CTFR 17/335,738 CTFR 93896 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 Arguments Rejection Under 103 Applicant's arguments filed 02/19/2026 have been fully considered. Applicant argues that the prior art fails to teach the amended claim. In response to Applicant’s argument, the argument appears to be directed toward the amendment and is therefore moot. See the updated rejection for further clarification. Rejection Under 101 Applicant's arguments filed 02/19/2026 have been fully considered. Applicant argues that the amended claims integrate the judicial exception into a practical application by reciting an improvement to the surgical operating room safety and environmental control as explained in the specification. The specification explains that by monitoring data associated with the air in the room, there is an increase in efficiency of the filtration system and room filtration. (Spec. [0499]). Therefore, the claims recite a practical application. In response to Applicant’s argument, the arguments in light of the amendments are persuasive. The 101 rejection is withdrawn. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 21-24, 26-33, 35-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nawana et al. (US 2018/0344308) in view of Grantcharov (US 2017/0249432) and Shelton et al. (US 2019/0201087) . Regarding claim 21, Nawana discloses a method comprising: obtaining, at a surgical computing system, a surgical procedure plan associated with a surgical procedure, wherein the surgical procedure plan indicates one or more interrelated aspects associated with the surgical procedure; (Nawana [0204] discloses an operational modules of the system provides an interface for surgical procedures and tracking information [0216] discloses obtaining data from a plurality of EEG sensors that that can move within the operating room since they are configured to be positioned on the head of a user [0222] discloses a plan tracking module for determining plan data for a procedure and making adjustments during the procedure to position the patient and surgeon in the proper positions based on the monitored data to improve procedure efficiency over time [0225] discloses using automated bed movements to move the patient while making the parameter adjustments based on the monitored data [0187] The SPP module 218 can be available to users inside and outside the OR. In other words, a user can perform a simulation using the SPP module 218 outside the OR, e.g., before surgery is even scheduled, and/or inside the OR, e.g., as immediate prep before a scheduled surgery. FIG. 11 illustrates an embodiment of a user 52 accessing the system 10 in an OR via a client terminal in the form of a computer including a processor (not shown), a display screen 54) obtaining, at a surgical computing system, monitored data associated with an operating room for the surgical procedure; (Nawana [0204] discloses an operational modules of the system provides an interface for surgical procedures and tracking information [0216] discloses obtaining data from a plurality of EEG sensors that that can move within the operating room since they are configured to be positioned on the head of a user) generating, at a surgical computing system, an outcome prediction associated with the one or more interrelated aspects associated with the surgical procedure based on the monitored data and the surgical procedure plan; (Nawana [0216] discloses that the data received is analyzed to determine if one or more pieces of equipment needs adjustment (e.g., dim a light, turn on a light, zoom in a camera, adjust equipment like a table position, etc.) [0222] discloses a plan tracking module for determining plan data for a procedure and making adjustments during the procedure to position the patient and surgeon in the proper positions based on the monitored data to improve procedure efficiency over time [0225] discloses using automated bed movements to move the patient while making the parameter adjustments based on the monitored data [0238] can predict deviations from the plan using the monitored data and uses triggered alerts when the surgery is determined to have gone too far off plan based on the monitored data [0239] based on the alert accessing the surgical procedure planning to modify the saved simulation of the surgical procedure in order to modify the simulated plan) determining an adjustment for at least a portion of the surgical procedure plan based on the outcome prediction, wherein the adjustment is associated with an adjusted outcome for the surgical procedure plan; generating a surgical procedure plan forecast indication configured to indicate the physical configuration; and (Nawana [0238] discloses feedback measured against the model can help confirm that the step using triggered alerts when the surgery is determined to have gone too far off plan based on the monitored data [0239] based on the alert accessing the surgical procedure planning to modify the saved simulation of the surgical procedure in order to modify the simulated plan {construed as being configured for modification/adjustment and the adjusted outcome based on the feedback; being configured for indication is intended use given little weight}) generating a control signal comprising the surgical procedure plan forecast indication (Nawana [0239] discloses saving the modified simulation plan to the system {construed as generating the controlled plan for adjustment which is saved to the system}) Nawana does not appear to explicitly disclose the following, however, Grantcharov teaches it is old and well known in the art of healthcare data processing to have: determining, based at least in part on the adjustment, a physical configuration adjustment parameter associated with modifying a physical configuration of an operating room device of the operating room; physical configuration adjustment parameter; and ([0125] The multi-channel recording device 40 may receive input feeds 42 from various data sources including, for example, feeds from cameras in the OR, feeds from wearable devices, feeds related to patient physiology from data stores, monitoring devices and sensors, feeds for environment factors from various sensors (temperature, decibel level, room traffic), feeds for device performance parameters, and so on [0193] The medical or surgical data may be provided to display device 180 for display or to receive interaction commands via touch screen interface to control one or more components of the system (e.g. view change on camera, start or stop recording); [0225] robust learning operations for recurrent neural networks based on filtering outliers from input/output space suitable for time series prediction; various selection methodologies for optimal parameter adjustment in pipelined recurrent neural networks used for prediction of nonlinear signals {the display is construed as the operating room device – see Nawana teaching above for surgical computing system including display screen [0187]}) generating a control signal comprising… wherein the control signal causes one or more surgical systems to modify the physical configuration of the operating room device in accordance with the physical configuration adjustment parameter (Fig. 16 and corresponding text; [0125] The multi-channel recording device 40 may receive input feeds 42 from various data sources including, for example, feeds from cameras in the OR, feeds from wearable devices, feeds related to patient physiology from data stores, monitoring devices and sensors, feeds for environment factors from various sensors (temperature, decibel level, room traffic), feeds for device performance parameters, and so on [0211] discusses implement changes to the devices based on the data analyzed, construed as effecting control adjustments to the surgical device [0225] robust learning operations for recurrent neural networks based on filtering outliers from input/output space suitable for time series prediction; various selection methodologies for optimal parameter adjustment in pipelined recurrent neural networks used for prediction of nonlinear signals) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare data processing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Nawana to incorporate determining, based at least in part on the adjustment, a physical configuration adjustment parameter associated with modifying a physical configuration of an operating room device of the operating room; physical configuration adjustment parameter; and generating a control signal comprising… wherein the control signal causes one or more surgical systems to modify the physical configuration of the operating room device in accordance with the physical configuration adjustment parameter, as taught by Grantcharov, in order to “assess critical safety deficiencies in medical technology and/or provide feedback for improvement in design and/or performance, analyze and monitor efficiency and processes in clinical environment” that need adjusting during the surgical procedures. See Grantcharov [0022]. Nawana-Grantcharov does not appear to explicitly teach the following, however Shelton teaches it is old and well known in the art of healthcare data processing wherein: wherein the monitored data is associated with at least a flow of air in the operating room; wherein the physical configuration modification comprises at least modifying a rate of smoke evacuation or air filtration of an air handling system; by adjusting the rate of smoke evacuation or air filtration of the air handling system (Shelton [0308] a sensor component of the smoke evacuation module 226, such as the air quality particle sensor, will detect a parameter. This parameter may be any parameter related to… the air quality of the surgical theater… if very little smoke is being evacuated, then the smoke evacuation module 226 may run more slowly and/or sense parameters less frequently. Alternatively, if the smoke evacuation module 226 is actively working to evacuate smoke that is rapidly being produced, it may be helpful for the smoke evacuation module 226 to run at a higher rate and/or sense parameters more frequently to ensure that the equipment is properly functioning. [0311] if the value of the sensed air quality parameter indicates a large quantity of smoke particles in the air, the cloud 204 may contain software algorithms that can use the value of the air quality parameter to determine how to alter the operation of the smoke evacuation module or modules A 56108, B 56106, and C 56104 in order to improve the ambient air quality of the surgical theater) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare data processing, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Nawana-Grantcharov, as modified above, to incorporate wherein the monitored data is associated with at least a flow of air in the operating room; wherein the physical configuration modification comprises at least modifying a rate of smoke evacuation or air filtration of an air handling system; by adjusting the rate of smoke evacuation or air filtration of the air handling system, as taught by Shelton, in order to improve the air quality in the surgical operating room and provide a safe environment for all people and equipment present in the room. See Shelton [0308] Regarding claim 22, Nawana-Grantcharov-Shelton teaches the method of claim 21, and further discloses: sensed data associated with one or more of a health care professional, a patient, or one or more surgical instruments. (Nawana [0216] discloses obtaining data from a plurality of EEG sensors that that can move within the operating room since they are configured to be positioned on the head of a user [0222] discloses a plan tracking module for determining plan data for a procedure and making adjustments during the procedure to position the patient and surgeon in the proper positions based on the monitored data to improve procedure efficiency over time). Regarding claim 23, Nawana-Grantcharov-Shelton teaches the method of claim 21, and further discloses: wherein the one or more interrelated aspects associated with the surgical procedure are associated with one or more of a product to be used in the surgical procedure, an HCP experience, an operating room time, or a patient co-morbidity. (Nawana [0216] discloses obtaining data from a plurality of EEG sensors that that can move within the operating room since they are configured to be positioned on the head of a user). Regarding claim 24, Nawana-Grantcharov-Shelton teaches the method of claim 21, and further discloses: wherein the outcome prediction is associated with one or more of a surgical complication, a cost, a patient recovery time, or a complexity associated with the surgical procedure. (Nawana [0238] discloses predicting deviations from the plan using the monitored data that trigger alerts when the surgery is determined to have gone too far off plan based on the monitored data {the predicted outcome/deviation is construed as a complexity or the procedure}). Regarding claim 26, Nawana-Grantcharov-Shelton teaches the method of claim 21, and further discloses: wherein the method further comprises: determining the adjusted outcome based on the determined adjustment, the surgical procedure plan, and the monitored data. (Nawana Fig. 36 and corresponding text; [0193] discloses monitoring the equipment and the surgery schedule to determine if the tool is unavailable for a patient’s surgery causing the surgery to be rescheduled or delayed and communicating that status [0216] discloses that the data received is analyzed to determine if one or more pieces of equipment needs adjustment (e.g., dim a light, turn on a light, zoom in a camera, adjust equipment like a table position, etc. [0238] can predict deviations from the plan using the monitored data {construed as adjusted outcome based on the flow diagram in Fig. 36}). Regarding claim 27, Nawana-Grantcharov-Shelton teaches the method of claim 21, and further discloses: wherein the adjustment is associated with one or more of a product mix used in the surgical procedure. (Nawana [0274] discloses that anesthesia is one of the surgical products/parameters that is monitored and adjusted). Regarding claim 28, Nawana-Grantcharov-Shelton teaches the method of claim 21, and further discloses: wherein the method further comprises: determining, based on the outcome prediction, a first adjustment associated with the surgical procedure plan and a second adjustment associated with the surgical procedure plan, wherein the surgical procedure plan forecast indicates the first adjustment and the second adjustment, wherein the first adjustment is associated with a first adjusted outcome, the second adjustment is associated with a second adjusted outcome, and the first adjustment combined with the second adjustment is associated with a third adjusted outcome, and wherein the surgical procedure plan forecast indicates the first adjusted outcome, the second adjusted outcome, and the third adjusted outcome. (Nawana Fig. 36 and corresponding text; [0222] discloses a plan tracking module for determining plan data for a procedure and making adjustments during the procedure to position the patient and surgeon in the proper positions based on the monitored data to improve procedure efficiency over time [0238] can predict deviations from the plan using the monitored data [0216] discloses that the data received is analyzed to determine if one or more pieces of equipment needs adjustment (e.g., dim a light, turn on a light, zoom in a camera, adjust equipment like a table position, etc. [0239] based on the alert accessing the surgical procedure planning to modify the saved simulation of the surgical procedure in order to modify the simulated plan {the future plans are construed to apply to the one or more equipment adjustments which is then has a predicted outcome as taught by Fig. 36}). Regarding claim 29 , Nawana-Grantcharov-Shelton teaches the method of claim 28, wherein the method further comprises: determining the first adjusted outcome based on the first adjustment, the surgical procedure plan, and the monitored data; determining the second adjusted outcome based on the second adjustment, the surgical procedure plan, and the monitored data; and determining the third adjusted outcome based on the first adjustment, the second adjustment, the surgical procedure plan, and the monitored data. (Nawana Fig. 36 and corresponding text; [0222] discloses a plan tracking module for determining plan data for a procedure and making adjustments during the procedure to position the patient and surgeon in the proper positions based on the monitored data to improve procedure efficiency over time [0238] can predict deviations from the plan using the monitored data [0216] discloses that the data received is analyzed to determine if one or more pieces of equipment needs adjustment (e.g., dim a light, turn on a light, zoom in a camera, adjust equipment like a table position, etc. [0239] based on the alert accessing the surgical procedure planning to modify the saved simulation of the surgical procedure in order to modify the simulated plan {the future plans are construed to apply to the one or more equipment adjustments which is then has a predicted outcome as taught by Fig. 36}). Regarding claim 30 , the claim recites substantially similar limitations as those already recited in the rejection of claim 21, and, as such, is rejected for similar reasons as given above. Regarding claim 31, the claim recites substantially similar limitations as those already recited in the rejection of claim 22, and, as such, is rejected for similar reasons as given above. Regarding claim 32, the claim recites substantially similar limitations as those already recited in the rejection of claim 23, and, as such, is rejected for similar reasons as given above. Regarding claim 33, the claim recites substantially similar limitations as those already recited in the rejection of claim 24, and, as such, is rejected for similar reasons as given above. Regarding claim 35, the claim recites substantially similar limitations as those already recited in the rejection of claim 26, and, as such, is rejected for similar reasons as given above. Regarding claim 36, the claim recites substantially similar limitations as those already recited in the rejection of claim 27, and, as such, is rejected for similar reasons as given above. Regarding claim 37, the claim recites substantially similar limitations as those already recited in the rejection of claim 28, and, as such, is rejected for similar reasons as given above. Regarding claim 38, the claim recites substantially similar limitations as those already recited in the rejection of claim 29, and, as such, is rejected for similar reasons as given above. Regarding claim 39, Nawana-Grantcharov-Shelton teaches the method of claim 21, and Nawana further discloses wherein the physical configuration modification further comprises at least one of: adjusting a position or orientation of a camera; or adjusting an angle of a display; or repositioning a surgical table. (Nawana [0216] cause such adjustment to occur (e.g., dim a light, turn on a light, zoom in a camera, adjust table height, etc.)). Regarding claim 40, Nawana-Grantcharov-Shelton teaches the method of claim 21, and Nawana further discloses wherein the physical configuration modification further comprises at least one of: adjusting a trocar angulation; adjusting lighting intensity; adjusting air flow or air pressure; or increasing a vacuum operation of a surgical instrument. (Nawana [0216] cause such adjustment to occur (e.g., dim a light, turn on a light, zoom in a camera, adjust table height, etc.)) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Roe et al. (US 2018/0139434). Roe teaches adjusting different settings for display devices that users are looking at in order to reduce their eye strain during this usage . 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 AMANDA R COVINGTON whose telephone number is (303)297-4604. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 - 5 MT. 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, Jason B. Dunham can be reached on (571) 272-8109. 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. /AMANDA R. COVINGTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3686 /RACHELLE L REICHERT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3686
Prosecution Insights