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 § 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.
Claims 7 and 11-14 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.
Regarding claim 7, the claim discloses “the receiver coils” (plural). However, claim 1 discloses “a receiver coil” therefore, the claim is considered indefinite.
Regarding claim 11, the claim discloses “the end portion” multiple times but for each instance it is not clear if “the end portion” refers to the “end portion of the first receiver coil” portion or the “end portion of the second receiver coil portion”. Therefore, the claim is considered indefinite. Claims 12-14 are rejected for depending on claim 11.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schnell (US 2008/0129293).
Regarding claim 1, Schnell teaches a magnetic resonance imaging apparatus, comprising:
a receiver coil that receives a magnetic resonance signal [See Figs. 6-9, see local coil. See also rest of reference.]; and
a couchtop that a subject is placed on and that moves the subject to an imaging region, wherein the couchtop has a space to stow the receiver coil in one or more portions of: widthwise side portions of the couchtop; lengthwise end portions of the couchtop; and a bottom portion of the couchtop [Figs. 6-9, see rolled-up local coil element is stored below the patient bed 8. See also rest of reference.], and
the receiver coil is configured to be used by being pulled out and/or pushed out from the one or more portions of the couchtop [¶0020. Fig. 6-9. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 2, Schnell further teaches wherein the couchtop has a couchtop frame that supports a load on the couchtop and that is movable to the imaging region [See patient bed 8. See also rest of reference.], and the couchtop frame has an upper surface where the subject is to be placed on and the couchtop frame forms the space in the one or more portions of the couchtop [Figs. 6-9, wherein the holder is part of the patient bed 8. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 4, Schnell further teaches wherein the receiver coil is a body receiver coil that receives a magnetic resonance signal from a body portion of the subject [See local coil mentioned throughout reference. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 5, Schnell further teaches wherein the receiver coil is a head receiver coil that receives a magnetic resonance signal from the head of the subject [¶0025, see coil can be used for head. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 6, Schnell further teaches wherein the receiver coil is configured to be placed on the subject by being pulled out and/or pushed out from at least one of the widthwise side portions of the couchtop or at least one of the lengthwise end portions of the couchtop [See Figs. 6-9 and ¶0020. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 7, Schnell further teaches wherein the space accommodates a plurality of the receiver coils arranged to be lined up in a direction of movement of the couchtop [¶0050. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 8, Schnell further teaches further comprising, separately from the receiver coil to be stowed in the space, a spine receiver coil that receives a magnetic resonance signal from the back of the subject [Figs. 6-9, see coil elements 38 which would be adjacent a patients spine. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 9, Schnell further teaches wherein the couchtop has the space to stow the receiver coil in both of the widthwise side portions of the couchtop, and the receiver coil has a first receiver coil portion and a second receiver coil portion [See Figs. 8-9. See also rest of reference.], the first receiver coil portion being configured to be placed on the subject by being pulled out and/or pushed out from one of the widthwise side portions of the couchtop [See Figs. 8-9. See also rest of reference.], the second receiver coil portion being configured to be placed on the subject by being pulled out and/or pushed out from the other one of the widthwise side portions of the couchtop [See Figs. 8-9. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 10, Schnell further teaches wherein the first receiver coil portion and the second receiver coil portion are configured such that an end portion of the first receiver coil portion and an end portion of the second receiver coil portion are connectible to each other on the subject [¶0046 and attachment 31 such as Velcro. See also rest of reference.].
Regarding claim 15, Schnell further teaches wherein the couchtop has the space to stow the receiver coil in one of the widthwise side portions of the couchtop or one of the lengthwise end portions of the couchtop [Figs. 7 and 11. See also rest of reference.], and the receiver coil is configured to be pulled out and/or pushed out from the one of the widthwise side portions of the couchtop or the one of the lengthwise end portions of the couchtop and to be connected and fixed to the other one of the widthwise side portions of the couchtop or the other one of the lengthwise end portions of the couchtop [Figs. 7 and 11. See also rest of reference.].
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 (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 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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Schnell, in view of Igney (US 2017/0281004).
Regarding claim 3, Schnell teaches the limitations of claim 2, which this claim depends from.
Schnell further teaches wherein the couchtop frame has a couchtop supporting portion that supports the upper surface [See patient bed 8. See also rest of reference.].
However, Schnell is silent in teaching and the couchtop supporting portion has a column-shaped or wall-shaped structure.
Igney, which is also in the field of MRI, teaches wherein the couchtop frame has a couchtop supporting portion [See Fig. 1, see supporting unit 4 or object table 3. See also rest of reference.] that supports the upper surface [See Fig. 1, see transfer plate 2. See also rest of reference.], and the couchtop supporting portion has a column-shaped or wall-shaped structure [See Fig. 1, see supporting unit 4 or object table 3. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Schnell and Igney because both references are in the field of MRI and because Igney teaches it is known that a patient is located on a transfer plate that is supported and moved into a MRI apparatus [Igney - ¶0038-0040].
Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over previously cited Schnell, in view of Feld (US 2009/0009172).
Regarding claim 11, Schnell teaches the limitations of claim 10, which this claim depends from.
Schnell further teaches wherein the first receiver coil portion includes a first coil element arranged near the end portion to be connected to the second receiver coil portion, the second receiver coil portion includes a second coil element arranged near the end portion to be connected to the first receiver coil portion [See Figs. 8-9. See also rest of reference.].
However, Schnell is silent in teaching at least one of the first receiver coil portion and the second receiver coil portion has a decoupling structure that implements decoupling between the first coil element and the second coil element when the end portion of the first receiver coil portion and the end portion of the second receiver coil portion are connected to each other.
Feld, which is also in the field of MRI, teaches wherein the first receiver coil portion includes a first coil element arranged near the end portion to be connected to the second receiver coil portion, the second receiver coil portion includes a second coil element arranged near the end portion to be connected to the first receiver coil portion, and at least one of the first receiver coil portion and the second receiver coil portion has a decoupling structure that implements decoupling between the first coil element and the second coil element when the end portion of the first receiver coil portion and the end portion of the second receiver coil portion are connected to each other [See Fig. 2, where the coils overlap in UB. ¶0034-0036, wherein decoupling is established when then the coils overlap. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Schnell and Feld because both references are in the field of MRI and because Schnell and Feld both teach overlapping coil elements and Feld teaches it is known in the art that decoupling is performed when coil elements overlap [Feld - ¶0034-0036].
Regarding claim 12, Schnell and Feld teaches the limitations of claim 11, which this claim depends from.
However, Schnell is silent in teaching wherein at least one of the first receiver coil portion and the second receiver coil portion has, as the decoupling structure: a structure having part of the first coil element and part of the second coil element overlapping each other when the end portion of the first receiver coil portion and the end portion of the second receiver coil portion are connected to each other; and/or decoupling circuitry that is arranged between the first coil element and the second coil element when the end portion of the first receiver coil portion and the end portion of the second receiver coil portion are connected to each other.
Feld, which is also in the field of MRI, teaches wherein at least one of the first receiver coil portion and the second receiver coil portion has, as the decoupling structure: a structure having part of the first coil element and part of the second coil element overlapping each other when the end portion of the first receiver coil portion and the end portion of the second receiver coil portion are connected to each other [See Fig. 2, where the coils overlap in UB. ¶0034-0036, wherein decoupling is established when then the coils overlap. See also rest of reference.]; and/or decoupling circuitry that is arranged between the first coil element and the second coil element when the end portion of the first receiver coil portion and the end portion of the second receiver coil portion are connected to each other.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Schnell and Feld because both references are in the field of MRI and because Schnell and Feld both teach overlapping coil elements and Feld teaches it is known in the art that decoupling is performed when coil elements overlap [Feld - ¶0034-0036].
Regarding claim 13, Schnell and Feld teaches the limitations of claim 11, which this claim depends from.
Schnell further teaches wherein at least one of the first receiver coil portion and the second receiver coil portion has a positioning structure that positions a connection position of the end portions of the first and second receiver coil portions to a position [¶0046, see Velcro. See also rest of reference.].
However, Schnell is silent in teaching where decoupling by the decoupling structure is possible.
Feld, which is also in the field of MRI, teaches wherein at least one of the first receiver coil portion and the second receiver coil portion has a positioning structure that positions a connection position of the end portions of the first and second receiver coil portions to a position where decoupling by the decoupling structure is possible [See detent and hook-and-loop fastener. See also rest of reference.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Schnell and Feld because both references are in the field of MRI and because Schnell and Feld both teach overlapping coil elements and Feld teaches it is known in the art that decoupling is performed when coil elements overlap [Feld - ¶0034-0036].
Regarding claim 14, Schnell and Feld teaches the limitations of claim 13, which this claim depends from.
Schnell and Feld both further teach wherein at least one of the first receiver coil portion and the second receiver coil portion has, as the positioning structure, a non-magnetic fixation tool attached to the end portion of the at least one of the first receiver coil portion and the second receiver coil portion [Schnell - ¶0046, see Velcro. Feld - See detent and hook-and-loop fastener. See also rest of references.].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2024/0319298, US 2020/0081081, and US 2015/0168511 are all considered relevant prior art because the references teach coils that are stored below or inside the patient table.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RISHI R PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-4385. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7 a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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.
/RISHI R PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights