DETAILED ACTION
Summary
Claims 1-20 are pending in the application. Claims 1-12, 14-15, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 USC 101. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 USC 103.
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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0007] recites “The green dot indicates the start point of the path, which the red dot”. The figures are in greyscale, and reference to the color of the figures should be remove.
[0009] recites “Vessels (blue) and endpoints (red)”. The figures are in greyscale, and reference to the color of the figures should be remove.
[0011] recites “The reference path (blue line) is shown for the vessel of interest, which branches from the center-left bifurcation down to the bottom-most end-point (red squares)”. The figures are in greyscale, and reference to the color of the figures should be remove.
[0041] recites “Vessels (blue) and endpoints (red)”. The figures are in greyscale, and reference to the color of the figures should be remove.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-7, 10, 13, 15-16, and 19 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recite “each vessel segment” in line 12. It should recite “each of the vessel segments”.
Claim 1 recite “each vessel segment” in line 14. It should recite “each of the vessel segments”.
Claim 3 recite “each frame of thermal data” in line 2. It should recite “each frame of the thermal data”.
Claim 3 recites “each binary map” in line 3. It should recite “each of the binary maps”.
Claim 4 recites “determined vessel features” in line 1. It should recite “the determined vessel features”.
Claim 6 recites “vessel segments” in line 2. It should recite “the vessel segments”.
Claim 7 recites “tracking each vessel segment” in line 1. It should recite “tracking each of the vessel segments”.
Claim 7 recites “each vessel segment” in lines 3-4. It should recite “each of the vessel segments”.
Claim 7 recites “tracking each vessel segment” in line 7. It should recite “tracking each of the vessel segments”.
Claim 10 recites “tracking each vessel segment” in line 1. It should recite “tracking each of the vessel segments”.
Claim 13 recites “instruction” in line 2. It should recite “instructions”.
Claim 15 recite “each frame of thermal data” in line 2. It should recite “each frame of the thermal data”.
Claim 15 recites “each binary map” in line 3. It should recite “each of the binary maps”.
Claim 16 recites “tracking each vessel segment” in line 2. It should recite “tracking each of the plurality of vessel segments”.
Claim 16 recites “each vessel segment” in lines 4-5. It should recite “each of the plurality of vessel segments”.
Claim 16 recites “tracking each vessel segment” in line 8. It should recite “tracking each of the plurality of vessel segments”.
Claim 19 recites “tracking each vessel segment” in line 2. It should recite “tracking each of the plurality vessel segments”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-12, 14-15, and 19-20 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 1 recite “thermal data” in line 3. It is not clear if this is referring to the thermal data in line 2, or if this is setting forth new thermal data. Clarification is required. For the purposes of examination, the former definition will be used.
Claim 1 recite “a thermal imaging system” in line 4. It is not clear if this is referring to the thermal imaging system in line 2, or if this is setting forth a new thermal imaging system. Clarification is required. The former definition will be used.
Claim 2 recite “each frame of the thermal data” in line 2. It is not clear if this is referring to each of the frames of thermal images, or if this is setting forth different frames. Clarification is required. For the purposes of examination, the former definition
Claim 10 recites “vessel features” in line 3. It is not clear if this is referring to the vessel features previously set forth, or if this is setting forth new vessel features. Clarification is required. For the purposes of examination, the former definition will be used.
Claim 10 recite “each frame of the thermal data” in line 3. It is not clear if this is referring to each of the frames of thermal images, or if this is setting forth different frames. Clarification is required. For the purposes of examination, the former definition
Claim 11 recites “for a vessel segment” in line 2. It is not clear if that referring to “at least one of the vessel segments” set forth in claim 1, or if this is setting forth an additional vessel segment. Clarification is required. For the purposes of examination, the former definition will be used.
Claim 11 recite “each frame of the thermal data” in line 3. It is not clear if this is referring to each of the frames of thermal images, or if this is setting forth different frames. Clarification is required. For the purposes of examination, the former definition
Claim 14 recite “each frame of the thermal data” in lines 2-3. It is not clear if this is referring to each of the frames of thermal images, or if this is setting forth different frames. Clarification is required. For the purposes of examination, the former definition
Claim 19 recite “each frame of the thermal data” in line 3. It is not clear if this is referring to each of the frames of thermal images, or if this is setting forth different frames. Clarification is required. For the purposes of examination, the former definition
Claim 20 recite “each frame of the thermal data” in lines 3-4. It is not clear if this is referring to each of the frames of thermal images, or if this is setting forth different frames. Clarification is required. For the purposes of examination, the former definition
All claims dependent from the above claims rejected under 35 USC 112(b) are also rejected, as the limitations of the dependent claims fail to cure the deficiencies identified above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite a mental process. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional limitations are extra-solution activities or mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer system. The claims does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional limitations are extra-solution activities or mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer system.
Claim 1 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. The steps (b)-(f) are steps which can be performed in the human mind. A user, looking at thermal data, can generate segmented vessel data using only there mind (e.g. by thinking at the different vessel segments). The user can then determine vessel features and identify the vessel segments using only there mind (by thinking about the features and using that to identify the segment). The user can further measure the temperature along the vessel segment (by thinking what temperature the thermal data says that the vessel is) and track the vessel across the frames (by thinking about which vessel is which among the frames). The claim recites an abstract idea.
The claim is not integrated into a practical application. The additional element of the computer system does not integrate the abstract idea in to a practical application .The computer system is recited at a high level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using the generic computer component, which does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The additional step of accessing thermal data is directed to an insignificant pre-solution activity of gathering data, and cannot integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The additional step of generating a report is directed to an insignificant post solution activity of outputting data, and cannot integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not contain any addition elements, when view individually or as an ordered combination, which amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. As detailed above, the additional elements are mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer system, and insignificant extra-solution activities. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 2 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. The step of generating segmented vessel is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. A user can, looking at frames of thermal data, think about (generate) the image as a binary map. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no additional limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 3 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. The step of generating segmented vessel is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. A user can, looking at frames of thermal data, think about (generate) the image as a skeleton map. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no additional limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 4 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. Specifying what the determined vessel features could be is further narrowing the mental process, and is still directed to a mental process. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no additional limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 5 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. Specifying what the determined vessel features could be is further narrowing the mental process, and is still directed to a mental process. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no additional limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 6 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. Specifying how the vessel can be identified is further narrowing the mental process, and is still directed to a mental process. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no additional limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 7 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. The steps of generating vessel segment feature data, generating clustered segments and tracking the segment are all steps which can reasonably be performed in the human mind. A user, looking at thermal, can determine vessel segment features (by thinking about the features), generate clustered vessel segment feature data (by grouping them in their mind), and track the vessels (by thinking about which vessel is which in different images). The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains not limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 8 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. A user could cluster the segments using a hierarchical clustering algorithm using only their mind. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no additional limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 9 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. Specifying what the vessel segment features could be is further narrowing the mental process, and is still directed to a mental process. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no additional limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 10 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. A user, looking at frames of data, could perform a point cloud registration using only their mind or with the aid of pen/paper. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no addition limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, or amount to significantly more than the practical application. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 11 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The step of generating the report by generating a thermogram based on temperature measurements is directed to an insignificant post solution activity of outputting data, and cannot integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim is not significantly more than the judicial exception. The step of generating the report by generating a thermogram based on temperature measurements is directed to an insignificant post solution activity of outputting data, and which does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 12 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The step of generating the report by generating a thermogram based on temperature measurements is directed to an insignificant post solution activity of outputting data, and cannot integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim is not significantly more than the judicial exception. The step of generating the report by generating a thermogram based on temperature measurements is directed to an insignificant post solution activity of outputting data, and which does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 13 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. The method steps can be performed in the human mind. A user, looking at thermal data, can generate segmented vessel data using only there mind (by thinking at the different vessel segments). The user can measure the temperature along the vessel segment (by thinking what temperature the thermal data says that the vessel is) and track the vessel across the frames (by thinking about which vessel is which among the frames). The claim recites an abstract idea.
The claim is not integrated into a practical application. The additional element of the non-transitory computer readable storage medium does not integrate the abstract idea in to a practical application. The computer components are recited at a high level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using the generic computer components, which does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The additional step of receiving thermal data is directed to an insignificant pre-solution activity of gathering data, and cannot integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The additional step of outputting a report is directed to an insignificant post solution activity of outputting data, and cannot integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not contain any addition elements, when view individually or as an ordered combination, which amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. As detailed above, the additional elements are mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer system and insignificant extra-solution activities. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 14 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. The step of generating segmented vessel is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. A user can, looking at frames of thermal data, think about (generate) the image as a binary map. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no additional limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 15 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. The step of generating segmented vessel is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. A user can, looking at frames of thermal data, think about (generate) the image as a skeleton map. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no additional limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 16 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. The steps of generating vessel segment feature data, generating clustered segments and tracking the segment are all steps which can reasonably be performed in the human mind. A user, looking at thermal, can determine vessel segment features (e.g. by thinking about the features), generate clustered vessel segment feature data (e.g. by grouping them in their mind), and track the vessels (e.g. by thinking about which vessel is which in different images). The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains not limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 17 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. A user could cluster the segments using a hierarchical clustering algorithm using only their mind. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no additional limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 18 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. Specifying what the vessel segment features could be is further narrowing the mental process, and is still directed to a mental process. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no additional limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the claimed abstract idea. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 19 recites an abstract idea without significantly more. A user, looking at frames of data, could perform a point cloud registration using only their mind or with the aid of pen/paper. The claim recites an abstract idea. The claim contains no addition limitations which either integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, or amount to significantly more than the practical application. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
Claim 20 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The step of generating the report by generating a thermogram based on temperature measurements is directed to an insignificant post solution activity of outputting data, and cannot integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim is not significantly more than the judicial exception. The step of generating the report by generating a thermogram based on temperature measurements is directed to an insignificant post solution activity of outputting data, and which does not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claim is not subject matter eligible.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, 11, 13-15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakileti (U.S PGPub 2018/0005085 A1) in view of Galeotti et al. (U.S PGPub 2022/0383500 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Kakileti teaches a method for detecting and tracking blood vessel temperature from thermal data acquired with a thermal imaging system (Abstract), the method comprising:
(a) accessing thermal data with a computer system (Fig. 4, 402) [0016]+[0020], wherein the thermal data comprise frames of thermal images acquired from a subject with a thermal imaging system [0014]-[0015] and depicting at least one blood vessel of the subject (Fig. 4, 404) [0021];
(b) generating segmented vessel data from the thermal data using the computer system to segment the at least one blood vessel depicted in the thermal data [0021]-[0022]+[0062]+[0068];
(c) determining vessel features for each segmented blood vessel in the segmented vessel data using the computer system [0080]+[0087]-[0090];
(d) identifying, by the computer system, vessel segments in the segmented vessel data based on the determined vessel features [0022]-[0023]+[0101];
(e) measuring, by the computer system, a temperature along each vessel segment based on the thermal data [0082];
(g) generating a report that indicates temperature measurements along at least one of the vessel segments [0104] (images and data are output, and that is considered a “report”).
Kakileti fails to explicitly teach tracking each vessel segment across the frames of thermal images using the computer system; and as tracked across the frames of thermal images.
Galeotti teaches a system for tracking features in medical images (Abstract). This system can track blood vessels [0009]+[0067] across different frames of thermal images [0066] using a computer system [0087]. This system outputs the results of the tracking across the frames [0089].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the combined system to track the vessel segments across frames, as taught by Galeotti, because this allows for the system to better track motion, even when the vessels are contorted during the procedure, as recognized by Galeotti [0003]-[0004].
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. Kakileti further teaches wherein segmenting the thermal data to generate the segmented vessel data comprises generating a binary map for each frame of the thermal data [0062] (the image can be a video, which is made up of multiple frames, so the image is segmented in in frame).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of references teaches the invention teaches the invention substantially as claimed. Kakileti further teaches wherein generating the segmented vessel data further comprises generating a vascular skeleton map for each frame of thermal data by skeletonizing each binary map [0080].
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of reference teaches the invention substantially as claimed. Kakileti further teaches where determined vessel features comprise at least one of vessel segment end points, vessel segment branch points, vessel segment midpoints, or vessel segment lengths [0090] (the centroid would be on the midpoint of the vessel).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. Kakileti further teaches generating the report includes generating a thermogram for a vessel segment based on temperature measurements for that vessel segment as tracked in each frame of the thermal data [0104].
Kakileti fails to explicitly teach as tracked in each frame of the thermal data.
Galeotti teaches a system for tracking features in medical images (Abstract). This system can track blood vessels [0009]+[0067] across different frames of thermal images [0066] using a computer system [0087]. This system outputs the results of the tracking across the frames [0089].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the combined system to track the vessel segments across frames, as taught by Galeotti, because this allows for the system to better track motion, even when the vessels are contorted during the procedure, as recognized by Galeotti [0003]-[0004]. One of ordinary skill would recognize the combined system would generate the thermal image of each of the vessel segments for each frame.
Regarding Claim 13, Kakileti teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon instruction that when executed by a processor cause the processor to perform a method [0104] comprising, the method comprising:
receiving thermal data by the processor (Fig. 4, 402) [0016]+[0020], wherein the thermal data comprise frames of thermal images acquired from a subject with a thermal imaging system [0014]-[0015 and depicting at least one blood vessel of the subject (Fig. 4, 404) [0021];
generating segmented vessel data from the thermal data [0021]-[0022]+[0062]+[0068], the segmented vessel data comprising a plurality of vessel segments associated with the at least one blood vessel depicted in the thermal data [0062]+[0068]+[0073];
measuring a temperature along each of the plurality of vessel segments based on the thermal data [0082];
outputting a report that indicates temperature measurements along at least one of the plurality of vessel segments [0104] (images and data are output, and that is considered a “report”).
Kakileti fails to explicitly teach tracking each of the plurality of vessel segments across the frames of thermal images; and as tracked across the frames of thermal images.
Galeotti teaches a system for tracking features in medical images (Abstract). This system can track blood vessels [0009]+[0067] across different frames of thermal images [0066] using a computer system [0087]. This system outputs the results of the tracking across the frames [0089].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the combined system to track the vessel segments across frames, as taught by Galeotti, because this allows for the system to better track motion, even when the vessels are contorted during the procedure, as recognized by Galeotti [0003]-[0004].
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. Kakileti further teaches wherein generating the segmented vessel data comprises generating a binary map for each frame of the thermal data [0062] (the image can be a video, which is made up of multiple frames, so the image is segmented in in frame).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of references teaches the invention teaches the invention substantially as claimed. Kakileti further teaches wherein generating the segmented vessel data further comprises generating a vascular skeleton map for each frame of thermal data by skeletonizing each binary map [0080].
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. Kakileti further teaches outputting the report comprises generating a thermogram for one of the plurality of vessel segments based on temperature measurements for that vessel segment as tracked in each frame of the thermal data [0104].
Kakileti fails to explicitly teach tracking the plurality of the vessel segments across the frames of thermal images.
Galeotti teaches a system for tracking features in medical images (Abstract). This system can track blood vessels [0009]+[0067] across different frames of thermal images [0066] using a computer system [0087]. This system outputs the results of the tracking across the frames [0089].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the combined system to track the vessel segments across frames, as taught by Galeotti, because this allows for the system to better track motion, even when the vessels are contorted during the procedure, as recognized by Galeotti [0003]-[0004]. One of ordinary skill would recognize the combined system would generate the thermal image of each of the vessel segments for each frame.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakileti and Galeotti as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Prokoski (U.S PGPub 2010/0172567 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. Kakileti is silent regarding wherein the determined vessel features comprise vessel segment end points and vessel segment branch points.
Prokoski teaches a system for producing infrared surface models (Abstract). This system uses vessel segment end points and branch points as determined vessel features [0468].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the vessel features analyzed by the combination with vessel branch and end points, as taught by Prokoski, as the substitution for one known vessel feature with another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill would have been able to carry out such a substitution, and the results of using vessel branch and endpoints as vessel features are reasonably predictable.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakileti and Galeotti as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Lyu et al. (U.S PGPub 2022/0167912 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of reference teaches the invention substantially as claimed. The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein vessel segments are identified based on vessel paths extending from at least one of: a first vessel segment end point to a second vessel segment end point; a vessel segment end point to a vessel segment branch point; or a first vessel segment branch point to a second vessel segment branch point.
Lyu teaches a blood vessel detecting system (Abstract). This system identifies vessel segments based on vessel paths [0049] extending from at least one of: a first vessel segment end point to a second vessel segment end point; a vessel segment end point to a vessel segment branch point; or a first vessel segment branch point to a second vessel segment branch point [0049]+[0057] (Fig. 8, Sk shows the starting point is a branch point) (Fig. 9, Vh includes branch points) [0053].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the combined system to determine vessel paths, as taught by Lyu, because this can more accurately detect a blood vessel in an image, as recognized by Lyu [0005].
Claims 7, 9, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakileti in view of Galeotti as applied to claims 1 and 13, respectively, above, and further in view of Shimamura (U.S PGPub 2019/0197705 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein tracking each vessel segment across the frames of thermal images in the thermal data comprises: generating vessel segment feature data by determining vessel segment features for each vessel segment; generating clustered vessel segment feature data by applying a clustering algorithm to the vessel segment feature data; and tracking each vessel segment based on the clustered vessel segment feature data.
Shimamura teaches an image processing system (Abstract). This system wherein tracking each vessel segment across the frames of thermal images in the thermal data comprises: generating vessel segment feature data by determining vessel segment features for each vessel segment [0103]-[0104]; generating clustered vessel segment feature data by applying a clustering algorithm to the vessel segment feature data [0104]; and tracking each vessel segment based on the clustered vessel segment feature data [0104] (tracked in each cluster layer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the combined system to track the vessels using a clustering algorithm, as taught by Shimamura, because this improves the visibility of structures in the imaging, as recognized by Shimamura [0010]-[0011].
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially a claimed. Kakileti further teaches wherein the vessel segment features comprise a vessel segment midpoint [0090] and a vessel segment length [0080].
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein tracking each vessel segment across the frames of thermal images in the thermal data comprises: generating vessel segment feature data by determining vessel segment features for each vessel segment; generating clustered vessel segment feature data by applying a clustering algorithm to the vessel segment feature data; and tracking each vessel segment based on the clustered vessel segment feature data.
Shimamura teaches an image processing system (Abstract). This system wherein tracking each vessel segment across the frames of thermal images in the thermal data comprises: generating vessel segment feature data by determining vessel segment features for each vessel segment [0103]-[0104]; generating clustered vessel segment feature data by applying a clustering algorithm to the vessel segment feature data [0104]; and tracking each vessel segment based on the clustered vessel segment feature data [0104] (tracked in each cluster layer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the combined system to track the vessels using a clustering algorithm, as taught by Shimamura, because this improves the visibility of structures in the imaging, as recognized by Shimamura [0010]-[0011].
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially a claimed. Kakileti further teaches wherein the vessel segment features comprise a vessel segment midpoint [0090] and a vessel segment length [0080].
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakileti in view of Galeotti and Shimamura as applied to claim 7 and 16, respectively, above, and further in view of Merckx et al. (U.S PGPub 2015/0228072 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the clustering algorithm comprises a hierarchical clustering algorithm.
Merckx teaches a system for analyzing an image (Abstract). This system uses a hierarchical clustering algorithm for analyzing the image [0036]-[0037].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the clustering algorithm of the combination with a hierarchical clustering algorithm, as taught by Merckx, as the substitution for one known clustering algorithm with another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill would have been able to carry out such a substitution, and the results of using a hierarchical clustering algorithm are reasonably predictable.
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the clustering algorithm comprises a hierarchical clustering algorithm.
Merckx teaches a system for analyzing an image (Abstract). This system uses a hierarchical clustering algorithm for analyzing the image [0036]-[0037].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the clustering algorithm of the combination with a hierarchical clustering algorithm, as taught by Merckx, as the substitution for one known clustering algorithm with another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill would have been able to carry out such a substitution, and the results of using a hierarchical clustering algorithm are reasonably predictable.
Claims 10 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakileti in view of Galeotti as applied to claim 1 and 13, respectively, above, and further in view of Kaiser et al. (U.S PGPub 2017/0071508 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein tracking each vessel segment across the frames of thermal images in the thermal data further comprises applying a point cloud registration to vessel features in each frame of thermal data.
Kaiser teaches a system for tracking images (Abstract). This system tracks each vessel segment across the frames of thermal images in the thermal data [0006] further comprises applying a point cloud registration to vessel features in each frame of thermal data [0026]+[0084].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to track the vessel segments using point cloud registration, as taught by Kaiser, as the substitution for one known tracking method with another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill would have been able to carry out such a substitution, and the results of tracking using point cloud registration are reasonably predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the combined system would use the point cloud registration of Kaiser on the vessel segments of the thermal images of Kakileti.
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. The combination fails to explicitly teach wherein tracking each vessel segment across the frames of thermal images in the thermal data further comprises applying a point cloud registration to vessel features in each frame of thermal data.
Kaiser teaches a system for tracking images (Abstract). This system tracks each vessel segment across the frames of thermal images in the thermal data [0006] further comprises applying a point cloud registration to vessel features in each frame of thermal data [0026]+[0084].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to track the vessel segments using point cloud registration, as taught by Kaiser, as the substitution for one known tracking method with another yields predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. One of ordinary skill would have been able to carry out such a substitution, and the results of tracking using point cloud registration are reasonably predictable. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the combined system would use the point cloud registration of Kaiser on the vessel segments of the thermal images of Kakileti.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakileti in view of Galeotti as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Prokoski (U.S Patent US 6,173,068 B1) (Prokoski’068).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of references teaches the invention substantially as claimed. Kakileti further teaches wherein the thermogram comprises a data matrix having a first dimension that samples the vessel segment temperature measurement over space [0015].
The combination is silent regarding a second dimensions that samples the vessel segment temperature measurement over time.
Prokoski’068 teaches a method for annotating medical images (Abstract). This system stores thermogram is matrices with dimensions that includes a dimension of the temperature readings over time (Col 27, lines 30-34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the combined system to include a matrix dimension of the temperature readings over time, as taught by Prokoski, because this allows the system to generate thermograms for any point in time when the thermal images were recorded, thereby allows for the user to see how the temperature changes over time, and allowing the user to choose a thermogram of the best view taken, thereby increasing the quality of the image, as recognized by Kakileti [0027].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Clifton et al. (U.S PGPub 2015/0324966 A1), which teaches a image processing apparatus for vascular images.
Liu et a. (U.S PGPub 8,149,273 B2), which teaches a method of segmenting vessels for vital sign calculation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN D MATTSON whose telephone number is (408)918-7613. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 AM - 5 PM 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, Pascal Bui-Pho can be reached at (571) 272-2714. 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.
/SEAN D MATTSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights