Ex Parte Garg et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 4, 2013

10578632 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 4, 2013)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
__________

Ex parte ROHIT GARG, DAMIEN DOLIMIER,
and DANNY SKYBA
__________

Appeal 2011-003098
Application 10/578,632
Technology Center 3700
__________

Before JEFFREY N. FREDMAN, STEPHEN WALSH, and
JACQUELINE WRIGHT BONILLA, Administrative Patent Judges.

FREDMAN, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 involving claims to a method
of simultaneous display of perfusion and anatomical images. The Examiner
rejected the claims as obvious. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm.

Appeal 2011-003098
Application 10/578,632

2
Statement of the Case
Background
The Specification teaches “a method and system [which] display in
anatomical registration both a parametric image of tissue perfusion and the
blood flow in the tissue” (Spec. 2, ll. 26-28). According to the Specification,
“the opacity of both images can be varied continuously, enabling the
clinician to simultaneously view the perfusion parameter in a region of
interest and the blood flow in that region” (Spec. 2, l. 30 to 3, l. 2).
The Claims
Claims 1, 3-11, and 13-19 are on appeal. Claim 1 is representative
and reads as follows1:
1. A method of simultaneously displaying a two or three
dimensional parametric perfusion image and an anatomical
structural image of the region of interest corresponding to the
parametric perfusion image on an ultrasonic image display,
comprising:
acquiring an anatomical structural image of a region of
interest of a subject comprising tissue containing blood flow;
acquiring harmonic signal components from a harmonic
contrast agent in the region of interest of the subject;
processing harmonic signal components of corresponding
locations in a sequence of images to form a parametric image of a
perfusion characteristic of the tissue of the region of interest; and
displaying the parametric perfusion image in anatomical
registration with the anatomical structural image, wherein the
relative opacity of the registered parametric image and
anatomical structural image is variable over a range of relative
opacities.

1 Claim 1 is shown without the numerous erroneous spacings found
in the Claims Appendix.
Appeal 2011-003098
Application 10/578,632

3
The issue
The Examiner rejected claims 1, 3-11, and 13-19 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as obvious over Schwartz2 and Averkiou3 (Ans. 4-7).
The Examiner finds that “Schwartz discloses a method of
simultaneously displaying a two or three dimensional parametric perfusion
image and an anatomical structural image of the region of interest
corresponding to the parametric perfusion image on an ultrasonic image
display” (Ans. 4). The Examiner finds that Schwartz teaches:
an image processor and acquiring an anatomical structural
image of a region of interest of a subject comprising tissue
containing blood flow; and displaying the parametric
perfusion image in anatomical registration with the
anatomical structural image (abstract; col.2, 11.9-24),
wherein the relative opacity of the registered parametric
image and anatomical structural image is variable over a
range of relative opacities.

(Ans. 4).
The Examiner finds that “Schwartz fails to disclose a contrast signal
processor; a parametric perfusion image processor and acquiring harmonic
signal components from a harmonic contrast agent in the region of interest
of the subject; and processing harmonic signal components” (Ans. 4).
The Examiner finds that Averkiou teaches “acquiring harmonic signal
components from a harmonic contrast agent in the region of interest of the
subject; and processing harmonic signal components of corresponding
locations in a sequence of images to form a parametric image of a perfusion

2 Schwartz, G., US 5,720,291, issued Feb. 24, 1998.
3 Averkiou et al., US 6,171,246 B1, issued Jan. 9, 2001.
Appeal 2011-003098
Application 10/578,632

4
characteristic of the tissue of the region of interest” (Ans. 5). The Examiner
concludes it would have been obvious to “modify the method of registering
an anatomical structural image and a parametric perfusion image with
acquiring and processing harmonic signal components. Doing so would
provide enhanced imaging of perfused tissue” (Ans. 5).
The issue with respect to this rejection is: Does the evidence of record
support the Examiner’s conclusion that Schwartz and Averkiou render claim
1 obvious?
Findings of Fact
1. Schwartz teaches that:
a technique is provided for producing three dimensional
ultrasonic presentations of both tissue and blood flow. A set
of three dimensional ultrasonic tissue data and a set of three
dimensional ultrasonic blood flow data are acquired from a
common region of the body. The data sets are acquired in
close time proximity so as to maintain the spatial
correspondence of the two data set.

(Schwartz, col. 2, ll. 10-16).
2. Schwartz teaches acquiring an anatomical structural image
where “samples are coupled to a detector and grayscale mapping circuit 24,
which produces grayscale signals with brightness corresponding to the
intensity of received echo signals. . . . scanlines of grayscale signals are
acquired to form a full planar image, and a sequence of B mode planar tissue
images is stored in tissue image memory 48” (Schwartz, col. 4, ll. 12-21).
3. Schwartz teaches acquiring a Doppler image of blood flow
where “data ensembles are processed by a Doppler technique such as
autocorrelation or Fourier transform processing to produce Doppler
Appeal 2011-003098
Application 10/578,632

5
signals. . . . The Doppler signals are processed to remove motion artifacts in
a flash suppresser 32, then stored in a Doppler image memory together with
information bearing their spatial relationship to the image field” (Schwartz,
col. 4, ll. 27-34).
4. Schwartz teaches that the “separate tissue and Doppler (blood
flow) image information is processed together to render a composite three
dimensional presentation” (Schwartz, col. 4, ll. 51-53).
5. Schwartz teaches that:
the three dimensional rendering of image frame 150a of the
three dimensional image sequence 158 is formed by
controlling the transparency (opacity) of the two types of
image information by means of blood flow opacity control
130 and tissue opacity control 140. Preferably the opacity
controls are capable of separately controlling the display
opacity of the two types of image information. With the
image opacity thus set, a composite three dimensional
rendering is formed using both types of image information
in their complementary spatial relationships.

(Schwartz, col. 3, ll. 42-52).
6. Averkiou teaches “[u]ltrasonic contrast agents are becoming
increasingly available to enhance the ultrasonic imaging of bloodflow
and tissue perfusion” (Averkiou, col. 1, ll. 9-11).
7. Averkiou teaches that “the echoes from microbubbles can be
distinguished or segmented from echoes from other structures on the basis of
their higher frequency content. This has led to the desire to enhance the
imaging of bloodflow and particularly perfused tissue such as the
myocardium with contrast agents, and most desirably to be able to do so in
realtime” (Averkiou, col. 1, ll. 23-28).
Appeal 2011-003098
Application 10/578,632

6
8. Averkiou teaches that:
The ultrasound pulses which are transmitted to scan the
imaged area are transmitted at a low power level which is
insufficient to cause substantial destruction of the
microbubbles yet high enough in power to elicit a harmonic
response from the microbubbles. Additionally, at a low
power level tissue is not generating a significant harmonic
component.

(Averkiou, col. 2, ll. 11-17).
9. Averkiou teaches that the “contrast agent is imaged by
processing the nonlinear echo components received from multiple echoes
from each sample volume of the imaged bloodflow” (Averkiou, col. 2, ll.
21-23).
10. Averkiou teaches that the “processed signals from the
microbubbles are preferably displayed in combination with a structural
display of the surrounding tissues” (Averkiou, col. 2, ll. 28-30).
Principles of Law
“The combination of familiar elements according to known methods
is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results.”
KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007). “If a person of
ordinary skill can implement a predictable variation, § 103 likely bars its
patentability.” Id. at 417. As noted by the Court in KSR, “[a] person of
ordinary skill is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton.” 550
U.S. at 421.

Appeal 2011-003098
Application 10/578,632

7
Analysis
Schwartz teaches a method of simultaneously displaying an ultrasonic
anatomical structural image and an ultrasonic perfusion image of a region of
interest (FF 1).
Schwartz teaches a first step of acquiring an ultrasonic anatomical
structural image where “samples are coupled to a detector . . . and a
sequence of B mode planar tissue images is stored in tissue image memory
48” (Schwartz, col. 4, ll. 12-21; FF 2).
Schwartz teaches a second step of acquiring an ultrasonic blood flow
image where “data ensembles are processed by a Doppler technique . . . The
Doppler signals are processed . . . then stored in a Doppler image memory
together with information bearing their spatial relationship to the image
field” (Schwartz, col. 4, ll. 27-34; FF 3).
Schwartz teaches that the “separate tissue and Doppler (blood flow)
image information is processed together to render a composite three
dimensional presentation” (Schwartz, col. 4, ll. 51-53; FF 4).
Schwartz teaches “controlling the transparency (opacity) of the two
types of image information by means of blood flow opacity control 130 and
tissue opacity control 140” (Schwartz, col. 3, ll. 44-47; FF 5).
While Schwartz does not teach the use of an ultrasonic contrast agent
with harmonics, Averkiou teaches that:
The ultrasound pulses which are transmitted to scan the
imaged area are transmitted at a low power level which is
insufficient to cause substantial destruction of the
microbubbles yet high enough in power to elicit a harmonic
response from the microbubbles. Additionally, at a low
Appeal 2011-003098
Application 10/578,632

8
power level tissue is not generating a significant harmonic
component.

(Averkiou, col. 2, ll. 11-17; FF 8). Averkiou teaches that the “contrast agent
is imaged by processing the nonlinear echo components received from
multiple echoes from each sample volume of the imaged bloodflow”
(Averkiou, col. 2, ll. 21-23; FF 9).
Applying the KSR standard of obviousness to the findings of fact, we
conclude that an ordinary artisan would have reasonably found it obvious to
substitute Averkiou’s harmonic blood flow measurement using ultrasound
contrast agents for Schwartz’s Doppler blood flow measurement since
Averkiou teaches that “[u]ltrasonic contrast agents are becoming
increasingly available to enhance the ultrasonic imaging of bloodflow and
tissue perfusion” (Averkiou, col. 1, ll. 9-11; FF 6).
The ordinary artisan would have chosen to display Averkiou’s
ultrasonic harmonic images with Schwartz’s anatomical images since
Averkiou teaches that the “processed signals from the microbubbles are
preferably displayed in combination with a structural display of the
surrounding tissues” (Averkiou, col. 2, ll. 28-30; FF 10). Such a
combination is merely a “predictable use of prior art elements according to
their established functions.” KSR, 550 U.S. at 417.
Appellants contend that “Schwartz is dealing with a different problem.
Schwartz is concerned with a problem particular to 3D imaging; he is
unconcerned with 2D imaging” (App. Br. 10).
We are not persuaded since claim 1 recites a “simultaneously
displaying a two or three dimensional parametric perfusion image and an
Appeal 2011-003098
Application 10/578,632

9
anatomical structural image”, thereby expressly encompassing three
dimensional imaging.
Appellants contend that, unlike Schwartz, their “two images, the
perfusion image and the structural image, are two different images of the
same region of interest, not one of one region and another of a different,
surrounding region” (App. Br. 11).
We are not persuaded. Schwartz teaches that a “set of three
dimensional ultrasonic tissue data and a set of three dimensional ultrasonic
blood flow data are acquired from a common region of the body. The data
sets are acquired in close time proximity so as to maintain the spatial
correspondence of the two data sets” (Schwartz, col. 2, ll. 12-16; FF 1).
Schwartz expressly teaches that the images are from the same region, “a
common region”, and Schwartz teaches that two different data sets, i.e.,
different images, are acquired (FF 1). Thus, Schwartz does teach two
images which are two different images of the same region.
Appellants contend that the “present invention provides an advantage
not found in the prior art. It enables the clinician to make a diagnosis by
fading back and forth between the tissue image and the tissue’s perfusion by
varying a range of relative opacities while maintaining the anatomical
registration of the two types of information” (Reply Br. 4-5).
We are not persuaded. Schwartz teaches that:
the three dimensional rendering of image frame 150a of the
three dimensional image sequence 150 is formed by
controlling the transparency (opacity) of the two types of
image information by means of blood flow opacity control
130 and tissue opacity control 140. Preferably the opacity
controls are capable of separately controlling the display
Appeal 2011-003098
Application 10/578,632

10
opacity of the two types of image information. With the
image opacity thus set, a composite three dimensional
rendering is formed using both types of image information
in their complementary spatial relationships.

(Schwartz, col. 3, ll. 42-52; FF 5). Schwartz teaches that the clinician may
fade back and forth between the tissue image and blood flow (perfusion)
while maintaining their anatomical registration (FF 5).
Conclusion of Law
The evidence of record supports the Examiner’s conclusion that
Schwartz and Averkiou render claim 1 obvious.
SUMMARY
In summary, we affirm the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as obvious over Schwartz and Averkiou. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §
41.37(c)(1)(2006), we also affirm the rejection of claims 3-11 and 13-19, as
these claims were not argued separately.

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).

AFFIRMED

lp