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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a non-Final office action in merits. Claims 1-12 are presently pending. Claims 1, 4-6, 9-12, after restriction election, have been elected and considered below.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. EP23198152.3, filed on 09/19/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/19/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Restriction Election
Applicant elects Species II, namely claims 4-5, 9-10, without traverse, for further examination.
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.
Claims 1, 4-6, 9-12 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: fitting, for the set of voxels, a function f to the measured values V expressed as a function of the determined distance d according to V(d) = f (β1, ... , βN, r, d) in order to determine a set of fitting parameters, in which no definition or explanation is provided for (β1, ... , βN) and r. Therefore, the measured values V and variables of the function with respect to V are unclear or ambiguous. Claim 1 therefore renders indefinite. Similar functional relationship is also recited in claims 5 and 10. They are rejected with the same reason.
All dependent claims depending from claim 1 are rejected the same.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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 1, 4-6, 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2024/0012080 A1, Wang et al. (hereinafter Wang).
As to claim 1, Wang discloses a computer-implemented method for characterizing a spatial distribution of a tissue microstructural property from quantitative imaging data, the method comprising
acquiring, for a biological object and via a first interface, a property map for a tissue of the biological object, wherein the property map comprises voxels whose intensity represents a measured value V of the property for the tissue (Fig 33a-33c, acquiring MR data of tissue to estimate magnetic susceptibility distribution of subject based on noise and prior properties and generate images of subject based on estimated susceptibility distribution; pars 0014, 0054, 0057-0058, 0065, 0095, Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) for a susceptibility distribution consistent with the tissue inhomogeneity field measurement; pars 0022, 0030, 0061, 0070, 0072, 0088, 0255, voxels being grouped based on their distances to a boundary M or spatial properties relative to M);
determining, for at least a set of the voxels, a distance d separating each voxel of the set from a center of interest so that each voxel of the set is associated with a measured value V and a determined distance d (Fig 1; pars 0137, 0152, 0255, a range of intensity values or similar intensity of voxels being identified corresponding to their distances to boundary M);
fitting, for the set of voxels, a function f to the measured values V expressed as a function of the determined distance d according to V(d) = f (β1, ... , βN, r, d) in order to determine a set of fitting parameters (Figs 1, 33; pars 0022, 0030, 0058-000060, 0070-0072, 0075, fitting parameters being determined with respect to voxels distances and intensity);
determining, from the fit, values of each fitting parameter (Figs 1, 33; pars 0022, 0030, 0058-000060, 0070-0072, 0075); and outputting a value of at least one of the fitting parameters (Fig 1; pars 0022, 0070-0072, 0075, 0088, 0133, 0164, 0207). Although Wang discloses above features in more than one embodiment, consider Wang’s teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of skill in the art before the filing date of invention to incorporate Wang’s teachings in more than one embodiments to provide predictable results of determining physical properties associated with at least one tissue microstructure.
2-3. (Withdrawn)
As to claim 4, Wang discloses the computer-implemented method according to claim 1, which comprises automatically classifying the tissue in a class of tissue as a function of a value of at least one of the fitting parameters (pars 0068, 0076, 0086, 0237, type of tissues being determined (e.g. classified) in the ROI through weights (e.g. parameters)).
As to claim 5, Wang discloses the computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein the function f further depends on a position r of the voxel within a frame of reference according to Vr,d = f(β1,…,βN, r, d) (Fig 1; pars 0022, 0072, 0075, 0089, 0208, 0243, 0251, 0255, the distance of voxels within and/or outside M identifies the respective position of voxels and/or voxels of the image corresponds to a particular spatial location of the subject depicting the intensity value of the subject at the location or the range of intensities, within a defined reference window).
As to claim 6, it is a system claim encompassed claim 1. Rejection of claim 1 is therefore incorporated herein.
7-8. (Withdrawn)
As to claims 9-10, they are rejected with the same reason as set forth in claims 4-5, respectively.
As to claim 11, it is an apparatus corresponding to claim 6. It is rejected with the same reason as set forth in claim 6.
As to claim 12, Wang discloses the imaging apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the imaging apparatus is a magnetic resonance imaging apparatus (Fig 33, pars 0005, 0057, 0060, MRI apparatus).
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular column, line number, paragraphs and/or figure(s) in the reference(s) as applied to the claims for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the reference(s) in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUN SHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7927. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 8:30-5:50 PT.
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, Amandeep Saini can be reached on 571-272-3382. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is 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. 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 you have questions on 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.
/QUN SHEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2662
Prosecution Insights