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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is responsive to the request for continued examination filed September 8, 2025.
Claims 2 and 6-10 have been previously canceled.
Claim 1 has been amended.
Claims 3-5 are in their original presentation.
Claims 1 and 3-5 are currently pending and have been fully examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 was amended to recite “an IoT-device hub configured to accommodate the plurality of vital sign measurement devices”. However, there is no support for this limitation in the specification or an IoT-device hub at all. Paragraph 34 of the specification describes how the IoT nursing equipment updates measured vital signs to the intelligent nursing platform front-end program on a smartphone, which are then updated to the intelligent nursing platform back-end management program on the system server. This seems to indicate that the smartphone, or user equipment, accommodates the plurality of vital sign measurement devices as being the conduit through which the measured vital signs is collected for updating the intelligent nursing platform back-end. Paragraph 36 of the specification describes the smart care work stand that provides a mobile device connecting point at an appropriate height above the ground to fixedly hold the smartphone and could also “provide a convenient member to collect and accommodate one or more of the IoT nursing equipment in one location”. This seems to indicate that the smart care work stand itself serves as a physical resting place to hold or accommodate IoT nursing equipment, rather than there being a separate IoT device hub to do so.
Dependent claims 3-5 inherit the deficiency of claim 1 and thus are also rejected.
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 and 3-5 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.
Claim 1 was amended to recite “an IoT-device hub configured to accommodate the plurality of vital sign measurement devices” and preceded by “a plurality of vital sign measurement devices…. communicatively connected to the user equipment via a second wireless communication link”. It is unclear whether the user equipment that is communicatively connected to the plurality of vital sign measurement devices is the IoT-device hub, or whether they are wholly separate. As noted above in the rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 112(a), it appears that the smart nursing cart itself serves as a physical place or structure where the plurality of vital sign measurement devices can be collected and accommodated. For the purposes of examination, the claimed “IoT-device hub” is interpreted to be a reference to shelf or compartment or something comparable of the smart nursing cart and not separate.
Dependent claims 3-5 inherit the deficiency of claim 1 and thus are also rejected.
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 and 3-5 is/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
The claim(s) recite(s) subject matter within a statutory category as a process (claim 1), which is recited as methods that perform the steps and/or functions of:
a system server configured to execute a nursing information module automation natural language processing model comprising a transfer learning-based nursing focus prediction module that is built on an unsupervised BERT-based architecture and fine-tuned with at least 160,000 labeled nursing records in DART format with a resultant training accuracy exceeding 96% based on a supervised machine learning scheme;
a user equipment comprising a touchscreen and communicatively connected to the system server via a first wireless communication link;
a plurality of vital sign measurement devices configured to acquire a series of real-time vital sign data and communicatively connected to the user equipment via a second wireless communication link; and
a smart nursing cart comprising an adjustable-height mobile device connecting point configured to detachably secure the user equipment for a user to operate and an IoT-device hub configured to accommodate the plurality of vital sign measurement devices;
comprising steps of:
receiving via the touchscreen, a nursing record inputted by the user via a nursing record operation interface executed on the touchscreen;
transmitting the nursing record to the nursing information module automation natural language processing model executed on the system server;
executing the transfer learning-based nursing focus prediction module to predict at least one nursing focus based on the inputted nursing record using a self-attention mechanism in real-time;
accessing a focus module knowledge database comprising a focus and module matching relationship of a plurality of nursing focuses with respect to a plurality of functional modules comprising a vital sign module stored in the system server;
matching at least one recommended module out of the plurality of functional modules for the at least one nursing focus automatically and comprehensively in accordance with (i) a probability ranking of occurrence, and (ii) a usage rate of a functional module with respect to the at least one nursing focus, returning the at least one recommended module to the nursing record operation interface, and automatically recommending and representing the at least one recommended module through the nursing record operation interface displayed and executed on the touchscreen for the user in real-time, and
executing the nursing information module automation natural language processing model to perform a semantics extraction technology, to identify a first semantic represented in a plurality of fields of the at least one recommended module and a second semantic represented in the nursing record, extract a second contents related to the first semantic from the nursing record based on the second semantic, and fill the extracted second contents into the plurality of fields of the at least one recommended module accordingly and automatically, to complete nursing documentation without manual entry and to improve the speed and consistency of nursing documentation; and
determining whether the at least one recommended module is the vital sign module and triggering a real-time streaming of the series of real-time vital sign data from the plurality of vital sign measurement devices to the user equipment if the at least one recommended module is the vital sign module, and filling the series of real-time vital sign data into a vital-sign related field out of the plurality of fields automatically.
Step 2A: Prong 1
When taken individually and as a whole, the steps corresponds to concepts identified as abstract ideas by the courts, such as “certain methods of organizing human activity”, which are interactions between individuals that can include: fundamental economic principles or practices; commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); and managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
The claim is directed to a system to perform the process of recommending nursing focus to a user, which is performed by the system performing the underlined limitations identified in the independent claim above. This is analyzing the data in the nursing record and providing rules or instructions to manage the behavior of nurse through the recommendations.
Step 2A: Prong 2
The claim recites a plurality of additional elements beyond the identified abstract idea. These additional elements are bolded above.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to be considered a practical application because the additional elements amount to: insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), generally linking the application of the abstract idea to a particular field of use or technological environment (2106.05(h)), or mere instructions to apply it with a computer (MPEP 2106.05(f)), as discussed below.
Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity
The limitations/steps of: receiving a nursing record inputted by a user and transmitting the nursing record to a nursing information module automation natural language processing model, as well as data retrieval (accessing a focus module knowledge database to match and return at least one recommended module) are examples of mere data gathering, which is an insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.5(g)).
The limitations/steps specifying the data to be a nursing record inputted by a user is/are examples of selecting by type or source the data to be manipulated, which is an extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The limitations/steps of representing the at least one recommended module through the nursing record operation interface displayed and executed on the touchscreen (e.g., displaying the at least one recommended module for the user via the interface of a user equipment) are examples of necessary data outputting. Necessary data outputting is an insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Insignificant extra-solution activities are not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or cause the claim to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(g))
Generally Linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use
The limitations/steps reciting the system server, user equipment, plurality of vital sign measurement devices, smart nursing cart and IoT-device hub are deemed to link the identified abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP 2106.05(h))
Mere Instructions to Apply the Abstract Idea Using a Computer
The limitations/steps reciting the use of computer components, such as the bolded passages of the independent claim identified above, serve as mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using a computer. This includes the execution of a transfer learning-based nursing focus prediction model to predict at least one nursing focus and executing the nursing information module automation natural language processing model to perform a semantics extraction technology to identify a first and second semantic,
The limitation/step of user equipment and vital sign measurement devices being “communicatively connected” to the system server via wireless communication link using known means as acknowledged by applicant, such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, Bluetooth Low Energy module, Sub-1G module, and 4G or 5G mobile communications module as described in par. [0031].
The limitation/step of “executing the nursing information module automation natural language processing model to perform a semantics extraction technology…” describes the process for performing the natural language processing using one of the plurality of known natural language processing models known in the art and listed at par. [0043] of the specification (par. [0043], “Preferably, the nursing information module automation natural language processing model provided in the present invention is selected from the ground including but not limited to Transformer model, BERT model, ELMO model, LSTM model, GPT1.0 model, GPT2.0 model, Flair model, StanfordNLP model, and ULMFiT model.”). Mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using a computer are not sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The “triggering a real-time streaming” limitation of the claim does not necessarily occur. As recited, the triggering of real-time stream only takes place if the recommended module is determined to be the vital sign module; if the recommended module is not the vital sign module, then the real-time streaming is not triggered. Thus, since the real-time streaming is not necessarily triggered, or performed, it does not provide a practical application.
Step 2B
The claims also do not include additional elements that are sufficient to be considered a significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional elements amount to: insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), mere instructions to apply it with a computer (MPEP 2106.05(f)), generally linking the application of the abstract idea to a particular field of use or technological environment (MPEP 2106.05(h)), or a well-understood, routine, and conventional limitation (MPEP 2106.05(d)), as discussed below.
The limitations/steps addressed above in Step 2A: Prong 2, when considered again under Step 2B are not considered to make the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because those steps, when considered additionally with regards to Step 2B, are still considered to be either insignificant extra-solution activity, mere instructions to apply an abstract idea with a computer, or generally linking the application of the abstract idea to a particular field of use or technological environment, which are types of limitations that are not sufficient to make the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05.I.A).
The limitations/steps recited as either being part of the abstract idea or insignificant extra-solution activity are all examples of at least one of: storing and retrieving data from a memory, sending and receiving data over a network (transmitting the nursing record to the nursing information module automation natural language processing model), electronic recordkeeping, electronically scanning or extracting data from a physical document (having a document be inputted by a user), or performing repetitive calculations. All of those functions have been identified as well-understood, routine, and conventional functions of a generic computer that are not significantly more than the abstract idea when claimed broadly or as an extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(d).II).
The recited computer components (e.g., a system server, a user equipment communicatively connected with the system server, plurality of vital sign measurement devices, IoT-device hub and the natural language processing model) are all generically recited components (see specification, par. [0019], [0031], [0043]). Commercially available components, generic computer components, and specially-programmed computer components performing the functions of a generic computer are not considered to be amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(b)).
When considered as a whole, the components do not provide anything that is not present when the component parts are considered individually. Using the broadest reasonable interpretation, the system as a whole is a system that receives a data input, transmits the input data to a model run on a general purpose computing device, and generates a recommendation based on the model’s analysis of the input data. This is a system of general purpose computing devices performing the abstract idea and insignificant extra-solution activities through these generically described devices performing well-understood, routine, and conventional functions of a generic computer (MPEP 2106.05(d).II).
Dependent Claim Analysis
Claims 3-5 are ultimately dependent from Claim(s) 1 and includes all the limitations of Claim(s) 1. Therefore, claim(s) 3-5 recite the same abstract idea of certain methods of organizing human activity of claim 1.
Claims 3-5 all recite additional limitations that serve as mere instructions to apply using a computer because they recite the specific types of computer programs that should be used to perform the analysis required to generate the recommendations. Mere instructions to apply the abstract idea using a computer are not limitations that are considered sufficient to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Response to Arguments
101 Rejections
Applicant's arguments filed September 8, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Step 2A Prong 1
Applicant argues that claim 1 recites a specific integration and combination of hardware and software components in the fields of NIS and HIS to recite a specific, tangible and technological solution to longstanding problems in the fields of NIS and HIS, by creating a unique, integrated platform that intelligently merges different hardware and data from disparate sources.
This argument is not persuasive. Firstly, claim 1 is a method/process claim that is implemented in a distributed nursing information module automation system. The method/process itself does not integrate or combine hardware and software components together. At best, it is the distributed nursing information module automation system where the alleged integration and combination occurs. The method is simply implemented/executed on said automation system, and is deemed to be similar to “apply it”, with the various components of the automation system providing a general link between the abstract idea and a particular technological environment or field of use. Secondly, there is no language in the claim in which data is received from disparate sources.
Lastly, claim 1 does recite limitations that are directed towards an abstract idea – namely, predicting at least one nursing focus to match at least one recommended module, identifying a first and second semantic to use to fill fields of the recommended module, and determine whether the recommended module is the vital sign module. These limitations are directed towards the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas, as they encompass the nurse’s duties in documenting the care process of a patient. The applicant’s arguments focus on an alleged technical solution; this is not the focus of Step 2A Prong 1.
The analysis at Step 2A Prong 1 requires determining whether a judicial exception is recited. According to the MPEP this only requires that the judicial exception be “set forth or described” (MPEP 2106.04.II.A.1). The rejection identifies which portions of the claimed invention recite a judicial exception. This abstract idea is recommending a nursing focus to a user, which is certain methods of organizing human activity because it is managing the behavior of the user by providing rules or instructions. Further, recommending a nursing focus repeatedly based on “incremental input” of the nursing record only means that the process of recommending a nursing focus is repeated, and repeating an abstract idea is still considered to be an abstract idea.
Because the claimed invention recites an abstract idea that falls within one of the enumerated groupings of judicial exceptions, the arguments against the analysis at Step 2A Prong 1 are not persuasive.
Step 2A Prong 2 and Step 2B
Applicant argues that claim 1 integrates any abstract idea into a practical application and that the combination of elements amounts to “significantly more” than any alleged abstract idea. Applicant argues that the implementation within a specific, non-generic system, including a system server configured with a highly specialized NLP model, a plurality of IoT-based vital sign devices, and a smart nursing cart, provide a tangible and concrete technological environment in which the method operates, and is a unique combination of features that are not well-known, routine or conventional in the fields of NIS and HIS systems.
Applicant also argues that the method of operation itself constitutes a practical application by improving the automation, speed and consistency of computer-based learning documentation systems, citing the unsupervised BERT-based architecture fine-tuned with at least 160,000 labeled nursing records in DART format to achieve a resultant training accuracy exceeding 96% and transforms the generic computer and network system from a simple data processor into a highly efficient nursing and documentation tool.
Applicant also argues that the practical application lies in solving the complex technical problem of integrating heterogeneous data, stating that the claimed method uses the high-accuracy analysis of unstructured text to intelligently trigger a real-time streaming of the series of real-time vital sign data to create a novel data processing pathway where the output of a semantic analysis engine directly controls the flow of data from physical hardware sensors.
Applicant argues that claim 1 is a detailed recitation on how to configure and operate a specific computing machine to achieve a task that was previously impractical, by combining the specifically trained, high-performance transfer learning model, the intelligent control of real-time IoT data, and the integration with a custom nursing cart to provide an inventive concept that amounts to significantly more and transforms the claim into a patent-eligible application of technology.
With respect to the arguments against the analysis at Step 2A Prong 2 and Step 2B, these arguments are not persuasive.
As noted above, the system server, user equipment, plurality of vital sign measurement devices and smart nursing cart are not elements or components of the claimed method/process, but rather the elements or components on which the claimed method/process are performed on. In the context of a method/process claim, these elements are deemed to be use in an “apply it” manner to the claimed method/process, with the various components of the automation system providing a general link between the abstract idea and a particular technological environment or field of use.
It is also noted that the ‘real-time streaming of the series of real-time vital sign data from the plurality of vital sign measurement devices to the user equipment’ only takes plan if the recommended module is determined to be the vital sign module. If the recommended module is determined to not be the vital sign module, then the real-time streaming does not occur. Since this does not definitely occur or take place, it could not be considered to provide a practical application, even without further considering whether real-time streaming would be a practical application.
It is also noted that claim 1 does not recite how the nursing information module automation natural language processing model is trained; claim 1 recites the use of an already-trained nursing information module automation natural language processing model. Similarly, claim 1 does not recite how the plurality of vital sign measurement devices acquire real-time vital sign data or communicate to the user equipment. Thus, these do not represent any improvement to technology, the technical field, or significantly more than the identified abstract idea.
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 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 PETER H CHOI whose telephone number is (469)295-9171. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9am-7pm.
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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at (571) 272-8105. 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.
/PETER H CHOI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3681