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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 2021023765, filed on 24.03.2020.
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.
Regarding claim 25, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim(s) 21 – 22, 25 – 26, 29 – 30, 32 – 34, 38 & 40 - 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banner et al. (US 2005/0098178 A1) in view of Kurtz et al. (US 2014/0348403 A1) & Wu et al. (CN 108630314 A).
Regarding claim 21, A system (Figure 1), comprising:
a ventilator 20 (Paragraph 0031)
one or more processors 40 (Paragraph 0036) configured to:
receive sensor data from one or more sensors 52 associated with the patient (Paragraph 0038);
determine, based on the sensor data, a physiological state of the patient (Paragraph 0038);
identify an operational mode of the ventilator 20 (Claim 1 discloses determining the appropriateness of ventilation for the patient);
the operational mode of the ventilator (Claim 1); and
adjust, based on the assessment classification, one or more operating parameters of the ventilator, wherein adjusting the one or more operating parameters influences the operational mode of the ventilator (Claim 1).
Banner does not disclose an image capture device configured to capture an image of a patient.
receive, from the image capture device, image data associated with the patient;
determine an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of pain, sepsis, or a delirium based on the determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient.
Kurtz discloses receive, from the image capture device, image data associated with the patient (Claim 9);
determine, based on the image data, a physical state of the patient (Claim 9).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to incorporate an additional assessment tool to receive, from the image capture device, image data associated with the patient and determine, based on the image data, a physical state of the patient as it would determine trends and triggers in normalized image data to figure out possible causes and interventions of identified health issues. (Claim 1)
Wu discloses determine an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of delirium based on the determined physiological state of the patient. (Page 6, Paragraph 3)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing day to further modify Banner to include determine an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of delirium based on the determined physiological state of the patient as the physiological index is used to determine the change in the patient that can dictates delirium. (Page 6, Paragraph 3)
Kurtz discloses determine an assessment classification indicating the determined physical state of the patient (Paragraph 0048).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modified Banner to include an assessment classification indicating the determined physical state of the patient as it can be considered wellness data that can be measured. (Paragraph 0048)
Regarding claim 22, Modified Banner discloses the system as claimed in claim 21.
Modified Banner discloses the one or more processors 40 (Paragraph 0036) being further configured to:
receiving diagnostic information associated with the patient (Paragraph 0065); and
determine the assessment classification based on the diagnostic information (Paragraph 0065), determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient, and the operational mode of the ventilator 20 (as claimed in claim 1).
Regarding claim 25, Modified Banner discloses the system as claimed in claim 21.
Modified Banner discloses wherein the operating parameters include, for example, a positive end respiratory pressure (PEEP). (Paragraph 0033)
Regarding claim 26, Modified Banner discloses the system as claimed in claim 21.
Modified Banner discloses the one or more processors 40 being further configured to:
adjust the one or more operating parameters to initiate a ventilation weaning, wherein the one or more operating parameters include a reduction in positive end respiratory pressure (PEEP) provided by the ventilator (Paragraph 0033).
Regarding claim 29, Modified Banner discloses the system as claimed in claim 21.
Modified Banner discloses wherein the one or more sensors 52 comprises a sensor configured to obtain a vital sign measurement of the patient (Paragraph 0038 – 0039), including one or more of blood pressure (Paragraph 0039), wherein the determined physiological state of the patient comprises information representative of the vital sign measurement (Paragraph 0038).
Regarding claim 30, Modified Banner discloses the system as claimed in claim 21.
Modified Banner discloses one or more processors 40. (as claimed in claim 1)
Modified Banner does not disclose wherein the system further comprises:
an audio device positioned to capture audio from the patient,
the one or more processors being further configured to:
receive audio information associated with the patient from the audio device; and
provide the audio information to an audio recognition algorithm configured to recognize an audio pattern and map the recognized audio pattern to an audio state indicative of a physical or mental state of the patient, wherein the assessment classification is further based on the audio state.
Kurtz discloses wherein the system further comprises:
an audio device positioned to capture audio from the patient (Paragraph 0062), the one or more processors 40 being further configured to:
receive audio information associated with the patient from the audio device (Paragraph 0062); and
provide the audio information to an audio recognition algorithm configured to recognize an audio pattern (Paragraph 0053) and map the recognized audio pattern to an audio state indicative of a physical or mental state of the patient , wherein the assessment classification is further based on the audio state (Paragraph 0062 & paragraph 0080).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to include wherein the system further comprises an audio device positioned to capture audio from the patient. The one or more processors being further configured to receive audio information associated with the patient from the audio device and provide the audio information to an audio recognition algorithm configured to recognize an audio pattern and map the recognized audio pattern to an audio state indicative of a physical or mental state of the patient, wherein the assessment classification is further based on the audio state as it would ensure a non-contact device that can enable a broad range of physiological measurements. (Paragraph 0108) Also, it can be used to collect baseline audio data and particular voice data by focusing on voice pitch, pacing, and loudness to be used as wellness parameters. (Paragraph 0062 & 0080)
Regarding claim 32, Modified Banner discloses the system as claimed in claim 21.
Modified Banner discloses the one or more processors being further configured to: send a message pertaining to the assessment classification and the adjusted one or more operating parameters to a user device, remote from the system, for display by a user interface operating on the user device when a user associated with the user device is authenticated to the system via the user interface (Paragraph 0046 discloses the operating clinician is who is alerted meaning they must be authenticated as the operated clinician).
Regarding claim 33, A machine-implemented method, comprising:
receiving sensor data from one or more sensors 52 associated with a patient provided ventilation by a ventilator 20 (Paragraph 0038);
determining, based on the sensor data, a physiological state of the patient (Paragraph 0038);
identifying an operational mode of the ventilator (Claim 1); and
adjusting, based on the assessment classification, one or more operating parameters of the ventilator, wherein adjusting the one or more operating parameters influences the operational mode of the ventilator (Claim 1).
Banner does not disclose receiving, from an image capture device, image data associated with the patient;
determining, based on the image data, a physical state of the patient;
determining an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of pain, sepsis, or a delirium based on the determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient.
Kurtz discloses receiving, from an image capture device 100, image data associated with the patient (Claim 9);
determining, based on the image data, a physical state of the patient (Claim 9).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to incorporate an additional assessment tool to receiving, from the image capture device, image data associated with the patient and determining, based on the image data, a physical state of the patient as it would determine trends and triggers in normalized image data to figure out possible causes and interventions of identified health issues. (Claim 1)
Wu discloses determining an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of delirium based on the determined physiological state of the patient. (Page 6, Paragraph 3)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing day to further modify Banner to include determine an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of delirium based on the determined physiological state of the patient as the physiological index is used to determine the change in the patient that can dictates delirium. (Page 6, Paragraph 3)
Kurtz discloses determine an assessment classification indicating the determined physical state of the patient (Paragraph 0048).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modified Banner to include an assessment classification indicating the determined physical state of the patient as it can be considered wellness data that can be measured. (Paragraph 0048)
Regarding claim 34, Modified Banner discloses the machine-implemented method as claimed in claim 33.
Modified Banner discloses further comprising: receiving diagnostic information associated with the patient (Paragraph 0065); and
determining the assessment classification based on the diagnostic information (Paragraph 0065), determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient, and the operational mode of the ventilator 20 (as claimed in claim 1).
Regarding claim 38, Modified Banner discloses the machine-implemented method as claimed in claim 33.
Modified Banner does not disclose further comprising:
receiving audio information associated with the patient from an audio device positioned to capture audio from the patient; and
providing the audio information to an audio recognition algorithm configured to recognize an audio pattern and map the recognized audio pattern to an audio state indicative of a physical or mental state of the patient, wherein the assessment classification is further based on the audio state.
Kurtz discloses wherein the system further comprises:
receiving audio information associated with the patient from the audio device positioned to capture audio from the patient (Paragraph 0062); and
providing the audio information to an audio recognition algorithm configured to recognize an audio pattern (Paragraph 0053) and map the recognized audio pattern to an audio state indicative of a physical or mental state of the patient , wherein the assessment classification is further based on the audio state (Paragraph 0062 & paragraph 0080).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to include receiving audio information associated with the patient from an audio device positioned to capture audio from the patient and providing the audio information to an audio recognition algorithm configured to recognize an audio pattern and map the recognized audio pattern to an audio state indicative of a physical or mental state of the patient, wherein the assessment classification is further based on the audio state as it would ensure a non-contact device that can enable a broad range of physiological measurements. (Paragraph 0108) Also, it can be used to collect baseline audio data and particular voice data by focusing on voice pitch, pacing, and loudness to be used as wellness parameters. (Paragraph 0062 & 0080)
Regarding claim 40, A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium having instructions thereon that, when executed by a machine, cause the machine to perform a method (Paragraph 0055 – 0056) comprising:
receiving sensor data from one or more sensors 52 associated with a patient provided ventilation by a ventilator 20 (Paragraph 0031 & 0038);
determining, based on the sensor data, a physiological state of the patient (Paragraph 0038);
identifying an operational mode of the ventilator 20 (Claim 1 discloses determining the appropriateness of ventilation for the patient);
the operational mode of the ventilator (Claim 1); and
adjusting, based on the assessment classification, one or more operating parameters of the ventilator, wherein adjusting the one or more operating parameters influences the operational mode of the ventilator (Claim 1).
Banner does not disclose receiving, from an image capture device, image data associated with the patient;
determining, based on the image data, a physical state of the patient; and
determining an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of pain, sepsis, or a delirium based on the determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient.
Kurtz discloses receiving, from the image capture device 100, image data associated with the patient (Claim 9);
determining, based on the image data, a physical state of the patient (Claim 9).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to incorporate an additional assessment tool to receive, from the image capture device, image data associated with the patient and determine, based on the image data, a physical state of the patient as it would determine trends and triggers in normalized image data to figure out possible causes and interventions of identified health issues. (Claim 1)
Wu discloses determining an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of delirium based on the determined physiological state of the patient. (Page 6, Paragraph 3)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing day to further modify Banner to include determine an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of delirium based on the determined physiological state of the patient as the physiological index is used to determine the change in the patient that can dictates delirium. (Page 6, Paragraph 3)
Kurtz discloses determine an assessment classification indicating the determined physical state of the patient (Paragraph 0048).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modified Banner to include an assessment classification indicating the determined physical state of the patient as it can be considered wellness data that can be measured. (Paragraph 0048)
Claim(s) 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banner et al. (US 2005/0098178 A1) in view of Kurtz et al. (US 2014/0348403 A1) & Wu et al. (CN 108630314 A) as claimed in claim 21, in view of Lee et al. (WO 0191691 A1).
Regarding claim 23, Modified Banner discloses the system as claimed in claim 21.
Modified Banner discloses one or more processors 40 (Paragraph 0036).
Modified Banner does not disclose receiving medication delivery information associated with a medication being administered to the patient; and
determine the assessment classification based on the medication delivery information, determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient, and the operational mode of the ventilator.
Lee discloses receiving medication delivery information associated with a medication being administered to the patient (Page 9, lines 4 - 7); and
determine the assessment classification based on the medication delivery information, determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient, and the operational mode of the ventilator (Page 11, lines 4 – 18).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to include receiving medication delivery information associated with a medication being administered to the patient and determine the assessment classification based on the medication delivery information, determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient, and the operational mode of the ventilator as it would provide the information being the state of the patient. This would also ensure the treatments are able to be changed based on the information received like re-adjust a breath of the machine and the medicine delivery or know of any error operation of an entire system. (Page 2, last paragraph)
Claim(s) 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banner et al. (US 2005/0098178 A1) in view of Kurtz et al. (US 2014/0348403 A1) & Wu et al. (CN 108630314 A) as claimed in claim 21, in view of el Kaliouby et al. (US 20170105668 A1).
Regarding claim 24, Modified Banner discloses the system as claimed in claim 21.
Modified Banner discloses one or more processors 40. (Paragraph 0036)
Modified Banner does not disclose receiving accelerometer data associated with at least one accelerometer coupled to the patient;
detect one or more motions of the patient based on the accelerometer data;
determine a classification of the one or more motions; and
determine the physical state of the patient based on the classification of the one or more motions and the image data.
el Kaliouby discloses receiving accelerometer data associated with at least one accelerometer coupled to the patient (Paragraph 0051);
detect one or more motions of the patient based on the accelerometer data (Paragraph 0053);
determine a classification of the one or more motions (Paragraph 0053); and
determine the physical state of the patient based on the classification of the one or more motions and the image data (Paragraph 0053 discloses determining sleep patterns, state of high activity and lethargy etc.).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to include receiving accelerometer data associated with at least one accelerometer coupled to the patient, detect one or more motions of the patient based on the accelerometer data, determine a classification of the one or more motion and determine the physical state of the patient based on the classification of the one or more motions and the image data as it would provide physiological data of the patient and use the information for analysis. (Paragraph 0051) The mental state can also be determined based in the physiological and physical data acquired. (Paragraph 0053)
Claim(s) 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banner et al. (US 2005/0098178 A1) in view of Kurtz et al. (US 2014/0348403 A1) & Wu et al. (CN 108630314 A) as claimed in claim 21, in view of de Paula et al. (US 11928891 B2)
Regarding claim 27, Modified Banner discloses the system as claimed in claim 21.
Modified Banner discloses the image capture device (as claimed in claim 1)
Modified Banner does not disclose a camera configured adjacent to the patient and positioned to capture at least one image of the patient's face, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive the one or more images from the camera; and
provide the one or more images to a facial recognition algorithm configured to recognize facial features and map the facial features to a facial state comprising one of a relaxed state, a tense state, and a grimacing state, wherein the physical state of the patient is further determined based on the determined facial state.
Kurtz discloses a camera configured adjacent to the patient and positioned to capture at least one image of the patient's face, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive the one or more images from the camera 120 (Paragraph 0049); and
provide the one or more images to a facial recognition algorithm (Paragraph 0073 & 0105) configured to recognize facial features. (Paragraph 0059 & 0065)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify the image capture device of Banner to include a camera configured adjacent to the patient and positioned to capture at least one image of the patient's face, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to receive the one or more images from the camera and provide the one or more images to a facial recognition algorithm configured to recognize facial features as it would ensure the processing of the captured images to aid the derivation of metrics relative to physiological conditions. (Paragraph 0041) The face recognizing algorithm is able to detect areas of the face like the eye, iris and pupil within an image. (Paragraph 0073) The algorithm can also be extended to identify an individual’s emotional state by quantifying a variety of facial expressions including but not limited to mouth shape patterns. (Paragraph 0105)
de Paula discloses a detected state of the facial expression such as being tired, bored, calm, level of pain, etc. to determine the physical state of the user. (Column 2, lines 11 – 38)
de Paula does not expressly disclose and map the facial features to a facial state comprising one of a relaxed state, a tense state, and a grimacing state, wherein the physical state of the patient is further determined based on the determined facial state.
However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Kurtz to include and map the facial features to a facial state comprising one of a relaxed state, a tense state, and a grimacing state, wherein the physical state of the patient is further determined based on the determined facial state as it would allow the feedback to include the indication of the detected state of the user and provide a category of the facial expression of the user. (Column 7, lines 15 – 25)
Claim(s) 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banner et al. (US 2005/0098178 A1) in view of Kurtz et al. (US 2014/0348403 A1) & Wu et al. (CN 108630314 A) as claimed in claim 21, in view of Blazey et al. (US 6293904 B1) & De Sapio et al. (US 9610036 B1).
Regarding claim 28, Modified Banner discloses the system as claimed in claim 21.
Modified Banner does not disclose wherein the one or more sensors comprises a sensor applied to the patient's skin and configured to measure a level of muscle tension, wherein the physical state of the patient is further determined based on the level of muscle tension.
Blazey discloses wherein the one or more sensors comprises a sensor applied to the patient's skin. (Column 7, lines 45 – 54)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to include one or more sensors comprises a sensor applied to the patient's skin as it would ensure being able to record biological information that is detected during stressful moments. (Column 7, lines 45 – 54)
De Sapio discloses measuring a level of muscle tension, wherein the physical state of the patient is further determined based on the level of muscle tension. (Abstract)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify the sensor of modified Banner to include measuring a level of muscle tension, wherein the physical state of the patient is further determined based on the level of muscle tension as there is a direct correlation between physical state and muscle tension as it can determine the physical performance of the user (Abstract)
Claim(s) 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banner et al. (US 2005/0098178 A1) in view of Kurtz et al. (US 2014/0348403 A1) & Wu et al. (CN 108630314 A) as claimed in claim 21, in view of Oster et al. (US 20090227906 A1).
Regarding claim 31, Modified Banner discloses the system as claimed in claim 21.
Modified Banner discloses wherein the system further comprises a strength assessment device configured to assess a muscle strength of the patient based on a pressure exerted by the patient on the strength assessment device, the one or more processors being further configured to:
receive strength information associated with the patient from the strength assessment device; and
map the strength information to a strength classification indicative of a physical strength of the patient, wherein the assessment classification is further based on the strength classification.
Oster discloses the system further comprises a strength assessment device configured to assess a muscle strength of the patient based on a pressure exerted by the patient on the strength assessment device (Abstract), the one or more processors (Paragraph 0034) being further configured to:
receive strength information associated with the patient from the strength assessment device (Abstract); and
map the strength information to a strength classification indicative of a physical strength of the patient, wherein the assessment classification is further based on the strength classification (Paragraph 0022 & 0058).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to include wherein the system further comprises a strength assessment device configured to assess a muscle strength of the patient based on a pressure exerted by the patient on the strength assessment device, the one or more processors being further configured to receive strength information associated with the patient from the strength assessment device as it has been determined that poor physical condition may cause a weakening to the strength of the muscle and this would allow the determination of the current strength of the muscle. (Paragraph 0083) The classification would provide normative data takes into consideration differences between patients. (Paragraph 0022 & 0058)
Claim(s) 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banner et al. (US 2005/0098178 A1) in view of Kurtz et al. (US 2014/0348403 A1) & Wu et al. (CN 108630314 A) as claimed in claim 33, in view of Lee et al. (WO 0191691 A1).
Regarding claim 35, Modified Banner discloses the machine-implemented method as claimed in claim 33.
Modified Banner does not disclose further comprising:
receiving medication delivery information associated with a medication being administered to the patient; and
determining the assessment classification based on the medication delivery information, determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient, and the operational mode of the ventilator.
Lee discloses receiving medication delivery information associated with a medication being administered to the patient (Page 9, lines 4 - 7); and
determine the assessment classification based on the medication delivery information, determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient, and the operational mode of the ventilator (Page 11, lines 4 – 18).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to include receiving medication delivery information associated with a medication being administered to the patient and determine the assessment classification based on the medication delivery information, determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient, and the operational mode of the ventilator as it would provide the information being the state of the patient. This would also ensure the treatments are able to be changed based on the information received like re-adjust a breath of the machine and the medicine delivery or know of any error operation of an entire system. (Page 2, last paragraph)
Claim(s) 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banner et al. (US 2005/0098178 A1) in view of Kurtz et al. (US 2014/0348403 A1) & Wu et al. (CN 108630314 A) as claimed in claim 33, in view of el Kaliouby et al. (US 20170105668 A1).
Regarding claim 36, Modified Banner discloses the machine-implemented method as claimed in claim 33.
Modified Banner does not disclose further comprising:
receiving accelerometer data associated with at least one accelerometer coupled to the patient;
detecting one or more motions of the patient based on the accelerometer data; determining a classification of the one or more motions; and
determining the physical state of the patient based on the classification of the one or more motions and the image data.
el Kaliouby discloses receiving accelerometer data associated with at least one accelerometer coupled to the patient (Paragraph 0051);
detecting one or more motions of the patient based on the accelerometer data (Paragraph 0053);
determine a classification of the one or more motions (Paragraph 0053); and
determine the physical state of the patient based on the classification of the one or more motions and the image data (Paragraph 0053 discloses determining sleep patterns, state of high activity and lethargy etc.).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to include receiving accelerometer data associated with at least one accelerometer coupled to the patient, detect one or more motions of the patient based on the accelerometer data, determine a classification of the one or more motion and determine the physical state of the patient based on the classification of the one or more motions and the image data as it would provide physiological data of the patient and use the information for analysis. (Paragraph 0051) The mental state can also be determined based in the physiological and physical data acquired. (Paragraph 0053)
Claim(s) 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banner et al. (US 2005/0098178 A1) in view of Kurtz et al. (US 2014/0348403 A1) & Wu et al. (CN 108630314 A) as claimed in claim 33, in view of de Paula et al. (US 11928891 B2)
Regarding claim 37, Modified Banner discloses the machine-implemented method as claimed in claim 33.
Modified Banner does not disclose wherein the image capture device is a camera configured adjacent to the patient and positioned to capture at least one image of the patient's face, the method further comprising:
receiving the one or more images from the camera; and providing the one or more images to a facial recognition algorithm configured to recognize facial features and map the facial features to a facial state comprising one of a relaxed state, a tense state, and a grimacing state, wherein the physical state of the patient is further determined based on the determined facial state.
Kurtz discloses wherein the image capture device is a camera 120 configured adjacent to the patient and positioned to capture at least one image of the patient's face (Paragraph 0049), the method further comprising:
receive the one or more images from the camera 120 (Paragraph 0049); and
provide the one or more images to a facial recognition algorithm (Paragraph 0073 & 0105) configured to recognize facial features. (Paragraph 0059 & 0065)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify the image capture device of Banner to include a camera configured adjacent to the patient and positioned to capture at least one image of the patient's face, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to receive the one or more images from the camera and provide the one or more images to a facial recognition algorithm configured to recognize facial features as it would ensure the processing of the captured images to aid the derivation of metrics relative to physiological conditions. (Paragraph 0041) The face recognizing algorithm is able to detect areas of the face like the eye, iris and pupil within an image. (Paragraph 0073) The algorithm can also be extended to identify an individual’s emotional state by quantifying a variety of facial expressions including but not limited to mouth shape patterns. (Paragraph 0105)
de Paula discloses a detected state of the facial expression such as being tired, bored, calm, level of pain, etc. to determine the physical state of the user. (Column 2, lines 11 – 38)
de Paula does not expressly disclose and map the facial features to a facial state comprising one of a relaxed state, a tense state, and a grimacing state, wherein the physical state of the patient is further determined based on the determined facial state.
However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Kurtz to include and map the facial features to a facial state comprising one of a relaxed state, a tense state, and a grimacing state, wherein the physical state of the patient is further determined based on the determined facial state as it would allow the feedback to include the indication of the detected state of the user and provide a category of the facial expression of the user. (Column 7, lines 15 – 25)
Claim(s) 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banner et al. (US 2005/0098178 A1) in view of Kurtz et al. (US 2014/0348403 A1) & Wu et al. (CN 108630314 A) as claimed in claim 33, in view of Oster et al. (US 20090227906 A1).
Regarding claim 39, Modified Banner discloses the machine-implemented method as claimed in claim 33.
Modified Banner discloses further comprising:
receive strength information associated with the patient from a strength assessment device configured to assess a muscle strength of the patient based on a pressure exerted by the patient on the strength assessment device; and
map the strength information to a strength classification indicative of a physical strength of the patient, wherein the assessment classification is further based on the strength classification.
Oster discloses the system further comprises a strength assessment device configured to assess a muscle strength of the patient based on a pressure exerted by the patient on the strength assessment device (Abstract), the one or more processors (Paragraph 0034) being further configured to:
receive strength information associated with the patient from the strength assessment device (Abstract) configured to assess a muscle strength of the patient based on a pressure exerted by the patient on the strength assessment device (Abstract); and
map the strength information to a strength classification indicative of a physical strength of the patient, wherein the assessment classification is further based on the strength classification (Paragraph 0022 & 0058).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to include receive strength information associated with the patient from a strength assessment device configured to assess a muscle strength of the patient based on a pressure exerted by the patient on the strength assessment device and map the strength information to a strength classification indicative of a physical strength of the patient, wherein the assessment classification is further based on the strength classification as it has been determined that poor physical condition may cause a weakening to the strength of the muscle and this would allow the determination of the current strength of the muscle. (Paragraph 0083) The classification would provide normative data takes into consideration differences between patients. (Paragraph 0022 & 0058)
Claim(s) 41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Banner et al. (US 2005/0098178 A1) in view of Lee et al. (WO 0191691 A1), Kurtz et al. (US 2014/0348403 A1), de Paula et al. (US 11928891 B2) & Wu et al. (CN 108630314 A).
Regarding claim 41, A machine-implemented method, comprising:
receiving diagnostic information for a patient (Paragraph 0065);
determining, based on signals received from one or more sensors 52, a physiological state of the patient (Paragraph 0038);
determining an operational mode of a ventilator 20 providing ventilation to the patient (Claim 1 discloses determining the appropriateness of ventilation for the patient);
providing the determined physiological state of the patient, the determined physical state of the patient, the determined operational mode of the ventilator, the medication delivery information, and the received diagnostic information for the patient to a neural network (Paragraph 0051 - 0056);
receiving, from the neural network (Paragraph 0056);
Banner does not disclose receiving, from a medication delivery device, medication delivery information associated with an ongoing administration of a medication to the patient.
activating a camera to obtain image data pertaining to the patient from the camera;
receiving one or more images from the camera;
providing the one or more images frames to a recognition algorithm configured to determine a physical state of the patient, the physical state including one of shivering or restlessness;
determining, by the recognition algorithm, whether the patient is in the physical state of shivering or restlessness;
an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of pain, sepsis, or a delirium based on providing to the neural network the determined physiological state of the patient,
Lee discloses receiving, from a medication delivery device, medication delivery information associated with an ongoing administration of a medication to the patient (Page 9, lines 4 – 7 & Page 11, lines 4 – 18).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Banner to include receiving, from a medication delivery device, medication delivery information associated with an ongoing administration of a medication to the patient as it would provide the information being the state of the patient. This would also ensure the treatments are able to be changed based on the information received like re-adjust a breath of the machine and the medicine delivery or know of any error operation of an entire system. (Page 2, last paragraph)
Kurtz discloses activating a camera 120 to obtain image data pertaining to the patient from the camera 120 (Paragraph 0049);
receiving one or more images from the camera 120 (Paragraph 0049);
providing the one or more images frames to a recognition algorithm (Paragraph 0073 & 0105) configured to determine a physical state of the patient (Paragraph 0059 & 0065).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify the image capture device of Banner to include activating a camera to obtain image data pertaining to the patient from the camera, receiving one or more images from the camera and providing the one or more images frames to a recognition algorithm configured to determine a physical state of the patient as it would ensure the processing of the captured images to aid the derivation of metrics relative to physiological conditions. (Paragraph 0041) The face recognizing algorithm is able to detect areas of the face like the eye, iris and pupil within an image. (Paragraph 0073) The algorithm can also be extended to identify an individual’s emotional state by quantifying a variety of facial expressions including but not limited to mouth shape patterns. (Paragraph 0105)
de Paula discloses a detected state of the facial expression such as being tired, bored, calm, level of pain, etc. to determine the physical state of the user. (Column 2, lines 11 – 38)
de Paula does not expressly disclose the physical state including one of shivering or restlessness and determining, by the recognition algorithm, whether the patient is in the physical state of shivering or restlessness .
However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Kurtz to include the physical state including one of shivering or restlessness and determining, by the recognition algorithm, whether the patient is in the physical state of shivering or restlessness .as it would allow the feedback to include the indication of the detected state of the user and provide a category of the facial expression of the user. (Column 7, lines 15 – 25)
Wu discloses determine an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of delirium based on the determined physiological state of the patient. (Page 6, Paragraph 3)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing day to further modify Banner to include determine an assessment classification indicating whether the patient is in a state of delirium based on the determined physiological state of the patient as the physiological index is used to determine the change in the patient that can dictates delirium. (Page 6, Paragraph 3)
Kurtz discloses determine an assessment classification indicating the determined physical state of the patient (Paragraph 0048).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modified Banner to include an assessment classification indicating the determined physical state of the patient as it can be considered wellness data that can be measured. (Paragraph 0048)
Based on the modifications made to Banner, it discloses the determined operational mode of the ventilator 20 (Claim 1), the medication delivery information, and the received diagnostic information for the patient (as claimed in claim 41);
adjusting, based on the assessment classification, one or more operating parameters of the ventilator, wherein adjusting the one or more operating parameters influences the operational mode of the ventilator (Claim 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRACIELA NATALIA LEBRON DE JESUS whose telephone number is (571)270-3892. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00 CST.
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, Kendra Carter can be reached at 571-272-9034. 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.
/GRACIELA NATALIA LEBRON DE JESUS/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/KENDRA D CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785