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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 9/4/2026 has been entered. Claims 1 and 3-7 remain pending the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 9/4/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive or are moot.
Applicant argues on pages 8-11 that the previous rejection does not address the newly added limitations to the independent claims requiring that the probe indicator be displayed on the ultrasound image obtained by the first ultrasound probe. This argument is moot in view of the new grounds of rejection which relies on a newly cited portions of Arakita to disclose these limitations in the claim. Accordingly, this argument is moot.
Applicant argues on pages 8-11 that the FOV indicator on Arakita does not rely on an “illustrated indicator” as newly recited in the independent claims. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The FOV image reads on the broadest reasonable interpretation of illustrated indicator because it is an image indicating a FOV of a probe. Accordingly, this argument is not persuasive. If the Applicant wishes to differentiate their invention in this manner, the Examiner recommends incorporating additional details about the illustrated indicator into the claims, such as those found in claim 3.
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, and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US20120203107) and Arakita et al. (US20140253544, hereafter Arakita).
Regarding claims 1 and 7, Kim discloses in Figure 1 an ultrasound image processing device a processor configured to and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing an ultrasound image processing program read by an ultrasound image processing device, the program causing a processor provided in the ultrasound image processing device to execute a process (Kim, Para 12; “According to aspects of exemplary embodiments of the present disclosure, there are provided an ultrasound measuring apparatus that acquires a plurality of images using multiple ultrasound probes and synthesizes the same, in turn producing images of a subject, as well as a control method thereof”) comprising:
generate ultrasound image data corresponding to each of a plurality of ultrasound probes based on a reception signal output from each of the ultrasound probes (Kim, Para 32; “The ultrasound measuring apparatus according to one embodiment of the present disclosure comprises: multiple ultrasound probes 10, each of which irradiates ultrasound toward a subject and receives a reflected ultrasound signal, thus generating an electrical signal; a control part 20 that accepts the electrical signal relating to the subject transmitted from each of the multiple ultrasound probes 10 and generates an image signal based on the electrical signals; and a display part 30 that receives the image signal from the control part 20 and displays an image of the inside of the subject”);
acquire position-and-posture information (Kim, Para 36; “A sensor 15 is mounted on each of the multiple ultrasound probes 10 […] include information as to how far the second ultrasound probe is spaced apart from the first ultrasound probe when the measurement is implemented, and […] an angle between the second ultrasound probe and the first ultrasound probe when measurement is implemented”) of each of the ultrasound probes (Kim, Para 33; “Each of the multiple ultrasound probes may include a transducer 11 to generate ultrasound, a sensor 15 to detect position information relating to the multiple ultrasound probes, and a communication part 13 to transmit the signal received from the transducer 11 and the sensor 15 toward the control part 20”) (Kim, Para 38; “The communication part 13 may receive an electrical signal generated as a result of measuring the subject from the transducer 11 and information relating to relative positions between the multiple ultrasound probes 10 sensed by the sensors 15, and then transmit the received signals to the control part 20”); and
generate display image data showing an ultrasound image obtained by a first ultrasound probe among the plurality of ultrasound probes (Kim, Para 32; “a display part 30 that receives the image signal from the control part 20 and displays an image of the inside of the subject”) (Kim, Para 41; “For instance, by receiving two different electrical signals from two (first and second) ultrasound probes 10, first and second image signals may be produced. Because the first and second ultrasound probes are spaced apart from each other and each irradiates ultrasound to the subject from a different angle or direction, the first and second image signals may display respective images corresponding to different angles relative to the inside of the subject”) based on the ultrasound image data corresponding to each of the ultrasound probes and the position-and-posture information (Kim, Para 42; “The control part 20 may use the position information relating to the multiple ultrasound probes 10 sensed by the sensor 15 to execute a compensation of an error relating to the corresponding image signals, before synthesizing the corresponding image signals and producing a synthesized image signal”) (Kim, Para 46; “That is, the control part 20 may receive two electrical signals from two respective ultrasound probes 10 and, using the relative position information with respect to the two ultrasound probes 10 sensed by the sensors 15, the received electrical signals are compared, compensated and synthesized, thus enabling calculation of a more accurate blood flow rate and displaying the calculated result as an image”).
Kim does not clearly and explicitly disclose displaying a probe indicator which is an illustrated indicator displayed on the ultrasound image obtained by the first ultrasound probe to indicate a region where a scan range of an ultrasound beam formed by a second ultrasound probe, among the plurality of ultrasound probes different from the first ultrasound probe, intersects with a scan range of an ultrasound beam formed by the first ultrasound probe.
In an analogous ultrasound imaging field of endeavor Arakita discloses displaying a probe indicator which is an illustrated indicator displayed on the ultrasound image obtained by a first ultrasound probe (wide area MPR image) to indicate a region where a scan range of an ultrasound beam formed by a second ultrasound probe (FOV image F1), intersects with a scan range of a ultrasound beam formed by the first ultrasound probe (Arakita, Figure 4) (Arakita, Para 79; “FIG. 4 depicts an example of the FOV image display. In FIG. 4, a FOV image F1 expressing the position of the narrow area MPR image within a wide area MPR image G2 is depicted superimposed on the wide area MPR image G2.”) (Arakita, Para 39; “As described in a second and subsequent embodiments, first and second embodiments may be applied to an X-ray imaging apparatus, an ultrasound imaging apparatus or an MRI apparatus.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim to include displaying a probe indicator which is an illustrated indicator displayed on the ultrasound image obtained by the first ultrasound probe to indicate a region where a scan range of an ultrasound beam formed by a second ultrasound probe, among the plurality of ultrasound probes different from the first ultrasound probe, intersects with a scan range of a ultrasound beam formed by the first ultrasound probe in order to help a user easily ascertain the positional relationship between images during diagnosis to facilitate diagnosis as taught by Arakita (Arakita, Para 7-8).
Regarding claim 4, Kim as modified by Arakita above discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Kim does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the display image data is image data in which the probe indicator is displayed in a superimposed manner on any of an ultrasound image obtained by the first ultrasound probe or an ultrasound image obtained by the second ultrasound probe.
Arakita further discloses wherein the display image data is image data in which a probe indicator is displayed in a superimposed manner on any of an ultrasound image obtained by a first ultrasound probe or an ultrasound image obtained by a second ultrasound probe (Arakita, Figure 4) (Arakita, Para 79; “FIG. 4 depicts an example of the FOV image display. In FIG. 4, a FOV image F1 expressing the position of the narrow area MPR image within a wide area MPR image G2 is depicted superimposed on the wide area MPR image G2.”) (Arakita, Para 39; “As described in a second and subsequent embodiments, first and second embodiments may be applied to an X-ray imaging apparatus, an ultrasound imaging apparatus or an MRI apparatus.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim wherein the display image data is image data in which the probe indicator is displayed in a superimposed manner on any of an ultrasound image obtained by the first ultrasound probe or an ultrasound image obtained by the second ultrasound probe in order to help a user easily ascertain the positional relationship between images during diagnosis to facilitate diagnosis as taught by Arakita (Arakita, Para 7-8).
Regarding claim 6, Kim as modified by Arakita above discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Kim further discloses each of the ultrasound probes; and a position-and-posture sensor provided in each of the ultrasound probes (Kim, Para 33; “Each of the multiple ultrasound probes may include a transducer 11 to generate ultrasound, a sensor 15 to detect position information relating to the multiple ultrasound probes, and a communication part 13 to transmit the signal received from the transducer 11 and the sensor 15 toward the control part 20”) (Kim, Para 38; “The communication part 13 may receive an electrical signal generated as a result of measuring the subject from the transducer 11 and information relating to relative positions between the multiple ultrasound probes 10 sensed by the sensors 15, and then transmit the received signals to the control part 20”),
wherein the processor is configured to:
generate the position-and-posture information of each of the ultrasound probes based on an output value of the position-and-posture sensor provided in each of the ultrasound probes (Kim, Para 36; “A sensor 15 is mounted on each of the multiple ultrasound probes 10 […] include information as to how far the second ultrasound probe is spaced apart from the first ultrasound probe when the measurement is implemented, and […] an angle between the second ultrasound probe and the first ultrasound probe when measurement is implemented”) (Kim, Para 33; “Each of the multiple ultrasound probes may include a transducer 11 to generate ultrasound, a sensor 15 to detect position information relating to the multiple ultrasound probes, and a communication part 13 to transmit the signal received from the transducer 11 and the sensor 15 toward the control part 20”) (Kim, Para 38; “The communication part 13 may receive an electrical signal generated as a result of measuring the subject from the transducer 11 and information relating to relative positions between the multiple ultrasound probes 10 sensed by the sensors 15, and then transmit the received signals to the control part 20”); and
generate the display image data based on the position-and-posture information of the first ultrasound probe and the position-and-posture information of the second ultrasound probe (Kim, Para 32; “a display part 30 that receives the image signal from the control part 20 and displays an image of the inside of the subject”) (Kim, Para 40; “The control part 20 may convert a plurality of electrical signals received from the multiple ultrasound probes 10 into image signals, thus enabling an internal image of the subject to be displayed on a display 30”) (Kim, Para 42; “The control part 20 may use the position information relating to the multiple ultrasound probes 10 sensed by the sensor 15 to execute a compensation of an error relating to the corresponding image signals, before synthesizing the corresponding image signals and producing a synthesized image signal”) (Kim, Para 46; “That is, the control part 20 may receive two electrical signals from two respective ultrasound probes 10 and, using the relative position information with respect to the two ultrasound probes 10 sensed by the sensors 15, the received electrical signals are compared, compensated and synthesized, thus enabling calculation of a more accurate blood flow rate and displaying the calculated result as an image”).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Arakita as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Osumi et al. (US20220047248, hereafter Osumi).
Regarding claim 5, Kim as modified by Arakita above discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Kim does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the display image data includes a probe positional relationship image showing the scan range of the ultrasound beam formed by the first ultrasound probe, the scan range of an ultrasound beam formed by the second ultrasound probe, and a positional relationship between the first ultrasound probe and the second ultrasound probe.
Arakita further discloses wherein display image data includes a probe positional relationship image showing a scan range of an ultrasound beam formed by a first ultrasound probe and a scan range of an ultrasound beam formed by a second ultrasound probe (Arakita, Para 65; “the X-ray CT apparatus 1 displays two or more images with overlapping FOV. The following description deals with a case in which two images with different FOVs are displayed.”) (Arakita, Para 39; “As described in a second and subsequent embodiments, first and second embodiments may be applied to an X-ray imaging apparatus, an ultrasound imaging apparatus or an MRI apparatus.”) (Arakita, Figure 4) (Arakita, Para 79; “FIG. 4 depicts an example of the FOV image display. In FIG. 4, a FOV image F1 expressing the position of the narrow area MPR image within a wide area MPR image G2 is depicted superimposed on the wide area MPR image G2.”) (Arakita, Para 39; “As described in a second and subsequent embodiments, first and second embodiments may be applied to an X-ray imaging apparatus, an ultrasound imaging apparatus or an MRI apparatus.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim wherein the display image data includes a probe positional relationship image showing the scan range of the ultrasound beam formed by the first ultrasound probe, the scan range of an ultrasound beam formed by the second ultrasound probe, and a positional relationship between the first ultrasound probe and the second ultrasound probe in order to help a user easily ascertain the positional relationship between images during diagnosis to facilitate diagnosis as taught by Arakita (Arakita, Para 7-8).
In an analogous ultrasound imaging system field of endeavor Osumi discloses displaying a positional relationship between a first ultrasound probe and a second ultrasound probe (Osumi, Para 129; “the probe-list display function 514 of the ultrasonic server 50 may additionally display, in the probe list, data related to the distance between the predetermined position and each probe, or the position information of each probe”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim to include displaying a positional relationship between the first ultrasound probe and the second ultrasound probe in order to improve operability in an economical manner as taught by Osumi (Osumi, Para 3-4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art does not disclose nor reasonably suggest the limitations set forth in claim 3. Specifically, the prior art does not disclose an ultrasound image processing device comprising: a processor configured to: generate ultrasound image data corresponding to each of a plurality of ultrasound probes based on a reception signal output from each of the ultrasound probes; acquire position-and-posture information of each of the ultrasound probes; generate display image data showing an ultrasound image obtained by one of the plurality of ultrasound probes and a probe indicator indicating an ultrasound transmission range of the other ultrasound probe, based on the ultrasound image data corresponding to each of the ultrasound probes and the position-and-posture information, wherein the probe indicator indicates a region in which a scan range of an ultrasound beam formed by a first ultrasound probe, which is one of the plurality of ultrasound probes, and a scan range of an ultrasound beam formed by a second ultrasound probe, which is the other ultrasound probe, intersect each other, wherein the probe indicator includes an intersection line between the scan range of the ultrasound beam formed by the first ultrasound probe and the scan range of the ultrasound beam formed by the second ultrasound probe, and an extension line formed by extending the intersection line, and the extension line extends in accordance with a projection image in which the scan range of the ultrasound beam formed by the second ultrasound probe is projected onto an ultrasound image obtained by the first ultrasound probe in a direction of the ultrasound beam formed by the second ultrasound probe as set forth in claim 3.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20240008844A1 – discloses displaying the FOV of a probe in another image.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John Li whose telephone number is (313)446-4916. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday; 5:30 AM to 3:30 PM Eastern.
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.
/JOHN D LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights