DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 19 and 22-41 are pending.
Claims 1-18 and 20-21 are canceled.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 19, 22-23, 27-32, 34-36 and 40-41 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over the claims of U.S. Patent No. US12142065B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations in the above indicated claims of the instant application are anticipated by the respective claimed limitations in the listed claims of U.S. Patent No. US12142065B2. See the claim anticipation mapping below.
Instant application
Claims
Patent US12142065B2
Claims
19
8
22
8, 9
23
8, 9, 10
27
19, 20
28
19, 20
29
19, 20, 21
30
19, 20
31
19, 20, 21
32
8, 15
34
8, 15
35
8, 9
36
1, 2
40
8, 9, 17
41
8, 9, 18
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 19, 22-26, 32-35 and 38-41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Douglass et al (US20070206843A1) in view of van Ryper et al (US20080020128A1).
Regarding claim 19, Douglass teaches a method for identifying cells, applied to a device for analyzing cell morphology, comprising:
acquiring a target number, wherein the target number is a number of cells of preset type that are desired to be photographed under a high-magnification objective lens by the device for analyzing cell morphology;
(Douglass, "The apparatus 10 automatically locates and counts candidate objects of interest and estimates normal cells present in a biological specimen", [0047]; Ryper, "The serpentine search is continued until the required number of white blood cell candidates is identified or the Optimal Examination Area is exhausted.", [0064]; Douglass teaches identifying and counting candidate cells. Ryper teaches setting a target number (required number) of cells of a preset type (white blood cell candidates) to be identified and examined under a high-magnification lens (100x objective). Together Douglass and Ryper teach acquiring a target number of cells of a preset type to be photographed under high-magnification)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Ryper into the system or method of Douglass in order to optimize processing time by concluding the scanning operation once a sufficient, diagnostically relevant number of cells are found rather than exhaustively scanning. The combination of Douglass and Ryper also teaches other enhanced capabilities.
The combination of Douglass and Ryper further teaches:
photographing a cell image of a blood sample under a low-magnification objective lens;
(Douglass, "At each location of the scan, a low magnification image is acquired and processed to detect candidate objects of interest.", [0006]; "Each slide is then scanned at a user selected low microscope magnification, for example, 10×", [0049]; photographing a cell image of a blood sample under a low-magnification objective lens)
identifying and positioning suspected cells of preset type in the cell image to obtain an identification result,"
(Douglass, “processed to detect candidate objects of interest. Preferably, color, size and shape are used to identify objects of interest. The location of each candidate object of interest is stored.", [0006]; identifying candidate cells based on parameters like color and size, and positioning them by storing their locations to obtain an identification result)
wherein the identification result comprises a number of cells of preset type identified from the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image;
(Douglass, "Processing is performed over the entire image to determine the number of such regions at 324 and to determine the area and coordinates for each detected blob at 326.", [0110]; Ryper, “locates the white blood cells of interest; acquires a digital image; counts the white blood cells as the images are acquired;", [0052]; Douglass teaches an identification result comprising areas and coordinates for the detected regions. Ryper teaches an identification result including counts of the target cell type identified as images are acquired. Together Douglass and Ryper teach an identification result comprising a number of cells of preset type. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would keep a running tally of identified cells to determine if clinical sample size targets are met)
stopping photographing under the low-magnification objective lens, based on the identification result and the target number;
(Douglass, “At the completion of the low level scan for each slide in the carrier on the stage, the optical system is adjusted to a high magnification", [0007]; Ryper, “The serpentine search is continued until the required number of white blood cell candidates is identified or the Optimal Examination Area is exhausted.", [0064]; Douglass teaches stopping photographing under the low-magnification objective lens. Ryper teaches stopping the scan when the required target number is reached. Together Douglass and Ryper teach stopping photographing based on the identification result reaching the target number. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would prevent redundant scanning once the required number of target cells has been accumulated)
switching from the low-magnification objective lens to the high-magnification objective lens;
(Douglass, “the optical system is adjusted to a high magnification such as 40× or 60×, and the X-Y stage is positioned to the stored locations for the candidate objects of interest", [0007]; switching from the low-magnification objective lens to the high-magnification objective lens)
photographing, under the high-magnification objective lens, the suspected cells of preset type that are identified and positioned under the low-magnification objective lens;
(Douglass, “A high magnification image is acquired for each candidate object of interest", [0008]; photographing under the high-magnification objective lens the suspected cells previously identified and positioned)
identifying whether the suspected cells of preset type photographed under the high-magnification objective lens are the cells of preset type; and counting a number of the cells of preset type photographed under the high-magnification objective lens to obtain a statistical value;
(Douglass, “a series of image processing steps are performed to confirm the analysis which was performed at low magnification.", [0008]; "confirm which candidate objects of interest located from the low magnification images are objects of interest.", [0088]; Ryper, “counts the white blood cells as the images are acquired; preclassifies the objects according to known color, size and morphology;", [0052]; Douglass teaches identifying/confirming whether the suspected cells photographed under high magnification are indeed the objects of interest. Ryper teaches counting the cells as they are acquired to obtain a statistical value. Together Douglass and Ryper teach identifying whether the cells are the preset type and counting them. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would maintain a precise statistical count of confirmed specific blood cell types for differential blood analysis)
stopping photographing under the high-magnification objective lens, if the statistical value satisfies that the statistical value ≥ the target number; and
(Douglass, “A high magnification image is acquired for each candidate object of interest", [0008]; Ryper, “The serpentine search is continued until the required number of white blood cell candidates is identified", [0064]; Douglass teaches evaluating the identified candidate cells. Ryper teaches operating the scanning protocol until a required threshold number of valid cells are identified. Together Douglass and Ryper teach stopping the high-magnification photography when the statistical value satisfies the required target number. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would provide an efficient workflow that ceases high-resolution image processing once the diagnostic target count has been satisfied)
outputting cell information of the suspected cells of preset type that are identified as the cells of preset type under the high-magnification objective lens.
(Douglass, “These images are then available for retrieval by a pathologist, or cytotechnologist to review for final diagnostic evaluation. Having stored the location of each object of interest, a mosaic comprised of the candidate objects of interest for a slide may be generated and stored.", [0009]; outputting cell information (images/mosaic) of the suspected cells identified as the cells of preset type)
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the method of claim 19, wherein the method further comprises:
obtaining probability information pi of each of the suspected cells of preset type being a cell of preset type during identifying the cell image; and
determining the number of the cells of preset type identified from the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image, according to the probability information pi of each of the suspected cells of preset type being a cell of preset type.
(Douglass, "candidate objects of interest, such as tumor cells, are detected based on a combination of characteristics, including size, shape, and color.", [0089]; Ryper, "preclassifies the objects according to known color, size and morphology;", [0052]; Douglass and Ryper teach evaluating morphological parameters and thresholds to classify cells. Determining if objects meet specific thresholds is mathematically equivalent to obtaining confidence/probability information (pi) indicating the likelihood that an object is the target cell, and determining the count based on that probability. Together Douglass and Ryper teach obtaining this probability information to determine the number of identified cells. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would utilize multi-parametric evaluation to accurately categorize and count the preset cell types)
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the method of claim 22, wherein the method further comprises:
estimating a number S=sum(pi, i=1 to N) of the cells of preset type according to the probability information pi of each of the suspected cells of preset type being a cell of preset type, wherein N represents a number of suspected cells of preset type that have been identified and positioned under the low-magnification objective lens, and wherein the number S is the number of the cells of preset type identified from the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image.
(Douglass, "Processing is performed over the entire image to determine the number of such regions at 324", [0110]; Ryper, "counts the white blood cells as the images are acquired", [0052]; Douglass and Ryper teach counting the number of confirmed objects of interest (cells) out of the suspected candidates in the image. Mathematically, counting confirmed cells is structurally equivalent to summing the probability information (S=sum(pi, i=1 to N) where the probability pi=1 for each confirmed cell and pi=0 for rejected artifacts. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would accurately quantify the specific valid cells identified from the total suspected candidates in the field of view)
Regarding claims 24 and 38, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the method of claim 22, wherein the method further comprises:
accumulating probability information of all of the suspected cells of preset type respectively being the cells of preset type obtained until a current moment to estimate a number S=sum(pi, i=1 to N) of the cells of preset type accumulatively identified from the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image until the current moment, wherein N represents a number of suspected cells of preset type that have been identified and positioned until the current moment, and wherein the number S is the number of the cells of preset type identified from the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image until the current moment; and
stopping photographing under the low-magnification objective lens, if the number S ≥ (λ * the target number) is satisfied, wherein λ is a constant.
(Douglass, Ryper, see comments on claim 35; Ryper, "counts the white blood cells as the images are acquired", [0052]; "The serpentine search is continued until the required number of white blood cell candidates is identified", [0064]; accumulating the cell count (probability pi=1 for each identified cell) until the target number (λ=1) is reached. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would track the running total of identified cells to halt scanning when the required number is acquired)
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the method of claim 24, wherein the method further comprises:
calculating a difference between an estimated number of the cells of preset type accumulatively identified before switching to a current field of view and λ * the target number;
sequentially identifying and positioning the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image in the current field of view to obtain an estimated number of the cells of preset type identified in the current field of view; and
stopping photographing under the low-magnification objective lens, if the estimated number of the cells of preset type identified in the current field of view is greater than or equal to the difference.
(Ryper, "The serpentine search is continued until the required number of white blood cell candidates is identified", [0064]; tracking the required number remaining (i.e., calculating the difference between the target and the previous accumulation) and stopping the photography process when the cells sequentially identified in the current field equal or exceed this remaining required difference. Evaluating if the total count reaches the target is mathematically and functionally obvious to evaluating if the current field's yield meets the remaining difference. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would accurately halt scanning mid-field the moment the necessary diagnostic cell count limit is achieved)
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the method of claim 24, wherein the method further comprises:
identifying and positioning all of the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image in a current field of view under the low-magnification objective lens to estimate the number of the cells of preset type accumulatively identified from the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image until the current moment,
wherein the estimated number of the cells of preset type accumulatively identified from the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image until the current moment is a sum of an estimated number of the cells of preset type accumulatively identified before switching to the current field of view and an estimated number of the cells of preset type identified in the current field of view; and
if the estimated number of the cells of preset type accumulatively identified from the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image until the current moment is greater than or equal to λ * the target number, stopping photographing under the low-magnification objective lens;
if the estimated number of the cells of preset type accumulatively identified from the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image until the current moment is less than λ * the target number, updating the estimated number of the cells of preset type accumulatively identified until the current moment after identifying and positioning the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image in the current field of view is completed, switching to a next field of view, and continuing to photograph the blood sample in the next field of view under the low-magnification objective lens.
(Douglass, "Processing is performed over the entire image to determine the number of such regions at 324 and to determine the area and coordinates for each detected blob at 326", [0110]; Ryper, "The serpentine search is continued until the required number of white blood cell candidates is identified or the Optimal Examination Area is exhausted.", [0064]; Douglass teaches processing entire image fields to determine the cell count in that field. Ryper teaches accumulating this count and switching to the next field in a serpentine search if the target is not yet reached, or stopping if the required target number is met. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would evaluate entire fields iteratively and halt the scanning process dynamically only when the target count is satisfied)
Regarding claim 32, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches a method for identifying cells, applied to a device for analyzing cell morphology, comprising:
acquiring a target number, wherein the target number is a number of cells of preset type that are desired to be photographed under a high-magnification objective lens in the device for analyzing cell morphology;
acquiring a cell image of a blood sample photographed under a low-magnification objective lens;
identifying suspected cells of preset type in the cell image, and sequentially identifying and positioning the suspected cells of preset type;
(Douglass, Ryper; see comments on claim 19)
obtaining information of all of the suspected cells of preset type accumulatively identified as the cells of preset type until a current moment, to determine whether it is necessary to position and identify a next suspected cell of preset type;
(Douglass, “Processing is performed over the entire image to determine the number of such regions at 324", [0110]; Ryper, “counts the white blood cells as the images are acquired;", [0052]; "The serpentine search is continued until the required number of white blood cell candidates is identified", [0064]; Douglass teaches determining numbers of regions per image. Ryper teaches accumulatively counting white blood cells across successive frames to determine if the required number is met (i.e., whether it is necessary to identify a next cell). Together Douglass and Ryper teach obtaining accumulative information to determine whether to position/identify a next cell. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would track running totals during slide evaluation to efficiently halt when clinical needs are fulfilled)
if it is necessary to position and identify the next suspected cell of preset type, positioning and identifying the next suspected cell of preset type;
(Douglass, “At each location of the scan, a low magnification image is acquired and processed to detect candidate objects of interest.", [0006]; Ryper, “The serpentine search is continued until the required number of white blood cell candidates is identified", [0064]; continuing the scanning and positioning process for the next cell if the required target has not yet been satisfied)
if it is not necessary to position and identify the next suspected cell of preset type, stopping photographing under the low-magnification objective lens;
switching from the low-magnification objective lens to the high-magnification objective lens;
(Douglass, Ryper; see comments on claim 19)
acquiring the suspected cells of preset type that have been positioned and identified under the low-magnification objective lens and are photographed under the high-magnification objective lens, identifying whether the suspected cells of preset type that are photographed under the high-magnification objective lens are the cells of preset type, and if a number of the cells of preset type identified under the high-magnification objective lens reaches the target number, stopping photographing under the high-magnification objective lens; and
(Douglass, Ryper; see comments on claim 19. Douglass teaches confirming the objects at high magnification and Ryper teaches stopping when the required number of white blood cells is identified)
outputting cell information of the suspected cells of preset type that have been identified as the cells of preset type under the high-magnification objective lens."
(Douglass, Ryper; see comments on claim 19)
Regarding claim 33, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the method of claim 32, wherein the obtaining information of all of the suspected cells of preset type accumulatively identified as the cells of preset type until the current moment, to determine whether it is necessary to position and identify the next suspected cell of preset type comprises:
positioning a current suspected cell of preset type, and obtaining probability information of the current suspected cell of preset type identified as a cell of preset type and probability information accumulated before identifying the current suspected cell of preset type;
updating accumulated probability information according to the probability information of the current suspected cell of preset type identified as the cell of preset type and the probability information accumulated before identifying the current suspected cell of preset type, and
according to the accumulated probability information, determining whether it is necessary to position the next suspected cell of preset type.
(Douglass, "Processing is performed over the entire image to determine the number of such regions at 324", [0110]; Ryper, "counts the white blood cells as the images are acquired", [0052]; "The serpentine search is continued until the required number of white blood cell candidates is identified", [0064]; Ryper teaches accumulating the identified cell count information (accumulated pi) over time to determine if it is necessary to identify a next cell by checking if the required target number is met. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would track the running total of identified cells to halt scanning when the required clinical number is acquired)
Regarding claim 34, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the method of claim 32, wherein the obtaining information of all of the suspected cells of preset type accumulatively identified as the cells of preset type until the current moment, to determine whether it is necessary to position and identify the next suspected cell of preset type comprises:
positioning a current suspected cell of preset type, and identifying whether the current suspected cell of preset type is the cell of preset type; and
updating a number of suspected cells of preset type that have been identified as the cells of preset type, to determine whether it is necessary to position and identify the next suspected cell of preset type.
(Douglass, "At each location of the scan, a low magnification image is acquired and processed to detect candidate objects of interest.", [0006]; Ryper, "The serpentine search is continued until the required number of white blood cell candidates is identified", [0064]; identifying whether the cell is of preset type, updating the number of suspected cells identified, and determining whether to position/identify the next cell based on whether the required target is reached. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would evaluate cells sequentially and halt processing as soon as target counts are met)
Regarding claim 35, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches a device for analyzing cell morphology, comprising:
(Douglass, “an apparatus for automated cell analysis of biological specimens is generally indicated by reference numeral 10", [0046]; a device for analyzing cell morphology)
a digital imaging apparatus, a control apparatus, a processor, and an output apparatus, wherein the digital imaging apparatus comprises a low-magnification objective lens, a high-magnification objective lens, and a digital camera;
(Douglass, “The apparatus 10 further includes an optical sensing array 42, such as a camera, preferably a CCD camera, for acquiring images ... The microscope subsystem 32 further includes a motorized objective turret 44 for selection of objectives.", [0046]; "the optical system is adjusted to a high magnification such as 40× or 60×", [0007]; "A computer subsystem comprises a computer 22 having at least one system processor 23... and color printer 35.", [0046]; the digital imaging apparatus having low/high mag objectives and a digital camera, a control/processor apparatus, and an output apparatus)
the digital camera is configured to photograph a cell image of a blood sample under the low-magnification objective lens;
(Douglass, “Each slide is then scanned at a user selected low microscope magnification, for example, 10×", [0049]; "a low magnification image is acquired and processed to detect candidate objects of interest.", [0006]; the camera photographs cell images under the low-magnification lens)
the processor is configured to acquire a target number, wherein the target number is a number of cells of preset type that are desired to be photographed under the high-magnification objective lens in the device for analyzing cell morphology;
the processor is further configured to identify and position suspected cells of preset type in the cell image to obtain an identification result, the identification result comprises a number of cells of preset type identified from the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image;
(Douglass, Ryper; see comments on claim 19)
the processor is further configured to obtain probability information pi of each of the suspected cells of preset type being a cell of preset type during identifying the cell image, and determine the number of the cells of preset type identified from the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image according to the probability information pi of each of the suspected cells of preset type being a cell of preset type;
(Douglass, “transforming the image to a different color space... analyzing the thresholded image to determine the presence of one or more regions of connected pixels having the same or similar color", [0011]; "candidate objects of interest, such as tumor cells, are detected based on a combination of characteristics, including size, shape, and color.", [0089]; Ryper, “preclassifies the objects according to known color, size and morphology;", [0052]; while Douglass and Ryper do not explicitly disclose "probability information pi", however, calculating morphological parameters (blob size, connected pixels, color thresholds) to determine whether objects match the predefined characteristics of a cell is fundamentally obtaining mathematical confidence/probability information indicating the likelihood of the object being a cell. Together Douglass and Ryper teach processing pixel/color space data to determine the likelihood (probability) that the candidate cell is a cell of preset type. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would utilize multi-parametric evaluation to accurately categorize and count the preset cell types)
the processor is further configured to instruct the digital camera to stop photographing under the low-magnification objective lens, based on the identification result and the target number;
the control apparatus is configured to switch from the low-magnification objective lens to the high-magnification objective lens;
the digital camera is further configured to photograph, under the high-magnification objective lens, the suspected cells of preset type that have been identified and positioned under the low-magnification objective lens;
the processor is further configured to identify whether the suspected cells of preset type photographed under the high-magnification objective lens are the cells of preset type, count a number of the cells of preset type photographed under the high-magnification objective lens to obtain a statistical value, and instruct the digital camera to stop photographing under the high-magnification objective lens if the statistical value satisfies that the statistical value > the target number; and
the output apparatus is configured to output cell information of the suspected cells of preset type that have been identified as the cells of preset type under the high-magnification objective lens.
(Douglass, Ryper; see comments on claim 19)
Regarding claim 39, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the device of claim 38, wherein the processor is further configured to:
update the estimated number of the cells of preset type accumulatively identified until the current moment after identifying and positioning the suspected cells of preset type in the cell image identified in a current field of view is completed; and
instruct the control apparatus to control the low-magnification objective lens to switch to a next field of view, if a sum of an estimated number of the cells of preset type accumulatively identified before switching to the current field of view and an estimated number of the cells of preset type in the cell image identified in the current field of view is less than λ * the target number; and the digital camera is further configured to continue to photograph the blood sample in the next field of view under the low-magnification objective lens.
(Douglass, "scan area of interest is scanned to acquire images”, [0070]; “The process iterates the scan across the slide", [0065]; Ryper, "The serpentine search is continued until the required number of white blood cell candidates is identified", [0064]; updating the accumulated number and switching to the next field of view to continue photographing if the sum is less than the target required number. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would process consecutive fields iteratively and halt only when the full target count is met)
Regarding claim 40, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the device of claim 35, further comprising:
a memory, configured to store images of the cells of preset type and the suspected cells of preset type that are not the cells of preset type photographed under the high-magnification objective lens,
wherein the output apparatus comprises a display screen, which is configured to display the images of the cells of preset type and the suspected cells of preset type that are not the cells of preset type photographed under the high-magnification objective lens.
(Douglass, "A high magnification image is stored for each confirmed object of interest.", [0008]; "These images are then available for retrieval by a pathologist... a mosaic comprised of the candidate objects of interest... may be generated and stored.", [0009]; "The pathologist can then visually inspect the images to make a determination whether to accept (152) or reject (153) each cell image.", [0112]; Ryper, "The images are tiled and presented to the technician as a mosaic for evaluation.", [0072]; Douglass teaches storing images of confirmed cells and rejected candidates (suspected but not actual preset type) and displaying them on a monitor for inspection. Ryper teaches presenting the images on a display for evaluation. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would allow visual validation and correction of the automated cell classification by a human technician)
Regarding claim 41, the combination of Douglass and Ryper teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the device of claim 35, wherein the cells of preset type are at least one of white blood cells or nucleated red blood cells.
(Ryper, "to perform a differential white blood cell count... white blood cells stain blue.", [0005]; "white blood cell candidates are computed", [0064]; the cells of preset type are white blood cells. Incorporating Ryper into Douglass would identify and classify specific white blood cells for hematological diagnostic evaluation)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIANXUN YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-9874. The examiner can normally be reached on MON-FRI: 8AM-5PM Pacific Time.
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, Amandeep Saini can be reached on (571)272-3382. 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.
/JIANXUN YANG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2662 8/22/2026
Prosecution Insights