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 statements (IDS's) submitted comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the examiner has considered the information disclosure statement; please see attached forms PTO-1449.
Drawings
The drawings submitted have been reviewed and determined to facilitate understanding of the invention. The drawings are accepted as submitted.
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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 2 recite the limitations "the acquired image data" and “the image data” in lines 5 and 1, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For examination purposes, “the acquired image data” shall be considered to refer to any image data used in the method of the invention. Further, “the image data” shall be considered as a reference that same image data used in the method of invention.
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 1-3, 6-9, 12-15, and 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication US 2014/0088377 A1 to Manske et al. (“US1”).
Regarding Claim 1, US1 describes a method of compensating for body movement during image acquisition, the method comprising:
acquiring wavelength data from at least one fiber Bragg grating (FBG) disposed on the body (see [0035], [0046]-[0048]);
detecting effective shifts of Bragg wavelengths in the wavelength data caused by body movement during image acquisition (see [0035]-[0036], [0048]); and
correcting the acquired image data during image reconstruction to compensate for body movement during an image scan based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG (see [003-]-[0033], [0041], [0049]).
Regarding Claim 2, US1 describes the image data as acquired from a computed tomography (CT) scan, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, positron emission tomography (PET) scan, or single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) scan (see [0026], [0029]).
Regarding Claim 3, US1 describes placing a single mode optical fiber on the body, the single mode optical fiber including the at least one FBG (see [0034]-[0035], [0041]).
Regarding Claim 6, US1 describes controlling a scanning device, based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths, to acquire image data of a target region while compensating for the body movement (see [0031]-[0032], [0044]).
Regarding Claim 7, US1 describes identifying, within the target region, an object for external beam treatment; and estimating movement of the object by correlating the acquired image data with the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths in the wavelength data (see [0031]-[0032], [0044]).
Regarding Claim 8, US1 describes controlling an external beam treatment device based at least in part on the estimated movement to maintain focus on the target region (see [0031]-[0032], [0044]).
Regarding Claim 9, US1 describes a wearable device for real time detection of body movement during a medical procedure, comprising:
a front portion having at least one fiber Bragg grating (FBG) (104, see [0035]) aligned along a coordinate system (spiral configuration aligns with a polar coordinate system, see [0025]);
a light emitter configured to pulse light waves through the at least one FBG (inherent to the operation of a FBG sensor as described at [0025]);
a light sensor configured to receive pulsed light waves (inherent to the operation of a FBG sensor as described at [0025]); and
a processor including:
a data acquisition module (122) configured to receive from the light sensor Bragg wavelengths reflected by the at least one FBG,
a comparator (115) configured to determine the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths due to strain along the at least one FBG, and
a controller (126) configured to control at least one of the acquisition of image data based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG or an external beam treatment device based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG (see [0032], [0040], [0044]).
Regarding Claim 12, US1 describes the processor further including a correction module (115/119) configured to correct acquired image data to compensate for body movement during an image scan based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG.
Regarding Claim 13, US1 describes the processor further including a correction module (126/115/119) configured to control the external beam treatment device to compensate for body movement based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG, thereby maintaining focus on the target region (see [0032], [0040], [0044]).
Regarding Claim 14, US1 describes the processor further including a correction module configured (126/119) to correct acquired image data to compensate for body movement during an image scan based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG (see [0031]); and control the external beam treatment device to compensate for body movement based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG, thereby maintaining focus on the target region (see [0032]).
Regarding Claim 15, US1 describes the processor further including an image acquisition module (115) configured to acquire image data from a computed tomography (CT) scan, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, positron emission tomography (PET) scan, or single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) scan (see [0026], [0029]).
Regarding Claim 25, US1 describes a system for real time detection of body movement during a medical procedure, the system comprising:
a single mode optical fiber (104) having at least one fiber Bragg grating (FBG) aligned along a coordinate system (see [0034]-[0035], [0041]);
a light emitter configured to pulse light waves through a first end of the single mode optical fiber (inherent to the operation of a FBG sensor as described at [0025]);
a light sensor attached to the single mode optical fiber and configured to receive pulsed light waves through the at least one FBG (inherent to the operation of a FBG sensor as described at [0025]); and
a computing device (112) including at least a processor, the processor including:
a data acquisition module (122) configured to receive wavelength data from the light sensor,
a comparator (115) configured to determine the effective shifts of Bragg wavelengths in the wavelength data due to strain along the at least one FBG, and a
controller (126) configured to control at least one of the acquisition of image data based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG or an external beam treatment device based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG (see [0032], [0040], [0044]).
Regarding Claim 26, US1 describes the processor further including a correction module (115/119) configured to correct acquired image data to compensate for body movement during an image scan based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG.
Regarding Claim 27, US1 describes the processor further including a correction module (115/119/126) configured to control the external beam treatment device to compensate for body movement based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG, thereby maintaining focus on the target region (see [0032], [0044]).
Regarding Claim 28, US1 describes the processor further including a correction module (126/119/115) configured to correct acquired image data to compensate for body movement during an image scan based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG (see [0031]); and control the external beam treatment device to compensate for body movement based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelengths of the at least one FBG, thereby maintaining focus on the target region (see [0032], [0044]).
Regarding Claim 29, US1 describes the processor further including an image acquisition module (115) configured to acquire image data from a computed tomography (CT) scan, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, positron emission tomography (PET) scan, or single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) scan (see [0036], [0029]).
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.
Claims 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US1 as applied above to Claim 9.
US1 does not describe the external beam treatment device as an external photon beam radiotherapy device or proton beam therapy device. US1 is silent as to the exact beam treatment device used. However, external photon beam radiotherapy devices and proton beam therapy devices are well-known beam treatment devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use an external photon beam radiotherapy device or proton beam therapy device for the external beam treatment device of US1. The motivation for doing so would have been to make a simple substitution of a known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-24 are allowed.
Claims 4-5, 10-11, and 30 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.
Claims 4, 10 and 30 describe at least one FBG is aligned along a cartesian coordinate system.
Claim 17 describes generating a respiratory gating signal based on the effective shifts of the Bragg wavelength measured over time.
These limitations represent subject matter not described or reasonably suggested, in conjunction with the further limitations of the present claims, by the prior art of record.
Claims 5 and 11 depend from Claims 4 and 10, respectively, and therefore contain at least the same allowable subject matter.
Claims 18-24 depend from Claim17, and therefore contain at least the same allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art cited in the attached form PTO-892 are made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior art describes devices utlitizing optical fiber sensors.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY RAHLL whose telephone number is (571)272-2356. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at 571-272-2397. 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.
/JERRY RAHLL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights