DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the election/restriction filed on April 14, 2026. Invention I (claims 1-7) has been elected without traverse. Invention II (claims 8-13) and Invention III (claims 14-20) have been withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-7 have been examined and are currently pending.
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 .
Response to Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of I in the reply filed on April 14, 2026 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on March 18, 2025 has been considered. An initialed copy of the Form 1449 is enclosed herewith.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knorl et al. US Publication 20090125757 A1 in view of Harder et al. US Publication 20150043774 A1 further in view of Kurosawa US Publication 20120137241 A1.
Claim 1:
As per claim 1, Knorl teaches a system comprising:
a medical imaging device configured to acquire imaging data of an associated imaging subject disposed in an examination region of the medical imaging device (paragraph 0089 “The systems monitored may acquire images or scans of the patient. The systems monitored may include radiography, angioplasty, computerized tomography, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems. Additional types of systems monitored may include perfusion and diffusion weighted MRI, cardiac computed tomography, computerized axial tomographic scan, electron-beam computed tomography, radionuclide imaging, radionuclide angiography, single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), cardiac positron emission tomography (PET), digital cardiac angiography (DSA), and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) systems. Alternate systems may be monitored.”);
and a problem remediation tool configured to perform at least one remedial action in response to receiving the problem report via the problem reporting GUI dialog (paragraphs 0015-0017, 0022, and 0051 “The embodiments described herein include methods, processes, apparatuses, instructions, systems, or business concepts for monitoring a system and presenting detailed troubleshooting workflow guidance. A system having a number of system components may be monitored for faults. Individual faulty system components may be automatically identified by a processor. After a faulty component is identified, component-related, context-related, and/or user-specific troubleshooting workflow guidance associated with the faulty system component identified may be retrieved, identified, selected, and/or determined by the processor and presented to a user.” and “As an example, the troubleshooting workflow guidance may provide guidance related to a number of workflow steps to be performed to (1) first identify the error with the faulty system component identified and (2) then correct the error identified. If the fault identified is only determined in relation to the system in general, the workflow guidance also may include workflow steps that may be performed to identify the faulty system component within the system. Reproducible and consistent troubleshooting may be performed following the virtual workflow guidance retrieved, selected, and/or identified by a processor and presented to the user, such via a display screen or hardcopy printout. As a result, limitations, inefficiencies, and/or ineffectiveness associated with conventional monitoring systems may be alleviated.”).
Knorl does not teach an electronic controller including a display and at least one user input device, the electronic controller configured to implement an imaging workflow graphical user interface (GUI) enabling an associated user to set up an imaging workflow, execute the imaging workflow to acquire imaging data of the associated imaging subject using the medical imaging device, and display at least one medical image of the associated imaging subject generated by processing of the imaging data acquired by the execution of the imaging workflow. However, Harder teaches an Automatic Planning for Medical Imaging and further teaches, “At 316, planning unit 107 presents the one or more imaging parameters for use in acquisition, reconstruction or processing of medical image data of the subject. The medical image data may include, for example, MR image data of the subject's head or neck. The one or more imaging parameters may be presented via, for instance, a user interface at workstation 103. The user interface may support different types of workflows, such as an MR angiography workflow, a stroke MR imaging workflow, or other dynamic workflows. Textual and/or graphical user guidance may be generated, based on the one or more imaging parameters, to facilitate a workflow for medical image acquisition, reconstruction or processing.” (paragraph 0044) and “The workstation 103 may include a computer and appropriate peripherals, such as a keyboard and display, and can be operated in conjunction with the entire system 100. For example, the workstation 103 may communicate with the imaging device 102 so that the image data acquired by, for instance, imaging device 102 can be rendered at the workstation 103 and viewed on the display. The workstation 103 may include a user interface 130 that allows a radiologist or any other skilled user (e.g., physician, technician, operator, scientist, etc.) to manipulate and view the image data. Further, the workstation 103 may communicate directly with computer system 101 to present acquired, reconstructed and/or processed image data. For example, a radiologist can interactively manipulate the displayed representation of the processed image data and view it from various viewpoints and in various reading modes.” (paragraph 0029). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify Knorl to include an electronic controller including a display and at least one user input device, the electronic controller configured to implement an imaging workflow graphical user interface (GUI) enabling an associated user to set up an imaging workflow, execute the imaging workflow to acquire imaging data of the associated imaging subject using the medical imaging device, and display at least one medical image of the associated imaging subject generated by processing of the imaging data acquired by the execution of the imaging workflow as taught by Harder in order to display image information received from an imaging device and provide steps for the analysis of the image.
Knorl and Harder do not teach a problem reporting GUI dialog hosted on the electronic controller and integrated with the workflow UI, wherein the problem reporting GUI is configured to receive a problem report indicating a problem with the medical imaging device. However, Kurosawa teaches a Medical Image Diagnostic Apparatus and Operations Information Recording Apparatus and further teaches, “The trouble condition information input unit 17 accepts an input operation of trouble condition information via the input device. An input signal of trouble condition information is supplied to the trouble condition information generation unit 19. The trouble condition information includes at least one of a character string (comment), mark, image, and option, each of which expresses a condition of a trouble of a user operation. A comment input method may include a text input method via a keyboard or an audio input method via a microphone or the like. The trouble condition information is input in association with a user operation.” (paragraph 0030), “Every time a user operation is input via the user operation input unit 11, the display unit 25 displays a set of an operation name of the input user operation and the input column IB on the user operation window W2 in real time. Typically, the set of the operation name of the latest user operation and input column IB is displayed below the already displayed sets.” (paragraph 0041), and “In the input column IB, a trouble condition information input via the trouble condition information input unit 17 is displayed in real time. For example, assume that an image saving operation is input via the user operation input unit 11, but the saving operation takes time. In this case, the user can input a character string (comment) "saving took time" in the input column IB of the operation name "image saving", for example, as shown in FIG. 4. This comment is recorded by the trouble condition information recording unit 21 in the storage unit 23 in association with the operation name "image saving". Also, for example, assume that an input operation of an annotation "ABCD" is made via the user operation input unit 11, but only "ABC" is displayed, as shown in an annotation input column AN in FIG. 4. In this case, the user can input a comment "[ABCD] was input, but [D] was not displayed". This comment is recorded by the trouble condition information recording unit 21 in the storage unit 23 in association with an identification name "ABC"…” (paragraph 0043). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at time of filing to modify Knorl and Harder to include a problem reporting GUI dialog hosted on the electronic controller and integrated with the workflow UI, wherein the problem reporting GUI is configured to receive a problem report indicating a problem with the medical imaging device as taught by Kurosawa in order to record or annotate issues associated with the medical imaging device.
Claim 2:
As per claim 2, Knorl, Harder, and Kurosawa teach the system of claim 1 as described above and Kurosawa further teaches wherein the electronic controller is operatively connected with an electronic data network, and the at least one remedial action performed by the problem remediation tool includes:
generating a service request for the problem report (paragraphs 0030, 0041, and 0043). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify Knorl and Harder to include generating a service request for the problem report as taught by Kusosawa allow a user to input issues or problems associated with the imaging device.
and transmitting the service request via the electronic data network to a customer interface via which service requests pertaining to medical devices are received (paragraphs 0030, 0041, and 0043). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify Knorl and Harder to include transmitting the service request via the electronic data network to a customer interface via which service requests pertaining to medical devices are received as taught by Kurosawa a user to input issues or problems associated with the imaging device.
receiving information on status of the transmitted service request from the customer interface (paragraphs 0037 and 0049-0050). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify Knorl and Harder to include receiving information on status of the transmitted service request from the customer interface as taught by Kurosawa in order to capture data associated with a user request.
and displaying the received status of the transmitted service request as a service request status message integrated with the workflow GUI (Figure 4 and paragraph 0040). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify Knorl and Harder to include displaying the received status of the transmitted service request as a service request status message integrated with the workflow GUI in order to provide information regarding the service request.
Claim 3:
As per claim 3, Knorl, Harder, and Kurosawa teach the system of claim 1 as described above and Knorl further teaches wherein the at least one remedial action performed by the problem remediation tool includes:
selecting a service dialog for remediating the problem (paragraph 0030);
and presenting the service dialog via the electronic controller (paragraphs 0015-0017, 0022, and 0051).
Claim 4:
As per claim 4, Knorl, Harder, and Kurosawa teach the system of claim 3 as described above and Knorl further teaches wherein the at least one remedial action further includes:
prior to presenting the service dialog, configuring the service dialog based on a state of the imaging workflow at a time of receipt of the problem report (paragraphs 0074-0075 and 0082).
Claim 5:
As per claim 5, Knorl, Harder, and Kurosawa teach the system of claim 4 as described above and Knorl further teaches wherein the problem remediation tool is hosted on the electronic controller and presents the service dialog via the imaging workflow GUI (paragraphs 0015-0017, 0022, and 0051).
Claim 6:
As per claim 6, Knorl, Harder, and Kurosawa teach the system of claim 1 as described above and Kurosawa further teaches wherein the problem reporting GUI dialog comprises a problem reporting selection input displayed by the imaging workflow GUI (paragraphs 0030, 0041, and 0043). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify Knorl and Harder to include wherein the problem reporting GUI dialog comprises a problem reporting selection input displayed by the imaging workflow GUI as taught by Kurosawa in order to submit or display issues with the medical imaging device.
Claim 7:
As per claim 7, Knorl, Harder, and Kurosawa teach the system of claim 1 as described above and Knorl further teaches wherein the medical imaging device comprises at least one of:
a computed tomography (CT) imaging device (paragraph 0089);
a magnetic resonance (MR) imaging device (paragraph 0089);
a positron emission tomography (PET) imaging device (paragraph 0089);
a single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging device (paragraph 0089);
an interventional radiology (IR) imaging device;
an image guided therapy (IGT) imaging device;
and/or an ultrasound imaging device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
La US Publication 20200320541 A1 Technical Support Troubleshooting Systems
La discloses a method, system, apparatus, and/or device for troubleshooting or fixing a malfunctioning device. The method, system, apparatus, and/or device may include: executing a troubleshooting application to assist a first individual with troubleshooting or fixing a malfunctioning device; capturing an image or a video of the malfunctioning device; displaying the image or the video; sending the image or the video of the malfunctioning device to a second processing device; executing a support representative application to assist a second individual with assisting the first individual with troubleshooting or fixing the malfunctioning device; receiving the image or the video from the first processing device; displaying a graphical user interface (GUI); receiving troubleshooting information; sending the troubleshooting information to the first device; receiving the troubleshooting information from the second processing device; and displaying the troubleshooting information.
Matson Chavarukattil et al. US Publication 20250149153 A1 Electronic Acquisition of Troubleshooting Knowledge for Medical Imaging Scanners
Matson Chavarukattil discloses systems or techniques that facilitate electronic acquisition of troubleshooting knowledge for medical imaging scanners are provided. In various embodiments, a system can access a plain text service manual and a service complaint that are associated with a medical imaging scanner. In various aspects, the system can identify, via named-entity recognition or natural language processing, a semantic hierarchy of the plain text service manual. In various instances, the system can record, via graphical user interface tracking, how a service technician that is troubleshooting the service complaint sequentially navigates through the semantic hierarchy, thereby yielding a troubleshooting trace that corresponds to the service complaint.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW L HAMILTON whose telephone number is (571)270-1837. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9:30-5:30 pm 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.
/MATTHEW L HAMILTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3682
