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 .
Examiner Note
Applicant has filed an RCE with no amendments or arguments after Patent Board affirmed the 101 rejection previously given. According to MPEP 706.07(b), under these conditions, it is proper for Examiner to go Final after RCE.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 3-14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without “significantly more.” Claims 1, 3-14 and 16-20 are directed to generating a user interface, obtaining a list, assigning a score, obtaining codes, calculating market value, determining utilization rate, generating and displaying a replacement forecast and provide a list of previously run forecasts, which is considered an abstract idea. Further, the claim(s) as a whole, when examined on a limitation-by-limitation basis and in ordered combination do not include an inventive concept.
Step 1 – Statutory Categories
As indicated in the preamble of the claims, the examiner finds the claims are directed to a machine or an article of manufacture.
Step 2A – Prong One - Abstract Idea Analysis
Exemplary claim 1 recites the following abstract concepts, in italics below, which are found to include an “abstract idea”:
A system for forecasting status for a fleet of medical equipment within an integrated delivery network (IDN), the system comprising a processor and a memory storing executable instructions that, in response to execution by the processor, cause the system to at least:
generate a user interface enabling a user to set a forecast period;
establish a connection to an equipment database and obtain a list of existing equipment within the IDN from the equipment database;
operate a scoring module to assign a score to each of the medical equipment recursively for each year of the forecast period;
establish a connection to a current procedural terminology (CPT) database and obtain a plurality of CPT codes from the CPT database;
establish a connection to an appraisal module and obtain from the appraisal module a calculated a market value, different from book value, for each of the equipment recursively for each year of the forecast period, the market value being updated using the CPT codes;
determine utilization rate for each of the medical equipment recursively for each year of the forecast period;
based on the score, the market value and the utilization rate, generate a replacement forecast by determining for each year of the forecast period whether any of the medical equipment should be replaced; and,
display the replacement forecast on the user interface; and,
provides a list of previously run forecasts by all registered users,
wherein the scoring module assigns the score by, for each of the medical equipment, for each year of the forecast period:
assign points based on predicted operability of the medical equipment, by adding points for each year of the medical equipment age above an assigned threshold, and incrementing the score according to the age of the equipment with respect to an assigned end of life and end of support date;
assign points based on predicted profitability of the medical equipment, by adding points if the equipment profit for the year is negative, and reducing the points if the profitability is less than maintenance cost and further reducing points if the profitability is less than the sum of maintenance cost and overhead costs;
assign points based on the predicted technology refresh of the medical equipment, by comparing the medical equipment age to a first age value and a second age value and awarding no points if the medical equipment age is below the first age value, adding points if the medical equipment age is between the first age value and the second age value, and awarding higher points if the medical equipment age is above the second age value; and,
summing all assigned points to generate the score.
The claim features in italics above as drafted, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, are mental processes and/or certain methods of organizing human activity performed by generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “an integrated delivery network (IDN)”, “an equipment database”, “a current procedural terminology (CPT) database” and “a processor and a memory”, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind or a method of organized human activity. For example, but for the “integrated delivery network (IDN)”, “equipment database”, “current procedural terminology (CPT) database”, “processor” and “memory” language, “A system for forecasting status for a fleet of medical equipment …, the system comprising a … storing executable instructions that, in response to execution …, cause the system to at least: generate a user interface enabling a user to set a forecast period; establish a connection … and obtain a list of existing equipment …; operate a scoring module to assign a score to each of the medical equipment recursively for each year of the forecast period; establish a connection … and obtain a plurality of CPT codes …; establish a connection to an appraisal module and obtain from the appraisal module a calculated a market value, different from book value, for each of the equipment recursively for each year of the forecast period, the market value being updated using the CPT codes; determine utilization rate for each of the medical equipment recursively for each year of the forecast period; based on the score, the market value and the utilization rate, generate a replacement forecast by determining for each year of the forecast period whether any of the medical equipment should be replaced; and, display the replacement forecast on the user interface; and, provides a list of previously run forecasts by all registered users, wherein the scoring module assigns the score by, for each of the medical equipment, for each year of the forecast period: assign points based on predicted operability of the medical equipment, by adding points for each year of the medical equipment age above an assigned threshold, and incrementing the score according to the age of the equipment with respect to an assigned end of life and end of support date; assign points based on predicted profitability of the medical equipment, by adding points if the equipment profit for the year is negative, and reducing the points if the profitability is less than maintenance cost and further reducing points if the profitability is less than the sum of maintenance cost and overhead costs; assign points based on the predicted technology refresh of the medical equipment, by comparing the medical equipment age to a first age value and a second age value and awarding no points if the medical equipment age is below the first age value, adding points if the medical equipment age is between the first age value and the second age value, and awarding higher points if the medical equipment age is above the second age value; and, summing all assigned points to generate the score” in the context of this claim encompasses certain methods of organizing human activity. If the claim limitations, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers fundamental economic practice, commercial or legal interaction or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Further, “wherein the scoring module assigns the score by, for each of the medical equipment, for each year of the forecast period: assign points based on predicted operability of the medical equipment, by adding points for each year of the medical equipment age above an assigned threshold, and incrementing the score according to the age of the equipment with respect to an assigned end of life and end of support date; assign points based on predicted profitability of the medical equipment, by adding points if the equipment profit for the year is negative, and reducing the points if the profitability is less than maintenance cost and further reducing points if the profitability is less than the sum of maintenance cost and overhead costs; assign points based on the predicted technology refresh of the medical equipment, by comparing the medical equipment age to a first age value and a second age value and awarding no points if the medical equipment age is below the first age value, adding points if the medical equipment age is between the first age value and the second age value, and awarding higher points if the medical equipment age is above the second age value; and, summing all assigned points to generate the score” in the context of this claim encompasses mental processes. If the claim limitations, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers steps which could be performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement of opinion but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “mental processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A – Prong Two - Abstract Idea Analysis
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites three additional elements – “an integrated delivery network (IDN)”, “an equipment database”, “a current procedural terminology (CPT) database” and “a processor and a memory”. The “integrated delivery network (IDN)”, “equipment database”, “current procedural terminology (CPT) database”, “processor” and “memory” are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (MPEP 2106.05(f), i.e. the generate, operate, determine, generate, display, provide, assign and sum steps), data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g), i.e. obtain steps) and linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP 2106.05(h), i.e. the establish steps). Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B - Significantly More Analysis
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of “an integrated delivery network (IDN)”, “an equipment database”, “a current procedural terminology (CPT) database” and “a processor and a memory” amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component, insignificant extra-solution activity and linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and insignificant extra-solution activity, linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use cannot provide an inventive concept. Further, the background does not provide any indication that the “integrated delivery network (IDN)”, “equipment database”, “current procedural terminology (CPT) database”, “processor” and “memory” are anything other than generic, off-the-shelf computer components, and the Symantec, TLI, and OIP Techs. court decisions (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)) indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). For these reasons, there is no inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 Hunter Wilder whose telephone number is (571)270-7948. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Florian Zeender can be reached on (571)272-6790. 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.
/A. Hunter Wilder/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights