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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/09/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-8, 11-12, 16-17, and 19-26 remain pending in the application.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-8, 11-12, 16-17, and 19-26 remain pending in the application in response to the applicant’s amendments to the rejections previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed 05/15/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/09/2026 with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Given the amendments to claim 1, reference to Winter is being relied upon to teach dependent claims 2-8, 11-12, 17, and 22-25 more-consistently with the instant claim language, as shown below.
Given the amendments to claim 1, reference to Coppens is being relied upon to teach dependent claim 16 and 26 more-consistently with the instant claim language, as shown below.
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, 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 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.
Claims 1-8, 11-12, 17, 19-20, and 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winter et al. (US 20130235969 A1, published September 12, 2013) in view of Tian et al. (US 20170156688 A1, published June 8, 2017), hereinafter referred to as Winter and Tian, respectively.
Regarding claim 1, and similarly for claims 19 and 20, Winter teaches a system for image registration, comprising:
at least one storage device storing a set of instructions for registering (see para. 0095 – “... This transformation matrix is then stored in the isocenter alignment tool,...” where a storage device for storing instructions is inherent and known in the art); and
at least one processor configured to communicate with the at least one storage device, wherein when executing the set of instructions, the at least one processor is configured to direct the system to perform operations (see para. 0095 – “...such that when subsequent MR imaging dataset are collected on the Linear accelerator, the MR images routed through the isocenter alignment tool automatically have this transformation matrix applied. Ultimately, this tool brings the daily MR image dataset into the same coordinate system as the linear accelerator.” Where a processor configured to execute stored instructions is inherent and known in the art) including:
actuating, by the at least one processor, a table to move a subject from a first position to a second position (see para. 0107 – “... application of couch shifts [actuating table to different positions] to bring the patient position in line with the RT plan...”),
the table including a positioning line (see para. 0126 – “An array of fiducial markers [positioning line] is embedded into a RT treatment couch top...”),
wherein the positioning line is integral with the table (see para. 0127 – “A series of different anatomic-based fiducial frames are assigned a particular position in the patient couch top along the inferior/superior (i.e., head-to-toe) direction.”);
controlling, by the at least one processor, a medical imaging component to acquire a first image including the subject and at least one portion of the positioning line, the subject being located at the second position during the acquisition of the first image (see para. 0126 – “With this arrangement, the markers are located beneath the patient so as not interfere with the patient position and immobilization.”; see para. 0127 – “Markers geometry may also be designed such that if only a subset of the MR/X-ray markers can be identified in the MR and RT imaging system [medical imaging component] fields-of-view [image], their location on the frame can still be uniquely identified.”); and
determining, by the at least one processor, based on the first image and the positioning line, a relative position of the second position to the first position (see para. 0127 – “Markers geometry may also be designed such that if only a subset of the MR/X-ray markers can be identified in the MR and RT imaging system fields-of-view, their location on the frame can still be uniquely identified.” distance between image of table second position and table first position is the same as the actuating distance of the table).
Winter teaches imaging the table while the subject is on the table, but does not explicitly teach acquiring an image of the table and an internal structure of the subject.
Whereas, Tian, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches controlling, by the at least one processor, a medical imaging component to acquire a first image including at least one internal structure existed within the subject and at least one portion of the positioning line, the subject being located at the second position during the acquisition of the first image (see para. 0104 – “CT device 2 processes scanning and sets lead marking points on the table plate 32, so the positions of tumor [internal structure existed within the subject] and lead marking points [positioning line] may be determined on the CT images when scanning finished...”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified imaging the table while the subject is on the table, as disclosed in r, by acquiring an image of the table and an internal structure of the subject, as disclosed in Tian. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order for the deviation between presupposed position of tumor and actual position may be obtained through software calculation, as taught Tian (see para. 0104).
Furthermore, regarding claim 2, Winter further teaches wherein the relative position includes a distance between the second position and the first position along a moving direction of the table and/or a distance between the second position and the first position along a direction perpendicular to the moving direction of the table (Fig. 2; see para. 0172 – “The table can be a multi axis movable or “robot” table of a type also available from Varian. This acts to hold the base stationary while the table top can be moved to any orientation around the base and relative to axes transverse to the base.”; see para. 0216 – “The patient table is adjusted in its fine positioning by the Guidance system which acts on actuators A in the couch in order to re-locate the patient relative to the RT treatment in dependence on the data from the current MR image.”).
Furthermore, regarding claim 3, Winter further teaches wherein the relative position includes at least one of: a distance between the second position and the first position along a length direction of the table and a distance between the second position and the first position along a width direction of the table (Fig. 2; see para. 0172 – “The table can be a multi axis movable or “robot” table of a type also available from Varian. This acts to hold the base stationary while the table top can be moved to any orientation around the base and relative to axes transverse to the base.”; see para. 0216 – “The patient table is adjusted in its fine positioning by the Guidance system which acts on actuators A in the couch in order to re-locate the patient relative to the RT treatment in dependence on the data from the current MR image.”).
Furthermore, regarding claim 4, Winter further teaches wherein the positioning line includes a positioning feature having a plurality of feature values, and each of the plurality of feature values corresponds to a cross section of the table (see para. 0127 – “Markers geometry [feature values] may also be designed such that if only a subset of the MR/X-ray markers can be identified in the MR and RT imaging system fields-of-view, their location on the frame can still be uniquely identified.”).
Furthermore, regarding claim 5, Winter further teaches wherein the determining the relative position of the second position to the first position includes: identifying a second cross section of the table in the first image that matches a first cross section of the table; and determining, based on the second cross section and the first cross section, the relative position of the second position to the first position (see para. 0107 – “This provides a method to ensure that the MR image datasets are in the Linac coordinates to enable expedient and accurate image matching and application of couch shifts to bring the patient position in line with the RT plan using the superior soft tissue contrast of MR.”; see para. 0127 – “Markers geometry may also be designed such that if only a subset of the MR/X-ray markers can be identified in the MR and RT imaging system fields-of-view, their location on the frame can still be uniquely identified.” distance between image (cross section) of table second position and table first position is the same as the actuating distance of the table).
Furthermore, regarding claim 6, Winter further teaches wherein the determining the relative position of the second position to the first position includes: determining a third position of the first cross section of the table in a first coordinate system; determining a feature value of the positioning feature corresponding to the first cross section of the table; identifying, based on the feature value of the positioning feature corresponding to the first cross section, the second cross section of the table in the first image that matches the first cross section; determining a fourth position of the second cross section in the first coordinate system; and determining, based on the third position and the fourth position, the relative position of the second position to the first position (see para. 0107 – “This provides a method to ensure that the MR image datasets are in the Linac coordinates to enable expedient and accurate image matching and application of couch shifts to bring the patient position in line with the RT plan using the superior soft tissue contrast of MR.”; see para. 0127 – “Markers geometry may also be designed such that if only a subset of the MR/X-ray markers can be identified in the MR and RT imaging system fields-of-view, their location on the frame can still be uniquely identified.” distance between image (cross section) of table second position and table first position is the same as the actuating distance of the table).
Furthermore, regarding claim 7, Winter further teaches wherein the third position of the first cross section includes a first coordinate of the first cross section, the fourth position of the second cross section includes a second coordinate of the second cross section, the relative position includes a distance between the second position and the first position, and the determining the relative position of the second position to the first position includes: determining, based on the first coordinate and the second coordinate, the distance between the second position and the first position (see para. 0107 – “This provides a method to ensure that the MR image datasets are in the Linac coordinates to enable expedient and accurate image matching and application of couch shifts to bring the patient position in line with the RT plan using the superior soft tissue contrast of MR.”; see para. 0127 – “Markers geometry may also be designed such that if only a subset of the MR/X-ray markers can be identified in the MR and RT imaging system fields-of-view, their location on the frame can still be uniquely identified.” distance between image (cross section) of table second position and table first position is the same as the actuating distance of the table).
Furthermore, regarding claim 8, Winter further teaches wherein the determining the feature value of the positioning feature corresponding to the first cross section of the table includes: obtaining a lookup table recording feature values of the positioning feature corresponding to a plurality of cross sections of the table; and determining, based on the third position of the first cross section, the feature value of the positioning feature corresponding to the first cross section of the table by looking up the lookup table (see para. 0095 – “This transformation matrix is then stored [look up table] in the isocenter alignment tool, such that when subsequent MR imaging dataset are collected on the Linear accelerator, the MR images routed through the isocenter alignment tool automatically have this transformation matrix applied.”).
Furthermore, regarding claim 11, Winter further teaches wherein a density of the positioning line is different from a density of the table, or a material of the positioning line is different from a material of the table (see para. 0210 – “For this purpose, an array 1 of MR and X-ray visible fiducial markers 2 is embedded into a patient support couch top of the patient support table.”).
Furthermore, regarding claim 12, Winter further teaches wherein the material of the positioning line is associated with a type of the imaging component (see para. 0210 – “For this purpose, an array 1 of MR and X-ray visible fiducial markers 2 is embedded into a patient support couch top of the patient support table.”).
Furthermore, regarding claim 17, Winter further teaches wherein the operations further comprises:
obtaining a second image of the subject, the second image being captured prior to the first image (see para. 0129 – “This fiducial frame represents a “global” coordinate system for registration purposes. The couch-top fiducials are first identified in pre-treatment MR images to establish the global coordinate system...In the next step, the same couch-top is moved to the RT system imaging position, and CBCT, 2D X-ray, or X-ray fluoroscopic images are obtained, in which the same fiducial markers are detected.”); and
registering, based on the relative position of the second position to the first position, the first image and the second image with each other, includes: transforming the second image into a transformed second image in a second coordinate system; transforming the first image into a transformed first image in the second coordinate system based on the relative position of the second position to the first position; aligning the transformed second image with the transformed first image to generate an aligned second image and an aligned first image; and registering the aligned first image with the aligned second image (see para. 0129 – “The coordinate system transformation matrix can then be used in the RT system to align the gantry isocentre with the pre-treatment MRI position verification,...”).
Furthermore, regarding claim 22, Winter further teaches wherein the determining the third position of the first cross section of the table in the first coordinate system includes: obtaining a lookup table storing X-coordinates of points in a plurality of cross sections of the table in the first coordinate system; determining X-coordinates of the first cross section in the first coordinate system based on the position of the first cross section relative to the table by looking up the look-up table (see para. 0095 – “This transformation matrix is then stored [look up table] in the isocenter alignment tool, such that when subsequent MR imaging dataset are collected on the Linear accelerator, the MR images routed through the isocenter alignment tool automatically have this transformation matrix applied.”).
Furthermore, regarding claim 23, Winter further teaches wherein the determining the fourth position of the second cross section in the first coordinate system includes: representing the first image in a coordinate system with respect to the imaging component; determining the fourth position according to the first image and a transformation relationship between the first coordinate system and the coordinate system with respect to the imaging component (see para. 0129 – “The coordinate system transformation matrix can then be used in the RT system to align the gantry isocentre with the pre-treatment MRI position verification,...”).
Furthermore, regarding claim 24, Winter further teaches wherein the positioning line includes a positioning feature having a plurality of unique feature values, and each of the plurality of feature values corresponds to a distinctive cross section of the table (see para. 0127 – “Markers geometry [feature values] may also be designed such that if only a subset of the MR/X-ray markers can be identified in the MR and RT imaging system fields-of-view, their location on the frame can still be uniquely identified.”).
Furthermore, regarding claim 25, Winter further teaches the medical imaging component and the table configured to carrying the subject (Fig. 2, MR magnet 10 of MR imaging system as medical imaging component, and table top 15 carrying the subject 12).
Claims 16 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winter in view of Tian, as applied to claim 4 above, and in further view of Coppens (US 20080031414 A1, published February 7, 2008), hereinafter referred to as Coppens.
Regarding claim 16, Winter in view of Tian teaches all of the elements disclosed in claim 4 above.
Winter in view of Tian teaches the positioning line on the table, but does not explicitly teach where the position line has an N shape.
Whereas, Coppens, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches wherein: the positioning line has an N-shape (Fig. 4A, points 4 on table 20 having an N shape),
a cross section of a plurality of cross sections has a first point, a second point, and a third point of the positioning line, the second point being located between the first point and the third point, and the positioning feature includes at least one of a first distance between the first point and the second point, a second distance between the second point and the third point, a ratio of the first distance to the second distance, a ratio of the second distance to the first distance, or a difference between the first distance and the second distance (see para. 0039 – “FIGS. 3A and 3B show two typical Cat Scan (CT) images (18) in which the markers (4) are present. Since the distance between the center marker and the offset marker is different at each axial location, the position of the scan (H1, H2, etc.) can be determined.”; see para. 0040 – “FIGS. 4A and 4B demonstrate that a variety of marker (4) configurations can be used to provide imaging space orientation and determination of the location of a series of axial markers. In this case, multiple additional markers are used corresponding to the numerical indexing location. The CT image (18) shows two markers (4) to the right of center, identifying the location as F2.”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the positioning line on the table, as disclosed in Winter in view of Tian, by having an N shape positioning line, as disclosed in Coppens. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to further ease identifying the location of the table, as taught in Coppens (see para. 0039-0040).
Furthermore, regarding claim 26, Coppens further teaches wherein different portions of the positioning line have a uniform diameter (Fig. 4A, markers 4 (positioning line) have uniform diameter).
The motivation for claim 26 was shown previously in claim 16.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winter in view of Tian, as applied to claim 6 above, and in further view of Jones et al. (US 20070237306 A1, published October 11, 2007), hereinafter referred to as Jones
Regarding claim 21, Winter in view of Tian teaches all of the elements disclosed in claim 6 above.
Winter in view of Tian teaches determining a position of a cross section of a table, but does not explicitly teach determining a Y-coordinate of the table via an encoder.
Whereas, Jones, in an analogous field of endeavor, teaches wherein the determining the third position of the first cross section of the table in the first coordinate system includes: detecting a Y-coordinate of the table in the first coordinate system by an encoder; determining Y-coordinates of the first cross section in the first coordinate system based on the Y-coordinate of the table and a position of the first cross section relative to the table (Fig. 4A; see para. 0037 "Attached to the Y-axis recirculating ball guide block in the upper-left corner is a Y-axis linear optical encoder 86. These encoders provide the XY position of the tabletop, which information is required to locate or register the reconstructed cross- sectional images in space.").
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified determining a position of a cross section of a table, as disclosed in Winter in view of Tian teaches, by also determining a Y-coordinate of the table via an encoder, as disclosed in Jones. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to present 3-D representations of the breast, where all the slice images are assembled into a single volumetric image, as taught in Jones (see para. 0037).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Erbel et al. (US 20020120986 A1, published September 5, 2002) discloses the bed is automatically positioned at the LINAC (computer-assisted via the tracking system and the markers on the bed) only when the defined relationship has been reached.
Cosman (US 20040122311 A1, published June 24, 2004) discloses the treatment couch carries index markers which are tracked by the camera system to indicate the instant position of the couch throughout a procedure, and the couch top may have X, Y, or Z movement, or, in the case of some CT scanners only, movement in the vertical and longitudinal directions, Y and Z.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nyrobi Celestine whose telephone number is 571-272-0129. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 7:00AM - 5:00PM EST.
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, Pascal Bui-Pho can be reached on 571-272-2714. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/N.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights