CTFR 19/033,827 CTFR 94166 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims This Final Office Action is in response to the Amendment and Remarks filed on 1/15/2026. Claims 1, 3-6, 9 and 13-14 are amended. Claims 15-19 are new. Claims 1-19 are pending and considered below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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. Claims 1-9 and 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without practical application and without significantly more than the abstract idea. Claim 13 recites the following, wherein the abstract limitations are not emboldened: An imaging apparatus, comprising: a main magnet; a recorder; and a controller configured to: receive sensor data describing sensor values relating to a patient to be examined; determine a state of the patient based on the sensor data, wherein the state of the patient comprises a respiratory characteristic of the patient including a breathing rhythm of the patient and/or a current phase of respiration of the patient; determine whether the respiratory characteristic of the patient satisfies a predetermined recording condition to perform a recording via a recorder of the imaging apparatus , the predetermined recording condition specifying a predetermined respiratory rate and/or a predetermined current phase of respiration of the patient, wherein, in response to the predetermined recording condition being satisfied, automatically trigger the recorder to perform a recording of a recording area of the patient to be examined. Claims 1 and 14 recite substantially similar limitations. The claimed invention is broadly directed to the abstract idea of collecting patient information, analyzing the information, and determining a state and a condition being satisfied. The claims recite subject matter within a statutory category as a machine, which recite steps to “receive sensor data describing sensor values relating to a patient to be examined; determine a state of the patient based on the sensor data, wherein the state of the patient comprises a respiratory characteristic of the patient including a breathing rhythm of the patient and/or a current phase of respiration of the patient; determine whether the respiratory characteristic of the patient satisfies a predetermined recording condition to perform a recording, the predetermined recording condition specifying a predetermined respiratory rate and/or a predetermined current phase of respiration of the patient, wherein, in response to the predetermined recording condition being satisfied, and to perform a recording of a recording area of the patient to be examined,” that as drafted, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, includes methods of organizing human activity including following rules or instructions. The claims are directed to matching a patient recording condition with sensor values and other patient information. That is, other than reciting an imaging apparatus, comprising: a main magnet; a recorder; and a controller and sensor nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed by people. The claim recites as a whole a method of organizing human activity because the limitations include a user accessing patient information and making new recordings based on the information. This is a method of managing interactions between people. The mere nominal recitation of generic computing devices does not take the claims out of the method of organizing human interactions grouping. The limitations seem to monopolize the abstract idea of patient/caregiver analysis and general diagnostic techniques between a clinician and her patient. Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of an imaging apparatus, comprising: a main magnet; a recorder; and a controller and sensor, and the devices in these steps are recited at a high-level of generality ( i.e. , as a generic processor/server/storage/display/sensor performing a generic computer function of receiving inputs and displaying selected information) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, the additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, other than the abstract idea per se, because the additional elements amount to mere instructions to apply an exception (such as recitation of a data processing system comprising memory and one or more processors amounts to invoking computers as a tool to perform the abstract idea, see MPEP 2106.05(f)); or add insignificant extra-solution activity to the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.05(g)). The claim is thus directed to an abstract idea. Furthermore, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of an imaging apparatus, comprising: a main magnet; a recorder; and a controller and sensor are insufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they merely are tools used to employ the abstract idea. The claimed computer components (controller and sensor) amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The dependent claims recite additional subject matter which further narrows or defines the abstract idea embodied in the claims. Claim 2 describes an output interface, which is recited at a high level of generality and even in combination does not provide a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea. Claims 3 -6 detail logging patient data and a recording condition and further limit the abstract idea. Claims 7-8 detail instructions for the patient and limit the abstract idea. Claim 9 describes a characteristic of the patient and limits the abstract idea. Claim 11 details recording and transmitting sensor data and is recited at a high level of generality and even in combination does not provide a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea. Claim 12 describes a pilot tone navigator, which is recited at a high level of generality and even in combination does not provide a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea. Claims 15-17 and 19 describe a respiratory rate or process/movements that are detected and further limits the abstract idea. Claim 18 describes the imaging apparatus as an MRI, which is recited at a high level of generality and even in combination does not provide a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea. The claims do not provide a practical application or include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. For at least the reasons as stated above, the claims are not patent eligible in view of 35 U.S.C. 101. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-9, 11 and 13-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2017/0245759 A1 to Jain et al., hereinafter “Jain,” in view of U.S. 2018/0031665 A1 to Zeller, hereinafter “Zeller” and further in view of U.S. 2019/0069869 A1 to Soza et al., hereinafter “Soza.” Regarding claim 1, Jain discloses A method for operating an imaging apparatus, comprising: receiving, via a controller of the imaging apparatus, sensor data describing sensor values relating to a patient to be examined ( See Jain at least at Abstract; Paras. [0007]-[0009] (“[A]n apparatus includes an image sensor configured to capture image data of a patient, a sensor configured to capture sensor data for the patient, a memory configured to store the image data and the sensor data, and a processor coupled to the image sensor, the sensor, and the memory. The processor is configured to receive image data in response to detecting a biological condition from the sensor data.”), [0031], [0052] [0059] (“[T]he system detects at least one of the biological conditions in the patient. In another aspect, the system detects any two of the biological conditions occurring concurrently with one another in the patient.” A state of the patient.), [0082], [0141]-[0145]; Figs. 1-15) ; determining, via the controller based on the sensor data, a state of the patient ( See id. ) . Jain may not specifically describe but Zeller teaches wherein the state of the patient comprises a respiratory characteristic of the patient including a breathing rhythm of the patient and/or a current phase of respiration of the patient ( See Zeller at least at Abstract; Paras. [0002]-[0004], [0007]-[0012] (“[T]he start of the acquisition of the measurement data (Magnetic Resonance Images) can be triggered by the recorded breathing curve, when a breath-holding state has been detected.”), [0038]- [0043], [0069]; Claims 10-14) ; and determining whether the respiratory characteristic of the patient satisfies a predetermined recording condition to perform a recording via a recorder of the imaging apparatus ( See id. ) , the predetermined recording condition specifying a predetermined respiratory rate and/or a predetermined current phase of respiration of the patient ( See id. at least at Paras. [0002]-[0015] (holding breath (respiratory rate) predetermined as recording condition for MR imaging device), [0038]-[0043], [0069]; Claims 10-14) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain to incorporate the teachings of Zeller and provide recording respiratory characteristics under certain conditions. Zeller is directed to magnetic imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the applicability, efficacy, and accuracy of the recording of images for a respiratory patient. The references may not specifically describe but Soza teaches in response to the predetermined recording condition being satisfied, automatically trigger, via the controller, the recorder to cause the recorder to perform a recording of a recording area of the patient to be examined ( See Soza at least at Abstract; Paras. [0008]-[0020] (controlling a recording condition with predetermined data/conditions), [0072]-[0078], [0090]-[0091] (“Before the automatic determination of a control data record, however, a manual or optionally also partially automatic selection of a medical imaging system should then advantageously also take place, with which a recording of regions of the body of the patient should be performed. In this case, the control facility preferably comprises an input unit for selecting a medical imaging system, with which a recording should take place.”), [0099]-[0109], [0125]-[0126]; Claims 2, 7-11; Figs. 1-3) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Zeller to incorporate the teachings of Soza and provide recording respiratory characteristics and under certain conditions. Soza relates to a control facility for controlling a medical imaging system. Incorporating the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza with the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the recording conditions for a patient being examined. Regarding claim 2, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Zeller further teaches determining whether the state of the patient satisfies a predetermined instruction condition; and in response to the predetermined instruction condition being satisfied, controlling, via the controller, an output interface to provide instructions to the patient to instruct the patient to satisfy the predetermined recording condition ( See Zeller at least at Paras. [0005]-[0009] (“An instruction is given to the patient to hold his/her breath, and the acquisition of MR measurement data is then started. A breathing curve is recorded at least after the instruction to the patient. A next-breath time is detected based on the recorded breathing curve. At least one final MR measurement data set is created in a processor based on the acquired MR measurement data, depending on the detected next-breath time. Image data are reconstructed from the at least one final MR measurement data set.”); Figs. 1-4) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Zeller to incorporate the teachings of Soza and provide instruction and other conditions. Soza relates to a control facility for controlling a medical imaging system. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would improve the recording of an image for a respiratory patient. Regarding claim 3, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Zeller further teaches logging the state of the patient over a time period; and determining the respiratory characteristic of the patient based on the state of the patient logged during the time period ( See Zeller at least at Abstract; Paras. [0002]-[0004], [0007]-[0012] (“[T]he start of the acquisition of the measurement data can be triggered by the recorded breathing curve, when a breath-holding state has been detected.”), [0029]-[0043] (time windows), [0069]; Claims 10-14) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Soza to incorporate the teachings of Zeller and provide time windows and logging respiratory characteristics. Zeller is directed to medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the applicability, efficacy, and accuracy of logging patient respiratory characteristics. Regarding claim 4, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 3, and Zeller further teaches wherein the determining whether the patient satisfies the predetermined recording condition is based upon the respiratory characteristic of the patient ( See Zeller at least at Abstract; Paras. [0002]-[0015], [0038]-[0043], [0069]; Claims 10-14) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Soza to incorporate the teachings of Zeller and provide determining if a recording condition is satisfied. Zeller is directed to medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve patient recording of images based on respiratory characteristics. Regarding claim 5, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 2, and Zeller further teaches logging the state of the patient over a time period; and determining the respiratory characteristic of the patient based on the state of the patient logged during the time period, and wherein the determining whether the state of the patient satisfies the predetermined instruction condition is based upon the respiratory characteristic of the patient ( See id. ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Soza to incorporate the teachings of Zeller and provide determining if a recording condition is satisfied and based on respiratory characteristics of a patient. Zeller is directed to medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the patient recording of images based on respiratory and other timing. Regarding claim 6, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 2, and Zeller further teaches logging the state of the patient over a time period; and determining the respiratory characteristic of the patient based on the state of the patient logged during the time period, wherein the instructions provided to the patient are based upon the respiratory characteristic of the patient ( See id. ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Soza to incorporate the teachings of Zeller and provide logging respiratory characteristics of a patient over time. Zeller is directed to medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve respiratory responses and recording of images for a patient. Regarding claim 7, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 2, and Jain further discloses wherein the instructions provided to the patient comprise audio signals ( See id. at least at Paras. [0072]-[0074], [0130]-[0135], [0141]-[0145] (collecting over time and instructions and audio prompt), [0267]-[0270]) . Regarding claim 8, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 2, and Jain further discloses wherein the instructions provided to the patient comprise visual representations ( See id. at least at Paras. [0072]-[0074], [0125] [0130]-[0135], [0141]-[0145], [0234], [0063]-[0065]; Figs. 1-12) . Regarding claim 9, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Jain further discloses wherein the state of the patient further comprises a movement characteristic of the patient ( See Jain at least at Paras. [0039]-[0043], [0249]) . Regarding claim 11, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Jain further discloses recording the sensor values relating to the patient via a sensor of the imaging apparatus; and transmitting the sensor data comprising the sensor values to the controller ( See Jain at least at Paras. [0040]-[0044], [0061], [0076]-[0082], [0267]-[0270]; Figs. 1-12) . Regarding claim 13, Jain discloses An imaging apparatus, comprising: a main magnet; a recorder; and a controller configured to: receive sensor data describing sensor values relating to a patient to be examined ( See Jain at least at Abstract; Paras. [0034], [0038]-[0039], [0045]-[0051]; Figs. 1-3, 10-15) ;determine a state of the patient based on the sensor data ( See id. at least at Abstract; Paras. [0007]-[0009] (“[A]n apparatus includes an image sensor configured to capture image data of a patient, a sensor configured to capture sensor data for the patient, a memory configured to store the image data and the sensor data, and a processor coupled to the image sensor, the sensor, and the memory. The processor is configured to receive image data in response to detecting a biological condition from the sensor data.”), [0031], [0052] [0059] (“[T]he system detects at least one of the biological conditions in the patient. In another aspect, the system detects any two of the biological conditions occurring concurrently with one another in the patient.” A state of the patient.), [0082], [0141]-[0145]; Figs. 9-15) . Jain may not specifically describe but Zeller teaches wherein the state of the patient comprises a respiratory characteristic of the patient including a breathing rhythm of the patient and/or a current phase of respiration of the patient ( See Zeller at least at Abstract; Paras. [0002]-[0004], [0007]-[0012] (“[T]he start of the acquisition of the measurement data (Magnetic Resonance Images) can be triggered by the recorded breathing curve, when a breath-holding state has been detected.”), [0038]- [0043], [0069]; Claims 10-14) ; and determine whether the respiratory characteristic of the patient satisfies a predetermined recording condition to perform a recording via a recorder of the imaging apparatus ( See id. ) , the predetermined recording condition specifying a predetermined respiratory rate and/or a predetermined current phase of respiration of the patient ( See id. at least at Paras. [0002]-[0015] (holding breath (respiratory rate) predetermined as recording condition for MR imaging device), [0038]-[0043], [0069]; Claims 10-14) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain to incorporate the teachings of Zeller and provide recording respiratory characteristics under certain conditions. Zeller is directed to magnetic imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the applicability, efficacy, and accuracy of the recording of images for a respiratory patient. The references may not specifically describe but Soza teaches wherein in response to the predetermined recording condition being satisfied, automatically trigger the recorder to perform a recording of a recording area of the patient to be examined ( See Soza at least at Abstract; Paras. [0008]-[0020] (controlling a recording condition with predetermined data/conditions), [0072]-[0078], [0090]-[0091] (“Before the automatic determination of a control data record, however, a manual or optionally also partially automatic selection of a medical imaging system should then advantageously also take place, with which a recording of regions of the body of the patient should be performed. In this case, the control facility preferably comprises an input unit for selecting a medical imaging system, with which a recording should take place.”), [0099]-[0109], [0125]-[0126]; Claims 2, 7-11; Figs. 1-3) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Zeller to incorporate the teachings of Soza and provide recording respiratory characteristics and under certain conditions. Soza relates to a control facility for controlling a medical imaging system. Incorporating the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza with the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the recording conditions for a respiratory patient being examined. Regarding claim 14, claim 14 recites substantially the same limitations as included in independent claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasoning and under the same grounds of rejection applied to claim 1, above. Regarding claim 15, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 2, and Zeller further teaches wherein the predetermined instruction condition comprises a respiratory rate of the patient being within a predetermined range of values and/or the presence of a predetermined phase of respiration of the patient ( See Zeller at least at Paras. [0002]-[0015] (holding breath (respiratory rate) predetermined as recording condition for MR imaging device), [0038]-[0043], [0069]; Claims 10-14) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Soza to incorporate the teachings of Zeller and provide a respiratory rate in a range to begin recording. Zeller is directed to medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the recording of an image for a respiratory patient. Regarding claim 16, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Zeller further teaches wherein the predetermined recording condition specifies that the patient has completed an exhalation process and respiratory movements are absent ( See Zeller at least at Paras. [0002]-[0015] (holding breath (respiratory movements absent) predetermined as recording condition for MR imaging device), [0038]-[0043], [0069]; Claims 10-14) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Soza to incorporate the teachings of Zeller and provide a respiratory rate in a range to begin recording. Zeller is directed to medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the recording of an image for a respiratory patient. Regarding claim 17, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Zeller further teaches wherein the predetermined recording condition specifies that the patient is holding their breath ( See id. ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Soza to incorporate the teachings of Zeller and provide a respiratory rate in a range to begin recording. Zeller is directed to medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the recording of an image for a respiratory patient. Regarding claim 18, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Zeller further teaches wherein the imaging apparatus comprises a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) apparatus, and wherein the recording of the recording area of the patient to be examined comprises an MRI image recording ( See Zeller at least at Abstract; Paras. [0001]-[0040])) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Soza to incorporate the teachings of Zeller and provide MR imaging device. Zeller is directed to medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the recording of an image for a respiratory patient. Regarding claim 19, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Zeller further teaches wherein the sensor data describes movement of a chest of the patient, and wherein the respiratory characteristic is determined from the movement of the chest ( See id. at least at Abstract; Paras. [0003]-[0013] (“A next-breath time is defined as a time, as of which the patient leaves the breath-holding state, i.e. a time, as of which a movement takes place again due to resumed breathing. Based on this detected next-breath time, a final MR measurement data set is generated from the acquired MR measurement data.”), [0042]-[0061]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain and Soza to incorporate the teachings of Zeller and provide determining movement taking place for a breath. Zeller is directed to medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient. Incorporating the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller with the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the recording of an image for a respiratory patient . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jain, in view of Zeller, in view of Soza and further in view of U.S. 2021/0239778 A1 to Bacher et al., hereinafter “Bacher.” Regarding claim 12, Jain as modified by Zeller and Soza discloses the limitations of claim 1, may not specifically describe but Bacher teaches wherein the sensor comprises a pilot tone navigator ( See Bacher at least at Abstract; Paras. [0002]-[0005], [0009]-[0019], [0022]-[0029]; Claims 6, 10; Figs. 1-5) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Jain, Zeller and Soza to incorporate the teachings of Bacher and provide a pilot tone navigator. Bacher is directed to evaluating a pilot tone signal. Incorporating the pilot tone navigator of Bacher with the medical imaging for respiratory characteristics of a patient as in Zeller, the control of medical imaging systems as in Soza and the control of image sensors and systems of Jain would thereby improve the applicability, efficacy, and accuracy of recording images for a respiratory patient. Response to Arguments Applicant’s remarks filed February 3, 2026 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. The following explains why: Applicant’s arguments pertaining to prior art rejections are not persuasive. The arguments are moot in light of at least new reference Zeller. Applicant’s arguments pertaining to subject matter eligibility are not persuasive. The Examiner disagrees with the arguments at Pages 9-11. The claims have been addressed with regard to the updated 35 U.S.C. §101 rejection discussed above, and considered under relevant sections of the MPEP. The Examiner disagrees with the arguments at Pages 9-10 that there is a practical application of the abstract idea. The claimed imaging apparatus and method for operating such are claimed broadly and do not provide a practical application of the abstract idea, nor an improvement to the underlying technology, as discussed above. The computer technology is being leveraged as a tool to perform the abstract idea, and alone or in combination the additional elements do not amount to a practical application of the abstract idea. The Examiner agrees at Page 10 that the amended claims cannot practically be performed in the mind. The Examiner disagrees at Pages 10-11 that there is a significantly more than the abstract idea recited in the claims. Example 45 relates to an injection mold operation method for creating a physical component, while the starting and stopping of recording images based on a respiratory characteristic is a method of performing medical analyses that is not uncommon, and merely triggers performance of a computer device. The respiratory rate monitoring and image recording control is an abstract idea of organizing human activity including following rules or instructions. Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM T. MONTICELLO whose telephone number is (313)446-4871. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th; 08:30-18:30 EST. 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, FONYA LONG can be reached at (571) 270-5096. 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. /WILLIAM T. MONTICELLO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3682 /FONYA M LONG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 2 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 3 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 4 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 5 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 6 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 7 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 8 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 9 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 10 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 11 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 12 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 13 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 14 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 15 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 16 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 17 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 18 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 19 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 20 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 21 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 22 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 23 Art Unit: 3682 Application/Control Number: 19/033,827 Page 24 Art Unit: 3682
Prosecution Insights