DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
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 of this title, 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 1-2 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takenaka US2023/0125228 in view of Yamanaka US2012/02340469.
As per Claim 1, Takenaka teaches the radiographic imaging apparatus comprising: at least one processor; and a memory in communication with the at least one processor, the memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to function as: an image acquisition unit configured to alternately acquire a radiation image acquired in a state where radiation is emitted and an offset image acquired in a state where the radiation is not emitted; and (Takenaka, Paragraph [0069], “The radiation image acquisition sequence is a sequence of operations performed to acquire a radiation image. The offset image acquisition sequence is a sequence of operations performed to acquire an offset image. The offset image is an image formed by signals obtained from the respective pixels 201 when no radiation is incident on the radiation imaging apparatus 110”)
Takenaka does not explicitly teach an offset correction unit configured to correct, in a case where a change amount between an offset image acquired at a first time and an offset image acquired at a second time before the first time is smaller than a first threshold value, a radiation image acquired after the first time using a plurality of offset images including the offset image acquired at the first time and the offset image acquired at the second time.
Yamanaka teaches an offset correction unit configured to correct, in a case where a change amount between an offset image acquired at a first time and an offset image acquired at a second time before the first time is smaller than a first threshold value, a radiation image acquired after the first time using a plurality of offset images including the offset image acquired at the first time and the offset image acquired at the second time. (Yamanaka, Paragraph [0026], “The timing determining unit 305 references a predetermined number of offset images, stored in the offset image memory 313, and determines, from the change over time of the offset images, whether or not the change amount is at least a predetermined threshold. Then, the timing determining unit 305 switches the timing of obtaining offset images based on this determination. The timing determining unit 305 determines whether to use the first timing processing unit 307 that uses a first offset image obtaining timing or the second timing processing unit 309 that uses a second offset image obtaining timing… Also, the first offset correction unit 308 performs offset correction using an offset image that the first timing processing unit 307 has obtained using the offset image obtaining unit 304. In addition, the second offset correction unit 310 performs offset correction by using an offset image that the second timing processing unit 309”)
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Yamanaka into Takenaka because by utilizing the offset correction algorithm as proposed by Yamanaka instead of the offset correction of Takenaka will allow for accurate offset correction to allow for an accurate final result.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to combine the two references to obtain the invention in Claim 1.
As per Claim 2, Takenaka in view of Yamanaka teaches the radiographic imaging apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the offset correction unit corrects the radiation image acquired after the first time using the offset image acquired at the first time in a case where the change amount between the offset image acquired at the first time and the offset image acquired at the second time is not smaller than the first threshold value. (Yamanaka, Paragraph [0026], “The timing determining unit 305 references a predetermined number of offset images, stored in the offset image memory 313, and determines, from the change over time of the offset images, whether or not the change amount is at least a predetermined threshold. Then, the timing determining unit 305 switches the timing of obtaining offset images based on this determination. The timing determining unit 305 determines whether to use the first timing processing unit 307 that uses a first offset image obtaining timing or the second timing processing unit 309 that uses a second offset image obtaining timing… Also, the first offset correction unit 308 performs offset correction using an offset image that the first timing processing unit 307 has obtained using the offset image obtaining unit 304. In addition, the second offset correction unit 310 performs offset correction by using an offset image that the second timing processing unit 309”)
The rationale applied to the rejection of claim 1 has been incorporated herein.
As per Claim 13, Takenaka in view of Yamanaka teaches the radiographic imaging system comprising: a radiation generation apparatus configured to generate radiation; and the radiographic imaging apparatus according to claim 1 communicably connected with the radiation generation apparatus. (Takenaka, Figure 1, Paragraph [0022], “FIG. 1 shows an example of a configuration of a radiation imaging system 100 according to a first embodiment of the present disclosure. The radiation imaging system 100 is configured to electrically capture an optical image formed by radiation and obtain an electrical radiation image. Radiation is typically X-rays, but the radiation may be α-rays, β-rays, γ-rays, or the like. The radiation imaging system 100 includes, for example, a radiation imaging apparatus 110, a computer 120, an exposure control apparatus 130, and a radiation source 140”)
The rationale applied to the rejection of claim 1 has been incorporated herein.
As per Claim 14, Claim 14 claims a method for a radiographic imaging apparatus as claimed in Claim 1. Therefore the rejection and rationale are analogous to that made in Claim 1.
As per Claim 15, Takenaka in view of Yamanaka teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program (Takenaka, Paragraph [0021]) for causing a computer to execute the processing method for the radiographic imaging apparatus according to claim 14.
Claims 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takenaka US2023/0125228 in view of Yamanaka US2012/02340469 as applied to Claim 1 and further in view of Koeda US2020/0077036.
As per Claim 8, Takenaka in view of Yamanaka teaches the radiographic imaging apparatus according to claim 1,
Takenaka in view of Yamanaka does not explicitly teach wherein the offset correction unit corrects the radiation image acquired after the first time using an image obtained by averaging the plurality of offset images.
Koeda teaches wherein the offset correction unit corrects the radiation image acquired after the first time using an image obtained by averaging the plurality of offset images. (Koeda, Paragraph [0130], “Here, in the offset correction process, the first offset image and second offset image acquired in the offset image acquiring process just before the radiograph acquiring process may be used, or average or median of first offset images and second offset images acquired in a plurality of offset image acquiring processes may be calculated and used as the first offset image and the second offset image, respectively. By evaluating the average or median of a plurality of offset images, it is possible to reduce offset noise. In the case where an offset difference is generated due to a difference in the acquisition time of the offset image, both the coincidence of the offset and the reduction in offset noise may be achieved by evaluating the average after giving a heavy weight to an image with a late acquisition time and giving a light weight to an old image”)
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Koeda into Takenaka in view of Yamanaka because by preprocessing offset images prior to offset correction will provide a more accurate offset correction leading to an accurate final result of processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to combine the three references to obtain the invention in Claim 8.
As per Claim 9, Takenaka in view of Yamanaka and Koeda teaches the radiographic imaging apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the offset correction unit acquires a difference between the radiation image acquired after the first time and the image obtained by averaging the plurality of offset images as a radiation image after an offset correction. (Koeda, Paragraph [0130], “Here, in the offset correction process, the first offset image and second offset image acquired in the offset image acquiring process just before the radiograph acquiring process may be used, or average or median of first offset images and second offset images acquired in a plurality of offset image acquiring processes may be calculated and used as the first offset image and the second offset image, respectively.”)
The rationale applied to the rejection of claim 1 has been incorporated herein.
As per Claim 10, Takenaka in view of Yamanaka teaches the radiographic imaging apparatus according to claim 1,
Takenaka in view of Yamanaka does not explicitly teach wherein the offset correction unit corrects the radiation image acquired after the first time using an image obtained by averaging the plurality of offset images using weighting coefficients.
Koeda teaches wherein the offset correction unit corrects the radiation image acquired after the first time using an image obtained by averaging the plurality of offset images using weighting coefficients. (Koeda, Paragraph [0130], “By evaluating the average or median of a plurality of offset images, it is possible to reduce offset noise. In the case where an offset difference is generated due to a difference in the acquisition time of the offset image, both the coincidence of the offset and the reduction in offset noise may be achieved by evaluating the average after giving a heavy weight to an image with a late acquisition time and giving a light weight to an old image”)
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Koeda into Takenaka in view of Yamanaka because by preprocessing offset images prior to offset correction will provide a more accurate offset correction leading to an accurate final result of processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to combine the three references to obtain the invention in Claim 10.
As per Claim 11, Takenaka in view of Yamanaka and Koeda teaches the radiographic imaging apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the offset correction unit acquires a difference between the radiation image acquired at the first time and the image obtained by averaging the plurality of offset images using the weighting coefficients as a radiation image after an offset correction. (Koeda, Paragraph [0130], “In the case where an offset difference is generated due to a difference in the acquisition time of the offset image, both the coincidence of the offset and the reduction in offset noise may be achieved by evaluating the average after giving a heavy weight to an image with a late acquisition time and giving a light weight to an old image”)
The rationale applied to the rejection of claim 10 has been incorporated herein.
As per Claim 12, Takenaka in view of Yamanaka and Koeda teaches the radiographic imaging apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the weighting coefficients of the plurality of offset images are smaller as the offset images are older. (Koeda, Paragraph [0130], “In the case where an offset difference is generated due to a difference in the acquisition time of the offset image, both the coincidence of the offset and the reduction in offset noise may be achieved by evaluating the average after giving a heavy weight to an image with a late acquisition time and giving a light weight to an old image”)
The rationale applied to the rejection of claim 10 has been incorporated herein.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MING HON whose telephone number is (571)270-5245. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 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, Emily Terrell can be reached on 571-270-3717. 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.
/MING Y HON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2666
Prosecution Insights