DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 2/23/2022 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered. No copies of the non-patent literature documents were provided.
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 1-17 and 25 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. The independent claims 1 and 25 recite “prior to processing the response payload”. There is no step of processing the response payload. The claim is therefore rejected as being incomplete for omitting essential steps or elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps or elements are: processing the response payload.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-17 and 25 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 7,942,844 to Moberg et al. in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0189436 to Vaswani et al. in view of JP 2009519111 A.
As to claims 1 and 25, Moberg discloses a system comprising:
a facility gateway configured to provide a web service (Moberg column 29 lines 1-32 see translation device); and
a medical device (Moberg column 34 lines 1-21 and column 30 lines 3-20 see infusion system); wherein:
only the medical device is configured to communicate with the facility gateway using the web service (Moberg column 34 lines 1-21 and column 30 lines 3-20 see infusion system),
the medical device is configured to initiate communications with the facility gateway using the web service to request a response payload, and the facility gateway is configured to be prevented from initiating communications with the medical device (Moberg column 34 lines 1-21 and column 37 lines 1-19);
the facility gateway is configured to:
in response to the medical device initiated communication by the medical device format the response payload comprising an availability of a queryable data type, wherein each current request status is a request for the medical device to transmit a data type of a plurality of data types to the facility gateway (Moberg column 34 lines 1-21 and column 37 lines 1-19), and
communicate the response payload to the medical device in response to the medical device initiated communication (Moberg column 34 lines 1-21 and column 37 lines 1-19), and
the medical device is configured to communicate all data types of the plurality of data types where a respective current request status of the current request statutes indicates a request of a respective data type (Moberg column 34 lines 1-21 and column 37 lines 1-19).
However, Moberg does not explicitly teach determine whether the medical device is listed on an access list of devices that can access the facility gateway and initiating communications based on the determination. Vaswani discloses determine whether the medical device is listed on an access list of devices that can access the facility gateway and initiating communications based on the determination (Vaswani [0073] and [0077]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing of the invention by applicant to use a list of approved devices as in Vaswani in the system of Moberg to improve data security.
However, Moberg and Vaswani do not explicitly teach verifying the response payload prior to processing the response payload. JP 2009519111 A discloses verifying the response payload prior to processing the response payload (see “Each portable patient management device 121 uses the SHA-1 hash algorithm's 2048-bit asymmetric RSA key during software update, and the software update image is digitally signed and verified prior to installation on the device. Use a trust software distribution scheme that requires Other forms of security are possible.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to verify a response payload prior to processing the response payload (installation of a software update) as in JP 2009519111 A in the system of Moberg and Vaswani to ensure the integrity of the system.
As to claim 2, see the discussion of claim 1, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the facility gateway and the medical device are configured to communicate on a TCP/IP-based network (Moberg column 39 lines 54-67).
As to claim 3, see the discussion of claim 1, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the facility gateway application is configured to be a web server of the web service and the medical device is configured to be a client of the web service (Moberg column 39 lines 54-67).
As to claim 4, see the discussion of claim 1, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the facility gateway application is configured to register a topic using a publish-subscribe service (Moberg column 39 lines 54-67).
As to claim 5, see the discussion of claim 1, additionally, Moberg discloses the system further comprising an integration API configured for execution by the facility gateway, wherein the integration API is configured to subscribe to the topic and communicate an event received by the subscription to the topic to an external server (Moberg column 41 lines 14-48).
As to claim 6, see the discussion of claim 5, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the topic is one of a reportable clinical events topic (Moberg column 41 lines 14-48).
As to claim 7, see the discussion of claim 4, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the topic is a reportable biomed event topic and the facility gateway is configured to reformat a device event received via the web service into a reportable biomed event receivable by a subscriber to the topic via a publish-subscribe engine (Moberg column 41 lines 14-48).
As to claim 8, see the discussion of claim 7, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the medical device is configured to communicate the medical device event via the network using the web service (Moberg column 41 lines 14-48).
As to claim 9, see the discussion of claim 4, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the topic is a reportable clinical event topic and the facility gateway is configured to reformat a device event received via the web service into a reportable clinical event receivable by a subscriber to the topic via a publish-subscribe engine (Moberg column 41 lines 14-48).
As to claim 10, see the discussion of claim 9, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the medical device is configured to communicate the medical device event via the network using the web service (Moberg column 41 lines 14-48).
As to claim 11, see the discussion of claim 4, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the topic corresponds to a class of pump events (Moberg claim 1).
As to claim 12, see the discussion of claim 11, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the class of pump events includes one of an infusion event regarding an alarm, alert or notification (Moberg column 30 lines 21-50)
As to claim 13, see the discussion of claim 1, additionally, Moberg discloses the system further comprising a continuous quality improvement listener configured for execution by the facility gateway, wherein:
the continuous quality improvement listener is configured to:
subscribe to a reportable biomed event topic and to a reportable clinical even topic, communicate a reportable biomed event received by the subscription to the reportable biomed event topic to an external database (Moberg column 41 lines 14-48)., and
communicate a reportable clinical event received by the subscription to the reportable clinical event topic to the external database (Moberg column 41 lines 14-48)..
As to claim 14, see the discussion of claim 13, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the external database is configured to record at least one of the reportable biomed event and the reportable clinical event (Moberg column 41 lines 14-48).
As to claim 15, see the discussion of claim 1, additionally, Moberg discloses the system further comprising a device manager configured to be executable on the facility gateway, wherein the medical device manager is configured to maintain the list of devices including the medical device (Moberg column 40 lines 38-49 and column 41 lines 14-35).
As to claim 16, see the discussion of claim 15, additionally, Moberg discloses the system wherein the list of the medical devices includes a list of serial numbers corresponding to the list of devices (Moberg column 40 lines 38-49 and column 41 lines 14-35 where the sensor identifiers are functionally equivalent to a serial number).
As to claim 17, see the discussion of claim 1, additionally, Moberg discloses the system further comprising a monitoring client configured to communicate with the medical device to receive status information therefrom (Moberg column 14-58).
Response to Arguments
Applicants arguments are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
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 Eliza Lam whose telephone number is (571)270-7052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-4:30PST.
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, Peter Choi can be reached on 469-295-9171. 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.
/ELIZA A LAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3681