DETAILED ACTION
[1] Remarks
I. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
II. Claims 1-10 are pending and have been examined, where claims 1-3 and 8-10 is/are rejected, claim 4-7 is/are objected to. Explanations will be provided below.
III. Inventor and/or assignee search were performed and determined no double patenting rejection(s) is/are necessary.
IV. Patent eligibility (updated in 2019) shown by the following: Claims 1-10 pass patent eligibility test because there is/are no limitation or a combination of limitations amounting to an abstract idea. Also, the following limitation or the combinations of the limitations:
“determining a first chemical composition signal and a second chemical composition signal based on the target phasor solution, and performing chemical shift coded imaging based on the first chemical composition signal and/or the second chemical composition signal” effects a transformation or a reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing / adds a specific limitation(s) other than what is well-understood, routine and conventional in the field, or adding unconventional steps that confine the claim to a particular useful application and providing improvements to the technical field of chemical determination, which recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and amounting significant more.
[2] Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim(s) 8 is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA U.S.C. 112 6th paragraph because of the following reason(s): the claim limitations uses the term “means” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder; the term “means” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically linked by the transition word “for” or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; the term “means” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure or material for performing the claimed function.
Claim(s) 9 are not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA U.S.C. 112 6th paragraph because of the following reason(s): limitations are modified by sufficient structure or material for performing the claimed function.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 10 do not require 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA U.S.C. 112 6th paragraph interpretation because they are method claims and / or they are CRM claims.
Upon examination of the specification and claims, the examiner has determined, under the best understanding of the scope of the claim(s), rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a)/(b) is not necessitated because of the following reasons: sufficient support are provided in the written description / drawings of the invention.
[3] Grounds of Rejection
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.
35 U.S.C. 101 requires that a claimed invention must fall within one of the four eligible categories of invention (i.e. process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter) and must not be directed to subject matter encompassing a judicially recognized exception as interpreted by the courts. MPEP 2106. The four eligible categories of invention include: (1) process which is an act, or a series of acts or steps, (2) machine which is an concrete thing, consisting of parts, or of certain devices and combination of devices, (3) manufacture which is an article produced from raw or prepared materials by giving to these materials new forms, qualities, properties, or combinations, whether by hand labor or by machinery, and (4) composition of matter which is all compositions of two or more substances and all composite articles, whether they be the results of chemical union, or of mechanical mixture, or whether they be gases, fluids, powders or solids. MPEP 2106(I).
Claims 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as not falling within one of the four statutory categories of invention because the broadest reasonable interpretation of the instant claims in light of the specification encompasses transitory signals. But, transitory signals are not within one of the four statutory categories (i.e. non-statutory subject matter). See MPEP 2106(I). However, claims directed toward a non-transitory computer readable medium may qualify as a manufacture and make the claim patent-eligible subject matter. MPEP 2106(I). Therefore, amending the claims to recite a “non-transitory computer-readable medium” would resolve this issue.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. Claims 1-3 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bydder (US 20150309137) in view of Xiang (US 20070098298).
Regarding claim 1, Bydder discloses a chemical shift coded imaging method based on a transition region and regional iterative phasor extraction, comprising:
acquiring an initial image (see figure 2A, 210), and determining an initial phasor solution of the transition region based on the initial image (see paragraph 8, fat characterization parameters can include an amount of fat, an amount of water, an initial phase, a field inhomogeneity, a T2*, and at least one fat spectrum parameter);
performing regional iterative phasor extraction initial phasor solution as initial information, and obtaining a target phasor solution based on a regional iterative phasor extraction result real ei φ, with real vector xreal and real scalar φ, see paragraph 42, can be an iterative process in which the error between the simulated signal and the obtained signal is minimized, where simulated signal is read as the initial information and obtained signal is read as the target phasor, see equation A5 which estimate the angle, where this angle is read as the direction, where the phasor is the angle between real and imaginary components, imaginary is read as imaginary); and
determining a first chemical composition signal and a second chemical composition signal based on the target phasor solution, and performing chemical shift coded imaging based on the first chemical composition signal and/or the second chemical composition signal (see paragraph 31, fat profiles are determined from an MR image despite relatively limited spectral information in a set of MR images as compared to MR spectra derived from MR spectroscopy characterization modalities, see figure 3A, NDB=1, 2, 3, and 4 are chemical with different compositions with various oils and fats reading on first chemical composition signal and a second chemical composition).
Bydder is silent in disclosing performing regional iterative phasor extraction in at least two set directions by taking the initial phasor solution as initial information, and obtaining a target phasor solution based on a regional iterative phasor extraction result corresponding to each set direction.
Xiang discloses performing regional iterative phasor extraction in at least two set directions by taking the initial phasor solution as initial information, and obtaining a target phasor solution based on a regional iterative phasor extraction result corresponding to each set direction (see paragraph 111, PU and PV will have a definite leading and lagging phase relationship which is unavailable for an anti-parallel acquisition corresponding to alpha=180 degrees due to the perfect symmetry between two vectors pointing in exactly opposite directions, see figure 4, find true error phasor P through phasor iteration, where the error is iterated through entire region are shown in figure 6A, white region, also see equations 15 and 16):
PNG
media_image1.png
162
528
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include performing regional iterative phasor extraction across multiple set directions isolates direction-dependent errors, filtering out inaccurate phase estimates and preserve only consistent, true phasor values which further improves image recognition.
Regarding claim 2, Bydder discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein determining the initial phasor solution of the transition region based on the initial image comprises:
determining foreground pixels based on pixel values of pixels in the initial image, and determining a phasor candidate solution of each foreground pixel (see paragraph 65, 730 is threshold using a binary mask generated, where the foreground are the bright regions); and
determining the transition region and the initial phasor solution of the transition region based on the phasor candidate solution of each foreground pixel (see figure 7, 730 the brought areas next to the arrows are read as the transition regions).
Regarding claim 3, Bydder discloses the method according to claim 2, wherein determining the foreground pixels based on the pixel values of the pixels in the initial image comprises: taking pixels with pixel values greater than a set amplitude value as the foreground pixels, wherein the set amplitude value is determined based on the pixel value of each pixel (see paragraph 65, 730 is threshold using a binary mask generated, where the foreground are the bright regions, thresholding is a technique where pixel value greater than the threshold is assigned 1 and below assigned 0).
Regarding claim 8 see the rationale and rejection for claim 1. In addition, initial phasor, target phasor and chemical shift coded modules are 210, 220 and 230 (Bydder), respectively.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, see the rationale and rejection for claim 1. In addition see figure 1 of Bydder.
[4] Claim Objections
Claim(s) 4-7 is/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.
With regards to claim 4, the examiner cannot find any applicable prior art providing teachings for the following limitation(s): the method according to claim 1, wherein performing regional iterative phasor extraction in the at least two set directions by taking the initial phasor solution as the initial information, and obtaining the target phasor solution based on the regional iterative phasor extraction result corresponding to each set direction comprises: obtaining the corresponding regional iterative phasor extraction result by taking the initial phasor solution as the initial information and performing regional iterative phasor extraction respectively in the set direction; determining, for each pixel, target phasor information of the pixel according to phasor information in each regional iterative phasor extraction result corresponding to the pixel; and determining a merged phasor solution based on the target phasor information of each pixel, and determining the target phasor solution based on the merged phasor solution; in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 1.
Xiang discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein performing regional iterative phasor extraction in the at least two set directions by taking the initial phasor solution as the initial information, and obtaining the target phasor solution based on the regional iterative phasor extraction result corresponding to each set direction (see paragraph 111, PU and PV will have a definite leading and lagging phase relationship which is unavailable for an anti-parallel acquisition corresponding to alpha=180 degrees due to the perfect symmetry between two vectors pointing in exactly opposite directions, see figure 4, find true error phasor P through phasor iteration, where the error is iterated through entire region are shown in figure 6A, white region, also see equations 15 and 16, ) comprises: obtaining the corresponding regional iterative phasor extraction result by taking the initial phasor solution as the initial information and performing regional iterative phasor extraction respectively in the set direction (PU and PV are read as initial phasor solution and target phasor solution), but does not disclose determining, for each pixel, target phasor information of the pixel according to phasor information in each regional iterative phasor extraction result corresponding to the pixel; and determining a merged phasor solution based on the target phasor information of each pixel, and determining the target phasor solution based on the merged phasor solution.
Claim(s) 4-7 is/are objected as well because it is dependent on a claim with allowable subject matter.
Chune (US 20030095721) discloses FIG. 5B depicts the application of both a Hamming window and a LoG 9 filter on the same unfiltered image used in FIG. 5A. Hamming windowing is performed to account for border processing effects (see paragraph 86) but does not disclose the method according to claim 4, wherein obtaining the corresponding regional iterative phasor extraction result by taking the initial phasor solution as the initial information and performing regional iterative phasor extraction respectively in the set direction comprises: conducting, for each set direction, Hamming window filtering on the initial phasor solution in the set direction to obtain a filtered phasor, and determining an iterative phasor solution of the phasor according to the filtered phasor, wherein a magnitude of a window function of the Hamming window filtering is determined according to a resolution of the initial image in the set direction; and taking the iterative phasor solution as new initial information, repeatedly executing the above steps until an iteration stop condition is reached, and determining the regional iterative phasor extraction result in the set direction.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX LIEW (duty station is located in New York City) whose telephone number is (571)272-8623 (FAX 571-273-8623), cell (917)763-1192 or email alexa.liew@uspto.gov. Please note the examiner cannot reply through email unless an internet communication authorization is provided by the applicant. The examiner can be reached anytime.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MISTRY ONEAL R, can be reached on (313)446-4912. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALEX KOK S LIEW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2674 Telephone: 571-272-8623
Date: 9/5/26
Prosecution Insights