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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy of the priority document has not been received.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/07/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
Claim 11 recites “acquisition unit,” which is generic placeholder for “means,” followed by the functional language “acquire an image sequence …” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed acquisition of information. Acquisition functions are described in specification with respect to acquisition unit 401, which is part of management apparatus 300. Accordingly, “acquisition unit” is interpreted as acquisition unit 401 and equivalents.
Claim 11 recites “recognition unit,” which is generic placeholder for “means,” followed by the functional language “perform text recognition on a specific region of the images and generate text information” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed acquisition of information. Recognition functions are described in specification with respect to recognition unit 402, which is part of management apparatus 300. Accordingly, “recognition unit” is interpreted as recognition unit 402 and equivalents.
Claim 11 recites “generation unit,” which is generic placeholder for “means,” followed by the functional language “generate use information of the medical imaging device according to the text information” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed acquisition of information. Generation functions are described in specification with respect to generation unit 403, which is part of management apparatus 300. Accordingly, “generation unit” is interpreted as generation unit 403 and equivalents.
Claim 12 recites “determination unit,” which is generic placeholder for “means,” followed by the functional language “determine the specific region …” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed acquisition of information. Determination functions are described in specification with respect to determination unit 404, which is part of management apparatus 300. Accordingly, “determination unit” is interpreted as determination unit 404 and equivalents.
Claim 18 recites “medical imaging device,” which is generic placeholder for “means,” followed by the functional language “generate an image sequence …” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed acquisition of information. Image generation functions are described in the specification with respect to medical imaging device 701 and the structures for a medical imaging device 701 are listed in in paragraph [0002] of the specification. Accordingly, “medical imaging device” is interpreted as any one of the listed structures in par. [0002] of the specification and equivalents.
Claim 18 recites “device management apparatus,” which is generic placeholder for “means,” followed by the functional language “acquire the image sequence, perform text recognition on a specific region of the images of the image sequence and generate text information, and generate use information of the medical imaging device according to the text inform” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed acquisition of information. Device management functions are described in the specification with respect to device management apparatus 300/400. Accordingly, “device management apparatus” is interpreted as device management apparatus 300/400 and equivalents.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 19 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. It is unclear and thus indefinite as to whether the recited “the image processing device” is a typo and should be “the device management apparatus,” or if “the image processing device” is a new device and should be “an image processing device”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 1-7 and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0035670 to Anders Abrahamsson (“Abrahamsson”).
Regarding claim 1:
A method for acquiring use information of a medical imaging device (Abrahamsson discloses a method “for acquiring medical device data” from a medical device, including medical information and/or an identifier of the medical device (“use information”). Abrahamsson at pars. [0005], [0007], [0019]-[0020], and [0099].), characterized by comprising:
acquiring an image sequence, wherein the image sequence is generated by the medical imaging device and comprises a plurality of images in a time dimension (Abrahamsson discloses that portable device 104 records images from the screen 110a of medical device 102a. Abrahamsson at par. [0068]. Thus, Abrahamsson discloses the claimed “acquiring.”);
performing text recognition on a specific region of the images and generating text information (Abrahamsson discloses that an optical character recognition (OCR) is performed “that converts portions of the recorded image [(“specific region”)] into text” (“text information”). Abrahamsson at par. [0098].); and
generating use information of the medical imaging device according to the text information (Abrahamsson discloses that the OCRed text can be medical information and/or an identifier of the medical device (“use information”). Abrahamsson at pars. [0019]-[0020] and [0098]-[0099] and Fig. 2 (data fields 202-208).).
Regarding claim 2: The method according to claim 1,
wherein the image sequence is an image sequence output by a video transmission interface of the medical imaging device (Abrahamsson discloses that portable device 104 records images from the screen 110a of medical device 102a. Abrahamsson at pars. [0068] and [0085]. Thus, Abrahamsson discloses the claimed “video transmission interface of the medical imaging device.”).
Regarding claim 3: The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
determining the specific region (Abrahamsson discloses that “the medical data application 126 may organize or arrange proximate text into data fields, such as data fields 202 to 208 of FIG. 2.” Abrahamsson at par. [0099]. Thus, Abrahamsson discloses “determining the specific region.” ), wherein the determining the specific region comprises:
for at least one image in the image sequence, performing text recognition within an entire range of the image to generate first text information (Abrahamsson discloses that the portable device records images and that the “portable device 104 also includes a medical data application 126 … to extract text [(“performing text recognition”)] as medical information [(“first text information”)] from the images [(“for at least one image in the image sequence”)].” Abrahamsson at par. [0085].); and
configuring a region in which the first text information comprising preset information is located as the specific region (Abrahamsson discloses that “the medical data application 126 may organize or arrange proximate text into data fields [(“specific region”)], such as data fields 202 to 208 of FIG. 2.” Abrahamsson also discloses that the “data fields may be defined based on a position or relative position within in image … [and] may also be defined based on keywords and/or labels” (also referred to as data templates), (“text information comprising preset information”). Abrahamsson at pars. [0113] and [0119]. ),
wherein the preset information is related to the use information (Abrahamsson discloses that “data templates [(“present information”)] define or specify data fields of certain medical information” (“use information”). Abrahamsson at par. [0113]. Thus, Abrahamsson discloses that claimed relationship.).
Regarding claim 4: The method according to claim 3,
wherein the preset information is prestored in a database (Abrahamsson discloses that data templates are stored in a template database. Abrahamsson at par. [0158].).
Regarding claim 5: The method according to claim 3,
wherein the preset information comprises at least one piece of index information for generating the use information (Abrahamsson discloses that a “data template may include definitions regarding locations, regions, labels, etc., [(“index information”)] of medical information within an image.” Abrahamsson at par. [0009].), and
each piece of index information comprises at least one piece of index data (The actual data values corresponding to the “locations, regions, labels, etc.” will be the “index data.”
Regarding claim 6: The method according to claim 5,
wherein when the first text information is the same as the index data or a similarity between the first text information and the index data is greater than a preset threshold (Abrahamsson discloses that data field 204a has the label “UF Vol.” (“text information”), which is also the displayed data (i.e., “UF Vol”) (“index data”). Abrahamsson at par. [0113] and Fig. 3.),
the region in which the first text information is located comprises the preset information (The location of data field 204 is based on the data template. Abrahamsson at par. [0119].).
Regarding claim 7: The method according to claim 5,
wherein there are a plurality of pieces of index information (Abrahamsson disclose that the “data template may specify locations of certain text and/or specify labels of certain text [(“plurality of pieces of index information”)] used for placing data fields on identified text within the recorded image.” Abrahamsson at par. [0119].), and
when the first text information is the same as first index data of first index information among the plurality of pieces of index information or a similarity between the first text information and the first index data is greater than a preset threshold, the region in which the first text information is located is configured as a specific region of the first index information (Abrahamsson discloses that data field 204a has the label “UF Vol.” (“text information”), which is also the displayed data (i.e., “UF Vol”) (“index data”). The location of data field 204a corresponds to a “specific region.” Abrahamsson at pars. [0113] and [0119] and Fig. 3.).
Regarding claim 9: The method according to claim 3,
wherein the determining the specific region further comprises: if a specific region of another image sequence is predetermined, determining a specific region of the image sequence according to a similarity between an image in the other image sequence and an image in the image sequence and the specific region of the other image sequence (Abrahamsson discloses use of a “ghost image” (“another image sequence”) to align the images being recorded by portable device 104 in order to ensure that the “image to be recorded contains the desired medical information and is recorded at an appropriate distance.” Abrahamsson at par. [0175]. To ensure that the medical information is recorded properly, the ghost image will include a predetermined specific region for the medical information. Accordingly, Abrahamsson discloses the claimed feature.).
Regarding claim 10: The method according to claim 9,
wherein if the similarity between the image in the other image sequence and the image in the image sequence is greater than a first threshold, the specific region of the other image sequence is used as the specific region of the image sequence (Abrahamsson at par. [0175].).
Regarding claim 11:
An imaging device management apparatus (Portable device 104. Abrahamsson at Figs. 1-4.), characterized by comprising:
an acquisition unit configured to acquire an image sequence, wherein the image sequence is generated by a medical imaging device and comprises a plurality of images in a time dimension; a recognition unit configured to perform text recognition on a specific region of the images and generate text information; and a generation unit configured to generate use information of the medical imaging device according to the text information (Please see analysis in claim 1. In addition, portable device 104 performs the functions corresponding to the claimed “acquisition unit,” “recognition unit,” and “generation unit.” Abrahamsson at Fig. 4.).
Regarding claim 12: The apparatus according to claim 11, further comprising:
a determination unit configured to determine the specific region, wherein for at least one image in the image sequence, the determination unit performs text recognition within an entire range of the image to generate first text information, and configures a region in which the first text information comprising preset information is located as the specific region, wherein the preset information is related to the use information (Please see analysis in claim 3. In addition, portable device 104 performs the functions corresponding to the claimed “determination unit.” Abrahamsson at Fig. 4.).
Regarding claim 13: The apparatus according to claim 12,
wherein the preset information comprises at least one piece of index information for generating the use information, and each piece of index information comprises at least one piece of index data (Please see analysis in claim 5.).
Regarding claim 14: The apparatus according to claim 13,
wherein when the first text information is the same as the index data or a similarity between the first text information and the index data is greater than a preset threshold, the region in which the first text information is located comprises the preset information( Please see analysis in claim 6.).
Regarding claim 15: The apparatus according to claim 13,
wherein there are a plurality of pieces of index information, and when the first text information is the same as first index data of first index information among the plurality of pieces of index information or a similarity between the first text information and the first index data is greater than a preset threshold, the region in which the first text information is located is configured as a specific region of the first index information (Please see analysis in claim 7.).
Regarding claim 16: The apparatus according to claim 12,
wherein if a specific region of another image sequence is predetermined, the determination unit determines a specific region of the image sequence according to a similarity between an image in the other image sequence and an image in the image sequence and the specific region of the other image sequence (Please see analysis in claim 9.).
Regarding claim 17: The apparatus according to claim 16,
wherein if the similarity between the image in the other image sequence and the image in the image sequence is greater than a first threshold, the specific region of the other image sequence is used as the specific region of the image sequence (Please see analysis in claim 10.).
Regarding claim 18:
A medical imaging system (System 100. Abrahamsson at Fig. 1.), characterized by comprising:
a medical imaging device configured to generate an image sequence, wherein the image sequence comprises a plurality of images in a time dimension; and a device management apparatus configured to acquire the image sequence, perform text recognition on a specific region of the images of the image sequence and generate text information, and generate use information of the medical imaging device according to the text information (Please see analysis in claim 1. Medical device 102 corresponds to the claimed “medical imaging device” and portable device 104 corresponds to the claimed “device management apparatus.” Abrahamsson at Figs. 1-4.).
Regarding claim 19: The system according to claim 18,
wherein the image processing device is connected to a video transmission interface of the medical imaging device to acquire the image sequence from the video transmission interface (Please see analysis in claim 2.).
Regarding claim 20: The system of claim 18, further comprising:
determining the specific region, wherein the determining the specific region comprises: for at least one image in the image sequence, performing text recognition within an entire range of the image to generate first text information; and configuring a region in which the first text information comprising preset information is located as the specific region, wherein the preset information is related to the use information (Please see analysis in claim 3.).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abrahamsson in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0302206 to Lemay et al. (“Lemay”).
Regarding claim 8: The method according to claim 7,
wherein the specific region is represented by position information (Abrahamsson discloses that a “data template may include definitions regarding locations, regions [(“position information”)], labels, etc., of medical information within an image.” Abrahamsson at par. [0009]; see also par. [0177].),
the position information comprising at least one of: coordinate information of a first pixel in the region in which the first text information is located, height information of the region in which the first text information is located, or width information of the region in which the first text information is located (Abrahamsson does not explicitly disclose that the location information is comprises pixel, height, or width information. In a same field of endeavor, optical character recognition (OCR) of text information in medical images (and thus analogous art), Lemay discloses that destination regions in a medical image (which correspond to data fields) can be determined based on pixels, including determining the height and width of the regions in pixels. Lemay at pars. [0055]-[0056]. Because Abrahamsson does not explicitly disclose how to define the locations and regions in a data template, one skilled in the art would have looked for methods of defining locations and regions in an image. Thus, it would have been obvious and one skilled in the art would have been motivated to use the method in Lemay to define the locations and regions in an image because using pixels to define location in an image is a known method that would have yielded predictable results. MPEP § 2143.I.A.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0279408 to Hirakawa et al. discloses a medical imaging processing system that performs character recognition.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0123915 to Paul Nagy discloses converting analog video data to digital data, which includes performing character recognition.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0374568 to Alessandro Simone Agnello discloses capturing medical device data, including performing character recognition.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0149601 to Langhofer et al. discloses recording medical image data onto digital recording media with automatic character recognition.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BHASKAR KAKARLA whose telephone number is (571)272-8221. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs.
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, Kenneth M. Lo can be reached at 571-272-9774. 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.
/B.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2116
/KENNETH M LO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Prosecution Insights