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
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.
Claim(s) 14-16, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maurer, Jr. et al. (US 2012/0189102; hereinafter Maurer).
Regarding claim 14, Maurer discloses a collision protection system (220) for a radiation therapy system (title) comprising: a movable collision shield (220) disposed between a bore (218) of the radiation therapy system (fig. 2a) and a rotatable gantry (204) of the radiation therapy system; and a positioning mechanism (240) that selectively positions the movable collision shield between a first position and a second position (along 304).
Regarding claim 15, Maurer discloses wherein the rotatable gantry has a treatment-delivering radiation source (210) and at least one X-ray imager (D1) mounted thereon.
Regarding claim 16, Maurer discloses wherein the treatment-delivering radiation source (210) directs a treatment beam through a treatment isocenter of the radiation therapy system (figs. 2a-2b).
Regarding claim 18, Maurer discloses wherein the positioning mechanism (240) translates the movable collision shield (220) between the first position and the second position in a direction parallel to a longitudinal axis (304) of the bore.
Regarding claim 20, Maurer discloses wherein, when the movable collision shield is in the second position, most or all of the movable collision shield (220) is disposed within a fixed portion of the bore (218).
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) 1-2, 6, 8-11, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurer as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Plummer (US 5097132).
Regarding claim 1, Maurer discloses a radiation therapy system (figs. 2a-3b) comprising: a support structure relative to a support surface (floor) external to the radiation therapy system (figs. 2a-3b); a rotatable gantry (204) with a treatment-delivering radiation source (210) and at least one X-ray imager (D1) mounted thereon, wherein the treatment-delivering radiation source (210) directs a treatment beam (203) through a treatment isocenter (216) of the radiation therapy system and wherein the rotatable gantry (204) is rotatably coupled to the support surface (floor) and is configured to rotate about a bore (218) of the radiation therapy system; a movable collision shield (220) disposed between the bore (218) and the rotatable gantry (204); and a positioning mechanism (240) that selectively positions the movable collision shield between a first position and a second position (along 304).
However, Maurer fails to disclose a stationary support structure fixed to a support surface external to the radiation system.
Plummer teaches a stationary support structure (82) fixed to a support surface (under 82) external to the radiation system (fig. 1).
It would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Maurer with the teaching of Plummer, since one would have been motivated to make such a modification for making the system more secure (Plummer: col. 6:28-32).
Furthermore, since the Examiner finds that the prior art (i.e., Maurer) contained a “base” upon which the claimed invention can be seen as an “improvement”, and since the Examiner finds that the prior art (i.e., Plummer) contained a “comparable” system that has been improved as recited in the claimed invention, the Examiner thus finds that one of ordinary skill in the art could have applied the known “improvement” technique to the “base” and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, such a claimed combination would have been obvious.
Regarding claim 2, Maurer discloses wherein the positioning mechanism (240) translates the movable collision shield (220) between the first position and the second position in a direction parallel to a longitudinal axis (along 304) of the bore (218).
Regarding claim 6, Maurer discloses wherein, when the movable collision shield (220) is in the second position, most or all of the movable collision shield is disposed within a fixed portion of the bore (218).
Regarding claim 8, Maurer discloses wherein the treatment isocenter (216) is disposed within the movable collision shield (220) when the movable collision shield is at the first position (fig. 2a).
Regarding claim 9, Maurer discloses wherein the movable collision shield comprises a cylindrical tube (220).
Regarding claim 10, Maurer discloses wherein the cylindrical tube (220) has a longitudinal axis that is parallel to a longitudinal axis of the bore (218).
Regarding claim 11, Maurer discloses wherein the cylindrical tube is open at both ends (220).
Regarding claim 17, Plummer teaches wherein the rotatable gantry (110) is rotatably coupled to a stationary support structure (82) of the radiation therapy system and is configured to rotate about a bore (116) of the radiation system.
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurer and Plummer as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Da Silva et al. (WO 2025/104322; hereinafter Silva).
Regarding claim 3, Maurer as modified above suggests claim 1. Maurer further discloses wherein, when the movable collision shield (220) is in the first position (along 304), at least a portion of the movable collision shield (220) is disposed within a cavity of the radiation therapy system that surrounds the treatment isocenter of the radiation therapy system (figs. 2a-2b).
However, Maurer fails to disclose a funnel-shaped cavity.
Silva teaches a funnel-shaped cavity (figs. 2a-3c).
It would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Maurer with the teaching of Silva, since one would have been motivated to make such a modification for easier patient entry (Silva: p. 2:27-34) and more optimal non-coplanar treatment (Silva: p. 1:24-25).
Regarding claim 4, Silva teaches a conical truss (for 220/230), wherein a surface of the funnel-shaped cavity is formed by a surface of the conical truss (figs. 2a-3c).
Regarding claim 5, Silva teaches wherein the conical truss supports the treatment-delivering radiation source (210) and the at least one X-ray imager (p. 4:9).
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurer and Plummer as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Manzke et al. (US 2009/0110152; hereinafter Manzke) and Silva.
Regarding claim 12, Maurer as modified above suggests claim 1. Maurer further discloses a cavity of the radiation therapy system (figs. 2a-3c).
However, Maurer fails to disclose a first front shutter operable to selectively move between a first retracted position and a first closed position, wherein the first front shutter encloses a first portion of a funnel-shaped cavity when disposed in the first closed position; and a second front shutter operable to selectively move between a second retracted position and a second closed position, wherein the second front shutter encloses a second portion of the funnel-shaped cavity when disposed in the second closed position.
Manzke teaches a first front shutter (24) operable to selectively move between a first retracted position (fig. 9a) and a first closed position (fig. 9b), wherein the first front shutter encloses a first portion of a cavity when disposed in the first closed position (fig. 9b); and a second front shutter (924) operable to selectively move between a second retracted position (fig. 9a) and a second closed position (fig. 9b), wherein the second front shutter encloses a second portion of the cavity when disposed in the second closed position (fig. 9b). Silva teaches a funnel-shaped cavity (figs. 2a-3c).
It would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Maurer with the teaching of Manzke, since one would have been motivated to make such a modification for protection (Manzke: par. 1).
It would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Maurer with the teaching of Silva, since one would have been motivated to make such a modification for easier patient entry (Silva: p. 2:27-34) and more optimal non-coplanar treatment (Silva: p. 1:24-25).
Regarding claim 13, Manzke teaches wherein the collision shield (seen in fig. 7) is operable to couple to the first front shutter (24) when the first front shutter is disposed in the first closed position (fig. 9b) and couple to the second front shutter (924) when the second front shutter is disposed in the second closed position (fig. 9b).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maurer as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Silva.
Maurer discloses claim 14. Maurer further discloses wherein, when the movable collision shield (220) is in the first position (along 304), at least a portion of the movable collision shield (220) is disposed within a cavity of the radiation therapy system that surrounds the treatment isocenter of the radiation therapy system (figs. 2a-2b).
However, Maurer fails to disclose a funnel-shaped cavity.
Silva teaches a funnel-shaped cavity (figs. 2a-3c).
It would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Maurer with the teaching of Silva, since one would have been motivated to make such a modification for easier patient entry (Silva: p. 2:27-34).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is 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, the prior art fails to disclose or fairly suggest A radiation therapy system including: wherein, when the movable collision shield is in the first position, no portion of the movable collision shield is disposed within the bore, in combination with all of the other recitations in the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Chih-Cheng Kao whose telephone number is (571)272-2492. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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.
/Chih-Cheng Kao/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights