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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
In the Amendment dated 12 November 2025, the following occurred: Claims 1 and 7 were amended; Claim 15 was cancelled.
Claims 1, 3-8, and 10-13 are pending.
Priority
This application claims priority to JP2021-069631 dated 16 April 2021.
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, 3-8, and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites an apparatus for processing medical information, which are within a statutory category of invention.
Step 2A1
The limitations of extract character strings having clinical meaning from first medical data as topics, wherein the first medical data indicates text data included in medical information about a subject to be examined, the medical information including at least one of sample test data, vitals data, prescription data, nursing record data, and metadata indicating an attribute of medical image data, the extracted character strings include a character string indicating a symptom, and the topics indicate reference viewpoints for referring to a plurality of pieces of the medical information, select one topic from the extracted topics according to an input by a user, calculate a degree of association between the selected one topic and each of one or more pieces of second medical data included in the medical information about the subject, the one or more pieces of the second medical data representing a condition of the subject, determine one or more pieces of the second medical data each having a calculated degree of association that exceeds a threshold as one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic, and perform control of displaying the determined one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic with a display layout corresponding to the calculated degree of association, store output information that includes a size of the output location on which the second medical data is displayed and a number of displayable pieces of the second medical data for the output location, wherein the character strings are extracted from the first medical data as the topics, according to an extraction condition indicating a condition for extracting the character strings, corresponding to a reference purpose of the medical information about the subject, the output size is identified to which the second medical data is displayed and the number of displayable pieces of the second medical data for the output size, and output the determined one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic with an output size and an arrangement corresponding to the calculated degree of association and the identified number of displayable pieces of the second medical data when a number of the determined one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic is equal to or less than the number of displayable pieces of the second medical data, output all of the determined one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic, when the number of the determined one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic exceeds the number of displayable pieces of the second medical data, arranges the determined one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic in descending order of the calculated degrees of association with the selected one topic and displays up to the number of displayable pieces of the second medical data from a top of the determined one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic, and display the determined one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic such that a piece having a higher degree of association is displayed with a larger display size, as drafted, is a process that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers certain methods of organizing human activity (i.e., managing personal behavior including following rules or instructions) but for recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting processing circuitry, memory, and a display (a computer), the claimed invention amounts to managing personal behavior or interaction between people. For example, but for the processing circuitry and a display, this claim encompasses a person determining second medical data from first medical data and displaying it in the manner described in the identified abstract idea, supra. The Examiner notes that certain “method[s] of organizing human activity” includes a person’s interaction with a computer (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior 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. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A2
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional element of processing circuitry, memory, and a display device that implements the identified abstract idea. The processing circuitry and a display are described by the Applicant as a generic computer (see Spec. Pg. 4, first full para.) at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. 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
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 using processing circuitry, memory, and a display device to perform the noted steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept (“significantly more”).
Claims 3-8, 10-13, and 15 are similarly rejected because they either further define/narrow the abstract idea and/or do not further limit the claim to a practical application or provide as inventive concept such that the claims are subject matter eligible even when considered individually or as an ordered combination. Claim(s) 3 merely describe(s) how the character string is extracted. Claim(s) 4 merely describe(s) calculating a level of importance of the topic. Claim(s) 5, 8, 10, 13, 15 merely describe(s) how or what data is displayed. Claim(s) 6, 7 merely describe(s) how the data is analyzed/grouped. Claim(s) 11, 12 merely describe(s) searching for matching data.
Response to Arguments
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101
Regarding the rejection of Claims 1, 3-8, 10-13, and 15, the Applicant has cancelled Claim 15 rendering the rejection of that claim moot. Regarding the remaining claims, the Examiner has considered the Applicant’s arguments; however, the arguments are not persuasive. Applicant argues:
With these additional elements noted above, amended claim I can display medical information in a layout optimized for the individual user.
Regarding (a), the Examiner respectfully submits that the only additional element(s) in the claim is the general-purpose computer. The various functions detailed by the Applicant, absent the computer components, is the abstract idea. See basis of rejection.
More particularly, if the processing circuitry simply displays one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic, depending on the number of one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic, the screen size, etc., a situation may occur where too many pieces of the second medical data are displayed with an extremely small size. To solve the problem, with the apparatus of Claim 1, the number of pieces of the second medical data displayed is determined in accordance with the screen size.
Regarding (b), the Examiner respectfully submits that while this may or may not be true, it is not a technical problem caused by the computer. As discussed previously, this problem exists independent of the computer; displaying data of a small size on a piece of paper represents the same problem. While the solution to this problem may be a technical one, the problem is not a technical problem and thus a practical application is not present based on this test.
Moreover, if one or more pieces of the second medical data related to the selected one topic are displayed in a simple manner as is done in conventional technology, one piece having a higher degree of association with the topic selected by the user (a piece that seems to have a higher degree of importance) may be displayed with the same size as another piece having a lower degree of association. To solve this problem…
Regarding (c), the Examiner respectfully submits that this is not a technical problem. At best this is a non-technical information outputting problem that exists whether the computer is present or not.
The above processing increases the processing load on the processor of the computer especially when the processing is performed on a plurality of pieces of the second medical data. […] Claim 1 improves the speed of processing, which is performed on a computer, to display medical information related to a topic that the user is concerned about and displays, in the processing, the medical information with a layout automatically optimized in accordance with a topic selected by the user.
Regarding (d), the Examiner respectfully submits that “increases the processing load on the processor of the computer” and “improves the speed of processing” is unsupported supposition on the part of the Applicant. There is no indication that processing load is decreased by implementation of the claim(s). Even assuming it was, any decrease would be a trivial amount that would not rise to the level of a practical application. For as much as the claim is concerned, processing requirements may actually increase by application of the claimed invention.
Similar to the automatic lip syncing presented in McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc .. 837 F.3d 1299 (Fed. Cir. 2016), the apparatus of Claim l uses a specific way to optimize the display to avoid further processing.
Regarding (e), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims in McRO were found to be eligible because they allowed a computer to perform functions that computers could not be previously programmed to perform. There is absolutely no indication on the record that computers could not be previously programmed to display data in the manner claimed.
Again, the Examiner cannot suggest a path forward with regard to the lack of subject matter eligibility.
Conclusion
Prior art made of record though not relied upon in the present basis of rejection are noted in the attached PTO 892 and include:
Abe et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Patent Publication No. 2014/0143232) which discloses a system for returning search results from an EMR search where a degree-of-association between a patient ID and a document is presented.
Gajic et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Patent Publication No. 2010/0198622) which discloses a system that extracts relevant data points for a provider from a patient’s EMR and arranges the data points into groups for display.
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 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 JASON S TIEDEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4594. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00am-4:00pm, off alternate Fridays.
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, Robert Morgan can be reached at 571-272-6773. 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.
/JASON S TIEDEMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3683