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 Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9 should be amended to recite --wherein each pixel group in an image occupies a space of the pixels contained in the pixel group--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “determination unit”, “checking unit”, and “adaptation unit” in claim 10; “regulating unit” of claim 11, and “control entity” of claim 12.
For the means-plus-function of “determination unit”, “checking unit”, and “adaptation unit” in claim 10; “regulating unit” of claim 11, and “control entity” of claim 12, [0034] of the originally filed specification discloses a computer unit with software programs, the computer unit comprising a microprocessors.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 recites “wherein each pixel group in an image occupies a space of the pixels contained the pixel group, each of these pixels in a particular pixel group has the pixel value of the particular pixel group, has a pixel value which corresponds to a normalized pixel value of the particular pixel group, or the pixel values of the pixels in the particular pixel group exhibit a progression between the pixel value of the particular pixel group and the pixel values of adjacent pixel groups”. It is unclear which recited alternatives of the features of the pixels of the pixel group is required by the limitation. That is, the limitation does not properly define if the pixel groups are required to occupy a space, AND each pixel of the pixel groups comprises the pixel value of the particular pixel group. It is also unclear what claim element “has a pixel value which corresponds to a normalized pixel value”. For purposes of the examination, the limitation is being interpreted to mean that the pixel group accomplish one of occupying a space, or comprising the pixel value of the particular pixel group.
Claim Rejections - 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 13, 5, 9-15, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takahashi, et al., US 20150055752 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Takahashi teaches a method for regulating a dose when recording images of an object (the abstract discloses an X-ray exposure control device comprises: an X-ray detection element including a plurality of pixels for dose detection each detecting a dose during X-ray radiation; a region setting unit configured to set a use pixel region including pixels for use in dose detection from the plurality of pixels for dose detection during the X-ray radiation; a signal generating unit configured to generate a stop signal for stopping the X-ray radiation from an X-ray source according to the dose detected by each of the pixels for use in the dose detection within the use pixel region set by the region setting unit; and a transmission unit configured to transmit to the X-ray source the stop signal to stop the X-ray radiation as generated by the signal generating unit) via an image recording device ([0077] discloses an X-ray imaging system 10) having a radiation source (X-ray source 12 of [0077]) and a pixel detector (X-ray detection apparatus 14 of [0077])), said method comprising:
exposing the object to X-radiation from the radiation source and recording an image via the pixel detector ([0031] discloses irradiating a target based on a start signal);
determining an irradiation value of the pixel detector, wherein the irradiation value indicates a measure for a dose received by at least a region of interest of the pixel detector ([0031] discloses “the X-ray detection element starts to detect the dose in each of the plurality of pixels for dose detection according to the start signal acquired by the acquisition unit”);
checking whether the irradiation value is outside a predetermined value range ([0033]-[0035] disclose a thresholding step for the detected dose of X-ray radiation detected by the pixels); and
changing, based on the checking, a readout of the pixel detector with regard to a combination of adjacent pixels of the pixel detector into pixel groups, wherein the pixels of a single pixel group are read out jointly as a resulting pixel ([0014] states “a region setting unit configured to set a use pixel region including pixels for use in dose detection from the plurality of pixels for dose detection during the X-ray radiation; a signal generating unit configured to generate a stop signal for stopping the X-ray radiation from the X-ray source according to the dose detected by each of the pixels for use in the dose detection within the use pixel region set by the region setting unit” and [0017] states that “the region setting unit identifies subject pixels representing the radiography target constituting a subject or pixels within a radiation field exposed to the X-ray radiation by combining a plurality of pixel characteristics and neighboring pixel characteristics from dose information of the plurality of pixels for dose detection, and sets the use pixel region containing the subject pixels or the pixels within the radiation field as the pixels for use in the dose detection”. Meaning that a change in readout is effected by virtue of the stop signal which changes an out of the radiation source and hence the signal from the detectors. Also see [0201] for reducing the volume of data read out by one readout operation to enable high-speed readout).
Regarding claim 3, Takahashi further teaches wherein the combining takes place progressively ([0099] discloses a row by row generation of gate pulses, where same rows are generated together).
Regarding claim 5, Takahashi further teaches wherein a multiplicity of dose-regulated images are recorded (see fig. 6 and [0191]-[192] which disclose dose dependent acquisition of the images).
Regarding claim 9, Takahashi further teaches wherein each pixel group in an image occupies a space of the pixels contained the pixel group, each of these pixels in a particular pixel group has the pixel value of the particular pixel group, has a pixel value which corresponds to a normalized pixel value of the particular pixel group, or the pixel values of the pixels in the particular pixel group exhibit a progression between the pixel value of the particular pixel group and the pixel values of adjacent pixel groups ([0107] discloses control pixels 76 which account for about several percent of the pixels 44 in the imaging surface 36, and satisfying predetermined conditions ([0131]), and further in [0133] that “the region excluding high density side pixels having the potential for the direct X-ray region and low density side pixels having the potential for the diaphragm region according to histogram analysis, in other words, the control pixels 76 having a median value of all the pixel values (40 to 60% in a cumulative histogram) are determined as the lighting field. Alternatively, the variance (.sigma..sup.2) of all the pixel values is determined and the control pixels 76 far from the average value by at least .alpha..times..sigma. (.alpha. is a constant) are excluded to determine the remaining control pixels 76 as the lighting field”).
Regarding claim 10, Takahashi teaches a device for regulating a dose when recording images of an object via an image recording device ([0077] discloses an X-ray imaging system 10) which has a radiation source (X-ray source 12 of [0077]) and a pixel detector (X-ray detection apparatus 14 of [0077])) the device comprising:
a determination unit (detection controller 22 of [0082]) configured to determine an irradiation value of the pixel detector, wherein the irradiation value indicates a value for a dose that is received at least in a region of interest by the pixel detector ([0031] discloses “the X-ray detection element starts to detect the dose in each of the plurality of pixels for dose detection according to the start signal acquired by the acquisition unit”);
a checking unit (signal generating unit of [0014]) configured to check whether the irradiation value is outside a predetermined value range ([0033]-[0035] disclose a thresholding step for the detected dose of X-ray radiation detected by the pixels); and
an adaptation unit (readout/accumulation portion 78 of [0119]) configure to change a readout of the pixel detector with regard to a combination of adjacent pixels of the pixel detector into pixel groups, wherein the pixels of a single pixel group are read out jointly as a resulting pixel ([0014] states “a region setting unit configured to set a use pixel region including pixels for use in dose detection from the plurality of pixels for dose detection during the X-ray radiation; a signal generating unit configured to generate a stop signal for stopping the X-ray radiation from the X-ray source according to the dose detected by each of the pixels for use in the dose detection within the use pixel region set by the region setting unit” and [0017] states that “the region setting unit identifies subject pixels representing the radiography target constituting a subject or pixels within a radiation field exposed to the X-ray radiation by combining a plurality of pixel characteristics and neighboring pixel characteristics from dose information of the plurality of pixels for dose detection, and sets the use pixel region containing the subject pixels or the pixels within the radiation field as the pixels for use in the dose detection”. Meaning that a change in readout is effected by virtue of the stop signal which changes an out of the radiation source and hence the signal from the detectors. Also see [0201] for reducing the volume of data read out by one readout operation to enable high-speed readout).
Regarding claim 11, Takahashi further teaches wherein at least one of, the adaptation unit is configured to at least one of, firstly combine pixel groups such that a combined signal of the pixel group is digitized, or derive a size of pixel groups from a comparison by the checking unit with a plurality of limit values; or the device comprises a regulating unit in which various regulating hierarchies are stored, the regulating unit configured to select a regulating hierarchy for changing at least one of a composition of the pixel groups or radiation parameters ([0135] states that “it is also possible to calculate a binarized threshold (e.g., center of a histogram) by histogram analysis and to determine the region having a specified size including the centers of gravity of the pixels equal to or larger than the threshold as the lighting field”).
Regarding claim 12, Takahashi teaches a control entity (control unit 20 of [0080]) for controlling an image recording system ([0077] discloses an X-ray imaging system 10) comprising: the device of claim 10 ([0081] discloses the control unit 20 includes an X-ray detection controller (hereinafter referred to simply as "detection controller") 22 comprehensively controlling the whole operation of the apparatus).
Regarding claim 13, Takahashi further teaches an image recording system ([0077] discloses an X-ray imaging system 10) comprising: the control entity of claim 12 ([0081] discloses the control unit 20 includes an X-ray detection controller (hereinafter referred to simply as "detection controller") 22 comprehensively controlling the whole operation of the apparatus).
Regarding claim 14, Takahashi teaches a computer program product, comprising instructions which when executed by a computer of a system, cause the system to perform the method of claim 1 ([0089] discloses that the device controller 34 preferably has the function of performing various image processing steps such as offset correction, sensitivity correction and defect correction on X-ray image data in the memory 38 and [0090] discloses that The X-ray image data from the image detection device 18 is stored in the memory 38 and then subjected to the above-described various image processing steps in the device controller 34 of the control unit 20. The X-ray image having undergone such image processing steps is displayed on the display 30 or its data is stored again in the memory 38 or a storage device (not shown), or a data storage such as an image storage server connected to the control unit 20 through a network, meaning that the system inherently includes a computer program product comprising instructions which when executed by a computer of a system, cause the system to perform the method of claim 1, as claimed).
Regarding claim 15, Takahashi further teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, comprising instructions which when executed by a computer of a system, cause the system to perform the method of claim 1 ([0081] discloses a memory 32 connected to the detection controller 22, [0086] indicates that the memory 32 stores in advance several types of radiographic conditions such as the tube voltage and the tube current, and [0088]-[0089] disclose that the device controller 34 of the detection controller 22 performs various controls and image processing steps, meaning that the memory 32 inherently includes instructions executed by the controller for performing the various claimed steps).
Regarding claim 18, Takahashi teaches all the limitations of claim 3.
Takahashi further teaches wherein in a case of an increasing dose, the rearranging includes: groups having a number of NxN pixels are made smaller by continuously reducing N by 1, noting in [0144] that as described above, it is also possible to detect a region within the radiation field and to set a region obtained by excluding high density pixels (e.g., 30% on the black side in the whole width of a histogram) having the potential for the direct X-ray region from the pixels in the region within the radiation field, or a median value (e.g., 30 to 70%) of the region as the lighting field. Also see figs. 9A-9C and [0202].
Regarding claim 20, Takahashi further teaches wherein the multiplicity of dose-regulated images are recorded in as part of a DFR recording, a tomosynthesis or a CT recording ([0263] states that “If the memory 38a has a capacity that may resist a menu such as tomosynthesis imaging in which imaging is performed several times in succession, continuous imaging can be continued to the end without being stopped even in a situation where image data cannot be transmitted”),
the respective irradiation value is determined for a plurality of the dose-regulated images ([0031] discloses “the X-ray detection element starts to detect the dose in each of the plurality of pixels for dose detection according to the start signal acquired by the acquisition unit”), and
an adaptation of at least one of the irradiation parameters or the pixel groups takes place iteratively at least for the subsequent recording ([0014] states “a region setting unit configured to set a use pixel region including pixels for use in dose detection from the plurality of pixels for dose detection during the X-ray radiation; a signal generating unit configured to generate a stop signal for stopping the X-ray radiation from the X-ray source according to the dose detected by each of the pixels for use in the dose detection within the use pixel region set by the region setting unit” and [0017] states that “the region setting unit identifies subject pixels representing the radiography target constituting a subject or pixels within a radiation field exposed to the X-ray radiation by combining a plurality of pixel characteristics and neighboring pixel characteristics from dose information of the plurality of pixels for dose detection, and sets the use pixel region containing the subject pixels or the pixels within the radiation field as the pixels for use in the dose detection”. Meaning that a change in readout is effected by virtue of the stop signal which changes an out of the radiation source and hence the signal from the detectors. Also see [0201] for reducing the volume of data read out by one readout operation to enable high-speed readout).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, 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.
Claims 2, 4, 6-8, 16-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi, et al., US 20150055752 A1 in view of Fu, et al., US 20170212253 A1.
Regarding claim 2, Takahashi teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above.
Takahashi fails to teach further comprising at least one of: combining pixels into pixel groups or into larger pixel groups if the irradiation value lies below a predetermined lower limit value; or rearranging existing pixel groups into smaller pixel groups or resolving existing pixel groups into individual pixels if the irradiation value exceeds a predetermined upper limit value.
However, within the same field of endeavor, Fu teaches a method for adaptively binning detector elements during an imaging scan without introducing an electronic noise penalty ([0007]), further comprising at least one of: combining pixels into pixel groups or into larger pixel groups if the irradiation value lies below a predetermined lower limit value; or rearranging existing pixel groups into smaller pixel groups or resolving existing pixel groups into individual pixels if the irradiation value exceeds a predetermined upper limit value ([0062] states that “threshold values (T values) can be specified (such as in the hardware or programmable circuitry) which can be used to evaluate (decision block 200) image data during an acquisition 202, such as an initial or test read out… If the specified threshold T is exceeded at block 200 based on the value observed at the respective X-ray intensity detector circuitry 168, the corresponding detector elements (e.g., pixels or sub-pixels) associated with that X-ray intensity detector are not binned (block 204). If, however the threshold T is not exceeded for a set of binnable detector elements, a determination (block 206) is made to bin some or all of the binnable detector elements and the selected elements are binned (block 208) for a given view angle by the control logic”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure Takahashi for combining pixels into pixel groups or into larger pixel groups if the irradiation value lies below a predetermined lower limit value; or rearranging existing pixel groups into smaller pixel groups or resolving existing pixel groups into individual pixels if the irradiation value exceeds a predetermined upper limit value, as taught by Fu, to provide a low-noise binning procedure which allows for optimized spatial resolution and/or optimized SNR ([0061]).
Regarding claim 4, Takahashi teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Takahashi fails to teach wherein a regulating hierarchy is specified, the regulating hierarchy specifies a sequence for changing irradiation parameters and changing the readout of the pixel detector.
However, Fu further teaches wherein a regulating hierarchy is specified, the regulating hierarchy specifies a sequence for changing irradiation parameters ([0026] further states that “Other factors that may be adjusted in view of the observed radiation intensity values during an imaging operation include, but are not limited to gain, signal processing parameters (e.g., signal integration time), and selected pixels for readout. Adjustment of such factors during an examination based on measured values may allow for on-line or real-time configuring the detector to receive a certain radiation intensity or flux, readout field of view (FOV), and/or detector operation mode (energy integration or photon counting)”) and changing the readout of the pixel detector by disclosing in [0062] that a determination (block 206) is made to bin some or all of the binnable detector elements and the selected elements are binned (block 208) for a given view angle by the control logic. While a single threshold T may be employed to create a binary outcome (i.e., all binnable detector elements binned or not binned), in other scenarios multiple thresholds may be employed that allow different degrees of binning. For example, being below T.sub.1 but above T.sub.2 results in two detector elements being binned, being below T.sub.2 but above T.sub.3 results in three detector elements being binned, being below T.sub.3 results in four detector elements being binned, and so forth.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure Takahashi wherein a regulating hierarchy is specified, the regulating hierarchy specifies a sequence for changing irradiation parameters and changing the readout of the pixel detector, as taught by Fu, to provide a low-noise binning procedure which allows for optimized spatial resolution and/or optimized SNR ([0061]).
Regarding claim 6, Takahashi teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Takahashi fails to teach wherein the recording records a first image using a preset composition of pixel groups and the radiation source is operated as to expose the object to radiation using preset radiation parameters, the preset radiation parameters specifying at least one of a radiant flux, a duration of emission of the radiation or an acceleration voltage, and at least one of an adapted composition of the pixel groups or adapted irradiation parameters are used for subsequent recordings of images of a same subject.
However, Fu further teaches wherein the recording records a first image using a preset composition of pixel groups ([0026] In certain implementations, the low-noise characteristics of the integrated readout electronics may facilitate certain operations or actions when in use, such as grouping (i.e., binning) of pixels during a scanning operation (i.e., in real-time) to allow adaptive detector configuration during the scan operation itself) and the radiation source is operated as to expose the object to radiation using preset radiation parameters, the preset radiation parameters specifying at least one of a radiant flux, a duration of emission of the radiation or an acceleration voltage ([0026] further states that “Other factors that may be adjusted in view of the observed radiation intensity values during an imaging operation include, but are not limited to gain, signal processing parameters (e.g., signal integration time), and selected pixels for readout. Adjustment of such factors during an examination based on measured values may allow for on-line or real-time configuring the detector to receive a certain radiation intensity or flux, readout field of view (FOV), and/or detector operation mode (energy integration or photon counting)”), and
at least one of an adapted composition of the pixel groups or adapted irradiation parameters are used for subsequent recordings of images of a same subject ([0026] also states that “Further, as discussed herein, such adaptive adjustment of spatial resolution (i.e., effective pixel size) may allow non-uniform spatial sampling during an acquisition, such as different projections or regions-of-interest within a given projection being sampled at different spatial resolutions within a single scan”. In this case, an first image of the scan includes radiation flux or readout FOV different from a second image of the scan with a different radiation flux or readout FOV different from the first image).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure Takahashi wherein the recording records a first image using a preset composition of pixel groups and the radiation source is operated as to expose the object to radiation using preset radiation parameters, the preset radiation parameters specifying at least one of a radiant flux, a duration of emission of the radiation or an acceleration voltage, and at least one of an adapted composition of the pixel groups or adapted irradiation parameters are used for subsequent recordings of images of a same subject, as taught by Fu, to improve the signal-to-noise or contrast-to-noise ratio and thus image quality for a given subject and imaging purpose ([0026]).
Regarding claim 7, Takahashi teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Takahashi does not teach wherein the determining determines the irradiation value from a readout of the pixel detector by adding pixel values of a recorded image.
However, Fu further teaches wherein the determining determines the irradiation value from a readout of the pixel detector by adding pixel values of a recorded image ([0062] discloses that an observed signal intensity guides a determination (block 206) to bin some or all of the binnable detector elements and the selected elements are binned (block 208) for a given view angle by the control logic, where the binning step involves addition of more binnable pixels).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure Takahashi wherein the determining determines the irradiation value from a readout of the pixel detector by adding pixel values of a recorded image, as taught by Fu, to improve the signal-to-noise or contrast-to-noise ratio and thus image quality for a given subject and imaging purpose ([0026]).
Regarding claim 8, Takahashi teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Takahashi does not teach further comprising: for a readout of pixels in a pixel group, combining signals of the pixels in the pixel group , wherein charges of the pixels in corresponding semiconductor elements of the pixel detector are added analogously, and a digital value of the pixel group is generated after the analog addition.
However, Fu further teaches further comprising: for a readout of pixels in a pixel group, combining signals of the pixels in the pixel group , wherein charges of the pixels in corresponding semiconductor elements of the pixel detector are added analogously, and a digital value of the pixel group is generated after the analog addition ([0041] states that “the detector 28 of FIG. 3 includes integrated readout electronics 100 provided in the light imager panel 72 itself. Such an arrangement simplifies the overall design of the detector 28 and also reduces introduced noise by eliminating the conductive structures 74 (FIG. 1) used to transmit analog signals to the readout and conversion circuitry located off-panel in conventional designs. In this manner, a digital output 92 is output by the light imager panel 72 itself, rather than being generated at an off-panel module”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure Takahashi further comprising: for a readout of pixels in a pixel group, combining signals of the pixels in the pixel group , wherein charges of the pixels in corresponding semiconductor elements of the pixel detector are added analogously, and a digital value of the pixel group is generated after the analog addition, as taught by Fu, to improve the signal-to-noise or contrast-to-noise ratio and thus image quality for a given subject and imaging purpose ([0026]).
Regarding claim 16, Takahashi in view of Fu teaches all the limitations of claim 2.
Takahashi does not teach wherein a plurality of predefined value ranges is available and binning is based on the value ranges outside of which the irradiation value lies.
However, Fu further teaches wherein a plurality of predefined value ranges is available and binning is based on the value ranges outside of which the irradiation value lies ([0062] states that “If, however the threshold T is not exceeded for a set of binnable detector elements, a determination (block 206) is made to bin some or all of the binnable detector elements and the selected elements are binned (block 208) for a given view angle by the control logic. While a single threshold T may be employed to create a binary outcome (i.e., all binnable detector elements binned or not binned), in other scenarios multiple thresholds may be employed that allow different degrees of binning. For example, being below T.sub.1 but above T.sub.2 results in two detector elements being binned, being below T.sub.2 but above T.sub.3 results in three detector elements being binned, being below T.sub.3 results in four detector elements being binned, and so forth”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure Takahashi wherein a plurality of predefined value ranges is available and binning is based on the value ranges outside of which the irradiation value lies, as taught by Fu, to improve the signal-to-noise or contrast-to-noise ratio and thus image quality for a given subject and imaging purpose ([0026]).
Regarding claim 17, Takahashi teaches all the limitations of claim 3.
Takahashi fails to teach wherein in a case of a decreasing dose the combining includes: first combining 4 adjacent pixels into a 2x2 group; second combining 9 pixels into a 3x3 group; and third combining 16 pixels into a 4x4 group.
However, Fu further teaches wherein in a case of a decreasing dose the combining includes: first combining 4 adjacent pixels into a 2x2 group; second combining 9 pixels into a 3x3 group; and third combining 16 pixels into a 4x4 group ([0062] states that “signal acquired over a fraction of the view time (e.g., less than or equal to 1/10.sup.th of the view time, such as 1/100.sup.th, or 1/500.sup.th, and so forth) may be used to determine if the observed signal is too low, such as by using the X-ray intensity detector circuitry 168 (FIG. 11) associated with the integrated readout circuitry for respective binnable sets (e.g., 2×2, 2×3, 3×3, and so forth) of pixels or sub-pixels of the detector array… While a single threshold T may be employed to create a binary outcome (i.e., all binnable detector elements binned or not binned), in other scenarios multiple thresholds may be employed that allow different degrees of binning. For example, being below T.sub.1 but above T.sub.2 results in two detector elements being binned, being below T.sub.2 but above T.sub.3 results in three detector elements being binned, being below T.sub.3 results in four detector elements being binned, and so forth”. Meaning that a hierarchy of pixel binning is provided for various thresholding conditions for decreased doses).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure Takahashi wherein in a case of a decreasing dose the combining includes: first combining 4 adjacent pixels into a 2x2 group; second combining 9 pixels into a 3x3 group; and third combining 16 pixels into a 4x4 group, as taught by Fu, to improve the signal-to-noise or contrast-to-noise ratio and thus image quality for a given subject and imaging purpose ([0026]).
Regarding claim 19, Takahashi in view of Fu teaches all the limitations of claim 4.
Takahashi does not teach wherein the regulating hierarchy is selected from a group of regulating hierarchies depending on a type of examination or a patient.
However, Fu further teaches wherein the regulating hierarchy is selected from a group of regulating hierarchies depending on a type of examination or a patient ([0058] states that “Based on the imaging application, the spatial resolution requirements (e.g., minimum or optimum spatial resolution) and noise requirements (e.g., maximum or optimum noise) 184 for the scan protocol are known and may be retrieved from an accessible data store; these are denoted as application-specific factors. These known resolution and noise requirements 184 may be used in conjunction with the information derived from the scout image(s) 180 to parameterize the control logic for detector as well as the operating current for the X-ray source for a given patient and imaging protocol (i.e., clinical or imaging application”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure Takahashi wherein the regulating hierarchy is selected from a group of regulating hierarchies depending on a type of examination or a patient, as taught by Fu, to improve the signal-to-noise or contrast-to-noise ratio and thus image quality for a given subject and imaging purpose ([0026]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Farouk A Bruce whose telephone number is (408)918-7603. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5pm PST.
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, Christopher Koharski can be reached at (571) 272-7230. 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.
/FAROUK A BRUCE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights