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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2015/0141829 to Fukasawa et al. “Fukasawa” in view of U.S. Publication No. 2022/0401078 to Huang et al. “Huang”.
As for Claims 1-3, 5-6, 9-13 and 15-19, Fukasawa discloses an ultrasound imaging system method and computer readable medium for executing processing instructions (Fig. 1 and corresponding descriptions) comprising a controller (16 in Fig. 1 and corresponding descriptions) configured to transmit a pulse inversion (PI) sequence including a positive pulse and negative pulse via an ultrasound probe into biological tissue (Paragraphs [0004], [0015], [0043] and [0050]-[0051]); a signal processing circuit (12 in Fig. 1 and corresponding descriptions) configured to receive echoes of the PI sequence and extract a direct current harmonic (DCH) signal, a fundamental signal including frequencies of both positive and negative pulses and a second harmonic signal based on the echo signals (Figs. 3A, 3B, 5, 6 and corresponding descriptions). Fukasawa discloses wherein the DCH deteriorates deeper targets and the DCH may be “decreased” with filtering processing (Paragraph [0057]). Fukasawa also discloses processing steps to remove the DCH and fundamental components to emphasize the harmonic signals (Paragraph [0059]). Such technique are considered to “weight” the DCH, fundamental and harmonic signals to obtain a final image based on the weighted signals for nonlinear frequencies in its broadest reasonable interpretation.
Nonetheless, Huang teaches from within a similar field of endeavor with respect to ultrasound imaging systems and methods (Abstract) where frequency components (e.g. fundamental and harmonic) are weighted and combined (Paragraphs [0029] and [0062]). Huang explains where the processor may generate a final image based entirely on the harmonic signals, entirely on the fundamental signals or a blend of the signals with weights input by a user interface (Paragraph [0029]).
Accordingly, one skilled in the art would have been motivated to have modified the processing means described by Fukasawa to accept a weighting input for each signal component as described by Huang in order to appropriately weight components based on a desired result (e.g. deep imaging, shallow imaging, etc.). Such a modification would enhance image quality by selectively emphasizing return signals and requires nothing more than combining prior art elements according to known techniques to yield predictable results (MPEP 2143).
With respect to Claims 4 and 14, Examiner notes that by using parts of the DCH signal as described above the final image would improve image penetration, reduce clutter levels and enhance border visibility in its broadest reasonable interpretation. In other words, the claim fails to disclose a specific weight for the DCH signal to achieve the claimed function. Thus, any weight of the DCH would appear to read on the claimed limitations in its broadest reasonable interpretation.
As for Claims 7-8, 17 and 20, Fukasawa discloses adding and subtracting signal components to extract the aforementioned signals (DHC, 2nd harmonic and fundamental) (Paragraphs [0062]-[0063], [0077], [0079] and [0087]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER L COOK whose telephone number is (571)270-7373. The examiner can normally be reached M-F approximately 8AM-5PM.
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, Anne Kozak can be reached at 571-270-0552. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER L COOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights