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)(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 1-4, 6-12, 14-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vertikov (US 2019/0142528 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Vertikov discloses an ultrasound image processing method, comprising: acquiring an ultrasound image (see paragraph 0052 acquiring image data wherein the imaging data can be from an ultrasound according to paragraphs 0058 and 0063) in a real-time ultrasound scanning process (see paragraphs 0046-0048 discussing the imaging process in real time), the ultrasound image being generated by processing an ultrasonic echo signal of a
PNG
media_image1.png
635
437
media_image1.png
Greyscale
currently scanned site acquired by a probe (see paragraphs 0046 and 0052 discussing the data processing from the signal acquire through the probe using console #100 as seen on Figure 2A attached herein showing probe #50 and console #100); automatically determining the currently scanned site in the real-time ultrasound scanning process (see paragraphs 0046-0048 discussing the imaging process in real time in an automated or semiautomated manner according to paragraph 0057); automatically selecting, from a plurality of image processing tools, an image processing tool corresponding to the currently scanned site, wherein the plurality of image processing tools correspond to a plurality of scanned sites of a scanned subject (see paragraphs 0083, 0112-0113 selection of the tool using tracking means), respectively; and processing the ultrasound image using the automatically selected image processing tool (see paragraphs 0083-0084).
With respect to claims 2, 10 and 17, Vertikov discloses the automatic determination of the currently scanned site comprises: determining a relative position of the probe with respect to the scanned subject using a sensing device; and determining the currently scanned site on the basis of the relative position (see paragraphs 0112-0113 disclosing the use of a sensor/tracker as the sensing means through a camera to determine the relative position probe with the currently scanned site).
With respect to claims 3 and 11, Vertikov discloses the sensing device comprises a camera, the camera acquiring an environment image comprising the probe and the scanned subject; and the relative position of the probe with respect to the scanned subject is determined by means of identifying the probe and the scanned subject in the environment image (see paragraphs 0112-0113).
With respect to claims 4 and 12, Vertikov discloses the sensing device comprises a first positioning apparatus and a plurality of second positioning apparatuses, the first positioning apparatus being disposed on the probe, and the plurality of second positioning apparatuses being disposed corresponding to different sites of the scanned subject, respectively; and the first positioning apparatus approaches one of the plurality of second positioning apparatuses and generates a sensing signal, and the relative position of the probe with respect to the scanned subject is determined on the basis of the sensing signal (see paragraphs 0112-0113 discussing position sensors 150B and 150C in Figure 3C and camera trough probe/first positioning apparatus #50).
With respect to claims 6, 14 and 19, Vertikov discloses processing the ultrasound image comprises performing at least one of quality optimization, image identification, anatomical feature identification, lesion identification, image segmentation and image measurement on the ultrasound image; and on the basis of different scanned sites, at least some of the image processing tools perform different processing on the ultrasound image (see paragraphs 0092-0095 showing image identification, anatomical feature identification, and image measurement).
With respect to claims 7, 15 and 20, Vertikov discloses in response to the currently scanned site not being determined, or in response to an inability to automatically select, from the plurality of image processing tools, the image processing tool corresponding to the currently scanned site, processing the ultrasound image using an alternative image processing tool (see paragraphs 0155 and 0157 for alternative tools and procedures).
With respect to claim 8, Vertikov discloses an ultrasound imaging apparatus, comprising (as seen on Figure 2A): an image processing apparatus, the image processing apparatus comprising (medical apparatus #150): a probe used to acquire an ultrasound image (probe #50); a memory storing instructions; and a processor configured to execute the instructions to (see paragraph 0165 disclosing the use of the memory and processor to provide instructions): acquire an ultrasound image (see paragraph 0052 acquiring image data wherein the imaging data can be from an ultrasound according to paragraphs 0058 and 0063) in a real-time ultrasound scanning process (see paragraphs 0046-0048 discussing the imaging process in real time), the ultrasound image being generated by processing an ultrasonic echo signal of a currently scanned site acquired by a probe (see paragraphs 0046 and 0052 discussing the data processing from the signal acquire through the probe using console #100 as seen on Figure 2A attached herein showing probe #50 and console #100); automatically determine the currently scanned site in the real-time ultrasound scanning process (see paragraphs 0046-0048 discussing the imaging process in real time in an automated or semiautomated manner according to paragraph 0057); automatically select, from a plurality of image processing tools, an image processing tool corresponding to the currently scanned site, wherein the plurality of image processing tools correspond to a plurality of scanned sites of a scanned subject (see paragraphs 0083, 0112-0113 selection of the tool using tracking means), respectively; and process the ultrasound image using the automatically selected image processing tool (see paragraphs 0083-0084).
With respect to claim 9, Vertikov discloses a sensing device sensing a relative position of the probe with respect to a scanned subject, and sending same to the processor (see paragraphs 0112-0113 disclosing the use of a sensor/tracker as the sensing means through a camera to determine the relative position probe with the currently scanned site).
With respect to claim 16, Vertikov discloses a non-transitory, computer readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to (see paragraph 0165 disclosing the use of the memory and processor to provide instructions): acquire an ultrasound image (see paragraph 0052 acquiring image data wherein the imaging data can be from an ultrasound according to paragraphs 0058 and 0063) in a real-time ultrasound scanning process (see paragraphs 0046-0048 discussing the imaging process in real time), the ultrasound image being generated by processing an ultrasonic echo signal of a currently scanned site acquired by a probe (see paragraphs 0046 and 0052 discussing the data processing from the signal acquire through the probe using console #100 as seen on Figure 2A attached herein showing probe #50 and console #100); automatically determine the currently scanned site in the real-time ultrasound scanning process (see paragraphs 0046-0048 discussing the imaging process in real time in an automated or semiautomated manner according to paragraph 0057); automatically select, from a plurality of image processing tools, an image processing tool corresponding to the currently scanned site, wherein the plurality of image processing tools correspond to a plurality of scanned sites of a scanned subject (see paragraphs 0083, 0112-0113 selection of the tool using tracking means), respectively; and process the ultrasound image using the automatically selected image processing tool (see paragraphs 0083-0084).
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.
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 5, 13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vertikov (US 2019/0142528 A1) in view of Roh et al. (US 2024/0122649 A1).
With respect to claims 5, 13 and 18, Vertikov discloses the claimed invention as stated above except for the plurality of image processing tools comprise a plurality of artificial intelligence image processing tools, and the plurality of artificial intelligence image processing tools are obtained by training for the different sites, respectively. However, Roh discloses the plurality of image processing tools comprise a plurality of artificial intelligence image processing tools, and the plurality of artificial intelligence image processing tools are obtained by training for the different sites, respectively (see paragraph 0020 disclosing AI and machine learning). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the plurality of image processing tools be a plurality of artificial intelligence image processing tools, and the plurality of artificial intelligence image processing tools are obtained by training for the different sites, respectively as taught by Roh in combination with Vertikov’s processing means for the purpose of obtaining the location and motion of the devices to analyzed and detect medical conditions through each acquired image being assessed, and provide the resulting probabilities in a consolidated and accurate manner in minimal time frame as taught by Roh. Also, it helps providing the capacity to provide faster result without waiting for an expert, trained person or surgeon to read an interpret the results to provide one possible diagnosis in order to offer a treatment specially in emergency cases between other available advantages discussed by Roh (paragraphs 0019-0020).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additional prior art cited in the PTO 892 not relied upon discloses ultrasound devices having tracking means to determining the position of the medical device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIXOMARA VARGAS whose telephone number is (571)272-2252. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Raymond Keith can be reached at 571-270-1790. 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.
/DIXOMARA VARGAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798