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 § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 9-14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D1.1
With regard to claim 1, D1 teach object detection method, at least a part of the object being located in a subject under examination, the object detection method comprising (see abstract, ¶ 52: detecting invasive device or catheter): obtaining volumetric image data generated by scanning a region of interest of the subject by an imaging device (see abstract, ¶¶ 52-53, 25: 3D imaging of subject and invasive device such as catheter using MRI); converting the volumetric image data into feature projection images, the feature projection images comprising three orthogonal plane feature projection images (see ¶¶ 25, 92: projecting the 3D image onto orthogonal planes); detecting coordinates of the object in each of the three orthogonal plane feature projection images to obtain corresponding projection coordinates of the object in respective coordinate systems of the three orthogonal plane feature projection images (see ¶¶ 93-94: detects position of the catheter or distinctive points on each of the images); and obtaining global coordinates of the object in a global coordinate system of the imaging device on the basis of the projection coordinates of the object (see abstract, ¶¶ 92-94: 3D position and direction of catheter determined).
With regard to claim 2, D1 teach object detection method according to claim 1, wherein the object comprises a rotating body having two-dimensional features (see abstract, ¶¶ 52-53, 76: catheter having 2D features such as marks or distinctive points).
With regard to claim 3, D1 teach object detection method according to claim 1, wherein the object comprises a needle, an endoscope, an implant, a catheter, a guide wire, a dilator, an ablator, and/or a contrast agent (see ¶ 53: catheter).
With regard to claim 4, D1 teach object detection method according to claim 1, wherein the feature projection images comprise one or more of the following items: a max intensity projection image, an average intensity projection image, a min intensity projection image, a standard deviation projection image, and a combination of two or more thereof (see ¶ 92: maximum intensity projection).
With regard to claim 5, D1 teach object detection method according to claim 1, wherein the three orthogonal planes are an axial plane, a sagittal plane, and a coronal plane of the subject (see ¶¶ 92-93, 25: projection onto three orthogonal planes).
With regard to claim 9, D1 teach object detection method according to claim 8, wherein the displaying comprises displaying a trajectory of the object (see ¶¶ 92-94, 52, 75: direction of the catheter or invasive object, displaying tracking results; see fig. 3: display monitor).
With regard to claim 10, see discussion of claim 1. D1 further teach a processor and memory (see ¶¶ 50-51, fig. 3).
With regard to claims 11-14 and 18, see discussion of claims 2-5 and 9, respectively.
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 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 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1.
With regard to claim 8, D1 teach object detection method according to claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach further comprising: performing multi-oblique plane reconstruction on the basis of the global coordinates to display an overall appearance of the object and the region of interest in a reconstructed image, however Examiner takes Official Notice to the fact that performing multi-oblique plane reconstruction is extremely well known in the art before the effective filing date and one skilled in the art would have been motivated to incorporate known teachings into the configuration of D1 yielding predictable and enhanced visualization of objects of interest.
With regard to claim 17, see discussion of claim 8.
Claims 6-7 and 15-16 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.
Pertinent Art
Gluncic2 teach projection images and locating an object.
Moriya3 teach projecting images into a first and second plane and determining coordinates of an object in the projection images.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AVINASH YENTRAPATI whose telephone number is (571)270-7982. The examiner can normally be reached on 8AM-5PM.
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, Sumati Lefkowitz can be reached on (571) 272-3638. 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.
/AVINASH YENTRAPATI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2672
1 US Publication No. 2004/0092813.
2 US Publication No. 2016/0228034.
3 US Patent No. 8,547,377.
Prosecution Insights