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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9, 11, 12, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2017/0372863 (Price) in view of US 2016/0217965 (Canfield).
Regarding claim 1, Price disclose an X-ray tube, comprising a cathode structure, wherein the cathode structure includes:
a cathode configured to emit an electron beam (68);
a cathode adjustment window disposed at a periphery of the cathode (62 and 64); and
a controller configured to adjust emittance of the electron beams emitted from the cathode by adjusting, a potential difference between the cathode adjustment window and the cathode, so that a size of an electron beam spot formed by the electron beam matches a target focal point size ([0034], [0044], 0058]-[0059]).
Price fails to teach adjusting the potential difference at different tube voltages to maintain the target focal point size.
Canfield teaches adjusting the potential difference at different tube voltages to maintain the target focal point size [0035].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Price with the teachings of Canfield. One would have been motivated to make such a modification to improve focal spot control.
Regarding claim 2, Price in view of Canfield disclose the X-ray tube of claim 1, wherein the potential difference between the cathode adjustment window and the cathode is adjusted one or more times to make the size of the electron beam spot of the electron beam emitted by the cathode be the target focal point size ([0044], [0059], [0006], [0034]).
Regarding claim 3, Price in view of Canfield disclose the X-ray tube of claim 1, wherein a first potential difference corresponding to the target focal point size at a current tube voltage is determined based on the target focal point size ([0044], [0059], [0006], [0034]); and the potential difference between the cathode adjustment window and the cathode is adjusted based on the first potential difference (as made obvious above).
Regarding claim 4, Price in view of Canfield disclose the X-ray tube of claim 1, wherein the cathode includes at least two emission portions, each of the at least two emission portions being configured to independently emit an electron beam ([0004]-[0006], [0046], [0048], [0052], [0060]); and the at least two emission portions are circumferentially arranged around a center of the cathode.
Regarding claim 5, Price in view of Canfield disclose the X-ray tube of claim 4, wherein the cathode structure further includes a focusing electrode, the focusing electrode being configured to focus the electron beam (62 and 64); an emission surface of the cathode forms a first acute angle with a central axis of the X-ray tube ([0044], [0058]); and a focusing surface of the focusing electrode forms a second acute angle with the central axis of the X-ray tube (Fig. 6, [0054]).
Regarding claim 6, Price in view of Canfield disclose the X-ray tube of claim5, wherein the focusing electrode includes at least two focusing poles, the at least two focusing poles being arranged in a one-to-one correspondence with the at least two emission portions (Fig. 2, 6, [0042], [0044, [0048])
Regarding claim 9, Price in view of Canfield disclose the X-ray tube of claim 4, wherein adjacent edges of any two adjacent emission portions of the at least two emission portions are parallel (Fig. 2 and 6).
Regarding claim 11, Price in view of Canfield disclose the X-ray tube of claim 1, wherein the cathode is circular or elliptical (Fig. 2 and 6).
Regarding claim 12, Price disclose a method for adjusting a focal point of an X-ray tube, wherein the X-ray tube includes a cathode (68) and a cathode adjustment window (62 and 64), and the cathode is configured to emit an electron beam, the method comprising:
obtaining a target focal point size of the X-ray tube ([0034], [0044], 0058]-[0059]); and
adjusting emittance of the electron beams emitted from the cathode by adjusting, a potential difference between the cathode adjustment window and the cathode, so that a size of an electron beam spot matches the target focal point size ([0034], [0044], 0058]-[0059]);
wherein the cathode adjustment window is disposed at a periphery of the cathode (Fig. 2 and 6).
Price fails to teach adjusting the potential difference at different tube voltages to maintain the target focal point size.
Canfield teaches adjusting the potential difference at different tube voltages to maintain the target focal point size [0035].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Price with the teachings of Canfield. One would have been motivated to make such a modification to improve focal spot control.
Regarding claim 20, Price disclose the X-ray device, comprising an X-ray tube, the X-ray tube including a cathode structure, wherein the cathode structure includes:
a cathode configured to emit an electron beam; a cathode adjustment window disposed at a periphery of the cathode (68); and
a controller configured to adjust emittance of the electron beams emitted from the cathode by adjusting, a potential difference between the cathode adjustment window and the cathode, so that a size of an electron beam spot formed by the electron beam matches a target focal point size ([0034], [0044], 0058]-[0059]).
Price fails to teach adjusting the potential difference at different tube voltages to maintain the target focal point size.
Canfield teaches adjusting the potential difference at different tube voltages to maintain the target focal point size [0035].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Price with the teachings of Canfield. One would have been motivated to make such a modification to improve focal spot control.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 8, 10, and 13-19 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 7, Price in view of Canfield disclose the X-ray tube of claim 6, but fail to teach the details of wherein the cathode structure further includes an auxiliary electrode, the auxiliary electrode is arranged within a fitting hole surrounded by the at least two emission portions, and the auxiliary electrode is configured to cooperate with the focusing electrode to control the electron beams emitted by the at least two emission portions.
Regarding claim 8, Price in view of Canfield disclose the X-ray tube of claim 7, but fail to teach the details of wherein an insulating layer is provided between the auxiliary electrode and the at least two emission portions.
Regarding claim 10, Price in view of Canfield disclose the X-ray tube of claim 1, but fail to teach the details of further comprising a magnetron unit, wherein the magnetron unit is configured to focus the electron beam emitted by controlling at least one emission portion through the cathode adjustment window.
Regarding claim 13, Price in view of Canfield disclose the method of claim 12, but fails to teach the details of further comprising: obtaining a radiation power corresponding to the target focal point size; determining a target tube current at an operating tube voltage based on the target focal point size and the radiation power; and adjusting a current passing through the cathode based on the target tube current, so that the cathode emits the target tube current. Claims 14-19 are dependent.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANI FOX whose telephone number is (571)272-3513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5.
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, David Makiya can be reached at 571-272-2273. 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.
/DANI FOX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights