DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the communication received on December 16, 2025 concerning application No. 18/955,877 filed on November 21, 2024.
Claims 1-8 are currently pending.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/16/2025 regarding the prior art rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to the applicant’s arguments that the prior art fails to teach “setting a region of interest on a tomographic plane from which the B-mode image data has been acquired based on a user’s operation when the attenuation distribution image is displayed on the display device”, examiner respectfully disagrees. [0035] of Watanabe discloses the input interface 15 receives instructions from the operator. [0060] discloses using an input interface 15 to select an imaging ROI position within the scan area (tomographic plane). [0089] discloses four types of images are displayed simultaneously on the display 40 which include at least a B-mode image I11 and an attenuation image B-mode image I21. [0090]-[0091] disclose setting the imaging ROI in the image while the attenuation image B-mode image I21 is being displayed as one of the four types of images. The teachings of Watanabe discussed above correspond to [0028]-[0029] and fig. 2 of the present applications specification which disclose setting a region of interest 72 within the B-mode image 60 while the attenuation distribution image 62 is simultaneously being displayed with the B-mode image. Similarly in Watanabe the imaging ROI I12 is being set in the B-mode image I11, while the B-mode image I11 and the attenuation image B-mode image I21 are simultaneously being displayed. Therefore, the ROI is being set while the attenuation distribution image is being displayed. For at least these reasons Watanabe teaches the argued limitation.
Further in response to applicants argument on pg. 8 that “nor does Watanabe permit the ROI-setting operation to be performed on the attenuation distribution image itself”, examiner notes the claims as currently written do not recite the ROI setting is being performed on the attenuation distribution image.
Examiner further notes that applicant references claim 11 on pg. 8, however the claims do not currently recite a claim 11.
In response to applicant’s arguments that the prior art of record fails to teach new claim 8, examiner respectfully disagrees. See the rejection of claim 8 below for how Watanabe is being applied to teach the limitations of the claim.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Watanabe et al. (US 20200268355, hereinafter Watanabe).
Regarding claim 1, Watanabe teaches an ultrasound diagnostic apparatus ([0019] ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus 1 in fig. 1) comprising an information processing unit (the electronic circuitry of apparatus 1 in fig. 1) configured to execute:
a B-mode image acquisition process of acquiring B-mode image data for a subject ([0054] “a scan for acquiring B-mode data”. [0066] “An ultrasonic wave is thereby transmitted from the ultrasonic probe 20 to the subject P based on the ultrasonic transmission/reception condition for B-mode scan”);
an attenuation property acquisition process of acquiring attenuation property data for the subject ([0071] “an ultrasonic transmission/reception condition for attenuation imaging mode scan”. Also see [0080]);
an attenuation distribution display process of displaying, on a display device (display 40 in fig. 1), an attenuation distribution image in which an attenuation property map indicated by the attenuation property data is superimposed on a B-mode image indicated by the B-mode image data ([0091] “In display region R20, an imaging ROI I22 is set in an attenuation image B-mode image I21, and an attenuation image I23 overlaps the imaging ROI I22”. Fig. 7 further shows the attenuation image I23 superimposed on a B-mode image I21. [0049] further discloses displaying an attenuation image B-mode image which represents the attenuation property map superimposed on a B-mode image);
a setting process of setting a region of interest on a tomographic plane from which the B-mode image data has been acquired based on a user’s operation ([0035] discloses the input interface 15 receives instructions from the operator. [0060] and [0094] disclose using an input interface 15 to select a imaging and measurement ROI positions) when the attenuation distribution image is displayed on the display device ([0089] discloses four types of images are displayed simultaneously on the display 40 which include the B-mode image I11 and the attenuation image B-mode image I21. [0090]-[0091] discloses setting an imaging ROI in the image while the attenuation image B-mode image I21 is being displayed as one of the four types of images); and
an elastic property acquisition process of acquiring elastic property data for the region of interest ([0085] “The processing circuitry 18 also generates elasticity image data that visualizes the shear wave speed in the imaging ROI based on the calculated shear wave speed and a preset color map. The processing circuitry 18 generates elasticity image data that visualizes the Young's modulus in the imaging ROI based on the calculated Young's modulus and a preset color map”),
wherein the information processing unit is configured to execute the setting process when the attenuation distribution image is displayed on the display device ([0090]-[0091] disclose the imaging ROI and measurement ROI are set in the images in the display region which comprise simultaneously displaying the attenuation image and B-mode image, therefore the information processing unit is configured to execute the setting of the ROI when the attenuation distribution image is displayed on the display device).
Regarding claim 3, Watanabe teaches the apparatus of claim 1, as set forth above. Watanabe further teaches the information processing unit is configured to execute the elastic property acquisition process based on the user’s operation when the attenuation distribution image is displayed on the display device ([0090]-[0091] disclose the imaging ROI and measurement ROI are set in the images in the display region and [0086] discloses generating the elasticity image data in the imaging ROI, therefore the information processing unit is configured to execute the elastic acquisition process based on the user’s operation when the attenuation distribution image is displayed).
Regarding claim 6, Watanabe teaches the apparatus of claim 1, as set forth above. Watanabe further teaches the setting process includes a process of displaying the attenuation distribution image and the B-mode image side by side on the display device (fig. 7 shows displaying the b-mode image I11 side by side with the attenuation distribution image I23 on the display).
Regarding claim 7, Watanabe teaches the apparatus of claim 1, as set forth above. Watanabe further teaches the information processing unit is configured to execute an elasticity distribution display process of displaying, on the display device (display 40 in fig. 1), an elasticity distribution image in which an elastic property map indicated by the elastic property data is superimposed on the B-mode image ([0090] discloses displaying the elasticity image I13 overlapping the B-mode image I11. See fig. 7).
Regarding claim 8, Watanabe teaches the apparatus of claim 1, as set forth above. Watanabe further teaches the information processing unit is further configured to execute: an image combining process of generating attenuation distribution image data in which the attenuation property map is superimposed on the B-mode image based on the B-mode image data and the attenuation property data ([0044] discloses “the ATI processing function 184 is a function for calculating an index value indicating an attenuation of an ultrasonic wave in the subject P based on the reception signal received from the ultrasonic reception circuitry 12. Specifically, through the ATI processing function 184, the processing circuitry 18 performs envelope detection processing, logarithmic compression processing, and the like on the reception signal received from the ultrasonic reception circuitry 12 to generate attenuation image B-mode data that expresses signal intensity by brightness”. [0048] further discloses “the processing circuitry 18 also executes, for example, a raw-pixel conversion on the attenuation image B-mode raw data calculated by the ATI processing function 184 to generate attenuation image B-mode image data”, the generated attenuation image B-mode image data is considered the combination of an attenuation image data and B-mode image data) ; and
an image converting process of converting the attenuation distribution image data to the attenuation distribution image for display during the setting process ([0049] discloses displaying an attenuation image B-mode image based on the attenuation image B-mode image data, thereby converting the image data to an image).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe in view of Tanigawa et al. (US 20220167946, hereinafter Tanigawa).
Regarding claim 2, Watanabe teaches the apparatus of claim 1, as set forth above. Watanabe further teaches the information processing unit is configured to:
execute the setting process when the attenuation distribution image is displayed on the display device in accordance with the attenuation property acquisition process and the attenuation distribution display process ([0090]-[0091] disclose the imaging ROI and measurement ROI are set in the images in the display region, meaning the setting of the ROI is executed when the attenuation distribution image is being displayed on the display device).
Watanabe does not specifically teach the information processing unit is configured to: repeatedly execute the attenuation property acquisition process and the attenuation distribution display process.
However,
Tanigawa in a similar field of endeavor teaches an information processing unit (the electronic circuitry of the system 1 shown in fig. 1) configured to repeatedly execute the attenuation property acquisition process and the attenuation distribution display process ([0050] discloses repeating a B-mode scan for one frame a measuring scan for the one frame. [0053] discloses the result of the measurement is a determination of ultrasound attenuation which is then displayed on the display 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus disclosed by Watanabe to have the information processing unit be configured to: repeatedly execute the attenuation property acquisition process and the attenuation distribution display process in order to allow the user to view how the anatomy changes over time, thereby improving the quality of the diagnostic information.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe in view of Kozai (US 20180271478).
Regarding claim 4, Watanabe teaches the apparatus of claim 1, as set forth above. Watanabe does not specifically teach a controller configured to determine whether or not an artifact is included in a region corresponding to the region of interest in the attenuation property map, wherein the information processing unit is configured to execute the elastic property acquisition process when it is determined that the artifact is not included.
However,
Kozai in a similar field of endeavor teaches a controller (the electronic circuitry of the system 1 in fig. 1) configured to determine whether or not an artifact is included in a region corresponding to the region of interest in the image ([0058] “The valid region determining unit 334 determines whether a target region is a region that does not include a noise region and is a region (a valid region) valid for generating a feature image”), wherein the information processing unit is configured to execute the feature property acquisition process when it is determined that the artifact is not included ([0058] and [0090] disclose when it is determined that the artifact is not included and the region is valid a feature property acquisition process is continued in order to generate the feature image).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the known technique of having a controller configured to determine whether or not an artifact is included in a region corresponding to the region of interest in the image, wherein the information processing unit is configured to execute the feature property acquisition process when it is determined that the artifact is not included of Kozai to the apparatus of Watanabe to allow for the predictable results of obtaining images with better image quality and improving the results of the image analysis and diagnosis of the subject.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe in view of Labyed (US 20190261949).
Regarding claim 5, Watanabe teaches the apparatus of claim 1, as set forth above. Watanabe does not specifically teach a controller configured to determine whether or not an artifact is included in the attenuation property map, and set the region of interest in a region on the tomographic plane in which the artifact is not included.
However,
Labyed in a similar field of endeavor teaches a controller (the electronic circuitry of the system shown in fig. 3) configured to determine whether or not an artifact is included in the image, and set the region of interest in a region on the tomographic plane in which the artifact is not included ([0042] discloses in act 14 a controller determines a position of an ROI in the ultrasound image using the locations of the input information, where the ROI is places to avoid the locations of the input information in the image. Fig. 1 and [0035]-[0036] disclose the input information includes clutter and noise (artifact) in the images).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the apparatus disclosed by Watanabe to have a controller configured to determine whether or not an artifact is included in the attenuation property map, and set the region of interest in a region on the tomographic plane in which the artifact is not included in order to provide for better image quality and improve diagnosis, as recognized by Labyed (abstract).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW BEGEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4744. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-5:00.
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, Keith Raymond can be reached at 5712701790. 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.
/ANDREW W BEGEMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3798