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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment of 01/15/2026 has been entered and fully considered by the examiner. Claims 1, 13, and 14 have been amended. Claims 1-14 are pending in the application with claims 1, 13, and 14 being independent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 of the subject matter eligibility test (see MPEP 2106.03).
Claim 1 is directed to a “processor” which describes one of the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter, i.e., an apparatus.
Claim 13 is directed to a “method” which describes one of the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter, i.e., a process.
Claim 14 is directed to a “non-transitory computer readable medium for storing program” which describes one of the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter, i.e., an item of manufacture.
Step 2A of the subject matter eligibility test (see MPEP 2106.04).
Prong One:
Claims 1, 13 and 14 recite (“sets forth” or “describes”) the abstract idea of a mental process, substantially as follows: “execute calculation processing of calculating blood volume and an oxygen saturation for each image acquired in the image acquisition processing; generate an image showing a change amount of blood volume for each image… with reference to a blood volume at a time point set by the user; generate a graph showing temporal changes in blood volume and oxygen saturation for each image acquired in the calculation processing.”
In claims 1, 13, and 14, the above recited steps can be practically performed in the human mind, with the aid of a pen and paper or with a generic computer, in a computer environment, or merely using the generic computer as a tool to perform the steps. If a person were to visually examine, i.e., perform an observation of the acquired image, based on the contrast and degree of reflected light from the hemoglobin of the blood, the oxygen saturation can be calculated using a formula; Similarly, by performing an observation of the image, and multiplying the vessel’s cross-sectional area by the time-average blood flow velocity, the blood volume can be calculated. There is nothing recited in the claim to suggest an undue level of complexity in how the blood volume and oxygen saturation are calculated. Therefore, a person would be able to perform the calculation steps mentally or with a generic computer. Further, it would be possible to compare the calculated values to a reference point in time and display a change in the form of a graph or an image. As a result, these abstract limitations can be performed in the mind of a practitioner or with a help of pen and paper or a generic computer.
Prong Two: Claims 1, 13, and 14 do not include additional elements that integrate the mental process into a practical application.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recites (1) additional steps of execution of acquisition of endoscope images; and (2) further an addition step of displaying the image and/or the graph that is generated.
The steps in (1) represent merely data gathering or pre-solution activities that are necessary for use of the recited judicial exception and are recited at a high level of generality with conventionally used tools (see below Step IIB for further details).
The step in (2) represents merely notification outputting by a processor as a post-solution activity and is recited at a high level of generality.
As a whole, the additional elements merely serve to gather and feed information to the abstract idea and to output a notification based on the abstract idea, while generically implementing it on conventionally used tools. There is no practical application because the abstract idea is not applied, relied on, or used in a meaningful way. No improvement to the technology is evident, and the estimated bio-information is not outputted in any way such that a practical benefit is realized. Therefore, the additional elements, alone or in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B of the subject matter eligibility test (see MPEP 2106.05).
Claims 1, 13, and 14 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, the claims recite additional steps of acquiring an image and outputting the graph and image generated. These steps represent mere data gathering, data outputting or pre/post/extra-solution activities that are necessary for use of the recited judicial exception and are recited at a high level of generality.
Accordingly, these additional steps and tools for measuring a pulse wave signal and contact pressure, and outputting a notification amount to no more than insignificant conventional extra-solution activity. Mere insignificant conventional extra-solution activity cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims hence are The not patent eligible.
Dependent Claims
The following dependent claims merely further define the abstract idea and are, therefore, directed to an abstract idea for similar reasons:
Further abstract idea of setting a region of interest as reference (claim 2).
Calculation of average values of the parameters (claims 3 and 7)
Subtraction of reference value from parameters (claim 4)
Assigning a color map (claim 5)
Generating an image superimposed on the ultrasound image with a plus and minus sign (claim 6)
Generating thumbnail images (claim 8)
Switching between display and non-display (claim 10)
Pattern matching (claim 11)
The following dependent claims merely further describe the extra-solution activities and therefore, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception or integrate the abstract idea into a practical application for similar reasons:
Displaying a scroll bar (Claim 9) ;
Notifying the user (claim 12);
Taken alone and in combination, the additional elements do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application at least because the abstract idea is not applied, relied on, or used in a meaningful way. They also do not add anything significantly more than the abstract idea. Their collective functions merely provide computer/electronic implementation and processing, and no additional elements beyond those of the abstract idea. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer, output device, improves technology other than the technical field of the claimed invention, etc. Therefore, the claims are rejected as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebata (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0214005) hereinafter “Ebata” in view of Shimamura (Publication No. 2020/0034964) hereinafter “Shimamura”.
Regarding claim 1, Ebata discloses an endoscope system comprising a processor [see abstract of Ebata], wherein the processor [processor device 16; see FIG. 1 and [0053]] is configured to:
executing image acquisition processing of acquiring an endoscopic image obtained by imaging [see [0063] of Ebata disclosing acquiring images from endoscope 12] an observation target at a time interval set in advance by a user [see [0069] and FIG. 4 of Ebata];
executing calculation processing of calculating [see [0070]-[0071]; the calculation unit 83 calculates a blood vessel index value based on the images] an oxygen saturation [see [0012]; the blood index value includes oxygen saturation] for each image acquired in the image acquisition processing; [see [0093] of Ebata]
generate a graph [see FIG. 15] showing temporal changes in the oxygen saturation [see [0148]; all of the blood index values can be depicted in a graph showing their temporal changes; [0012] discloses that the blood index value includes oxygen saturation] and blood volume [see [0012]; one of the parameters being calculated as blood index is blood flow rate; a person of ordinary skill level in the art would be able to integrate the blood flow rate in time and arrive at the blood volume and then graph its change in time according to [0148]] for each image acquired in the calculation processing; and [see [0067], [0073] and [0148]
display, on a display, at least one of the image showing the change amount of the blood volume or the graph showing the temporal changes of the blood volume and the oxygen saturation. [see FIG. 14-15 of Ebata]
Ebata does not disclose that the processor generates an image showing a change amount of the blood volume for each image acquired in the calculation processing with reference to a blood volume at a time point set by the user; wherein the image showing the change amount of blood volume is generated by superimposing the change amount of blood volume to the endoscope image;
Shimamura, directed towards dynamic image analysis of medical images [see abstract of Shimamura] further discloses that the processor generates an image showing a change amount of the blood volume for each image [see [0266] and [0302]-[0305] of Shimamura] acquired in the calculation processing with reference to a blood volume at a time point set by the user; [see [0091] and [0108] of Shimamura] wherein the image showing the change amount of blood volume is generated by superimposing the change amount of blood volume to the endoscope image [see FIG. 16A-B and [0303]-[0304]; the change is shown by superimposing the color representing the changed amount of blood volume on the image]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata such that the processor generates an image showing a change amount of the blood volume for each image acquired in the calculation processing with reference to a blood volume at a time point set by the user wherein the image showing the change amount of blood volume is generated by superimposing the change amount of blood volume to the endoscope image according to the teachings of Shimamura in order to provide a visual feedback to the operator regarding the pulmonary blood flow distribution changes in time [see [0343] of Shimamura]
Regarding claim 2, Ebata as modified by Shimamura discloses all the limitations of claim 1 [see rejection of claim 1]
Shimamura further discloses that the processor is configured to perform reference point imaging by setting a reference observation target as a region of interest in the image acquisition processing. [see [0266] and [0302]-[0305] of Shimamura]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata as modified by Shimamura such that the processor is configured to perform reference point imaging by setting a reference observation target as a region of interest in the image acquisition processing according to the teachings of Shimamura in order to provide more accurate results that are all adjusted to the same reference point allowing for subjective comparison of results. [see [0006] of Shimamura]
Regarding claim 3, Ebata as modified by Shimamura discloses all the limitations of claim 2 [see rejection of claim 2]
Ebata further discloses that the processor is configured to calculate average values of the blood volume and the oxygen saturation based on pixels within the region of interest, and to set the calculated average values as reference values of the blood volume and the oxygen saturation. [see [0100] of Ebata disclosing calculating an average value of the parameters calculated]
Regarding claim 4, Ebata as modified by Shimamura discloses all the limitations of claim 3 [see rejection of claim 3]
Shimamura further discloses that the processor is configured to perform subtraction processing by subtracting the reference value of the blood volume from the blood volume calculated in the calculation processing. [see [0261] and [0266] of Shimamura]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata as modified by Shimamura such that the processor is configured to perform subtraction processing by subtracting the reference value of the blood volume from the blood volume calculated in the calculation processing according to the teachings of Shimamura in order to provide more accurate results that are all adjusted to the same reference point allowing for subjective comparison of results. [see [0006] of Shimamura
Regarding claim 5, Ebata as modified by Shimamura discloses all the limitations of claim 4 [see rejection of claim 4]
Shimamura further discloses that the processor is configured to assign a color map with varying shades according to the change amount based on the blood volume calculated in the subtraction processing [see [0295] and [0357] and Fig. 16A-B of Shimamura] , and generate an image in which the color map is superimposed on the image. [see FIG. 16A-B of Shimamura]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata as modified by Shimamura such that the processor is configured to assign a color map with varying shades according to the change amount based on the blood volume calculated in the subtraction processing, and generate an image in which the color map is superimposed on the image according to the teachings of Shimamura in order to provide a user friendly feedback to the user depicting the values. Further, using a color map to show various parameter ranges is common practice in the art.
Regarding claim 6, Ebata as modified by Shimamura discloses all the limitations of claim 4 [see rejection of claim 4]
Shimamura further discloses that the processor is configured to generate an image in which the change amount is superimposed on the image by representing a minus-side change and a plus-side change with different colors, based on the blood volume calculated in the subtraction processing. [see FIG. 16A-B and [0303] of Shimomura]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata as modified by Shimamura such that the processor is configured to generate an image in which the change amount is superimposed on the image by representing a minus-side change and a plus-side change with different colors, based on the blood volume calculated in the subtraction processing according to the teachings of Shimamura in order to provide a user friendly feedback to the user depicting the values. Further, using a color map to show various parameter ranges is common practice in the art.
Regarding claim 7, Ebata as modified by Shimamura discloses all the limitations of claim 4 [see rejection of claim 4]
Ebata further discloses that the processor is configured to, for each image acquired in the image acquisition processing, perform the calculation processing based on pixels in the same region as the observation target set as the region of interest, [see [0084] and [0086]-[0088] of Ebata disclosing performing calculating processing on each pixel and calculating the parameters based on pixels of the image] and generate the graph in which the calculated blood volume and oxygen saturation are plotted, for displaying the graph. [see FIG. 14 and [0105] of Ebata]
Regarding claim 12, Ebata as modified by Shimamura discloses all the limitations of claim 2 [see rejection of claim 2]
Shimamura further discloses that the processor is configured to perform notifying the user of operation guidance for resetting the region of interest in a case where the observation target affected by a disturbance is set as the region of interest in the reference point imaging. [see [0159]-[0160] of Shimamura]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata as modified by Shimamura such that the processor is configured to perform notifying the user of operation guidance for resetting the region of interest in a case where the observation target affected by a disturbance is set as the region of interest in the reference point imaging according to the teachings of Shimamura in order to allow the user to objectively determine the degree of blood flow artifact [see [0160] of Shimamura]
Regarding claim 13, an operation method for an endoscope system [see abstract of Ebata] including a processor [processor device 16; see FIG. 1 and [0053]], the method comprising:
via the processor, executing image acquisition processing of acquiring an endoscopic image [see [0063] of Ebata disclosing acquiring images from endoscope 12] obtained by imaging an observation target at a time interval set in advance by a user; [see [0069] and FIG. 4 of Ebata];
executing calculation processing of calculating [see [0071]; the calculation unit 83 calculates a blood vessel index value based on the images] an oxygen saturation [see [0012]; the blood index value includes oxygen saturation] for each image acquired in the image acquisition processing; [see [0093] of Ebata]
generating a graph [see FIG. 15] showing temporal changes in the blood volume [see [0012]; one of the parameters being calculated as blood index is blood flow rate; a person of ordinary skill level in the art would be able to integrate the blood flow rate in time and arrive at the blood volume and then graph its change in time according to [0148]] and the oxygen saturation [see [0148]; all of the blood index values can be depicted in a graph showing their temporal changes; [0012] discloses that the blood index value includes oxygen saturation for each image acquired in the calculation processing; [see [0067], [0073] and [0148]
and displaying, on a display, at least one of the image showing the change amount of the blood volume or the graph showing the temporal changes of the blood volume and the oxygen saturation. [see FIG. 14-15 of Ebata]
Ebata does not disclose that the processor generates an image showing a change amount of the blood volume for each image acquired in the calculation processing with reference to a blood volume at a time point set by the user;
Shimamura, directed towards dynamic image analysis of medical images [see abstract of Shimamura] further discloses that the processor generates an image showing a change amount of the blood volume for each image [see [0266] and [0302]-[0305] of Shimamura] acquired in the calculation processing with reference to a blood volume at a time point set by the user; [see [0091] and [0108] of Shimamura] wherein the image showing the change amount of blood volume is generated by superimposing the change amount of blood volume to the endoscope image [see FIG. 16A-B and [0303]-[0304]; the change is shown by superimposing the color representing the changed amount of blood volume on the image]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata such that the processor generates an image showing a change amount of the blood volume for each image acquired in the calculation processing with reference to a blood volume at a time point set by the user wherein the image showing the change amount of blood volume is generated by superimposing the change amount of blood volume to the endoscope image according to the teachings of Shimamura in order to provide a visual feedback to the operator regarding the pulmonary blood flow distribution changes in time [see [0343] of Shimamura]
the pulmonary blood flow distribution changes in time [see [0343] of Shimamura]
Regarding claim 14, a non-transitory computer readable medium for storing a computer-executable program for causing a computer to function as an endoscope system [see abstract of Ebata], the computer-executable program causing a computer [processor device 16; see FIG. 1 and [0053]] to implement:
a function of executing image acquisition processing of acquiring an endoscopic image [see [0063] of Ebata disclosing acquiring images from endoscope 12] obtained by imaging an observation target at a time interval set in advance by a user[see [0069] and FIG. 4 of Ebata];
a function of executing calculation processing of [see [0071]; the calculation unit 83 calculates a blood vessel index value based on the images] an oxygen saturation [see [0012]; the blood index value includes oxygen saturation for each image acquired in the image acquisition processing; [see [0093] of Ebata]
a function of generating graph [see FIG. 15] showing temporal changes in the blood volume [see [0012]; one of the parameters being calculated as blood index is blood flow rate; a person of ordinary skill level in the art would be able to integrate the blood flow rate in time and arrive at the blood volume and then graph its change in time according to [0148]] and the oxygen saturation [see [0148]; all of the blood index values can be depicted in a graph showing their temporal changes; [0012] discloses that the blood index value includes oxygen saturation for each image acquired in the calculation processing; [see [0067], [0073] and [0148]
a function of displaying, on a display, at least one of the image showing the change amount of the blood volume or the graph showing the temporal changes of the blood volume and the oxygen saturation. [see FIG. 14-15 of Ebata]
Ebata does not disclose that the processor generates an image showing a change amount of the blood volume for each image acquired in the calculation processing with reference to a blood volume at a time point set by the user;
Shimamura, directed towards dynamic image analysis of medical images [see abstract of Shimamura] further discloses that the processor generates an image showing a change amount of the blood volume for each image [see [0266] and [0302]-[0305] of Shimamura] acquired in the calculation processing with reference to a blood volume at a time point set by the user; [see [0091] and [0108] of Shimamura] wherein the image showing the change amount of blood volume is generated by superimposing the change amount of blood volume to the endoscope image [see FIG. 16A-B and [0303]-[0304]; the change is shown by superimposing the color representing the changed amount of blood volume on the image]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata such that the processor generates an image showing a change amount of the blood volume for each image acquired in the calculation processing with reference to a blood volume at a time point set by the user wherein the image showing the change amount of blood volume is generated by superimposing the change amount of blood volume to the endoscope image according to the teachings of Shimamura in order to provide a visual feedback to the operator regarding the pulmonary blood flow distribution changes in time [see [0343] of Shimamura]
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebata (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0214005) hereinafter “Ebata” in view of Shimamura (Publication No. 2020/0034964) hereinafter “Shimamura” as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hirakawa et al. (U.S. Publication No.) hereinafter “Hirakawa”.
Regarding claim 8, Ebata as modified by Shimamura discloses all the limitations of claim 1 [see rejection of claim 1 above]
Ebata as modified by Shimamura does not expressly disclose that the processor is configured to perform converting the images obtained by the image acquisition processing into thumbnail images and displaying the thumbnail images in parallel in time series on the display.
Hirakawa, directed towards displaying the time lapse of images in time [see abstract of Hirakawa] further discloses that the processor is configured to perform converting the images obtained by the image acquisition processing into thumbnail images and displaying the thumbnail images in parallel in time series on the display. [see [0114] and FIGs. 6-7; thumbnails 28a are displayed in parallel in time series on the display]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata as modified by Shimamura further such that the processor is configured to perform converting the images obtained by the image acquisition processing into thumbnail images and displaying the thumbnail images in parallel in time series on the display according to the teachings of Hirakawa in order to use the thumb nail images are a visual reference [see [0013] of Hirakawa]
Regarding claim 9, Ebata as modified by Shimamura discloses all the limitations of claim 8 [see rejection of claim 8 above]
Ebata as modified by Shimamura does not expressly disclose that the processor is configured to perform displaying a scroll bar for scrolling through the images displayed in parallel on the display.
Hirakawa further discloses that the processor is configured to perform displaying a scroll bar for scrolling through the images displayed in parallel on the display. [scroll bar 28c; see [0119] and FIG. 6-7 of Hirakawa]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata as modified by Shimamura further such that the processor is configured to perform displaying a scroll bar for scrolling through the images displayed in parallel on the display according to the teachings of Hirakawa in order to choose the thumbnails that need to be displayed on the screen as a result of the operation of the scroll bar [see [0119] of Hirakawa]
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebata (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0214005) hereinafter “Ebata” in view of Shimamura (Publication No. 2020/0034964) hereinafter “Shimamura” as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Irisawa et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2019/0000420) hereinafter “Irisawa”
Regarding claim 10, Ebata as modified by Shimamura discloses all the limitations of claim 1 [see rejection of claim 1 above]
Ebata as modified by Shimamura does not expressly disclose that the processor is configured to perform enabling the user to change between display or non-display of the graph.
Irisawa, directed towards display of ultrasound-based images of the body [see abstract of Irisawa] further discloses that the processor is configured to perform enabling the user to change between display or non-display of the graph. [see [0170]-[0175] of Irisawa]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata as modified by Shimamura further such that the processor is configured to perform enabling the user to change between display or non-display of the graph according to the teachings of Irisawa in order to display or hide the images based on operator’s need [see [0170] of Irisawa]
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebata (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0214005) hereinafter “Ebata” in view of Shimamura (Publication No. 2020/0034964) hereinafter “Shimamura” as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tripathi et al. (U.S. Publication No.) hereinafter Tripathi”.
Regarding claim 11, Ebata as modified by Shimamura discloses all the limitations of claim 1 [see rejection of claim 1 above]
Ebata as modified by Shimamura does not expressly disclose that the processor is configured to perform pattern matching based on a blood vessel shape of the observation target in the reference point imaging, and perform registration in a case where an endoscope or the observation target moves.
Tripathi, directed towards vascular imaging [see abstract of Tripathi] further discloses that the processor is configured to perform pattern matching based on a blood vessel shape of the observation target in the reference point imaging, and perform registration in a case where an endoscope or the observation target moves. [see [0038] of Tripathi]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill level in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the design of Ebata as modified by Shimamura further such that the processor is configured to perform pattern matching based on a blood vessel shape of the observation target in the reference point imaging, and perform registration in a case where an endoscope or the observation target moves according to the teachings of Tripathi in order to identify features of the image and find the corresponding features in the image based on a reference [see [0038] of Tripathi]
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Rejection of claims under U.S.C. 101
With regards to the rejection of claims for being directed towards an abstract idea, the applicant has argued that the added amendment to the claim which requires the image showing the change of blood volume to be superimposed on the endoscope image can not be practically be performed in a human mind, and therefore, the claim is directed to more than the abstract idea.
In response, the examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that the criteria for being directed towards an abstract idea is that the act could be performed in human mind, with the help of a pen and paper or with a generic processor.
Here, the superimposition of two images or superimposition of values on an image is certainly possible with the help of a pen and paper by writing the changed values on the image or coloring them different colors using a color map. This act can also be performed using a generic processor. Therefore, the limitation does not add any act which would constitute significantly more than the abstract idea.
Rejection of claims under U.S.C. 103
With regards to Ebata reference, the applicant has argued that Ebata does not dislsose that the blood vessel index value Di is distracted from “each endoscope image” since [0071] discloses only that the Di is calculated for each vascular structure.
In response, the examiner respectfully notes that [0070] clearly discloses that the vascular structure is extracted in “each image”. Therefore, the vascular structures identified correspond to each image as well and Ebata discloses the feature.
Further, the applicant has argued that the limitation requiring: “generating a graph showing temporal changes in the blood volume and the oxygen saturation” is not disclosed in Ebata because Ebata only shows the change in Di and not blood volume or oxygen saturation.
In response, the examiner respectfully notes that, as explained in the rejection section of the claim 1 above with regards to this limitation: [0148] discloses that all of the blood index values can be depicted in a graph showing their temporal changes as it is shown in FIG. 15-16; [0012] discloses that the blood index value includes oxygen saturation and blood volume [see [0012]; one of the parameters being calculated as blood index is blood flow rate; a person of ordinary skill level in the art would be able to integrate the blood flow rate in time and arrive at the blood volume and then graph its change in time according to [0148]].
Therefore, since the changes in Di can be shown, and blood volume and oxygen saturation are examples of Di, it is only concluded that their changes can be graphed as well. Therefore, Ebata discloses the above cited limitation.
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 MARJAN - SABOKTAKIN whose telephone number is (303)297-4278. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am-5pm CT.
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, Michael Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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.
/MARJAN SABOKTAKIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/MICHAEL J CAREY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795