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 Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 1, it appears that “X-ray rotating anode analyzing system” should perhaps be “X-ray rotating anode analysis system” because all the dependent claims refer to “analysis system”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, it appears that “a plurality of individual images” should perhaps be “the plurality of individual images”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 1, it appears that “The X-ray rotation analysis system” should perhaps be “The X-ray rotating anode analysis system”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2, it appears that “rotation” should be “rotating”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 16, 18, and 24-25 are 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.
Claim 16 recites, in part, “the data processor being configured to determine, from at least a part of the recorded 3-dimensional height profile, a radiation power to be expected or a value of the X-ray rotating anode.” It is not known what “a value of the X-ray rotating anode” refers to.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the wavelength range" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 24, the phrase "can be" in line 4 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 25, the phrase "can be" in line 5 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
Claims 16-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Siller et al. (“Geometrical Model for Calculating the Effect of Surface Morphology on Total X-Ray Output of Medical X-Ray Tubes”, Medical Physics, 9 December 2020, pages 1546-1556, XP093082675, DOI: 10.1002/mp.14649) – copy provided by applicants.
With respect to claims 16 and 29, Siller et al. disclose an X-ray rotating anode analyzing system (laser scanning confocal microscope (LSCM) – the Olympus LEXT OLS4100 is used to detect a three-dimensional elevation profile. The Olympus LEXT OLS4100 is known to have an image-capturing unit and a positioning unit. The elevation profile is then processed in a data processing unit to derive an expected radiant power. The system is suitable for analyzing a used X-ray rotating anode having a circumferential focal track on a surface section thereof) for analyzing a used X-ray rotating anode having a circumferential focal path at a surface portion thereof, the system comprising: a positioning device for the X-ray rotating anode; an image recorder; the focal path; and the data processor being configured to determine, from at least a part of the recorded 3-dimensional height profile, a radiation power to be expected or a value of the X-ray rotating anode (“2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”). Siller et al. do not specifically disclose a data processor coupled to the image recorder. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Siller et al. to include a data processor coupled to the image recorder, to enable faster analysis.
With respect to claim 17, Siller et al. as modified above disclose wherein the image recorder and the data processor are configured to: produce, using electromagnetic radiation, a plurality of individual images with respectively different depth information of a surface section of the X-ray rotating anode to be analysed; and reconstruct a 3-dimensional height profile of the surface section to be analysed from the individual images (“2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”).
With respect to claim 18, Siller et al. as modified above disclose wherein the image recorder and the data processor are configured to produce, from different angles, a plurality of individual images of the surface section to be analysed using electromagnetic radiation (“2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”). Siller et al. do not specifically disclose using electromagnetic radiation in a wavelength range of 380 nm - 780 nm. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Siller et al. to use electromagnetic radiation in a wavelength range of 380 nm - 780 nm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
With respect to claim 19, Siller et al. as modified above disclose wherein the data processor is configured to determine the radiation power to be expected or a characteristic value of the X-ray rotating anode based on an automatically calculated absorption of X-rays along an X-ray emission direction, taking into account local absorption effects due to local surface modifications according to the recorded 3-dimensional height profile (“2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”).
With respect to claim 20, Siller et al. as modified above disclose wherein the data processor is configured to use at least one line profile, which extends in the X-ray emission direction over a predetermined minimum length along the detected surface section of the X-ray rotating anode and has local surface modifications according to the 3-dimensional height profile, for the automated calculation of the absorption of X-rays (“1. Introduction” & “2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”).
With respect to claim 21, Siller et al. as modified above disclose wherein the data processor is configured to use at least one surface profile which extends in the X-ray emission direction over a predetermined minimum length and substantially perpendicularly thereto over a predetermined minimum width along the detected surface section and has local surface modifications according to the 3-dimensional height profile for the automated calculation of the absorption of X-rays (“1. Introduction” & “2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”).
With respect to claim 22, Siller et al. as modified above disclose wherein the data processor is configured to include at least one input value in the automated calculation of the absorption of X-rays, the at least one input value being selected from the group consisting of: generation depth of X-rays; X-ray emission angle; material of the focal path of the X-ray rotating anode; size of the focal spot; electron intensity distribution of the focal spot; and filter (“1. Introduction” & “2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”).
With respect to claim 23, Siller et al. as modified above disclose the data processor is configured to identify and categorize, from the recorded 3-dimensional height profile or from an otherwise recorded image information of a surface section of the focal path, damage to the focal path of the X-ray rotating anode in a region of the surface section (“1. Introduction” & “2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”).
With respect to claim 24, Siller et al. as modified above disclose wherein the image recorder and the data processor are configured to record at least one image recording of a further surface section of the X-ray rotating anode in a region next to the focal path can be recorded (“1. Introduction” & “2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”).
With respect to claim 25, Siller et al. as modified above disclose wherein the data processor is configured to evaluate further usage options of the X-ray rotating anode based on the determined expected radiation power or a characteristic value for the determined expected radiation power, and a corresponding usage recommendation can be issued (“1. Introduction” & “2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”).
With respect to claim 26, Siller et al. as modified above do not specifically disclose wherein the data processor is coupled to a memory, and the data processor and the memory are configured to: store information determined individually for the respective analysed X-ray rotating anode in the memory by the data processor and read out the stored information from the memory; store type-specific information for different types of X-ray rotating anodes in the memory by the data processor and read out stored type-specific information from the memory; store operating data recorded individually for the respective analysed X-ray rotating anode in the memory by the data processor and read out the stored operating data from the memory; and store individual history of the respective analysed X-ray rotating anodes regarding their use in the field and regarding revisions and modifications made to them in the memory and read out the stored individual history from the memory. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify Siller et al. to do this, for the obvious reason of using historical data to predict future events.
With respect to claim 27, Siller et al. as modified above disclose wherein the data processor is configured to include at least one of the following further pieces of information in the evaluation of the further use options of the X-ray rotating anode: homogeneity of the 3-dimensional height profile along a circumferential direction of the X-ray rotating anode; damage to the focal path of the X-ray rotating anode in the area of the surface section; image of a further surface section of the X-ray rotating anode in the area next to its focal path; geometric changes in the X-ray rotating anode; information determined individually for the respective analysed X-ray rotating anode; type-specific information for the respective analysed X-ray rotating anode; individually recorded operating data for the respective analysed X-ray rotating anode; and individual history of the analysed X-ray anode (“1. Introduction” & “2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”).
With respect to claim 28, Siller et al. as modified above disclose wherein the X-ray rotating anode is configured as an individual component in the positioning device (“1. Introduction” & “2. Materials And Methods” & “3. Results”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JURIE YUN whose telephone number is (571)272-2497. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30 am - 7:30 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, David J 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.
/JURIE YUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
September 9, 2026
