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
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)(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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shapiro et al (US 7,945,021 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Shapiro et al disclose a radiation therapy (RT) system (1), comprising: a gantry (202) (col. 2, lines 17-27) having a linear accelerator, wherein the gantry is rotationally movable (214) to position the gantry at a plurality of gantry angles (col. 2, lines 41-44), and wherein at any of the gantry angles, the gantry is configured to direct a treatment beam generated by the linear accelerator towards a target (205) (col. 2, lines 41-58); a source (204) of the treatment beam at the linear accelerator; a collimator at the gantry (202) and having a field center (215), wherein a central beam axis of the treatment beam is defined by the source and the field center (isocenterline) (215); a couch (218) that provides the target where the treatment beam is directed (col. 2, lines 33-40); and a controller (450) operatively coupled to the collimator, wherein for any particular gantry angle of the plurality of gantry angles, the controller is configured to change a position of the field center to align the central beam axis of the treatment beam to the target (col. 2, lines (col. 2, lines 17-49 and col. 6, lines 11-20).
Regarding claim 2, Shapiro et al discloses wherein: the target is placed at an isocenter (treatment couch (218) positioned adjacent to gantry (202) to place patient and target volume within range of operation for radiation source (204) and imager (206) (col. 2, lines 33-40), at the particular gantry angle, the central beam axis deviates from the isocenter (isocenterline (215)) prior to the change in the position of the field center, and the controller is configured to change the position of the field center to coincide the central beam axis with the isocenter where the target is placed (col. 2, lines 41-67).
Regarding claim 3, Shapiro et al discloses wherein the collimator comprises a multi-leaf collimator (MLC) (dynamic multileaf collimator) (col. 7, lines 47-59) having a plurality of leaves that are positioned to define an aperture having the field center, and wherein the controller is configured to change the position of the field center by collectively changing a location of the plurality of leaves of the MLC to correspondingly change a location of the aperture (col. 7, lines 47-59).
Regarding claim 4, Shapiro et al discloses wherein the collimator comprises a multi-leaf collimator (MLC) having a plurality of leaves that are positioned to define an aperture (shaped opening) having the field center, and wherein the controller is configured to change the position of the field center by individually changing a position of at least some of the plurality of leaves of the MLC to define a new aperture having the changed field center (col. 7, lines 47-59).
Regarding claim 5, Shapiro et al discloses wherein further comprising a lookup table that includes information that represents, for each gantry angle, the change in the position of the field center to align the central beam axis to the target, wherein the controller is configured to access the lookup table to determine the change in the position of the field center for each gantry angle (compared/registered with simulator or other reference images to determine patient repositioning required) (See Fig. 4, col. 5, lines 38-63).
Regarding claim 6, Shapiro et al discloses wherein the information in the lookup table that represents the change in the position of the field center is determined and stored in the lookup table during a calibration phase (See Fig. 4, col. 5, lines 38-63).
Regarding claim 7, Shapiro et al discloses wherein: the gantry includes a gantry head that bends downward due to gravity (See Fig. 1), for each gantry angle of the plurality of gantry angles, the downward bend of the gantry head misaligns the central beam axis from an isocenter (215) where the target is placed, and for each gantry angle of the plurality of gantry angles, the controller (450) is configured to change the position of the field center to realign the central beam axis with the isocenter where the target is placed and so reduce an isocenter size of the isocenter (col. 2, lines 17-49 and col. 6, lines 11-20).
Regarding claim 8, Shapiro et al discloses a radiation therapy (RT) system (1), comprising: a gantry (202) (col. 2, lines 17-27) having a linear accelerator, wherein the gantry is rotationally movable (214) to position the gantry at a plurality of gantry angles (col. 2, lines 41-44), and wherein at any of the gantry angles, the gantry is configured to direct a treatment beam generated by the linear accelerator towards a target (205) (col. 2, lines 41-58); a source (204) a source (204) of the treatment beam at the linear accelerator; a collimator at the gantry (202) and having a field center (215), wherein a central beam axis of the treatment beam is defined by the source and the field center (isocenterline) (215); a couch (218) that provides the target where the treatment beam is directed (col. 2, lines 33-40); and a controller (450) operatively coupled to the couch, wherein for any particular gantry angle of the plurality of gantry angles, the controller is configured to change a position of the couch to compensate for an offset of the central beam axis of the treatment beam relative to an isocenter so that the target is coincident with the central beam axis (col. 2, lines 17-49 and col. 6, lines 11-20).
Regarding claim 9, Shapiro et al discloses wherein the controller is configured to change the position of the couch by adjustment of a rotational position or a lateral position of the couch, relative to the central beam axis (col. 2, lines 33-40).
Regarding claim 10, Shapiro et al discloses the controller is configured to dynamically change the position of the couch during treatment, so that the target is coincident with the central beam axis for each of the plurality of gantry angles (translating in multiple panes plus angulation (219) for position and re-positioning the patient (205) and therefore the target volume) (col. 2, lines 33-49).
Regarding claim 11, Shapiro et al discloses wherein further comprising a lookup table that includes information that represents, for each gantry angle, the change in the position of the field center to align the central beam axis to the target, wherein the controller is configured to access the lookup table to determine the change in the position of the field center for each gantry angle (compared/registered with simulator or other reference images to determine patient repositioning required) (See Fig. 4, col. 5, lines 38-63).
Regarding claim 12, Shapiro et al discloses wherein the information in the lookup table that represents the change in the position of the field center is determined and stored in the lookup table during a calibration phase (See Fig. 4, col. 5, lines 38-63).
Regarding claim 13, Shapiro et al discloses wherein: the gantry includes a gantry head that bends downward due to gravity (See Fig. 1), for each gantry angle of the plurality of gantry angles, the downward bend of the gantry head misaligns the central beam axis from an isocenter (215) where the target is placed, and for each gantry angle of the plurality of gantry angles, the controller (450) is configured to change the position of the field center to realign the central beam axis with the isocenter where the target is placed and so reduce an isocenter size of the isocenter (col. 2, lines 17-49 and col. 6, lines 11-20).
Regarding claim 14, Shapiro et al discloses wherein a position of either or both the source or the field center is unchanged while the position of the couch is changed (col. 2, lines 33-49).
Regarding claim 15, Shapiro et al discloses a computer-implemented method (220) (col. 5) to reduce a size of an isocenter in a radiation therapy (RT) system (1), the method comprising: determining an offset (off axis) (col. 7, lines 14-18) of a central beam axis of a treatment beam relative to the isocenter, wherein the RT system includes a gantry having a linear accelerator and a collimator, wherein the gantry (202) (col. 2, lines 17-27) is rotationally movable (214) to position the gantry at a plurality of gantry angles, wherein at any particular gantry angle of the gantry angles (col. 2, lines 41-44), the gantry is configured to direct the treatment beam which is generated by the linear accelerator towards the isocenter where a target is placed (col. 2, lines 33-40), and wherein the offset is determined for each of the plurality of gantry angles; for a particular gantry angle, compensating for the offset determined for the particular gantry angle by changing a position of a field center of the collimator, wherein the central beam axis of the treatment beam is defined by a source at the linear accelerator and the field center of the collimator (col. 2, lines (col. 2, lines 17-49 and col. 6, lines 11-20); and directing the treatment beam, through the field center with the changed position, towards the target with the central beam axis being coincident with the isocenter (col. 7, lines 42-59).
Regarding claim 16, Shapiro et al discloses wherein determining the offset of the central beam axis of the treatment beam relative to the isocenter is performed during a calibration phase of the RT system, for each of the plurality of gantry angles (col. 2, lines 17-49 and col. 6, lines 11-20)
Regarding claim 17, Shapiro et al discloses wherein the collimator comprises a multi-leaf collimator (MLC) (dynamic multileaf collimator) (col. 7, lines 47-59) having a plurality of leaves that are positioned to define an aperture having the field center, and wherein the controller is configured to change the position of the field center by collectively changing a location of the plurality of leaves of the MLC to correspondingly change a location of the aperture (col. 7, lines 47-59).
Regarding claim 18, Shapiro et al discloses wherein the collimator comprises a multi-leaf collimator (MLC) having a plurality of leaves that are positioned to define an aperture (shaped opening) having the field center, and wherein the controller is configured to change the position of the field center by individually changing a position of at least some of the plurality of leaves of the MLC to define a new aperture having the changed field center (col. 7, lines 47-59).
Regarding claim 19, Shapiro et al discloses further comprising: storing information pertaining to the determined offset in a lookup table, for each of the plurality of gantry angles, wherein compensating for the offset comprises accessing the information stored in the lookup table to determine the changed position of the field center (compared/registered with simulator or other reference images to determine patient repositioning required) (See Fig. 4, col. 5, lines 38-63).
Regarding claim 20, Shapiro et al discloses wherein: the gantry includes a gantry head that bends downward due to gravity (See Fig. 1), for each gantry angle of the plurality of gantry angles, the downward bend of the gantry head misaligns the central beam axis from the isocenter where the target is placed, and compensating for the offset determined for the particular gantry angle by changing the position of the field center comprises, for each gantry angle of the plurality of gantry angles (col. 2, lines 17-49 and col. 6, lines 11-20), changing the position of the field center to realign the central beam axis with the isocenter where the target is placed while a position of the source remains unchanged (col. 2, lines 33-49).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Blumhofer et al (US 6865253 B2) discloses a method for accurately positioning a patient for radiotherapy and/or radiosurgery, comprising the following steps: the patient is pre-positioned as accurately as possible with respect to a linear accelerator; at least two x-ray images of the patient and/or one of the parts of his body in the vicinity of the radiation target point are produced from different respective recording angles on a single image recorder; the x-ray image is spatially localized; at least one reconstructed image, corresponding to each x-ray image and deriving from a three-dimensional patient scan data set, is produced, the reconstructed images containing the desired image contents of the x-ray images when the patient is correctly positioned; and the real x-ray images are superimposed, and the positioning error is determined electronically and/or with computer guidance by way of particular landmarks and/or the intensity gradient or the contours in the two images; and the position of the patient is corrected by way of the determined positioning error.
Bani-Hashemi et al (US 8238519 B2) discloses a system, apparatus, and method for determining that a motion of a patient area of a patient due to breathing is substantially periodic according to a treatment plan, moving a radiotherapy gantry towards a first treatment gantry angle, moving a radiotherapy beam shaping device towards a first treatment shape corresponding to the first treatment gantry angle, determining when a next treatment window is to begin based on a predictive model derived from the motion of the patient area, where the treatment window is a period of time designated for delivery of treatment radiation to the patient area according to the treatment plan, adjusting the moving of the radiotherapy gantry such that the radiotherapy gantry will reach the first treatment angle during the determined next treatment window, and delivering a treatment radiation beam to the patient area during the determined next treatment window.
Behling et al (US 7949102 B2) discloses a multiple focal spot X-ray tube (100) comprising an electron source (105), which is adapted to generate an electron beam (106), an anode (110), which is arranged within the electron beam (106) and which comprises a first focal spot portion (120) and a second focal spot portion (130), whereby the second focal spot portion (130) is spatially separated from the first focal spot portion (120). The X-ray tube (100) further comprises a first electron beam manipulation unit (125), which is adapted to interact with the electron beam (106), when the electron beam (106) impinges onto the first focal spot portion (120), and a second electron beam manipulation unit (135), which is adapted to interact with the electron beam (106), when the electron beam (106) impinges onto the second focal spot portion (130). By assigning one electron beam manipulation unit (125, 135) to each of the focal spot portions (120, 130), a precise focusing of the X-ray beam can be realized individually for each focal spot of the X-ray tube (100). Preferably, the first and the second focal spot portions have a distance along the axis of a rotating anode.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FANI POLYZOS BOOSALIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2447. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-3:30 PM.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at Uzma.Alam@USPTO.GOV. 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.
/F.P.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights