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 .
Detailed Action
This is the first action on the merits (FAOM) to this continuation application in which claims 1-9 are pending. Claim 1 is independent and claim 2-9 are dependent.
Applicant has presented the same original claims of the parent application No. 18/008,469 in this instant continuation application1. This is not an uncommon practice on behalf of Applicants. During the prosecution of parent application (i.e., application No. 18/008,469), original claims were objected to because the original claim language contained typographic errors. For example, missing colon in certain places. Original claims in the parent application required amending for placing them in condition for allowance. In this continuation filing of claims, the Applicant has not corrected those obvious typographic errors but presented the same and identical claims including the typographic errors. Therefore, the Applicant is being reminded of those issues, needing Applicant’s attention, in this very first action.
Simulation of MRI system for purpose of training technicians is not completely a new idea. It is like flight simulator in pilot training. Further, based on the prosecution history of the parent application, and since the instant application claims same original subject matter, the claims should be rejected as was in the case of parent application.
Claim Objection
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: colons should be used after words, “comprising”, on line 2, and “involving” on lines 7 and 11, and “comprises” on line 14 of the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is further objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein the input of data is at least a pulse sequence and an anatomical model”, on lines 3-4, is unclear because “input of data parameter” cannot be equal to “a pulse sequence” or “anatomical model”. However, an inputting operation may include inputting a pulse sequence and an anatomical model.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is further objected to because of the following informalities: “setting input data” is unclear. Further description of input data is required. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is further objected to because of the following informalities: the claim (claim 1) contains features which have parts and sub-parts which should be appropriately line-indented, see MPEP §608.01(i) and 37 CFR 1.75(i). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is further objected to because of the following informalities: “recalculation of data parameter” is unclear. Further description of “recalculation of data parameter” is required. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is further objected to because of the following informalities: “performing a slice selection in an obtained image in the web interface” is unclear. Further description of “recalculation of data parameter” is required as slices are usually to selected before images are obtained. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejection under 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.
Claim 4 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
As to claim 4, the claim contains a trademark/trade name “MATLAB”.
Claim 4 contains the trademark/trade2 name MATLAB. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a tool for mathematical calculation and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Double Patenting Rejection
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,260,951. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because instant claims are broader and hence, are fully met by the issued claims 1-6.
Item matching between instant claims and issued claims are shown in the Table below.
Instant claims
Issued claims
Comment
1.A method for simulation of a magnetic resonance (MR) scanner in an MRI simulator, said method comprising input of data parameters into a web interface of the MRI simulator, wherein the input of data parameters is at least a pulse sequence and an anatomical model; connection of the web interface with a cloud-based simulator engine of the MRI simulator for transfer of data parameters to the cloud-based simulator engine, said method involving importing a pulse sequence calculation model; setting input data; and performing a slice selection in an obtained image in the web interface; said method also involving recalculation of the data parameters for the provision of one or more simulated MR signals, said recalculation being performed in the cloud, and wherein the method also comprises reconstruction of an MR image based on said one or more simulated MR signals, said reconstruction of an MR image being performed in the cloud; and sending the MR image to the web interface.
1. A method for simulation of a magnetic resonance (MR) scanner in an MRI simulator, said method comprising: inputting data parameters into a web interface of the MRI simulator, wherein the inputting is at least data parameters relating to a pulse sequence and an anatomical model; connecting the web interface with a cloud-based simulator engine of the MRI simulator for transfer of data parameters to the cloud-based simulator engine; importing a pulse sequence calculation model, thereby building a pulse sequence during the simulation; setting input data; performing a slice selection in an obtained image in the web interface; recalculating the data parameters for the provision of one or more simulated MR signals, said recalculating being performed in the cloud reconstructing an MR image based on said one or more simulated MR signals, said reconstructing being performed in the cloud; and sending the MR image to the web interface, wherein phase encoding direction and frequency encoding direction represent one axis each orthogonal to the slice selection direction, and wherein the slice selection is a single slice selection 2D acquisition(s) or a slab in 3D acquisition(s).
All content of instant claim 1 is found in issued claim 1.
Content of instant claim 7 can be found in issued claim 1.
Content of instant claim 8 can be found in issued claim 1, see 3D slab in issued claim 1.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the cloud-based simulator engine performs the recalculation and sends recalculated data to one or more GPUs (graphics processing units) of the MRI simulator, which GPUs sends back said one or more simulated MR signals.
2.The method according to claim 1, wherein the cloud-based simulator engine performs the recalculation and sends recalculated data to one or more GPUs (graphics processing units) of the MRI simulator, which GPUs sends back said one or more simulated MR signals.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the cloud-based simulator engine performs the recalculating and sends recalculated data to one or more GPUs (graphics processing units) of the MRI simulator, which GPUs sends back said one or more simulated MR signals.
Content of instant claim 2 is found in issued claim 2.
3. The method according to claim 1, wherein the step of reconstruction of an MR image is performed by one or more CPUs (central processing units) and/or one or more GPUs (graphics processing units) of the MRI simulator in the cloud.
3. The method according to claim 1, wherein the reconstructing is performed by one or more CPUs (central processing units) and/or one or more GPUs (graphics processing units) of the MRI simulator in the cloud.
Content of instant claim 3 is found in issued claim 3.
4. The method according to claim 1, wherein MATLAB is used for performing at least parts of the recalculation.
Contents of instant claim 4 are not found in issued patent.
5. The method according to claim 1, wherein a pulse sequence is a sequence of events which change how every point in space should behave to generate a signal.
4. The method according to claim 1, wherein a pulse sequence is a sequence of events which change how every point in space should behave to generate a signal.
Contents of instant claim 5 are found in issued claim 4.
6. The method according to claim 1, wherein each new slice selection functions as a reference for a next slice selection.
5. The method according to claim 1, wherein each new slice selection functions as a reference for a next slice selection.
Contents of instant claim 6 are found in issued claim 5.
7. The method according to claim 1, wherein phase encoding direction and frequency encoding direction represent one axis each orthogonal to the slice selection direction.
Contents of instant claim 7 are found in issued claim 1.
8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the slice selection is a single slice selection 2D acquisition(s) or a slab in 3D acquisition(s).
Contents of instant claim 8 are found in issued claim 1.
Rejection under 35 USC §102
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 1-3, 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Haishi (JP-2017140165-A1).
Haishi is a reference of the record, see IDS filed by the Applicant on 30 January 2025 and further, see Parent prosecution history where this reference was applied by the Examiner in rejecting these same claims.
Claim No
Claim feature
Prior art
Haishi (JP-2017-140165-A)
1
A method for simulation of a magnetic resonance (MR) scanner in an MRI simulator, said method comprising
Haishi discloses a method for simulation of a magnetic resonance (MR) scanner in an MRI simulator, as set forth in the preamble of claim 1, when Haishi describes a “virtual MRI detection unit 25”)3
input of data parameters into a web interface of the MRI simulator, wherein the input of data parameters is at least a pulse sequence and an anatomical model;
Haishi meets this claim feature when it describes inputting pulse sequence (63) and anatomical model (43 or 26), see, the first sentence in second paragraph under BACKGROUND-ART in the attached English translation.
As to data being entered into the web interface, it should be said that, Haishi discloses the feature when it describes a “network server”4 and further states5 that the GPGPU hardware need not to be held locally, even though it does not use the term “web interface”.
connection of the web interface with a cloud-based simulator engine of the MRI simulator for transfer of data parameters to the cloud-based simulator engine, said method involving - importing a pulse sequence calculation model;
- setting input data; and
- performing a slice selection in an obtained image in the web interface;
This claim feature is met by Haishi as it calculates pulse sequence and sets input data (Haishi sets parameters of a pulse sequence which can be equated to setting input data).
The non-local Virtual MRI 25 in Haishi can be equated to the claimed cloud-based MRI simulator engine.
As to a step of performing slice section, it should be said that in MRI imaging technology, image of an anatomy is obtained in the form of multiple slices and the pulse sequence includes a slice selection gradient and excitation pulses, and Haishi is understood to meet this feature as it discloses an MRI imaging process, even though Haishi does not use the term “slice selection”.
As to “web interface” and “cloud-based simulator engine” Haishi meets these features when it discloses a virtual MRI unit 25 held in a “network server”.
said method also involving
- recalculation of the data parameters for the provision of one or more simulated MR signals, said recalculation being performed in the cloud, and
This feature of the claim (claim 1) is indicated in Haishi when it mentioned “adjusting the imaging sequence”6 which includes recalculating (adjusting) data parameters.
Recalculation of data parameters is omnipresent in MRI procedures.
Every calculation including recalculation in Haishi is performed in the cloud (“network server”).
wherein the method also comprises
- reconstruction of an MR image based on said one or more simulated MR signals, said reconstruction of an MR image being performed in the cloud; and
- sending the MR image to the web interface.
This last feature of the claim (claim 1) is met by Haishi as image reconstruction is performed in the MRI simulation system that generates simulated MRI signal in a virtual MRI machine (25).
In Haishi, reconstructed MRI image is held in the virtual MRI machine (25) which may be in the cloud (non-local or remote server, see footnote 2). Sending an MRI image to cloud (remote network server) is a generic step and hence, not new over the conventional state of the MRI art.
2
The method according to claim 1, wherein the cloud-based simulator engine performs the recalculation and sends recalculated data to one or more GPUs (graphics processing units) of the MRI simulator, which GPUs sends back said one or more simulated MR signals.
Claim 2 is met by Haishi, the MRI simulator in Haishi can be cloud-based (non-local GPGPU) simulator engine, see footnote 2 above.
3
The method according to claim1, wherein the step of reconstruction of an MR image is performed by one or more CPUs (central processing units) and/or one or more GPUs (graphics processing units) of the MRI simulator in the cloud.
Claim 3 is met by Haishi when it discloses an MRI simulator system that generates “reconstruction image”, see abstract and the simulation system includes GPGPU.
5
The method according to claim 1, wherein a pulse sequence is a sequence of events which change how every point in space should behave to generate a signal.
Claim 5 is met by Haishi as it discloses a pulse sequence and a pulse sequence is a sequence of events which change how every point in space should behave to generate a signal.
6
The method according to claim 1, wherein each new slice selection functions as a reference for a next slice selection.
In MRI slices are selected consecutively and therefore, new slice selection serves as reference for the next slice.
Haishi meets the claim as it discloses an MRI imaging process that, implicitly or inherently, includes imaging in slices.
7
The method according to claim 1, wherein phase encoding direction and frequency encoding direction represent one axis each orthogonal to the slice selection direction.
In MRI process, the phase encoding and frequency encoding directions are orthogonal.
Haishi meets the claim (claim 7) as it discloses read gradient which is understood to be in x-direction and phase gradient which is understood to be in y-direction.
8
The method according to claim 1, wherein the slice selection is a single slice selection 2D acquisition(s) or a slab in 3D acquisition(s).
Haishi meets the claim as it discloses “two-dimensional” and “three-dimensional” acquisitions.
9
The method according to claim 1, wherein the following procedure is performed: - performing a slice selection in an obtained image in the web interface;
- a new image is obtained; - a new slice selection is performed in a different direction; - a new image is obtained; and finally - yet another slice selection is performed, and wherein each image obtained preferably is a cross sectional plane to the image in which the slice selection is performed.
Claim 9 does not add a new and unobvious invention over claim 1 but repeats same imaging process for different and new slices and this is common practice in MRI, even when Haishi does explicitly discuss it.
Claims 1-3, 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuth (US-2003/0068608-A1).
Claim No
Claim feature
Prior art
Kuth (US-2003/0068608-A1)
1
A method for simulation of a magnetic resonance (MR) scanner in an MRI simulator, said method comprising
Kuth discloses a method for simulation as it discloses an MRI simulator, see Figs. 1-4 in Kuth.
Word “image” in Kuth is not found; however, word “measurement” is understood to indicate an image in the context of magnetic resonance.
input of data parameters into a web interface of the MRI simulator, wherein the input of data parameters is at least a pulse sequence and an anatomical model;
Kuth discloses this inputting of data parameters as it shows an example of a screen shot of interface Masks 41,42, 43, 44 and 45 in web page 30 and 40.
connection of the web interface with a cloud-based simulator engine of the MRI simulator for transfer of data parameters to the cloud-based simulator engine, said method involving - importing a pulse sequence calculation model;
- setting input data; and
- performing a slice selection in an obtained image in the web interface;
Kuth discloses a connection between local PC 5 and the internet server 1, see Fig. 1.
The web pages 30, 40 in Kuth are cloud based (i.e., web based).
The internet server 1 provides the cloud-based simulator engine.
See masks 42, 44, 45 where relevant pulse sequence parameters are depicted.
See masks 42, 44 and 45 where Kuth discloses slice section box in the web page 40.
Performing slice selection in obtained image is not clearly understood; however, slice selection can be understood to be performed prior to and for the purpose of obtaining image, in Kuth.
said method also involving
- recalculation of the data parameters for the provision of one or more simulated MR signals, said recalculation being performed in the cloud, and
It is unclear what constitutes recalculation of data parameters; however, it can be understood that based on an organ (e.g., liver, kidney or lung) selected the data parameters may need recalculation in Kuth.
wherein the method also comprises
- reconstruction of an MR image based on said one or more simulated MR signals, said reconstruction of an MR image being performed in the cloud; and
- sending the MR image to the web interface.
Kuth is understood to reconstruct MR image as claimed in the cloud (internet).
Generated image is sent to web interface (5, 5a, 5b, 5c).
2
The method according to claim 1, wherein the cloud-based simulator engine performs the recalculation and sends recalculated data to one or more GPUs (graphics processing units) of the MRI simulator, which GPUs sends back said one or more simulated MR signals.
Kuth meets claim 2 as it discloses graphical user interface (see various Figs. in Kuth) which requires GPU for processing.
3
The method according to claim 1, wherein the step of reconstruction of an MR image is performed by one or more CPUs (central processing units) and/or one or more GPUs (graphics processing units) of the MRI simulator in the cloud.
Kuth meets claim 3 as claimed as it generates images. Generating an image using CPU or GPU is not a new invention in the art.
5
The method according to claim 1, wherein a pulse sequence is a sequence of events which change how every point in space should behave to generate a signal.
This claim is met by Kuth as it discloses generation measurement data (i.e., images as can be understood) by use of pulse sequence. This claimed property of a pulse sequence is fundamental to generation of images in MRI and not a new invention.
6
The method according to claim 1, wherein each new slice selection functions as a reference for a next slice selection.
Kuth meets claim 6 as slices in MRI is generated one at a time.
7
The method according to claim 1, wherein phase encoding direction and frequency encoding direction represent one axis each orthogonal to the slice selection direction.
In MRI frequency encoding and slice selection are orthogonal and not a new in invention.
8
The method according to claim 1, wherein the slice selection is a single slice selection 2D acquisition(s) or a slab in 3D acquisition(s).
Kuth meets this claim feature as it depicts 3D acquisitions, see masks 42, 44 and 45.
9
The method according to claim 1, wherein the following procedure is performed: - performing a slice selection in an obtained image in the web interface;
- a new image is obtained; - a new slice selection is performed in a different direction; - a new image is obtained; and finally - yet another slice selection is performed, and wherein each image obtained preferably is a cross sectional plane to the image in which the slice selection is performed.
Kuth can be understood to meet claim 9 as it performs slice selection the web tool.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to G.M. HYDER whose telephone number is (571)270-3896. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9 AM- 5 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, Stephanie Bloss, can be reached on (571) 272-3555. 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.
G.M. HYDER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2852
/G.M. A HYDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
1 Examiner comment: This is not an uncommon practice on behalf of Applicants.
2 Examiner Comment: See discussion in MPEP related to Form Paragraph 7.35.01.
3 See second paragraph under BACKGROUNF-ART: “As an MRI numerical simulation method, input pulse sequence information, apparatus characteristic information, and inspection object information are converted into internal data, and the inspection object information generation unit divides the magnetization distribution of the inspection object information into lattices, Magnetization with magnitude and relaxation time according to the distribution is arranged, and the device characteristic information generation unit divides the field of view into the same size grid as the inspection target information generation unit, and calculates the magnetic field strength at each lattice As a data, the magnetization group generation unit divides the inspection target into equal magnetic field regions, divides the magnetization into multiple groups with the same magnetic field intensity at the position where the magnetization is placed, and stores the result in memory There is a known method (see Patent Document 1).”
4See the 7th paragraph under “(MRI software platform): “Note that the GPGPU hardware need not be held locally, and may be realized in a pseudo manner via a high-speed network”.
5 See second paragraph under DESCRIPTION-OF-EMBODIMENTS: “In order to solve the above problem, the present invention realizes a virtual MRI detection unit in a PC (personal computer) equipped with GPGPU (GENRAL PURPOSE GRAPHIC PROCESSOR UNIT) or on a network server, and has an actual MRI machine. This makes it possible to perform simulated imaging of MRI even if it is not”.
6 When measuring the inhomogeneity of the static magnetic field, in order to detect the phase shift of the nuclear magnetization, the spin echo center or gradient echo center of the image for obtaining the phase difference is compared with the reference image, for example, 1 ms. Delay the image acquisition. For example, imaging is performed by shifting the focusing time between the spin echo center and the gradient echo center by Δt = 1 ms. In fact, when adjusting the imaging sequence, the spin echo cannot be seen when the gradient echo is visible, so it is necessary to identify the spin echo center and the gradient echo center with the gradient magnetic field applied ON / OFF. is there. It is the image which the MRI image of the left side of FIG. 3 acquired. Reflects the inhomogeneity of the static magnetic field.
Prosecution Insights