DETAILED ACTION
This Office action responds to papers filed on 18 September 2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending and presented for examination.
Applicant's submission of references on form PTO-1449, filed on November 20, 2024, has been considered. A signed copy of the form is attached.
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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The status of the listing of application numbers related to the instant disclosure needs to be updated. The status of Application No. 17/129,934 needs to be updated. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 11 includes the term “real” in relation to the master controller. It is not clear what Applicant intends the “real” controller to be in relation to a master controller. The instant disclosure does not provide much explanation for this other than saying “[i]n some embodiments, the master controller 530 may function as a relay station. In some embodiments, the master controller 530 may further function as a real controller”, as stated in paragraph [0102] of the instant specification. The specification has not given a proper explanation or description of what a “real controller” is to be in reference to the instant invention. Moreover, a Google® definition does not indicate any specific relevance to a computerized control system other than indicating that a “real” controller is not fake and is manufactured by the brand. Hence, a proper description or explanation is not provided so as to enable one of ordinary skill to make or use the “real” controller. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-11 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication No. US 2019/0090838 A1 to Tanaka et al. in view of US Patent Publication No. US 2017/0359275 A1 to Puthillathe.
The published reference of prior art to Tanaka et al. (herein after “Tanaka”) relates to an X-ray fluoroscopy and imaging apparatus to obtain an X-ray image of a subject and particularly relates to the X-ray fluoroscopy and imaging apparatus equipped with a foot-switch by which an operator enables to switch an on-off operation. In doing so the reference of prior art teaches and/or fairly suggests the elements of the instant invention as follows.
As per independent claim 1, a system for controlling movement of a table supporting an object – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0061] and shown in Fig. 1 as “an X-ray fluoroscopy and imaging apparatus”), is stated as comprising:
• a first control sub-system configured to generate a first control instruction – (taught as the “switch controls 39a for fluoroscopy controls relative to the fluoroscopy” part of the machine as described in paragraph [0071] and shown in Fig. 3 with control sub-system being the X-ray irradiation control element 19 in Fig. 2 by Tanaka);
• a second control sub-system configured to generate a second control instruction – (again taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0071] 39b is labeled as the switch for controlling for imaging controls for the machine as described and shown in Fig. 3 with control sub-system being the image generation control element 21 in Fig. 2);
• a table control sub-system operably coupled to the table – (the table control unit is taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0072] as table movement switch 39c which controls the movement of the table and is shown in Fig. 3 with control sub-system being the table moving mechanism control element 20 in Fig. 2); and
• a master controller – (is taught as the main control element as described in paragraph [0069] and shown in Fig. 2 as main control element 27 of Tanaka) configured to
o receive the first control instruction from the first control sub-system, or the second control instruction from the second control sub-system, generate a third control instruction based on the first control instruction or the second control instruction, and transmit the third control instruction to the table control sub-system, – (this is taught in paragraph [0069] of Tanaka as “the main control element 27 that comprises a central processing unit (CPU) and so forth controls comprehensively the X-ray irradiation control element 19 (i.e. the first control sub-system), the table movement mechanism 20 (i.e. the third control unit), the image generation element 21 (i.e. the second control sub-system), the image display monitor 31 and the apparatus information display monitor 33 based on the directives input to the operation panel 23 and so forth. In addition, the main control element 27 that receives the information detected by the detection sensors set forth later sends the information to the image display monitor.” Tanaka comprehensively teaches that each control sub-system or element generates instructions based on each control unit to be sent to the main controller. The sensors detect and send instructions as detected and for display on the monitor for the table control unit),
o wherein the table control sub-system is configured to generate a control signal based on the third control instruction, and cause the table to move based on the control signal – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0072] as “when the table movement switch 39c is stepped on by foot, a control signal is sent to a table movement mechanism 20 from the main control element 27, so that the table movement mechanism 20 changes the height of the table 3. The table 3 shifts in between the relatively low-position (loading position), at which the subject M gets on and off, and the relatively high-position (treatment position), at which the operator performs a medical treatment on the subject M in the decubitus position, in accordance with the operation of the table movement switch 39”.
wherein the first control sub-system is operably connected to the master controller via a virtual table motion controller; and the virtual table motion controller is configured to relay the first control instruction from the first control sub-system to the master controller bypassing the second control sub-system. Starting at paragraph [0070], Tanaka describes the connectivity of the apparatus but fails to include the virtual connectivity as claimed. For this reason, the prior art of Puthillathe is relied upon. In describing the communication connectivity of an information handling system, Puthillathe teaches the use of virtual control. As described in paragraph [0025], the creation and use of a virtual network is given. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the above-mentioned invention of Tanaka with the virtual concept of Puthillathe so as to enable an increase in storage, processing and communication in the environment.
In claim 2 the system of claim 1, further states wherein the system includes a switch mechanism configured to cause the master controller to switch between a first functional connection with the first control sub-system and a second functional connection with the second control sub-system. Tanaka teaches the use of a switch system in paragraphs [0069] and [0070] where “the main control element 27 that comprises a central processing unit (CPU) and so forth controls comprehensively the X-ray irradiation control element 19, the table movement mechanism 20, the image generation element 21, the image display monitor 31 and the apparatus information display monitor 33 based on the directives input to the operation panel 23 and so forth. In addition, the main control element 27 that receives the information detected by the detection sensors set forth later sends the information to the image display monitor 31”, and “the main control element 27 is built into the support element 4 and in FIG. 1, the cable 35 is connected the support element 4. Referring to FIG. 3, the foot-switch 29 includes the body element 37, the foot-switches 39 that the operator operates by foot and the bottom plate 41. The switches 39 comprises three pedal-switches including a switch 39a for fluoroscopy, a switch 39b for imaging and a switch 39c for moving the table”, respectively.
As per claim 3 the system of claim 2, states wherein the switch mechanism is further configured to switch control of the table between the first control sub- system and the second control sub-system based on a control command from the first control sub-system or the second control sub-system, or a workflow. The switch used to control the movement of the table is explained in paragraph [0082] as “operator visually recognizes the information Q and makes sure instantly that the switch 39 which the operator per se is contacting is the switch 39c for moving the table”.
Regarding claim 4, the system of claim 3, is directed to wherein the table control sub- system is further configured to determine movement information of the table; and transmit the movement information to the master controller. Tanaka teaches this feature of the instant invention in paragraph [0072] as “the table movement switch 39c controls on-off of the movement of the table 3 in the vertical direction. Specifically, when the table movement switch 39c is stepped on by foot, a control signal is sent to a table movement mechanism 20 from the main control element 27, so that the table movement mechanism 20 changes the height of the table 3. The table 3 shifts in between the relatively low-position (loading position), at which the subject M gets on and off, and the relatively high-position (treatment position), at which the operator performs a medical treatment on the subject M in the decubitus position, in accordance with the operation of the table movement switch 39c.”
Claim 5 recites the system of claim 4, wherein the master controller is further configured to in response to determining that the control of the table is switched to the first control sub-system, transmit the movement information to the first control sub-system; or in response to determining that the control of the table is switched to the second control sub-system, transmit the movement information to the second control sub-system. This is taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0073] where “each of the switches 39 comprises a detection sensor 43. The detection sensor 43 detects that the switch 39 is contacted and sends the signal that identifies which sensor is contacted to the main control element 27” is stated.
In claim 6 the system of claim 1, wherein the second control sub-system is operably connected to the master controller, is stated. Tanaka teaches this element in Fig. 2 where item 21 – the image generation element is connected to item 27 – the main control element.
With claim 7 the system of claim 1, wherein first control sub-system is operably connected to the master controller via a peripheral component interconnect express (PCIE) cable and communication between the first control sub-system and the master controller is performed based on a PCIE protocol is specified. Puthillathe teaches the use of a PCIE point-to-point connection is paragraph [0025] as “a software driver 272 detects a PCIe device (such as the PCIe bus 220) and creates a virtual network interface 274 in the local memory 120 of the host server 200 using the network parameters (e.g., the BMC-side MAC address 250 and/or the Internet Protocol address 254 and the host-side MAC address 262 and/or the Internet Protocol address 264). The virtual network interface 274 may be created as a point-to-point connection …” as explained.
Regarding claim 8 wherein the system of claim 7 further states the master controller is operably connected to the table control sub-system via an electrical cable – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0070] as “the aspect of the Embodiment 1, the main control element 27 is built into the support element 4 and in FIG. 1, the cable 35 is connected the support element 4”), and communication between the master controller and the table control sub-system is performed based on a controller area network (CAN) protocol or a CANOpen protocol – (is taught by Puthillathe in paragraph [0025] where the use of networks is described. The specific use of CAN network is invention specific and performs the same functions as the virtual network described by Puthillathe.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the above-mentioned invention of Tanaka with that of Puthillathe to achieve a more reliable and priority driven system.
Claim 9 states the system of claim 8 wherein the virtual table motion controller is configured to tunnel the CAN or CANOpen protocol into a PCIE packet to adapt to a point-to-point connection between the first control sub-system and the master controller. Puthillathe teaches this aspect in paragraph [0025] where the virtual network interface uses the Ethernet communications to communicate with the baseboard (main) controller.
In claim 10 the system of claim 1 is further limited to wherein the master controller converts a PCIE packet back into a CAN or CANOpen protocol and sends the packet to the table control sub-system. In paragraph [0025], Puthillathe explains “the virtual network interface 274 may be created as a point-to-point connection with a target address defined or read from the PCIe device's extended configuration space.” Allowing for information to be passed along.
As per claim 11, the system of claim 1, wherein the master controller is a real controller, is recited. As can best be understood, paragraph [0069] of Tanaka teaches that the main control element is a real controller.
Regarding claim 14, the system of claim 1 further states wherein
the first control sub-system is operably coupled to a first device, the second control sub-system is operably coupled to a second device, and the table is configured to move between the first device and the second device. Tanaka teaches this in paragraph [0070] through [0072] where the sub-systems are connected to the devices and the switch operation dictates which system is to being used.
Claim 15 is directed to the system of claim 14, wherein the first device is an imaging device, and the second device Is a treatment device, or the first device is an imaging device of a first modality, and the second device is an imaging device of a second modality, the first modality being different from the second modality is stated. The presence of two attributes of the machine is outlined as the X-ray fluoroscopy device and the imaging device as explained in paragraphs [0061] and [0066] of Tanaka.
Independent claim 16 states a system for imaging and treating an object, comprising:
an imaging device configured to generate an image of the object - (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0061] as an X-ray fluoroscopy and imaging apparatus);
a treatment device configured to treat the object based on the image – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0061] as the X-ray detector and comprises a detection surface that detects the X-ray and X-ray detection elements);
a table configured to support the object – (paragraph [0061] of Tanaka again defines the use of a table to support an object as a table 3 on which a subject M lies horizontally);
a table control sub-system that is operably coupled to the table and configured to cause the table to move under control of the imaging device or the treatment device – (a table control sub-system is taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0072] as the table movement switch where a control signal is sent to a table movement mechanism);
a master controller operably connected to the table control sub-system – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0069] as the main control element); wherein
the imaging device includes a first control sub-system configured to generate a first control instruction for controlling the table – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0071] as switch 39b for imaging controls);
the treatment device includes a second control sub-system configured to generate a second control instruction for controlling the table – (taught in paragraph [0071] of Tanaka as switch 39a for fluoroscopy controls);
the system includes a switch mechanism on the second control sub- system configured to switch control of the table between the imaging device and the treatment device – (taught by Tanaka as the switches 39a-c as shown in Fig. 3);
the first control sub-system is operably connected to the master controller via a virtual table motion controller; and
the virtual table motion controller is configured to relay the first control instruction from the first control sub-system to the master controller bypassing the second control sub-system – (the motion controller is explained by Tanaka with reference to the main control element in paragraph [0069]).
In claim 17 the system of claim 16, wherein the second control sub-system is operably connected to the master controller, is stated. Tanaka teaches this element in Fig. 2 where item 21 – the image generation element is connected to item 27 – the main control element.
As per claim 18, the system of claim 16 adds wherein the switch mechanism is further configured to switch control of the table between the first control sub-system and the second control sub-system based on a control command from the first control sub-system or the second control sub-system, or a workflow. The switch used to control the movement of the table is explained in paragraph [0082] of Tanaka as “operator visually recognizes the information Q and makes sure instantly that the switch 39 which the operator per se is contacting is the switch 39c for moving the table”.
Regarding claim 19 the system of claim 18, is directed to wherein
the table control sub- system is further configured to
determine movement information of the table; and transmit the movement information to the master controller. Tanaka teaches this feature of the instant invention in paragraph [0072] as “the table movement switch 39c controls on-off of the movement of the table 3 in the vertical direction. Specifically, when the table movement switch 39c is stepped on by foot, a control signal is sent to a table movement mechanism 20 from the main control element 27, so that the table movement mechanism 20 changes the height of the table 3. The table 3 shifts in between the relatively low-position (loading position), at which the subject M gets on and off, and the relatively high-position (treatment position), at which the operator performs a medical treatment on the subject M in the decubitus position, in accordance with the operation of the table movement switch 39c.”
the master controller is further configured to
in response to determining that the control of the table is switched to the first control sub-system, transmit the movement information to the first control sub-system; or in response to determining that the control of the table is switched to the second control sub-system, transmit the movement information to the second control sub-system. This is taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0073] where “each of the switches 39 comprises a detection sensor 43. The detection sensor 43 detects that the switch 39 is contacted and sends the signal that identifies which sensor is contacted to the main control element 27” is stated.
Claim 20 is directed to a method for controlling movement of a table supporting an object, comprising:
transmitting, by first control sub-system, a first control instruction to a master controller via a virtual table motion controller, the virtual table motion controller being configured to relay the first control instruction from the first control sub-system to the master controller bypassing a second control sub-system – (taught in paragraph [0070] by Tanaka);
transmitting, by the second control sub-system, a second control instruction to the master controller directly – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0073]);
generating, by the master controller, a third control instruction based on the first control instruction or the second control instruction – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0072]);
transmitting, by the master controller, the third control instruction to a table control sub-system – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0072]);
generating, by the table control sub-system, a control signal based on the third control instruction – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0072]);
causing, by the table control sub-system, a table to move based on the control signal – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0072]);
receiving movement information of the table from the table control sub-system – taught in paragraph [0073] by Tanaka);
in response to a determination that the table is under control of the first control sub-system, transmitting the movement information of the table to the first control sub- system – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0073]); and
in response to a determination that the table is under control of the second control sub-system, transmitting the movement information of the table to the second control sub-system – (taught by Tanaka in paragraph [0073]).
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Publication No. US 2019/0090838 A1 to Tanaka et al. in view of US Patent Publication No. US 2017/0359275 A1 to Puthillathe as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent Publication No. US 2019/0103989 A1 to Kida et al..
The limitations of the instant invention as taught by Tanaka are aforementioned.
Claims 12 and 13 include the configuration of transmitting clock synchronization information as associated with the control sub-system. The prior art of Tanaka fails to address this facet of the instant invention. For this reason, the prior art of Kida et al. (herein after “Kida”) is introduced. The prior art of Kida teaches of a communication control system in which a control device and one or many control target devices are connected through network.
With regard to claims 12 and 13, the system of claim 1, is claimed as wherein the first or second control sub-system is further configured to transmit first or second clock synchronization information associated with the first or second control sub-system to the master controller; and the master controller is further configured to update time information associated with the master controller according to the first or second clock synchronization information. As stated above, Tanaka falls short of addressing this feature; however, in paragraphs [0033] and [0041] Kida teaches the transmitting of a clock signal for notifying each of the slave devices 20 of a synchronization timing in each synchronization period. The control device 10 repeatedly executes the transmission of such a clock signal and control command for each synchronization period and performs a control for establishing the synchronization between the control device 10 and each slave device 20. The control device of Kida is equivalent to the master controller and the slave devices correspond to the first, second, or third sub-systems as claimed. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the above-mentioned inventions of Tanaka and Puthillathe with that of Kida so as allow for operating the device and sub-systems to improve accuracy during operation of the plurality of controls and devices.
For the reasons stated above, the limitations of the instant invention are taught and/or fairly suggested by the prior arts of record; thereby, rendering the instant claims unpatentable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent Publication No. US 2017/0296846 A1 Ju
Relates to a quality management system and method for a radiation therapy apparatus that may configure a user-customized automatic quality management system in a quality management method for a radiation therapy apparatus using an image acquiring unit.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sheela Rao whose telephone number is (571) 272- 3751. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Wednesday from 7:00 am to 1:00 pm.
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, Mohammad Ali, can be reached on (571) 272-4105. The fax number for the organization where this application or any proceeding papers has been assigned is (571) 273- 8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. It should be noted that status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http:// pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should any questions arise regarding access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Sheela Rao/Examiner, Art Unit 2119 August 26, 2026
/MOHAMMAD ALI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights