reason, the additional elements are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For these reasons, claim 1 is not patent eligible.
Claims 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claims 12-14 are not patent eligible because their additional limitations merely specify the involved data type, which corresponds to generally linking the judicial exception to the medical imaging field and is not indicative of integration into a practical application. For claims 15-17, they are not patent eligible because they recite limitations that also fall under the enumerated grouping of abstract idea, i.e., mental processes and mathematical concepts, because they recite that the template is obtained based either on a mathematical relationship, e.g., Large Diffeomorphic Deformation Metric Mapping, or on concept performed in the human mind, e.g., an observation. With respect to claims 18-20, they are not patent eligible because they recite limitations that are generic computer components that do not preclude the claims from reciting an abstract idea. As such, the claims 12-20 are not patent eligible.
Additional Citations
The following table lists several references that are relevant to the subject matter claimed and disclosed in this Application. The references are not relied on by the Examiner, but are provided to assist the Applicant in responding to this Office action.
Citation
Relevance
Miyasa et al. (us pat. pub. 2023/0032941)
Describes an image processing apparatus. In one embodiment, the apparatus includes an acquisition unit configured to acquire first medical image data and second medical image data obtained by imaging a subject, an intermediate deformation information acquisition unit configured to acquire intermediate deformation information obtained by applying registration processing up to a predetermined stage in first registration processing including a plurality of stages to the acquired first medical image data and second medical image data, a determination unit configured to perform determination of a deformation abnormality with respect to the acquired intermediate deformation information, and a deformation unit configured to perform, in a case where the determination unit determines that there is the deformation abnormality, second registration processing different from the first registration processing with respect to the first medical image data and the second medical image data and calculate deformation information.
Kullberg et al. (us pat. pub. 2018/0144472)
Describes a method for registration of whole body volume images comprises obtaining a first image and a second image. In one embodiment, the first image is a whole body volume image comprising water and fat magnetic resonance image data and the second image is a whole body volume image comprising water and fat magnetic resonance image data. Bone tissue is identified from the first image creating a first bone image, and bone tissue is identified from the second image creating a second bone image. Water components are separated from the first image, generating a first water image based on absolute water content, and water components are separated from the second image, generating a second water image based on absolute water content. Fat components are separated from the first image, generating a first fat image based on absolute fat content, and fat components are separated from the second image, generating a second fat image based on absolute fat content. The first image is registered to the second image by deforming the first bone image according to a bone tissue deformation rule, deforming the first water image according to a water tissue deformation rule under constraints of the deformation of the first bone image and deforming the first fat image according to a fat tissue deformation rule under constraints of the deformation of the first bone image and the deformation of the first water image.
Davatzikos et al. (us pat.pub. 2016/0239969)
Describes methods, systems, and computer readable media for automated detection of abnormalities in medical images . According to a method for automated abnormality detection, the method includes receiving a target image. The method also includes deformably registering to the target image or to a common template a subset of normative images from a plurality of normative images, wherein the subset of normative images is associated with a normal variation of an anatomical feature. The method further includes defining a dictionary using the subset of normative images. The method also includes decomposing, using sparse decomposition and the dictionary, the target image. The method further includes classifying one or more voxels of the target image as normal or abnormal based on results of the sparse decomposition.
Table 1
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Table 1 and form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WOO RHIM whose telephone number is (571)272-6560. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30 am - 6:00 pm et.
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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at 571-272-4637. 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.
/WOO C RHIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2676
Prosecution Insights