DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-13 are currently pending and have been examined.
This action is in response to the amendment filed on 8/3/2026.
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.
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 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Pal (US20250014740) in view of Shen (US20220399107).
As per claim 1, Pal teaches a medical information system comprising:
an information system that generates an examination order including an examination instruction for an image diagnosis examination (para. 29: examination order received); and
a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) that captures a medical image of a subject in accordance with the examination order (para. 24, 33, 48: MRI imaging device executes examination order),
wherein the MRI apparatus includes
a storage device stores the examination instruction and one or more imaging protocols (para. 124: examination orders and radiology protocols are stored), and
one or more processors that execute processing of acquiring the examination order from the information system and displaying the examination instruction of the acquired examination order (para. 55: display patient information, imaging examination order forms with selectable interface elements enabling a user to input various pieces of information as part of completion of an imaging examination order, recommended radiology protocols produced in response to an imaging examination order).
Pal does not expressly teach a storage device that pre-stores association information in which a protocol ID corresponding to the examination instruction is associated with one or more imaging protocols, held in the MRI apparatus, wherein each of the one or more imaging protocols defines a sequence and an imaging condition for image capture, and
acquiring the protocol ID corresponding to the examination instruction from the acquired examination order;
in a case in which only one imaging protocol is associated with the acquired protocol ID in the association information, automatically selecting the only one imaging protocol as a selected imaging protocol;
displaying the examination instruction of the acquired examination order and the selected imaging protocol; and
controlling the MRI apparatus to acquire a nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) signal from the subject in the sequence and the imaging condition defined by the selected imaging protocol and performing image reconstruction based on the NMR signal to generate the medical image of the subject.
Shen, however, teaches to guide users to effortlessly assign the correct protocol for an exam order using a standard protocol library and patient clinical information (abstract). Shen also teaches to a plurality of first protocol tags and a first identifier for each scanner level protocol of a plurality of scanner level protocols (para. 113). Shen further teaches to determines whether a match between any of the plurality of scanner level protocols and the queried medical imaging procedure exists based on the first and second identifiers (para. 114). Shen teaches selects each scanner level protocol respectively corresponding to the one or more matching identifiers and outputs the selected scanner level protocols to a display (para. 119). The processor may translate the selected scanner level protocol to a scanner level protocol executable, which may then be executed by a scanner of the medical imaging system, such as MRI scanner, as the medical imaging procedure (para. 31, 131).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the aforementioned features in Shen with Pal based on the motivation of provide a medical protocol recommendation that enable the recommendation to be generalizable to specific entities such as specific hospitals (Shen – para. 2).
As per claim 2, Pal and Shen teach the medical information system according to claim 1. Pal does not expressly teach wherein the one or more processors execute processing of displaying a setting screen for accepting a setting operation to associate the protocol ID corresponding to the examination instruction with the one or more imaging protocols held in the MRI apparatus.
Shen, however, teaches to guide users to effortlessly assign the correct protocol for an exam order using a standard protocol library and patient clinical information (abstract). Shen also teaches to a plurality of first protocol tags and a first identifier for each scanner level protocol of a plurality of scanner level protocols (para. 113).
The motivations to combine the above mentioned references are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and incorporated herein.
As per claim 3, Pal and Shen teach the medical information system according to claim 1. Pal does not expressly teach wherein the one or more processors execute processing for provisional registration of storing the protocol ID, which is identification information determined for each type of the examination instruction and a plurality of imaging protocols related to an examination site according to the examination instruction in association with each other in the storage device.
Shen, however, teaches to guide users to effortlessly assign the correct protocol for an exam order using a standard protocol library and patient clinical information (abstract). Shen also teaches to a plurality of first protocol tags and a first identifier for each scanner level protocol of a plurality of scanner level protocols (para. 113).
The motivations to combine the above mentioned references are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and incorporated herein.
As per claim 4, Pal and Shen teach the medical information system according to claim 3. Pal teaches wherein the one or more processors display the plurality of imaging protocols associated with the identification information and display a screen for prompting an operator to select any of the imaging protocols, in a case in which the provisional registration has been made for the examination instruction of the examination order acquired from the information system (para. 142: receives a user selection of a site-specific radiology protocol. In some embodiments, a radiologist, technologist, or other care provider, may make a selection of a radiology protocol, e.g., by using a care provider device to select a site-specific radiology protocol from a list presented via a user interface.).
As per claim 5, Pal and Shen teach the medical information system according to claim 1. Pal does not expressly teach wherein the one or more processors execute processing for final registration of storing the protocol ID, which is identification information determined for each type of the examination instruction and one imaging protocol in association with each other in the storage device.
Shen, however, teaches to guide users to effortlessly assign the correct protocol for an exam order using a standard protocol library and patient clinical information (abstract). Shen also teaches to a plurality of first protocol tags and a first identifier for each scanner level protocol of a plurality of scanner level protocols (para. 113).
The motivations to combine the above mentioned references are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and incorporated herein.
As per claim 6, Pal and Shen teach the medical information system according to claim 5. Pal teaches wherein the one or more processors display the imaging protocol uniquely associated with the identification information and execute automatic selection of the uniquely associated imaging protocol, in a case in which the final registration has been made for the examination instruction of the examination order acquired from the information system (para. 55: display patient information, imaging examination order forms with selectable interface elements enabling a user to input various pieces of information as part of completion of an imaging examination order, recommended radiology protocols produced in response to an imaging examination order).
As per claim 7, Pal and Shen teach the medical information system according to claim 1. Pal teaches wherein the examination order includes coordination necessity information indicating a necessity of coordination between the information system and the MRI apparatus (para. 38-39: patient information extracted from the imaging examination order is correlated with one or more additional sources of medical information/patient data).
As per claim 8, Pal and Shen teach the medical information system according to claim 7. Pal does not expressly teach wherein the one or more processors control whether or not to display the one or more imaging protocols associated with the acquired protocol ID in the association information according to the coordination necessity information included in the examination order acquired from the information system.
Shen, however, teaches to number of recommended protocols that are output can be limited only to those protocols with higher confidence scores and also using stored rules regarding the patient (para. 81).
The motivations to combine the above mentioned references are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and incorporated herein.
As per claim 9, Pal and Shen teach the medical information system according to claim 1. Pal does not expressly teach wherein the examination order includes the protocol ID as identification information determined for the examination instruction.
Shen, however, teaches to guide users to effortlessly assign the correct protocol for an exam order using a standard protocol library and patient clinical information (abstract). Shen also teaches to a plurality of first protocol tags and a first identifier for each scanner level protocol of a plurality of scanner level protocols (para. 113). Shen further teaches to determines whether a match between any of the plurality of scanner level protocols and the queried medical imaging procedure exists based on the first and second identifiers (para. 114). Shen teaches selects each scanner level protocol respectively corresponding to the one or more matching identifiers and outputs the selected scanner level protocols to a display (para. 119). The processor may translate the selected scanner level protocol to a scanner level protocol executable, which may then be executed by a scanner of the medical imaging system, such as MRI scanner, as the medical imaging procedure (para. 31, 131).
The motivations to combine the above mentioned references are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and incorporated herein.
As per claim 10, Pal and Shen teach the medical information system according to claim 1. Pal does not expressly teach wherein the protocol ID is a common symbol that is unchangeable between the information system and the MRI apparatus and is assigned to the examination instruction and the one or more imaging protocols associated with the protocol ID in the association information.
Shen, however, teaches to guide users to effortlessly assign the correct protocol for an exam order using a standard protocol library and patient clinical information (abstract). Shen also teaches to a plurality of first protocol tags and a first identifier for each scanner level protocol of a plurality of scanner level protocols (para. 113). Shen further teaches to determines whether a match between any of the plurality of scanner level protocols and the queried medical imaging procedure exists based on the first and second identifiers (para. 114). Shen teaches selects each scanner level protocol respectively corresponding to the one or more matching identifiers and outputs the selected scanner level protocols to a display (para. 119). The processor may translate the selected scanner level protocol to a scanner level protocol executable, which may then be executed by a scanner of the medical imaging system, such as MRI scanner, as the medical imaging procedure (para. 31, 131).
The motivations to combine the above mentioned references are discussed in the rejection of claim 1, and incorporated herein.
Claims 11-13 recite substantially similar limitations as those already addressed in claim 1, and, as such, are rejected for similar reasons as given above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Solal (US20130311472) teaches to recommending at least one of a plurality of protocols for an imaging procedure based on at least one of a score, a probability, or a pre-determined rule, which is based on extracted medical concepts from patient information and extracted medical concepts from previously imaged patient information, and generating a signal indicative of the recommendation.
Lee (US20140365244) teaches to a recommender that evaluates at least one of a user interaction with a displayed image of a scan of an imaging examination protocol or information about the scan in an electronically formatted radiology report, and generates a signal including a recommendation to remove the scan only in response to at least one of the user interaction or the radiology report information satisfying predetermined criteria.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jonathan K Ng whose telephone number is (571)270-7941. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM - 5 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, Anita Coupe can be reached at 571-270-7949. 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.
/Jonathan Ng/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights