Ex Parte Higgs et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Apr 29, 2011

10952648 (B.P.A.I. Apr. 29, 2011)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARKOFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
10/952,648 09/29/2004 Brent E. Higgs NG(MS)6693 9988
26294 7590 05/02/2011
TAROLLI, SUNDHEIM, COVELL & TUMMINO L.L.P.
1300 EAST NINTH STREET, SUITE 1700
CLEVELAND, OH 44114
EXAMINER
LEE, JOHN W
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2624
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
05/02/2011 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte BRENT E. HIGGS, JOHN S. BIRBECK, CLIFF E. FRIELER and
ROBERT M. COTHREN

___________

Appeal 2009-013627
Application 10/952,648
Technology Center 2600
____________

Before SCOTT R. BOALICK, DANIEL S. SONG, and ERIC B. CHEN,
Administrative Patent Judges.

CHEN, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

Appeal 2009-013627
Application 10/952,648

2
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the final rejection of
claims 1-20 and 22-26. Claim 21 has been cancelled. We have jurisdiction
under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm-in-part.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants’ invention relates to a system for analyzing
multidimensional data (Spec. ¶ [0001]) (e.g., non-invasive medical imaging
(Spec. ¶ [0002])). A contour initializer generates multiple initial contours
from respective images within a series of images. (Spec. Abstract.) A
model initializer interconnects the initial contours into a surface model and a
model refiner refines the surface model. (Spec. Abstract.)
Claims 1 and 17 are exemplary:
1. A system that analyzes a series of images comprising:
a contour initializer that establishes a plurality of initial
contours from respective images within the series of images;
a model initializer that interconnects the plurality of initial
contours into a surface model; and
a model refiner that refines the plurality of initial contours by
manipulating the surface model.

17. A method of determining an optimal contour of a body
cavity from a series of time-varying images from the body cavity,
comprising:
generating an [sic] first initial contour estimate comprising a
plurality of vertices corresponding to features within a first image of
the series of time-varying images of the body cavity;
generating a second initial contour estimate comprising a
plurality of vertices corresponding to features within a second image
of the series of time-varying images of the body cavity; and
iteratively repeating the following until a termination condition
is achieved to produce a contour model:
Appeal 2009-013627
Application 10/952,648

3
calculating a virtual force on a given vertex from the first
initial contour estimate according to the relative position of the
given vertex and at least one feature associated with the image
and the relative position of the given vertex and a
corresponding vertex in the second initial contour estimate; and
determining an acceleration value from the calculated
virtual force according to a mass assigned to the given vertex;
and
calculating a displacement over a discrete interval of time
from the acceleration.
Claims 1-5, 8-11, 13 and 14 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)
as being anticipated by Yamauchi (U.S. Patent Application Publication No.
2002/0102023).
Claims 6 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
obvious over Yamauchi and Medina (Verónica B. Medina et al., Automatic
Initialization for a Snakes-Based Cardiac Contour Extraction, PROC. OF THE
22ND ANN. EMBS INT’L CONF. 1625-1628 (2000)).
Claim 12 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious
over Yamauchi and Yoshioka (U.S. Patent No. 5,274,759).
Claim 15 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious
over Yamauchi and Berez (U.S. Patent Application Publication No.
2004/0236424).
Claims 1 and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
obvious over Yamauchi and Banks (U.S. Patent No. 6,674,449).
Claims 17-20 and 22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
obvious over Jiang (Jiang Qian et al., A Physically Based Model for the
Registration of a 2D Image Sequence, 1996 IEEE INT’L CONF. ON
ACOUSTICS, SPEECH, AND SIGNAL PROCESSING 2195-2198 (1996)) and
Yamauchi.
Appeal 2009-013627
Application 10/952,648

4
Claims 23-26 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
obvious over Yamauchi and Salomie (U.S. Patent No. 6,982,710).
ISSUES
§ 102 Rejection – Yamauchi
With respect to independent claim 1, Appellants argue that
“Yamauchi fails to teach interconnecting a plurality of initial contours into a
surface model, and refining the plurality of initial contours by manipulating
the surface model . . . .” (App. Br. 5.) In particular, Appellants argue that in
Yamauchi, “it would be impossible for the contour correction unit to refine
the plurality of initial contours by manipulating the surface model, because
the surface model has not been generated when the contour correcting unit is
correcting the contours.” (Reply Br. 3.)
Appellants’ arguments present the following dispositive issues:
1. Does Yamauchi teach “a model initializer that interconnects the
plurality of initial contours into a surface model”?
2. Does Yamauchi teach “a model refiner that refines the plurality of
initial contours by manipulating the surface model”?
§ 103 Rejection – Jiang/Yamauchi
With respect to independent claim 17, Appellants argue that
“Yamauchi and Jiang, taken alone or in combination, fail to teach or suggest
all of the limitations of the method of claim 17” because Yamauchi does not
teach the first and second initial contour estimates as part of a series of time-
varying images. (App. Br. 11; see also Reply Br. 7.)
Appellants’ arguments present the following dispositive issues:
Appeal 2009-013627
Application 10/952,648

5
1. Does the combination of Jiang and Yamauchi render obvious
“generating an [sic] first initial contour estimate comprising a plurality of
vertices corresponding to features within a first image of the series of time-
varying images of the body cavity”?
2. Does the combination of Jiang and Yamauchi render obvious
“generating a second initial contour estimate comprising a plurality of
vertices corresponding to features within a second image of the series of
time-varying images of the body cavity”?
FINDINGS OF FACT
Yamauchi
1. Yamauchi relates to an ultrasonic diagnostic device and “particularly
to a technique to extract a contour of an object that is subject to an
examination . . .” (¶ [0002]) (e.g., an internal or circulatory organ
(¶ [0005])). In a first embodiment, a digital ultrasonic diagnostic
device 10 (¶ [0090]) includes an image processing unit 103 (¶ [0094]).
The image processing unit 103 includes an image generating unit 110,
a contour correcting unit 114, a 3D image generating unit 116 and an
automatic contour extracting unit 120. (¶ [0097]; fig. 2.)
2. The automatic contour extracting unit 120 “extracts a contour of an
object to be examined, such as a heart, within the ultrasound image by
performing a predetermined operation on the ultrasound image.”
(¶ [0103].) The automatic contour extracting unit 120 includes two
units, an initial contour extracting unit 121 and a dynamic contour
extracting unit 122. (¶ [0103].)
App
App

3.
4.
5.
6.
eal 2009-0
lication 10
The con
automat
contour
contour
standard
The 3D
either th
correctio
“generat
contour
Figures
“B”) of
contour
Figure 9
the two
contour
13627
/952,648
tour correc
ic contour
correcting
takes an ab
. . . .” (¶
image gen
e automati
n unit 114
es 3D ima
data . . . .”
9A and 9B
contour da
extracting
C (below)
extracted c
extracting
tion unit 1
extracting
unit 114 m
normal sh
[0108].)
erating un
c contour
. (¶ [0112
ge data of
(¶ [0112]
(below) i
ta that hav
unit 120.
illustrates
ontours “A
unit 121.
6
14 correct
unit 120.
akes . . .
ape devia
it 116 cont
extracting
].) The 3D
the object
.)
llustrate tw
e been ext
(¶ [0133].
the genera
” and “B
(¶ [0133].
s a contou
(¶ [0107]
[a] judgme
ting from t
inuously r
unit 120 o
image g
from the a
o exampl
racted by
)
tion of an
” through
)
r extracted
.) Specific
nt as to w
he predete
eceives da
r the cont
enerating u
ccumulat
es (contou
the autom

initial con
use of the
by the
ally, “the
hether the
rmined
ta from
our
nit 116
ed 2D
rs “A” and
atic
tour from
initial

App
App

7.
eal 2009-0
lication 10
[T
an
ul
pe
fr
ex
12
es
da
tw
ex
co
12
(¶ [0134
Jiang rel
physical
registrat
relates th
correspo
Before p
extracted
13627
/952,648
]he initial
initial con
trasound im
rforming m
om two se
tracted by
2 immedi
timated. F
ta precede
o frames,
tracting un
ntour to th
2.
].)
ates to “a
ly deforma
ion as a “p
e content
ndence be
erforming
. (P. 219
contour ex
tour of an
age by p
ovement
ts of conto
the dynam
ately befor
or instanc
the initial
respective
it 121 the
e dynamic
new appro
ble mode
rocess of
s of two im
tween the
image reg
5, col. 2, ¶
7
tracting u
object of
redicting m
compensa
ur data wh
ic contou
e the initia
e, the two
contour b
ly. The in
n sends th
contour e
Jiang
ach that re
l.” (Abstra
determinin
ages . . . a
two image
istration,
1.) A phy
nit 121 est
interest w
ovement
tion) of th
ich have b
r extractin
l contour
sets of con
y one fram
itial conto
e estimate
xtracting
gisters tw
ct.) Jiang
g a geome
nd establi
s.” (P. 21
contours o
sically de

imates
ithin an
(i.e.,
e object
een
g unit
to be
tour
e and
ur
d initial
unit
o images b
describes
tric transf
shing the
95, col. 1,
f two imag
formable m
ased on a
image
orm that
¶ 1.)
es are
odel is
Appeal 2009-013627
Application 10/952,648

8
applied to deform one contour, called the start contour to match the
second contour, the goal contour. (P. 2195, col. 2, ¶ 1.) The
physically deformable model considers each contour as a set of
vertices with each vertex having a physical property (e.g., position,
velocity, acceleration and mass). (P. 2195, col. 2, ¶ 1.)
ANALYSIS
§ 102 Rejection – Yamauchi
We are convinced by Appellants’ arguments (App. Br. 5; see also
Reply Br. 3) that Yamauchi does not teach “a model initializer that
interconnects the plurality of initial contours into a surface model” and “a
model refiner that refines the plurality of initial contours by manipulating the
surface model.”
The Examiner found that the 3D image generating unit 116 of
Yamauchi corresponds to the claimed “model initializer.” (Ans. 4.) The
Examiner also found that the 3D image generating unit 116 and the contour
correction unit 114 of Yamauchi collectively correspond to the claimed
“model refiner.” (Ans. 4.) We do not agree.
Claim 1 recites “a model initializer that interconnects the plurality of
initial contours into a surface model” and “a model refiner that refines the
plurality of initial contours by manipulating the surface model” (emphasis
added). Thus, the claim term “the surface model” recited in the “model
refiner” limitation refers back to the previous recitation of “a surface model”
recited in the “model initializer” limitation. In other words, the step of
interconnecting “the plurality of initial contours into a surface model” using
the “model initializer” must occur before the step of refining “the plurality
Appeal 2009-013627
Application 10/952,648

9
of initial contours by manipulating the surface model” using the “model
refiner.” (See Spec. ¶¶ [0021]-[0022].)
Yamauchi teaches a digital ultrasonic diagnostic device 10 with an
image processing unit 103 that includes a contour correcting unit 114, a 3D
image generating unit 116 and an automatic contour extracting unit 120.
(FF 1.) The automatic contour extracting unit 120 extracts a contour of an
object to be examined (FF 2) and the contour correction unit 114 corrects the
contour (FF 3). The 3D image generating unit 116 receives data from either
the automatic contour extracting unit 120 or the contour correction unit 114
to generate 3D image data from 2D contour data. (FF 4.) In other words,
Yamauchi teaches that 2D contour data is corrected (i.e., the claimed step of
“refining”) prior to forming the 3D image data. In contrast, claim 1 requires
a different order of steps by first interconnecting a plurality of initial
contours into a surface model, followed by refining the surface model.
Thus, we do not agree with the Examiner that Yamauchi teaches “a
model initializer that interconnects the plurality of initial contours into a
surface model” and “a model refiner that refines the plurality of initial
contours by manipulating the surface model.”
Accordingly, we reverse the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b). Claims 2-5, 8-11, 13 and 14 depend from independent claim 1 and
we reverse the rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) for the
reasons discussed with respect to independent claim 1.
§ 103 Rejection – Jiang/Yamauchi
We are not convinced by Appellants’ arguments (App. Br. 11; see
also Reply Br. 7) that the combination of Jiang and Yamauchi does not teach
or suggest “generating an [sic] first initial contour estimate comprising a
Appeal 2009-013627
Application 10/952,648

10
plurality of vertices corresponding to features within a first image of the
series of time-varying images of the body cavity” and “generating a second
initial contour estimate comprising a plurality of vertices corresponding to
features within a second image of the series of time-varying images of the
body cavity.”
The Examiner acknowledged that Jiang does not teach the limitations
of generating a first initial contour estimate and generating a second initial
contour estimate and cited Yamauchi for the disclosure of these disputed
limitations. (Ans. 25.) In particular, the Examiner found that Yamauchi
discloses “time sequence processing, which is a temporal dimension, by
extracting contours from ultrasound images and generating 3D images from
the accumulated contour data.” (Ans. 25; FF 5, 6.) The Examiner
concluded that claim 17 would have been obvious over the combination of
Jiang and Yamauchi. (Ans. 11, 25.) We agree with the Examiner.
Yamauchi teaches that the initial contour extracting unit 121 estimates
an initial contour of an object by predicting movement of the object from
two sets of contour data which have been extracted by the dynamic contour
extracting unit 122 immediately before the initial contour is estimated.
(FF 5, 6.) Figures 9A and 9B of Yamauchi illustrate exemplary contours
(i.e., contour “A” and contour “B”) that precede the initial contour by one
frame and two frames. (FF 5, 6.) In other words, Yamauchi teaches
“generating an [sic] first initial contour estimate . . . corresponding to
features within a first image of the series of time-varying images of the body
cavity” and “generating a second initial contour estimate . . . corresponding
to features within a second image of the series of time-varying images of the
body cavity.” Furthermore, the physically deformable model of Jiang
Appeal 2009-013627
Application 10/952,648

11
considers contours as a set of vertices (i.e., the claimed “initial contour
estimate comprising a plurality of vertices”). (FF 7.)
Yamauchi describes a digital ultrasonic diagnostic device 10 for
extracting a contour from an object (e.g., an internal or circulatory organ)
subject to examination. (FF 1.) Jiang describes the application of a
physically deformable model to determine physical properties (e.g., position,
velocity, acceleration and mass) of a set of vertices that form each contour.
(FF 7.) A person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that
incorporating the physically deformable model of Jiang with the digital
ultrasonic diagnostic device 10 of Yamauchi provides the advantage of
modeling the physical properties of organs by extracting contours of such
organs. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 417 (2007).
Thus, we agree with the Examiner that the combination of Jiang and
Yamauchi teaches or suggests “generating an [sic] first initial contour
estimate comprising a plurality of vertices corresponding to features within a
first image of the series of time-varying images of the body cavity” and
“generating a second initial contour estimate comprising a plurality of
vertices corresponding to features within a second image of the series of
time-varying images of the body cavity.”
Accordingly, we affirm the rejection of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a). Claims 18-20 and 22 depend from independent claim 17 and we
affirm the rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) for the reasons
discussed with respect to independent claim 17.
§ 103 Rejection – Yamauchi/Medina
Claims 6 and 7 depend from independent claim 1 and the Examiner
has not articulated a reason for modifying Yamauchi to satisfy the above-
Appeal 2009-013627
Application 10/952,648

12
noted limitations. Medina was cited by the Examiner for teaching the
features of claims 6 and 7. (Ans. 7.) However, the Examiner’s application
of Medina does not cure the above-noted deficiencies of Yamauchi.
§ 103 Rejection – Yamauchi/Yoshioka
Claim 12 depends from independent claim 1 and the Examiner has not
articulated a reason for modifying Yamauchi to satisfy the above-noted
limitations. Yoshioka was cited by the Examiner for teaching the features of
claim 12. (Ans. 7-8.) However, the Examiner’s application of Yoshioka
does not cure the above-noted deficiencies of Yamauchi.
§ 103 Rejection – Yamauchi/Berez
Claim 15 depends from independent claim 1 and the Examiner has not
articulated a reason for modifying Yamauchi to satisfy the above-noted
limitations. Berez was cited by the Examiner for teaching the features of
claim 15. (Ans. 8.) However, the Examiner’s application of Berez does not
cure the above-noted deficiencies of Yamauchi.
§ 103 Rejection – Yamauchi/Banks
As discussed previously with respect to independent claim 1,
Yamauchi does not teach “a model initializer that interconnects the plurality
of initial contours into a surface model” and “a model refiner that refines the
plurality of initial contours by manipulating the surface model.” Claim 16
depends from independent claim 1 and the Examiner has not articulated a
reason for modifying Yamauchi to satisfy the above-noted limitations.
Banks was cited by the Examiner for teaching the features of claim 16.
(Ans. 8.) However, the Examiner’s application of Banks does not cure the
above-noted deficiencies of Yamauchi.
Appeal 2009-013627
Application 10/952,648

13
§ 103 Rejection – Yamauchi/Salomie
Independent claim 23 recites limitations similar to those discussed
with respect to independent claim 1. We reverse the rejection of claim 23,
as well as claims 24-26, which depend from claim 23, for the reasons
discussed with respect to claim 1. Salomie was cited by the Examiner for
teaching the analysis of N-dimensional data. (Ans. 12.) However, the
Examiner’s application of Salomie does not cure the above-noted
deficiencies of Yamauchi.
DECISION
The decision to reject claims 1-16 and 23-26 is reversed.
The decision to reject claims 17-20 and 22 is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(1)(iv).

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

cu