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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 10-11, filed 09/25/2025, with respect to the rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Examiner agrees the amended claims recite feedback components and specific use that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The rejection of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 101 has therefore been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 12-16, filed 09/25/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of Claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Tian and Stewart (See below).
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 9, “a data processor operatively connected to the memory, the display…” should read “a data processor operatively connected to the memory[[,]] and the display…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-8 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 recites “the patient testing device comprising at least of: (i) a joystick configured to detect gripping or directional force input; (ii) a touchpad configured to provide a thermal stimulus by heating or cooling; and (iii) another sensor configured to receive physical patient input by direct contact with the patient testing device, the patient testing device being a specialized device distinct from a general-purpose computer”. It is unclear what the metes and bounds of the clause “specialized device distinct from a general-purpose computer” are. As general-purpose computers are extremely modifiable, and normally have distinct specialized accessories configured to receive physical patient input by direct contact (e.g. mouse, keyboard, etc.), it would be unclear to one of ordinary skill in the art what the dividing line between a specialized device distinct from a general-purpose computer and a device specialized device not distinct from a general-purpose computer is. For the purposes of substantive examination, the examiner is construing this claim limitation as “the patient testing device comprising at least of: (i) a joystick configured to detect gripping or directional force input; (ii) a touchpad configured to provide a thermal stimulus by heating or cooling; and (iii) another sensor configured to receive physical patient input by direct contact with the patient testing device that is not a computer mouse, keyboard, or touchscreen”.
Claims 2-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) by virtue of dependence on Claim 1.
The Examiner notes Claim 14 is not rejected under 112(b) for use of the word “distinct” because the metes and bounds of the word are clear in context.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8-11, 14, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Non-Patent Literature (NPL) to Tian et al (“H-TIME: Haptic-enabled Tele-Immersive Musculoskeletal Examination”, hereinafter Tian ) in view of Stewart et al (US 9883831 B1, hereinafter Stewart).
Regarding Claim 1, Tian discloses a system for remote motor and sensory function testing (“In this paper, a Haptic-enabled Tele-Immersive Musculoskeletal Examination (H-TIME) system is introduced”, Abstract; See Fig. 1) comprising:
a memory comprising a non-transitory data processor-readable medium (“each site had a rendering machine Intel i7 5600k@4.0 GHz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, NVIDIA GTX 970, connected to a Force Dimension Omega.3 haptic device”, Section 4; the computer referenced comprises a memory comprising a non-transitory data processor-readable medium);
a data processor operatively connected to the memory (“each site had a rendering machine Intel i7 5600k@4.0 GHz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, NVIDIA GTX 970, connected to a Force Dimension Omega.3 haptic device”, Section 4; the computer referenced a data processor operatively connected to the memory); and
user interface management instructions embodied in data processor-executable code stored in the memory, said user interface management instructions being executable by the data processor to provide an interface management engine configured to (“Both sites are setup with each user seated at a table with the haptic device, looking at a TV. The doctor is at one site, and the patient is at the other, each site had a rendering machine Intel i7 5600k@4.0 GHz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, NVIDIA GTX 970, connected to a Force Dimension Omega.3 haptic device. The rendering machine renders the scene in 3D on a 60in Samsung 3D TV. Each site also contains a side camera machine with Intel Xeon processor 5600 @ 3.2 GHz, 16GB DDR3 RAM, NVIDIA Quadro 4000. Both machines are also connected to MS Kinect V2 RGB-D cameras, to capture the scene. The external site contains a Gateway machine, all the machines on each site are connected by gigabit Ethernet.”, Section 4):
cause display of instructions for performance of at least one of a motor function test and a sensory test at a remotely located computing device (“During a standard upper limb musculoskeletal evaluation, the doctor asks the patient to perform ten basic motions as shown in Figure 4”, Section 5.1; See Figs. 1 and 4; the patient can see the display of the doctor giving instructions for performance), the instructions comprising instructions for a test involving interacting with a patient testing device by physical contact with the patient testing device (“In H-TIME, the patient places his/her elbow on the table and holds the haptic handle. After that the patient is asked to bend the arm, pulling the handle toward his/her shoulder (flexion), and then extend his/her arm, moving the handle back down toward the table (extension). Similarly, all the other arm motions are mapped”, Section 5.1), the patient testing device comprising at least of: (i) a joystick configured to detect gripping or directional force input; (ii) a touchpad configured to provide a thermal stimulus by heating or cooling; and (iii) another sensor configured to receive physical patient input by direct contact with the patient testing device (“a Force Dimension Omega.3 haptic device”, Section 4), the patient testing device being a specialized device distinct from a general-purpose computer (“a Force Dimension Omega.3 haptic device”, Section 4);
receive sensor data corresponding to the physical contact with the patient testing device (“In the proposed H-TIME system, the doctor and patient sites both have the same processing pipeline for haptic rendering. At each haptic rendering loop, the haptic interaction position (HIP) data is collected from the other site…”, Section 3);
process the sensor data to generate feedback data (“and then each site calculates the force feedback by using a spring-damper, as shown in Figure 1”, Section 3), the feedback data indicating a patient's interaction with the patient testing device (“Examination (H-TIME) system is introduced, that allows doctors to physically examine musculoskeletal conditions of the patients remotely, by looking at the 3D reconstructed model of the patient in the virtual world, and physically feeling the patient’s range of mobility using a haptic device”, Abstract); and
transmit the feedback data via a communications network (See Section 4.0, specifically the third and fifth paragraphs):
wherein the feedback data is operable to drive a clinician control device to provide haptic replication of the patient's interaction (“Both doctor and patient are able to feel each other’s movement, since both haptic devices are “linked" to each other by the spring-damper”, Section 1.1).
Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing wherein the system is further configured to store the feedback data for asynchronous clinician review. However, Stewart, which also discloses a system for remote motor and sensory function testing (See Figs. 1-2), teaches wherein the system is further configured to store the feedback data (“capturing, on the touch screen computing device, the patient interactions as first performance results corresponding to performance of the patient of first tasks of the first digital cognitive test”, Claim 1) for asynchronous clinician review (“Database cluster 206 receives and stores test results and medical information from many different patients using client computing devices 202 in a database that may span one or more servers. Storing the test results in the database enables medical researchers to query the database and analyze the test results of many different patients”, 9:26-31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to store the feedback data of Tian for asynchronous review, as taught by Stewart, because this allows for review at an optimal or convenient time for the clinician.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Tian discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the remotely located computing device comprises a patient computing device separate from the patient testing device (See Fig. 1; “each site had a rendering machine Intel i7 5600k@4.0 GHz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, NVIDIA GTX 970, connected to a Force Dimension Omega.3 haptic device”, Section 4).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Tian system of claim 1, wherein the remotely located computing device comprises the patient testing device (“each site had a rendering machine Intel i7 5600k@4.0 GHz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, NVIDIA GTX 970, connected to a Force Dimension Omega.3 haptic device”, Section 4). Modified Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing the patient testing device comprising: at least one of a joystick and a temperature-controlled touchpad. However, Stewart teaches the patient testing device comprising: at least one of a joystick (“Not only may the tests measure patient touches on a touch screen, but the tests may also incorporate other peripheral devices that communicate with or through I/O ports 118. Examples of peripherals include, without limitation…joysticks…”, 7:38-43) and a temperature-controlled touchpad. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the joystick of Stewart to the patient testing device of Tian, because this allows additional motor function tests to be conducted.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Tian discloses the system of claim 3, wherein the remotely located computing device comprises a clinician computing device separate from the patient testing device (See Fig. 1; “each site had a rendering machine Intel i7 5600k@4.0 GHz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, NVIDIA GTX 970, connected to a Force Dimension Omega.3 haptic device”, Section 4).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Tian discloses the system of claim 1. Modified Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing the system further comprising instructions to:
store the feedback data in the memory;
wherein said instructions to transmit the feedback data via the communications network involves retrieving the feedback data from the memory, and wherein the said instructions cause the transmitting in response to a request for transmission of the feedback data at a time after completion of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test.
However, Stewart teaches instructions to:
store the feedback data in the memory (“Once saved, client computing devices 202 can present the developer's test (or battery of tests) to patients, capture patient's test results, and transmit the test results to server 204, which stores the test results in database cluster 206”, 8:9-13);
wherein said instructions to transmit the feedback data via the communications network involves retrieving the feedback data from the memory, and wherein the said instructions cause the transmitting in response to a request for transmission of the feedback data (“Database cluster 206 receives and stores test results and medical information from many different patients using client computing devices 202 in a database that may span one or more servers. Storing the test results in the database enables medical researchers to query the database and analyze the test results of many different patients”, 9:26-31) at a time after completion of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test (“Server 204 is configured to consider test metrics and the presuppositions to make determinations about the patient that are subsequently transmitted to a clinician via a clinician computing device or a Web-hosted cloud computing service”, 10:26-30; in order to subsequently transmit test metrics, the test must already be completed and the transmission must happen at a time after completion of the test). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Tian with the instructions of Stewart, because this enables medical researchers to query the database and analyze the test results of many different patients at any convenient time.
Regarding Claim 8, modified Tian discloses the system of claim 1. Modified Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing wherein said instructions for causing display of instructions for performance of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test comprise causing display of first instruction data at a first time for a first test and causing display of second instruction data at a second time for a second test, and wherein the causing of display of second instruction data at the second time for the second test is a result of sending of the second instruction data at the second time as determined automatedly according to data gathered during the first test. However, Stewart teaches wherein said instructions for causing display of instructions for performance of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test comprise causing display of first instruction data at a first time for a first test (Step 1502, Fig. 15) and causing display of second instruction data at a second time for a second test (Step 1510, Fig. 15), and wherein the causing of display of second instruction data at the second time for the second test is a result of sending of the second instruction data at the second time as determined automatedly according to data gathered during the first test (“if the patient fails to meet the threshold, server 204 makes a determination that additional testing is needed and selects a subsequent battery of tests based to administer to the patient”, 15:27-30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Tian with the instructions of Stewart, because this is a way to administer subsequent tests, if needed.
Regarding Claim 9, Tian discloses a method for performing remote motor and sensory function testing (See Abstract) comprising:
displaying instructions for performing the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test (“During a standard upper limb musculoskeletal evaluation, the doctor asks the patient to perform ten basic motions as shown in Figure 4”, Section 5.1; See Figs. 1 and 4; the patient can see the display of the doctor giving instructions for performance), the instructions comprising instructions to interact with a patient testing device by physical contact with the patient testing device (“In H-TIME, the patient places his/her elbow on the table and holds the haptic handle. After that the patient is asked to bend the arm, pulling the handle toward his/her shoulder (flexion), and then extend his/her arm, moving the handle back down toward the table (extension). Similarly, all the other arm motions are mapped”, Section 5.1),
gathering sensor data corresponding to the physical contact with the patient testing device (“In the proposed H-TIME system, the doctor and patient sites both have the same processing pipeline for haptic rendering. At each haptic rendering loop, the haptic interaction position (HIP) data is collected from the other site…”, Section 3);
processing the sensor data to generate feedback data (“and then each site calculates the force feedback by using a spring-damper, as shown in Figure 1”, Section 3), the feedback data indicating the patient's interaction with the patient testing device (“Examination (H-TIME) system is introduced, that allows doctors to physically examine musculoskeletal conditions of the patients remotely, by looking at the 3D reconstructed model of the patient in the virtual world, and physically feeling the patient’s range of mobility using a haptic device”, Abstract) and being operable to control a clinician control device to provide feedback corresponding to the patient's interaction (“Both doctor and patient are able to feel each other’s movement, since both haptic devices are “linked" to each other by the spring-damper”, Section 1.1), wherein controlling the clinician control device comprises driving a haptic actuator to physically replicate, for the clinician, at least one of the patient's applied force and movement measured at the patient testing device (“Both doctor and patient are able to feel each other’s movement, since both haptic devices are “linked" to each other by the spring-damper”, Section 1.1); and
transmitting the feedback data via a communications network (See Section 4.0, specifically the third and fifth paragraphs).
Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing a computer-implemented method for controlling a display of a computerized device to perform remote motor and sensory function testing, the computerized device comprising a memory comprising a non-transitory data processor-readable medium, a data processor operatively connected to the memory, the display, and user interface management instructions embodied in data processor- executable code stored in the memory and executable by the data processor to provide an interface management engine, the computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving instruction data for performance of at least one of a motor function test and a sensory test;
wherein the patient testing device comprises at least one of: (i) a joystick configured to detect at least one of gripping force and directional movement; and (ii) a touchpad configured to provide a thermal stimulus by controlled heating or cooling for sensory testing; and
wherein the feedback data is stored and usable to replay the physical replication asynchronously at a later time.
However, Stewart, which also discloses a method for remote motor and sensory function testing (See Figs. 14-15), teaches a computer-implemented method (“A computer-implemented method for administering one or more cognitive tests for evaluating a patient for a cognitive impairment”, Claim 16) for controlling a display of a computerized device to perform remote motor and sensory function testing (11:11-15; 12:1-9; 3:59-62), the computerized device comprising a memory (Element 206, Fig. 2) comprising a non-transitory data processor-readable medium (“the method implemented by a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs”, Claim 16), a data processor operatively connected to (“computing device 100 includes a bus 110 that directly or indirectly couples the following devices: memory 112, one or more processors 114, one or more presentation components 116, input/output ports 118, input/output components 120, and an illustrative power supply 122”, 6:29-34) the memory (Server 202, Fig. 2), the display (“Presentation components 116 may also include a display device, speaker, printing component, vibrating component, etc.”, 7:8-10), and user interface management instructions embodied in data processor-executable code stored in the memory and executable by the data processor to provide an interface management engine, the method comprising (“the one or more programs comprising instructions, which, when executed by one or more servers having one or more processors, cause the at least one server to…”, Claim 16):
receiving instruction data for performance of at least one of a motor function test and a sensory test (“A test developer uses developer computer 210 to design a cognitive test, or a battery of tests, for client computing devices 202 and upload the tests to server 204”, 8:2-5);
wherein the patient testing device comprises at least one of: (i) a joystick configured to detect at least one of gripping force and directional movement (“Not only may the tests measure patient touches on a touch screen, but the tests may also incorporate other peripheral devices that communicate with or through I/O ports 118. Examples of peripherals include, without limitation…joysticks…”, 7:38-43; joysticks are configured to detect directional movement); and (ii) a touchpad configured to provide a thermal stimulus by controlled heating or cooling for sensory testing; and
wherein the feedback data is stored and usable to replay the test results (“capturing, on the touch screen computing device, the patient interactions as first performance results corresponding to performance of the patient of first tasks of the first digital cognitive test”, Claim 1) asynchronously at a later time (“Database cluster 206 receives and stores test results and medical information from many different patients using client computing devices 202 in a database that may span one or more servers. Storing the test results in the database enables medical researchers to query the database and analyze the test results of many different patients”, 9:26-31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention modify the method of Tian with the computer-implemented method and method steps of Stewart (e.g., wherein the feedback data is stored and usable to replay the physical replication of Tian at a later time, wherein the patient testing device comprises a joystick, wherein the feedback data is stored and usable to replay the physical replication asynchronously at a later time), because this allows for automation of tests, the joystick allows for additional motor function tests to be conducted, and the storing and physical replicability of test results allows medical researchers to query the database and analyze the test results of many different patients at any convenient time.
Regarding Claim 10, modified Tian discloses the method of claim 9. Modified Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing the method further comprising:
storing the feedback data in the memory;
wherein said transmitting the feedback data via the communications network involves retrieving the feedback data from the memory, and wherein said transmitting is performed in response to a request for transmission of the feedback data at a time after completion of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test.
However, Stewart teaches the method further comprising storing the feedback data in the memory (“Once saved, client computing devices 202 can present the developer's test (or battery of tests) to patients, capture patient's test results, and transmit the test results to server 204, which stores the test results in database cluster 206”, 8:9-13);
wherein said transmitting the feedback data via the communications network involves retrieving the feedback data from the memory, and wherein said transmitting is performed in response to a request for transmission of the feedback data (“Database cluster 206 receives and stores test results and medical information from many different patients using client computing devices 202 in a database that may span one or more servers. Storing the test results in the database enables medical researchers to query the database and analyze the test results of many different patients”, 9:26-31) at a time after completion of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test (“Server 204 is configured to consider test metrics and the presuppositions to make determinations about the patient that are subsequently transmitted to a clinician via a clinician computing device or a Web-hosted cloud computing service”, 10:26-30; in order to subsequently transmit test metrics, the test must already be completed and the transmission must happen at a time after completion of the test). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the method of Tian with the method of Stewart, because this enables medical researchers to query the database and analyze the test results of many different patients at any convenient time.
Regarding Claim 11, modified Tian discloses the method of claim 9, wherein said transmitting the feedback data via the communications network comprises transmitting the feedback data to one of a clinician computing device and the clinician control device (See Figs. 1 and 5; See Section 4.0, specifically the third and fifth paragraphs).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Tian discloses the method of claim 9, wherein said displaying instructions for performing the at least one of a motor function test and a sensory test comprises displaying instructions (“During a standard upper limb musculoskeletal evaluation, the doctor asks the patient to perform ten basic motions as shown in Figure 4”, Section 5.1; See Figs. 1 and 4; the patient can see the display of the doctor giving instructions for performance) at a patient computing device distinct from the patient testing device (See Fig. 1; “each site had a rendering machine Intel i7 5600k@4.0 GHz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, NVIDIA GTX 970, connected to a Force Dimension Omega.3 haptic device”, Section 4).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Tian discloses the method of claim 9. Modified Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing wherein said receiving instruction data for performance of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test comprises receiving first instruction data at a first time for a first test and receiving second instruction data at a second time for a second test, and wherein the receiving of second instruction data at the second time for the second test is a result of sending of the second instruction data at the second time as determined automatedly according to data gathered during the first test. However, Stewart teaches wherein said receiving instruction data for performance of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test comprises receiving first instruction data at a first time for a first test (Step 1502, Fig. 15) and receiving second instruction data at a second time for a second test (Step 1510, Fig. 15), and wherein the receiving of second instruction data at the second time for the second test is a result of sending of the second instruction data at the second time as determined automatedly according to data gathered during the first test (“if the patient fails to meet the threshold, server 204 makes a determination that additional testing is needed and selects a subsequent battery of tests based to administer to the patient”, 15:27-30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the method of Tian with the method of Stewart, because this is a way to administer subsequent tests, if needed.
Regarding Claim 17, Tian discloses a computer program product for implementing a method of performing remote motor and sensory function testing (See Abstract) comprising:
displaying instructions for performing the at least one of a motor function test and a sensory test (“During a standard upper limb musculoskeletal evaluation, the doctor asks the patient to perform ten basic motions as shown in Figure 4”, Section 5.1; See Figs. 1 and 4; the patient can see the display of the doctor giving instructions for performance), the instructions comprising instructions to interact with a patient testing device by physical contact with the patient testing device (“In H-TIME, the patient places his/her elbow on the table and holds the haptic handle. After that the patient is asked to bend the arm, pulling the handle toward his/her shoulder (flexion), and then extend his/her arm, moving the handle back down toward the table (extension). Similarly, all the other arm motions are mapped”, Section 5.1);
gathering sensor data corresponding to the physical contact with the patient testing device (“In the proposed H-TIME system, the doctor and patient sites both have the same processing pipeline for haptic rendering. At each haptic rendering loop, the haptic interaction position (HIP) data is collected from the other site…”, Section 3);
processing the sensor data to generate feedback data (“and then each site calculates the force feedback by using a spring-damper, as shown in Figure 1”, Section 3), the feedback data indicating the patient's interaction with the patient testing device (“Examination (H-TIME) system is introduced, that allows doctors to physically examine musculoskeletal conditions of the patients remotely, by looking at the 3D reconstructed model of the patient in the virtual world, and physically feeling the patient’s range of mobility using a haptic device”, Abstract) and being operable to control a clinician control device to provide feedback corresponding to the patient's interaction (“Both doctor and patient are able to feel each other’s movement, since both haptic devices are “linked" to each other by the spring-damper”, Section 1.1), wherein controlling the clinician control device comprises driving a haptic actuator to physically replicate, for the clinician, at least one of the patient's applied force and movement measured at the patient testing device (“Both doctor and patient are able to feel each other’s movement, since both haptic devices are “linked" to each other by the spring-damper”, Section 1.1); and
transmitting the feedback data via a communications network (See Section 4.0, specifically the third and fifth paragraphs).
Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing a computer program product for implementing a method of controlling a display of a computerized device to perform remote motor function and sensory function testing, the computer program product comprising a non- transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause a computerized system to perform a method comprising:
receiving instruction data for performance of at least one of a motor function test and a sensory test;
the patient testing device comprising at least one of: (i) a joystick configured to detect at least one of gripping force and directional movement, and (ii) a touchpad configured to provide thermal stimuli by controlled heating or cooling for sensory testing;
and wherein the feedback data is stored and usable to replay the physical replication asynchronously at a later time.
However, Stewart, which also discloses a method for remote motor and sensory function testing (See Figs. 14-15), teaches a computer program product for implementing a method of controlling a display of a computerized device to perform remote motor function and sensory function testing (11:11-15; 12:1-9; 3:59-62), the computer program product comprising a non- transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause a computerized system to perform a method comprising (“A computer-implemented method for administering one or more cognitive tests for evaluating a patient for a cognitive impairment, the method implemented by a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions, which, when executed by one or more servers having one or more processors, cause the at least one server to”, Claim 16):
receiving instruction data for performance of at least one of a motor function test and a sensory test (“A test developer uses developer computer 210 to design a cognitive test, or a battery of tests, for client computing devices 202 and upload the tests to server 204”, 8:2-5);
the patient testing device comprising at least one of: (i) a joystick configured to detect at least one of gripping force and directional movement (“Not only may the tests measure patient touches on a touch screen, but the tests may also incorporate other peripheral devices that communicate with or through I/O ports 118. Examples of peripherals include, without limitation…joysticks…”, 7:38-43; joysticks are configured to detect directional movement), and (ii) a touchpad configured to provide thermal stimuli by controlled heating or cooling for sensory testing; and
wherein the feedback data is stored and usable to replay the test results (“capturing, on the touch screen computing device, the patient interactions as first performance results corresponding to performance of the patient of first tasks of the first digital cognitive test”, Claim 1) asynchronously at a later time (“Database cluster 206 receives and stores test results and medical information from many different patients using client computing devices 202 in a database that may span one or more servers. Storing the test results in the database enables medical researchers to query the database and analyze the test results of many different patients”, 9:26-31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention modify the computer program product and instructions of Tian with the method steps of Stewart (e.g., wherein the feedback data is stored and usable to replay the physical replication of Tian at a later time, wherein the patient testing device comprises a joystick, wherein the feedback data is stored and usable to replay the physical replication asynchronously at a later time), because the computer-implemented method allows for automation of tests, the joystick allows for additional motor function tests to be conducted, and the storing and physical replicability of test results allows medical researchers to query the database and analyze the test results of many different patients at any convenient time.
Regarding Claim 18, modified Tian discloses the computer program product of claim 17. Modified Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing the computer program product further comprising instructions to perform the method comprising:
storing the feedback data in a memory; wherein said transmitting the feedback data via the communications network involves retrieving the feedback data from the memory, and wherein said transmitting is performed in response to a request for transmission of the feedback data at a time after completion of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test. However, Stewart teaches the computer program product further comprising instructions to perform the method comprising:
storing the feedback data in a memory (“Once saved, client computing devices 202 can present the developer's test (or battery of tests) to patients, capture patient's test results, and transmit the test results to server 204, which stores the test results in database cluster 206”, 8:9-13);
wherein said transmitting the feedback data via the communications network involves retrieving the feedback data from the memory, and wherein said transmitting is performed in response to a request for transmission of the feedback data (“Database cluster 206 receives and stores test results and medical information from many different patients using client computing devices 202 in a database that may span one or more servers. Storing the test results in the database enables medical researchers to query the database and analyze the test results of many different patients”, 9:26-31) at a time after completion of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test (“Server 204 is configured to consider test metrics and the presuppositions to make determinations about the patient that are subsequently transmitted to a clinician via a clinician computing device or a Web-hosted cloud computing service”, 10:26-30; in order to subsequently transmit test metrics, the test must already be completed and the transmission must happen at a time after completion of the test).
Regarding Claim 20, modified Tian discloses the method of claim 17. Modified Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing wherein said receiving instruction data for performance of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test comprises receiving first instruction data at a first time for a first test and receiving second instruction data at a second time for a second test, and wherein the receiving of second instruction data at the second time for the second test is a result of sending of the second instruction data at the second time as determined automatedly according to data gathered during the first test. However, Stewart teaches wherein said receiving instruction data for performance of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test comprises receiving first instruction data at a first time for a first test (Step 1502, Fig. 15) and receiving second instruction data at a second time for a second test (Step 1510, Fig. 15), and wherein the receiving of second instruction data at the second time for the second test is a result of sending of the second instruction data at the second time as determined automatedly according to data gathered during the first test (“if the patient fails to meet the threshold, server 204 makes a determination that additional testing is needed and selects a subsequent battery of tests based to administer to the patient”, 15:27-30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the method of Tian with the instructions of Stewart, because this is a way to administer subsequent tests, if needed.
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Tian and Stewart, and further in view of Mason et al (US 20210127974 A1, hereinafter Mason).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Tian disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the remotely located computing device comprises a clinician control device separate from the patient testing device See Fig. 1; “each site had a rendering machine Intel i7 5600k@4.0 GHz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, NVIDIA GTX 970, connected to a Force Dimension Omega.3 haptic device”, Section 4), Modified Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing said clinician control device comprising at least one joystick, and wherein said clinician control device is operable to provide haptic feedback via the at least one joystick corresponding to input provided via the joystick at the patient testing device. However, Mason teaches said clinician control device (Element 126, Fig. 1) comprising at least one joystick (“The master device 126 may be a joystick…”, [0084]), and wherein said clinician control device is operable to provide haptic feedback via the at least one joystick (“The joystick may have master sensors 128 within a stick of the joystick. The stick may be configured to provide feedback to the user (e.g., vibrations or pressure exerted by the stick to the user's hand)”, [0084]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Tian with Mason such that said clinician control device comprises at least one joystick, and wherein said clinician control device is operable to provide feedback via the at least one joystick corresponding to input provided via the joystick at the patient testing device, because providing haptic feedback to the patient in addition to visual feedback can provide physical therapy and/or more varied feedback to the patient.
Regarding Claim 13, Tian discloses the method of claim 9, wherein said clinician control device is operable to provide haptic feedback corresponding to input provided via the joystick at the patient testing device (“Both doctor and patient are able to feel each other’s movement, since both haptic devices are “linked" to each other by the spring-damper”, Section 1.1; the patient device was modified to comprise a joystick in parent Claim 9). Modified Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing wherein the clinician control device comprises at least one joystick, wherein said clinician control device is operable to provide haptic feedback via the at least one joystick corresponding to input provided via the joystick at the patient testing device. However, Mason teaches wherein the clinician control device (Element 126, Fig. 1) comprises at least one joystick (“The master device 126 may be a joystick…”, [0084]), and wherein said clinician control device is operable to provide haptic feedback via the at least one joystick (“The joystick may have master sensors 128 within a stick of the joystick. The stick may be configured to provide feedback to the user (e.g., vibrations or pressure exerted by the stick to the user's hand)”, [0084]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Tian with Mason such that the clinician control device comprises at least one joystick, and wherein said clinician control device is operable to provide haptic feedback via the at least one joystick, because providing haptic feedback to the patient in addition to visual feedback can provide physical therapy and/or more varied feedback to the patient.
Claims 7, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tian in view of Stewart, and further in view of Junnarkar (US 20220068505 A1, hereinafter Junnarkar).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Tian discloses a system of claim 1, wherein said instructions for a test involving interacting with a patient testing device by physical contact with the patient testing device comprise instructions to display instructions at a patient computing device for using a patient testing device (“During a standard upper limb musculoskeletal evaluation, the doctor asks the patient to perform ten basic motions as shown in Figure 4”, Section 5.1; See Figs. 1 and 4; the patient can see the display of the doctor giving instructions for performance). Modified Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing instructions to display instructions at a clinician computing device for using a clinician control device, said causing of display of instructions at the patient computing device and the clinician computing device being coordinated in concert in support of performance of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test. However, Junnarkar teaches display of data for a test involving interacting with a patient testing device by physical contact with the patient testing device (“Otoscopy processing block 835 filters the received video/image data obtained using otoscope 150”, [0052]) at the patient computing device and the clinician computing device being coordinated in concert in support of performance of the test (“the filtered data from otoscopy processing block 835 are simultaneously (synchronously) rendered locally on display block 860 of phone 110 as well as in a display of a remote device (after concurrent transmission to the remote device)”, [0052]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system of Tian with the teachings of Junnarkar to display data (i.e. the instructions already disclosed by modified Tian) for a test involving interacting with a patient testing device by physical contact with the patient testing device the patient computing device and the clinician computing device being coordinated in concert in support of performance of the test (i.e. the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test already disclosed by modified Tian) for the advantage of improving the real-time diagnosis by the physician at the remote device, as taught by Junnarkar ([0041], [0052]).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Tian discloses the method of claim 9, wherein said displaying instructions for performing the at least one of a motor function test and a sensory test comprises displaying instructions at a patient computing device for using the patient testing device (“During a standard upper limb musculoskeletal evaluation, the doctor asks the patient to perform ten basic motions as shown in Figure 4”, Section 5.1; See Figs. 1 and 4; the patient can see the display of the doctor giving instructions for performance). Modified Tian discloses the claimed invention except for expressly disclosing displaying instructions at a clinician computing device for using a clinician control device, said displaying of instructions at the patient computing device and the clinician computing device being coordinated in concert in support of performance of the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test. However, Junnarkar teaches displaying instructions at a clinician computing device for using a clinician control device, said displaying of instructions at the patient computing device and the clinician computing device being coordinated in concert in support of performance of a medical test (“the filtered data from otoscopy processing block 835 are simultaneously (synchronously) rendered locally on display block 860 of phone 110 as well as in a display of a remote device (after concurrent transmission to the remote device)”, [0052]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the method of modified Tian with the teachings of Junnarkar to further comprise displaying data (i.e. the instructions already disclosed by modified Tian) at a clinician computing device for using a clinician control device, said displaying of data (i.e. the instructions already disclosed by modified Tian) at the patient computing device and the clinician computing device being coordinated in concert in support of performance of the test (i.e. the at least one of the motor function test and the sensory test already disclosed by modified Tian), for the advantage of improving real-time diagnosis by the physician at the remote device, as taught by Junnarkar ([0041], [0052]).
Regarding Claim 19, modified Tian discloses the computer program product of claim 17, wherein said displaying instructions for performing the at least one of a motor function test and a sensory test comprises displaying instructions at a patient computing device for using the patient testing device (“During a standa