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 § 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 2-3, 6, 8-9, and 12 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 2 recites “a condition of setting a saturation pulse” and is not definite since claim 1 recites “a condition of setting a saturation pulse” and it is not clear whether it is same or different condition of setting a saturation pulse or not.
Claim 3 recites “the condition of setting a saturation pulse” and “a condition of setting a saturation pulse.” It is not definite whether it refers to same “a condition of setting a saturation pulse” recited in claim 1 or different and distinct from the limitation.
Claim 6 recites “a pulse sequence” and is not definite whether it is same or different from recited “a pulse sequence” in claim 1.
Claim 8 recites “a condition of setting a saturation pulse” and is not definite since claim 7 recites “a condition of setting a saturation pulse” and it is not clear whether it is same or different condition of setting a saturation pulse or not.
Claim 9 recites “the condition of setting a saturation pulse” and “a condition of setting a saturation pulse.” It is not definite whether it refers to same “a condition of setting a saturation pulse” recited in claim 7 or different and distinct from the limitation.
Claim 12 recites “a pulse sequence” and is not definite whether it is same or different from recited “a pulse sequence” in claim 7.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 7, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Yoshizawa et al.,” US 2023/0349995 (hereinafter Yoshizawa) and “Polimeni et al.,” US 2014/0225612 (hereinafter Polimeni).
Regarding to claim 1, Yoshizawa teaches a magnetic resonance data acquisition apparatus (MRI apparatus [0034]) comprising processing circuitry configured to:
obtain a designated region of interest (predetermined site [0045]);
generate a pulse sequence for acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times based on the region of interest while changing at least one of a region for acquisition or a condition of setting a saturation pulse (pulse sequence determined based on user selection and imaging condition [0059]-[0060]; condition setting screen displays blocks for receiving a button for instructing whether a saturation pulse is required and setting for saturation pulse); and
acquire of magnetic resonance data according to the pulse sequence (imaging performed and data collection in region of k-space data [0067]).
Yoshizawa does not explicitly teach multiple pieces of data as claimed.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in MRI apparatus, Polimeni teaches acquiring image data from multiple locations in a subject using pulse sequence ([0028]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify pulse sequence of MRI as taught by Yoshizawa to incorporate teaching of Polimeni, since acquiring multiple image data from multiple locations was well known in the art as taught by Polimeni. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Yoshizawa with no change in their respective functions, using pulse sequence while shifting FOV of MRI, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to produce a plurality of image slices, reducing repetition of pulse sequence and scan time ([0021]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding to claim 4, Yoshizawa and Polimeni together teach all limitations of claim 1 as set forth above.
Yoshizawa does not further explicitly disclose wherein the processing circuitry is configured to generate the pulse sequence for acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times while shifting a position of the region of interest along a designated direction, and the multiple pieces of magnetic resonance data are data corresponding to respective positions of the region of interest changed.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in MRI, Polimeni teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to generate the pulse sequence for acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times while shifting a position of the region of interest along a designated direction, and the multiple pieces of magnetic resonance data are data corresponding to respective positions of the region of interest changed (Figure 4B, simultaneously acquiring image data from multiple slice locations in a subject such that FOV shift is imparted to MR signals [0028]; FOV shift selected by user [0055]; and [0060]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify pulse sequence of MRI as taught by Yoshizawa to incorporate teaching of Polimeni, since acquiring multiple image data from multiple locations was well known in the art as taught by Polimeni. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Yoshizawa with no change in their respective functions, using pulse sequence while shifting FOV of MRI, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to produce a plurality of image slices, reducing repetition of pulse sequence and scan time ([0021]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding to claim 7, Yoshizawa teaches a magnetic resonance data acquisition method (MRI apparatus [0034]), comprising :
obtaining a designated region of interest (predetermined site [0045]);
generating a pulse sequence for acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times based on the region of interest while changing at least one of a region for acquisition or a condition of setting a saturation pulse (pulse sequence determined based on user selection and imaging condition [0059]-[0060]; condition setting screen displays blocks for receiving a button for instructing whether a saturation pulse is required and setting for saturation pulse); and
acquiring magnetic resonance data according to the pulse sequence (imaging performed and data collection in region of k-space data [0067]).
Yoshizawa does not explicitly teach multiple pieces of data as claimed.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in MRI method, Polimeni teaches acquiring image data from multiple locations in a subject using pulse sequence ([0028]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify pulse sequence of MRI as taught by Yoshizawa to incorporate teaching of Polimeni, since acquiring multiple image data from multiple locations was well known in the art as taught by Polimeni. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Yoshizawa with no change in their respective functions, using pulse sequence while shifting FOV of MRI, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to produce a plurality of image slices, reducing repetition of pulse sequence and scan time ([0021]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding to claim 10, Yoshizawa and Polimeni together teach all limitations of claim 7 as set forth above.
Yoshizawa does not further explicitly disclose wherein the processing circuitry is configured to generate the pulse sequence for acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times while shifting a position of the region of interest along a designated direction, and the multiple pieces of magnetic resonance data are data corresponding to respective positions of the region of interest changed.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in MRI, Polimeni teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to generate the pulse sequence for acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times while shifting a position of the region of interest along a designated direction, and the multiple pieces of magnetic resonance data are data corresponding to respective positions of the region of interest changed (Figure 4B, simultaneously acquiring image data from multiple slice locations in a subject such that FOV shift is imparted to MR signals [0028]; FOV shift selected by user [0055]; and [0060]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify pulse sequence of MRI as taught by Yoshizawa to incorporate teaching of Polimeni, since acquiring multiple image data from multiple locations was well known in the art as taught by Polimeni. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Yoshizawa with no change in their respective functions, using pulse sequence while shifting FOV of MRI, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to produce a plurality of image slices, reducing repetition of pulse sequence and scan time ([0021]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding to claim 13, Yoshizawa teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium including computer executable instructions, wherein the instructions, when executed by a processor (computer reading a program stored in the storage device [0037]), cause the processor to perform a method comprising:
obtaining a designated region of interest (imaging of predetermined site [0045]);
generating a pulse sequence for acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times based on the region of interest while changing at least one of a region for acquisition or a condition of setting a saturation pulse (pulse sequence determined based on user selection and imaging condition [0059]-[0060]; condition setting screen displays blocks for receiving a button for instructing whether a saturation pulse is required and setting for saturation pulse);
acquiring multiple pieces of magnetic resonance data according to the pulse sequence (imaging performed and data collection in region of k-space data [0067]).
Yoshizawa does not explicitly teach multiple pieces of data as claimed.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in MRI method, Polimeni teaches acquiring image data from multiple locations in a subject using pulse sequence ([0028]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify pulse sequence of MRI as taught by Yoshizawa to incorporate teaching of Polimeni, since acquiring multiple image data from multiple locations was well known in the art as taught by Polimeni. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Yoshizawa with no change in their respective functions, using pulse sequence while shifting FOV of MRI, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to produce a plurality of image slices, reducing repetition of pulse sequence and scan time ([0021]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 2-3, 5, 8-9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshizawa and Polimeni as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of “Sugiura,” US,7,990,140 (hereinafter Sugiura).
Regarding to claim 2, Yoshizawa and Polimeni together teach all limitations of claim 1 as set forth above.
Yoshizawa further teaches determine a condition of setting a saturation pulse or a region of interest that makes an influence of fat in an acquisition-target region equal to or below a threshold (specify to select to add fat saturation pulse to only a part of the k-space data or to add the fat saturation pulse to the whole ([0062]), but does not further disclose wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine, from the multiple pieces of magnetic resonance data.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in MRI apparatus, Sugiura teaches MRI apparatus performing fat-suppression pulses based on image data corresponding to various fat-suppression levels (Col. 4 lines 15-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify saturation pulse setting unit as taught by Yoshizawa to incorporate teaching of Sugiura, since determining a condition of setting a saturation pulse such as a flip-angle that makes an influence of a strong peak signal equal to or below a threshold selected by a user was well known in the art as taught by Sugiura. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Yoshizawa with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide a desired fat-suppression for imaging (Col. 8 lines 45-55), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding to claims 3 and 5, Yoshizawa teaches all limitations of claim 1 as set forth above.
Yoshizawa teaches wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to perform control so that (a) the at least one of the region for acquisition or the condition of setting a saturation pulse changed by the processing circuitry (specify to select to add fat saturation pulse to only a part of the k-space data or to add the fat saturation pulse to the whole [0062]) and (b) corresponding magnetic resonance data are displayed (displaying MRI data [0067]); but does not further explicitly disclose “determine a condition of setting a saturation pulse or a region of interest that makes an influence of a strong peak signal in an acquisition-target region equal to or below a threshold based on one region for acquisition or one condition of setting a saturation pulse selected by a user” and “wherein the processing circuitry is configured to generate the pulse sequence for acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times while changing at least one condition among a position, an angle, and number of the saturation pulse, and the multiple pieces of magnetic resonance data are data corresponding to respective conditions of the saturation pulse changed.”
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in MRI imaging apparatus, Sugiura teaches MRI apparatus performing fat-suppression pulses based on image data corresponding to various fat-suppression levels (Col. 4 lines 15-26), and scan-condition setting unit and fat-suppression level setting unit sets a fat-suppression level based on input of user (Col. 7 lines 17-31). Sugiura explicitly discloses setting gat-suppression level can be 100%, 70% or 30% or selecting desired fat-suppression level among plurality of predetermined fat-suppression levels by input device (Col. 7 line 50-Col. 8 line 13), thus reads on claimed limitation of saturation pulse that makes an influence of strong peak signal (Fat signal) equal to or below a threshold (fat-suppression level which would suppress the peak signal to be below threshold) selected by a user.
Sugiura further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to generate the pulse sequence for acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times while changing at least one condition among a position, an angle, and number of the saturation pulse, and the multiple pieces of magnetic resonance data are data corresponding to respective conditions of the saturation pulse changed (flip-angle calculation unit for flip angle that achieves a desired fat-suppression level, Col. 8 lines 45-55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify saturation pulse setting unit as taught by Yoshizawa to incorporate teaching of Sugiura, since determining a condition of setting a saturation pulse such as a flip-angle that makes an influence of a strong peak signal equal to or below a threshold selected by a user was well known in the art as taught by Sugiura. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Yoshizawa with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide a desired fat-suppression for imaging (Col. 8 lines 45-55), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding to claim 8, Yoshizawa and Polimeni together teach all limitations of claim 7 as set forth above.
Yoshizawa further teaches determining a condition of setting a saturation pulse or a region of interest that makes an influence of fat in an acquisition-target region equal to or below a threshold (specify to select to add fat saturation pulse to only a part of the k-space data or to add the fat saturation pulse to the whole ([0062]), but does not further disclose wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine, from the multiple pieces of magnetic resonance data.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in MRI apparatus, Sugiura teaches MRI apparatus performing fat-suppression pulses based on image data corresponding to various fat-suppression levels (Col. 4 lines 15-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify saturation pulse setting unit as taught by Yoshizawa to incorporate teaching of Sugiura, since determining a condition of setting a saturation pulse such as a flip-angle that makes an influence of a strong peak signal equal to or below a threshold selected by a user was well known in the art as taught by Sugiura. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Yoshizawa with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide a desired fat-suppression for imaging (Col. 8 lines 45-55), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding to claims 9 and 11, Yoshizawa and Polimeni together teach all limitations of claim 7 as set forth above.
Yoshizawa teaches wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to perform control so that (a) the at least one of the region for acquisition or the condition of setting a saturation pulse changed by the processing circuitry (specify to select to add fat saturation pulse to only a part of the k-space data or to add the fat saturation pulse to the whole [0062]) and (b) corresponding magnetic resonance data are displayed (displaying MRI data [0067]); but does not further explicitly disclose “determine a condition of setting a saturation pulse or a region of interest that makes an influence of a strong peak signal in an acquisition-target region equal to or below a threshold based on one region for acquisition or one condition of setting a saturation pulse selected by a user” and “wherein the processing circuitry is configured to generate the pulse sequence for acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times while changing at least one condition among a position, an angle, and number of the saturation pulse, and the multiple pieces of magnetic resonance data are data corresponding to respective conditions of the saturation pulse changed.”
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in MRI imaging apparatus, Sugiura teaches MRI apparatus performing fat-suppression pulses based on image data corresponding to various fat-suppression levels (Col. 4 lines 15-26), and scan-condition setting unit and fat-suppression level setting unit sets a fat-suppression level based on input of user (Col. 7 lines 17-31). Sugiura explicitly discloses setting gat-suppression level can be 100%, 70% or 30% or selecting desired fat-suppression level among plurality of predetermined fat-suppression levels by input device (Col. 7 line 50-Col. 8 line 13), thus reads on claimed limitation of saturation pulse that makes an influence of strong peak signal (Fat signal) equal to or below a threshold (fat-suppression level which would suppress the peak signal to be below threshold) selected by a user.
Sugiura further teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to generate the pulse sequence for acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times while changing at least one condition among a position, an angle, and number of the saturation pulse, and the multiple pieces of magnetic resonance data are data corresponding to respective conditions of the saturation pulse changed (flip-angle calculation unit for flip angle that achieves a desired fat-suppression level, Col. 8 lines 45-55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify saturation pulse setting unit as taught by Yoshizawa to incorporate teaching of Sugiura, since determining a condition of setting a saturation pulse such as a flip-angle that makes an influence of a strong peak signal equal to or below a threshold selected by a user was well known in the art as taught by Sugiura. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Yoshizawa with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide a desired fat-suppression for imaging (Col. 8 lines 45-55), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshizawa and Polimeni as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of “Muftuler et al.,” US 2015/0137811 (hereinafter Muftuler).
Regarding to claim 6, Yoshizawa and Polimeni together teach all limitations of claim 1 as set forth above.
Yoshizawa does not further explicitly disclose wherein if acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times, the processing circuitry is configured to generate a pulse sequence having a repetition time for acquiring the magnetic resonance data multiple times that is shorter than a repetition time for main acquisition.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in MRI apparatus, Muftuler teaches wherein if acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times, the processing circuitry is configured to generate a pulse sequence having a repetition time for acquiring the magnetic resonance data multiple times that is shorter than a repetition time for main acquisition (acquire several projections using pulse sequence with very short repetition time [0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify repetition time as taught by Yoshizawa and Polimeni to incorporate teaching of Muftuler, since shorter repetition time was well known in the art as taught by Muftuler. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Yoshizawa and Polimeni with no change in their respective functions, configuring pulse sequence with short repetition time, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide acquisition of multiple projections without increasing the scan time ([0033]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding to claim 12, Yoshizawa and Polimeni together teach all limitations of claim 7 as set forth above.
Yoshizawa does not further explicitly disclose wherein if acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times, the processing circuitry is configured to generate a pulse sequence having a repetition time for acquiring the magnetic resonance data multiple times that is shorter than a repetition time for main acquisition.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in MRI apparatus, Muftuler teaches wherein if acquiring magnetic resonance data multiple times, the processing circuitry is configured to generate a pulse sequence having a repetition time for acquiring the magnetic resonance data multiple times that is shorter than a repetition time for main acquisition (acquire several projections using pulse sequence with very short repetition time [0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify repetition time as taught by Yoshizawa and Polimeni to incorporate teaching of Muftuler, since shorter repetition time was well known in the art as taught by Muftuler. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Yoshizawa and Polimeni with no change in their respective functions, configuring pulse sequence with short repetition time, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide acquisition of multiple projections without increasing the scan time ([0033]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICIA J PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-1788. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8 am - 3 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, 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.
/PATRICIA J PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights