DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 21 and 29-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morf et al. (US 2017/0079610) hereinafter known as “Morf”.
With regards to claim 21, Morf discloses automatic exposure control methods and imaging apparatuses and systems supporting automatic exposure control [0001], the radiation imaging apparatus (FIG. 1; [0028]; the image detector 106) integrating a dose detected by a dose detection pixel that detects a dose of radiation [0010][0011]([0060]; “ The rows of AEC pixels 320 can be used to rapidly and in real-time measure the delivered dose on the detector array 304A during the x-ray on time.”) irradiated from a radiation source (FIG. 1; [0027]; x-ray source 102) , and the imaging control apparatus controlling the radiation imaging apparatus ([0028]; “The acquisition control 112 may include electronics for generating control signals for the image detector 106.”), wherein the imaging control apparatus 112
transmits information regarding a third region ([0030]; “…the acquisition of a single image of a subject, such as a body portion of a patient…is split off into acquisition of two or more subimages or frames.”)(The reference do not specifically teach of a third region however, the reference teaches of creating two or more subimages of multiple body portions and anatomies such as a patient's chest, abdomen, head, spine, or thorax, etc. and omages taken in various directions such as antero-posterior (AP), postero-anterior (PA), lateral (L), etc. [0030]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art to establish a third image of a body portion with the motivation of obtaining a composite image of the region of interest and surrounding body portions.),
which is obtained by excluding a second region including a non-integrated dose detection pixel ([0054]; non-AEC pixels 312) where integration is not performed from a first region including the dose detection pixel in an imaging region of the radiation imaging apparatus ([0051]; “the detector array 304 may include a number of AEC pixels 320 which provides signals for automatic exposure control.… the AEC pixels 320 are grayed and the non-AEC pixels are indicated as having white background for clarity of illustration.”), to the radiation imaging apparatus, and the radiation imaging apparatus
outputs a signal regarding stopping the irradiation of the radiation by using a dose detected by the dose detection pixel included in the third region ([0056]; “Once the integrated signals measured by the AEC pixels 320 indicate that a desired dose level is reached, the system may generate a control signal to terminate the exposure beam.”) [0061].
Claim(s) 22-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morf, and further in view of Yokoyama et al. (US 2017/0090041) hereinafter known as “Yokoyama”.
With regards to claim 22, Morf discloses the first subimage may be acquired with an exposure of a low dose [0007]. Morf teaches of obtaining an optimal dose for an image [0010]. Further, the reference teaches “In case the first subimage acquired does not provide sufficient information or signal value for analysis, a second subimage with e.g. 2, 3, 4, or 5 times or greater the dose level of the first subimage may be used.”) [0031]. Also, [0043] teaches, “…in a multi-energy x-ray imaging, the first subimage may be acquired using low kV and half the default dose. The dose for the second subimage can then be estimated based on the first subimage, but with the condition that the second subimage uses a higher or lower kV value.”
Morf do not specifically disclose a high-dose region.
In the same field of endeavor, Yokoyama discloses a radiation imaging apparatus (Abstract). The reference teaches of a second pixel 121 (The second pixel is arranged in an image sensing region and is configured to detect incident radiation. [0010][0030]) that receives low-energy radiation in a low dose per unit time and high-energy radiation at a high dose per unit time [0052].
In view of Yokoyama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art to provide and utilize a high-dose region in the imaging apparatus of Morf. The motivation is to use a high-dose region, along with a low-dose region, to detect the irradiation dose necessary to image and distinguish specific body portions.
With regards to claim 23, Morf, in view of Yokoyama, discloses the radiation imaging system according to claim 22, wherein the high-dose region includes a direct-ray region including a grid-only region in a radiation image captured by the radiation imaging apparatus. (Yokoyama; [0030]; FIG. 2; “If a plurality of second pixel 121 is arranged, an incident radiation dose may be detected by only one of the detecting elements 122 of the plurality of second pixels 121 or a plurality of detecting elements.”)
With regards to claim 24, Morf, in view of Yokoyama, discloses the radiation imaging system according to claim 22, wherein the low-dose region includes a metal region including a metal in a radiation image captured by the radiation imaging apparatus. (Morf; [0036]; implants (metals) )
With regards to claim 25, Morf, in view of Yokoyama, discloses the radiation imaging system according to claim 22, wherein the low-dose region includes a non-irradiated region being not irradiated with the radiation in a radiation image captured by the radiation imaging apparatus. (Morf; [0051]; non-AEC pixels)
With regards to claim 26, Morf, in view of Yokoyama, discloses the radiation imaging system according to claim 23, wherein the direct-ray region is specified using an optical image captured by a camera. (Yokoyama; [0056]; “…a camera connected to the radiation control unit 229 may be used to estimate an object thickness or specify a region of an object as a region of interest and estimate the radiation transmittance of the object region of interest.”)
With regards to claim 27, Morf, in view of Yokoyama, discloses the radiation imaging system according to claim 24, wherein the metal region is specified using a previously captured radiation image. (Yokoyama; [0056])
With regards to claim 30, Morf discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a program that causes a computer to execute the controlling method of the radiation imaging system according to claim 30. (Morf; [0038])
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 28 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regards to claim 28, Morf, in view of Yokoyama, do not specifically disclose the radiation imaging system according to claim 25, wherein the non- irradiated region is specified using a distance between the radiation source and the radiation imaging apparatus.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Takahashi et al. (US 2015/0055752)
Kuwabara (US 2013/0182823)
Voronenko et al. (US 2018/0345042)
Matsuura (US 2013/0068955)
Otto (US 2018/0326222)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUGH H MAUPIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1495. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 5:00 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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/HUGH MAUPIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights