NNotice 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on December 22, 2022 and March 9, 2023 were filed after the mailing date. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to
an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite mental processes and mathematical concepts. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as explained below.
Step 1 for all Claims:
Claims 1-10 are directed to a system (machine). Claims 11-20 are directed to a method. Therefore, Claims 1-20 are directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Regarding Claim 1:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
determine, based on the image features and a machine learning model, a step identifier for a step in a multi-step surgical procedure; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses determining a step identifier which is making a judgement based upon visual information which can be feasibly performed in the human mind (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
determine, based on the gesture information and a second machine learning model, a performance metric that measures performance of the care provider; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses determining a performance score which is making an evaluation based upon visual information and performance data which can be feasibly performed in the human mind (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Step 2A, Prong 2:
A system for comprising: a processor, the processor configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
acquire image data from a camera targeting a location where healthcare is administered; This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
receive sensor data from a sensor attached to a care provider during performance of a multi-step medical procedure; This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
generate gesture features based on the sensor data; This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The generating is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the generating feature process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
generate image features based on the image data; This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The generating is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the generating of image features process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
access natural language text descriptive of an instruction to perform the step; This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
display the natural language text associated with the step on a display accessible to the care provider; This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
and output the performance metric, wherein to output the performance metric the processor is configured to: This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
store the performance metric in a memory, communicate the performance metric over a communications network, display the performance metric on the display, or a combination thereof. This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
A system for comprising: a processor, the processor configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
acquire image data from a camera targeting a location where healthcare is administered; As discussed above, the additional elements of data gathering or acquisition which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
receive sensor data from a sensor attached to a care provider during performance of a multi-step medical procedure; As discussed above, the additional elements of data gathering or receiving which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
generate gesture features based on the sensor data; This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The generating is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the generating feature process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
generate image features based on the image data; This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The generating is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the generating of image features process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
access natural language text descriptive of an instruction to perform the step; As discussed above, the additional elements of data gathering or accessing from storage which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
display the natural language text associated with the step on a display accessible to the care provider; As discussed above, the additional elements of data gathering and displaying which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping", “presenting offers and gathering statistics”, and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
and output the performance metric, wherein to output the performance metric the processor is configured to: As discussed above, the additional elements of data gathering and displaying output data which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping", “presenting offers and gathering statistics”, and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
store the performance metric in a memory, communicate the performance metric over a communications network, display the performance metric on the display, or a combination thereof. As discussed above, the additional elements of data gathering and displaying which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping", “presenting offers and gathering statistics”, and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
Regarding Claim 2:
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
playback an audible explanation of description of how to perform the step. This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
playback an audible explanation of description of how to perform the step. As discussed above, the additional elements of data gathering and outputting the playback audio explanation which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
FRegarding Claim 3:
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
communicate a live video feed of the medical procedure to a device at a remote location, the device configured to receive input information provided by a remote user remotely viewing the medical procedure, the input information comprising audio, images, text, lines, or a combination thereof. This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
communicate a live video feed of the medical procedure to a device at a remote location, the device configured to receive input information provided by a remote user remotely viewing the medical procedure, the input information comprising audio, images, text, lines, or a combination thereof. As discussed above, the additional elements of data transmission and receiving over a network which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
Regarding Claim 4:
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
communicate the natural language text to an augmented reality device viewable by the care provider to display input information provided by the remote user. This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of selecting and displaying information for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
communicate the natural language text to an augmented reality device viewable by the care provider to display input information provided by the remote user. As discussed above, the additional elements of data transmission and data storage and retrieval which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
Regarding Claim 5:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
determine respective performance metrics for the steps in the multi-step procedure; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses determining performance which is making a judgement based upon visual performance information which can be feasibly performed in the human mind (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
and determine, based on aggregation of the respective performance metrics, a combined performance metric for the multi-step procedure. As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses determining a performance score which is making a judgement based upon visual performance data and adding them all together which can be feasibly performed in the human mind (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Step 2B:
The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Regarding Claim 6:
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of claim 1, wherein the sensor data comprises a measurement of directional movement information, rotation information, vibration information, position information, or a combination thereof, corresponding to the care provider, or an appendage of the care provider, operating in the location where healthcare is administered. This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The system of claim 1, wherein the sensor data comprises a measurement of directional movement information, rotation information, vibration information, position information, or a combination thereof, corresponding to the care provider, or an appendage of the care provider, operating in the location where healthcare is administered. As discussed above, the additional elements of the data gathering step which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
Regarding Claim 7:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
determine the performance metric satisfies an intervention criterion; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses determining whether a performance metric is satisfactory or not which is making an evaluation based upon performance data which can be feasibly performed in the human mind (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
and establish, in response to satisfaction of the intervention criterion, communication with a remote node at a different geographic location from where healthcare is administered. This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
and establish, in response to satisfaction of the intervention criterion, communication with a remote node at a different geographic location from where healthcare is administered. As discussed above, the additional elements of data transmission over a network which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
Regarding Claim 8:
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of claim 7, further comprising: transmit the performance metric, the image data, the gesture data, or a combination thereof to the remote node. This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The system of claim 7, further comprising: transmit the performance metric, the image data, the gesture data, or a combination thereof to the remote node. As discussed above, the additional elements of data transmission over a network which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
Regarding Claim 9:
Step 2A, Prong 1:
determine the performance metric satisfies an intervention criterion; As drafted and under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this limitation covers performance of the limitation in the mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion) or with the aid of pencil and paper but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, this limitation encompasses determining whether or not a performance is satisfactory or not which is making an evaluation based upon performance data which can be feasibly performed in the human mind (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of claim 1, the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
in response to satisfaction of the intervention criterion: acquire a second natural language text specifying an instruction to improve the performance of the step; This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
and display the second natural language text and/or playback the natural language text in audio format. This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The system of claim 1, the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
in response to satisfaction of the intervention criterion: acquire a second natural language text specifying an instruction to improve the performance of the step; As discussed above, the additional elements of data storage and retrieval which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
and display the second natural language text and/or playback the natural language text in audio format. As discussed above, the additional elements of data storage and retrieval which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
Regarding Claim 10:
Step 2A, Prong 2:
The system of claim 1, wherein to display the natural language text, the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
display the natural language text and live video of the location where healthcare is administered on a display device viewable by the care provider. This limitation amounts to extra-solution activity of gathering data and outputting for use in the claimed process. As described in MPEP 2106.05(g), limitations that amount to merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B:
The system of claim 1, wherein to display the natural language text, the processor is further configured to: This limitation is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. The configuration is recited at a high-level of generality with no detail of the configuration process such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
display the natural language text and live video of the location where healthcare is administered on a display device viewable by the care provider. As discussed above, the additional elements of data transmission and receiving over a network which is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to extra-solution activity of transmitting data. The courts have found limitations directed to obtaining information electronically, recited at a high level of generality, to be well-understood, routine, and conventional (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), “receiving or transmitting data over a network”, "electronic record keeping," and "storing and retrieving information in memory").
Regarding Claim 11:
A method, comprising: acquiring image data from a camera targeting a location where healthcare is administered; receiving sensor data from a sensor attached to a care provider during performance of a multi-step medical procedure; generating gesture features based on the sensor data; generating image features based on the image data; determining, based on the image features and a machine learning model, a step identifier for a step in a multi-step surgical procedure; accessing natural language text descriptive of an instruction to perform the step; displaying the natural language text associated with the step on a display accessible to the care provider; determining, based on the gesture information and a second machine learning model, a performance metric that measures performance of the care provider; and outputting the performance metric by storing the performance metric in a memory, communicating the performance metric over a communications network, displaying the performance metric on the display, or a combination thereof.
The claim is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 1 for reciting substantially similar limitations.
Regarding Claim 12:
The method of claim 11, further comprising: playing back an audible explanation of description of how to perform the step.
The claim is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 2 for reciting substantially similar limitations.
Regarding Claim 13:
The method of claim 11, further comprising: transmitting a live video feed of the medical procedure to a device at a remote location, the device configured to receive input information provided by a remote user remotely viewing the medical procedure, the input information comprising audio, images, text, lines, or a combination thereof.
The claim is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 3 for reciting substantially similar limitations.
Regarding Claim 14:
The method of claim 11, further comprising: transmitting the natural language text to an augmented reality device viewable by the care provider to display input information provided by the remote user.
The claim is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 4 for reciting substantially similar limitations.
Regarding Claim 15:
The method of claim 11, further comprising: determining respective performance metrics for the steps in the multi-step procedure; and determining, based on aggregation of the respective performance metrics, a combined performance metric for the multi-step procedure.
The claim is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 5 for reciting substantially similar limitations.
Regarding Claim 16:
The method of claim 11, wherein the sensor data comprises a measurement of directional movement information, rotation information, vibration information, position information, or a combination thereof, corresponding to the care provider, or an appendage of the care provider, operating in the location where healthcare is administered.
The claim is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 6 for reciting substantially similar limitations.
Regarding Claim 17:
The method of claim 11, further comprising: determine the performance metric satisfies an intervention criterion; and establish, in response to satisfaction of the intervention criterion, communication with a remote node at a different geographic location from where healthcare is administered.
The claim is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 7 for reciting substantially similar limitations.
Regarding Claim 18:
The method of claim 17, further comprising: transmitting the performance metric, the image data, the gesture data, or a combination thereof to the remote node.
The claim is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 8 for reciting substantially similar limitations.
Regarding Claim 19:
The method of claim 11, further comprising: determining the performance metric satisfies an intervention criterion; in response to satisfaction of the intervention criterion: acquiring a second natural language text specifying an instruction to improve the performance of the step; and displaying the second natural language text.
The claim is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 9 for reciting substantially similar limitations.
Regarding Claim 20:
The method of claim 11, wherein displaying the natural language text further comprises: displaying the natural language text and live video of the location where healthcare is administered on a display device viewable by the care provider.
The claim is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 10 for reciting substantially similar limitations.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-13, 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jarc et al. (US 20190090969 A1) in view of Wolf et al. (US 11426255 B2), hereinafter referred to as Jarc and Wolf, respectively.
Regarding Claim 1:
Jarc teaches: A system for comprising: a processor, the processor configured to: ([0152] “Example computer system 1700 includes at least one processor 1702 (e.g., a central
processing unit (CPU)…”)
acquire image data from a camera targeting a location where healthcare is administered; ([0043] “An image of the surgical site can be obtained by a camera mounted with an endoscope 28, such as a stereoscopic endoscope, which can be manipulated by the patient-side cart 22 to position and orient the endoscope 28. Computer processors located on the electronics cart 24 can be used to process the images of the surgical site for subsequent display to the surgeon 18 through the surgeon's console 16.”)
receive sensor data from a sensor attached to a care provider during performance of a multi-step medical procedure; ([0090] “Event monitor 1102 receives event data, which can include system events, kinematics and external inputs, from TSS 950, and logs sequences of events. In a related embodiment, event monitor 1102 receives information regarding additional actions taken in surgical environment 902 other than with or by TSS 950, such as actions by assistant(s) or other equipment/instruments associated with the procedure. These actions may be detected by one or more sensors of the TSS 950, or by environment-monitoring sensors such as a video capture device, or by those other equipment/instruments themselves, and communicated to TSS 950, for instance. As referenced above, events can further include any of activations of instrument controls, such as, for example, button presses, instrument movement controls, instrument selections, video system controls, wrist movements, camera movement activations master gestures/activations and other inputs provided by the surgeon, by assistants, or any other detectable actions/inputs/outputs. For example, other data that may be gathered as events include kinematics data, eye movements, user authentication (e.g., trig recognition), muscle activity (e.g., measured using an electromyography), sensed surgeon posture, images taken by an endoscope, system state (e.g., docked/deployed states of various instruments, engagement/disengagement state of the arms with a master controller, instrument types installed, quantity of instruments installed, head engagement state of the operator, forces applied to the controls such as master control, forces detected by the robot instruments, camera movement and control, touchscreen input, personnel location (e.g., as provided by sensors are in the surgical environment, and history of any of these.”
Examiner’s Note: Electromyography measures skeletal muscle activation by attaching electrode sensors onto the participant’s body. Simply, the event monitor receives event data of actions taken in a surgical environment from sensors which includes examples of electromyography, image data, wrist movement, camera movement, button presses, instrument control activations, etc.
generate gesture features based on the sensor data; ([0091] “In some embodiments, a gesture assessor 1104 reads the time-series event data, and applies gesture criteria 1106 to ascertain whether combinations of events constitute any defined gestures. In the present context, a gesture is a sequence of two or more events that constitute compound movements of tools and controls.” Examiner’s Note: Time-series event data is read as sensor data.)
generate image features based on the image data; ([0088] “In another related embodiment, VSE 904 is programmed, or otherwise configured, to determine the stage, or segment, of a surgical procedure based on the VSE-simulated effects of surgical inputs to the TSS…”
[0101] “In an example embodiment real-time segmentation assessor 1200 is configured as a recurrent neural network (RNN), using a long short-term memory (LSTM) RNN architecture for deep learning. As depicted, feature extractor 1202 applies filtering or other selection criteria to a sequence of assessed tasks and their corresponding parameters to create a feature vector as the input to RNN 1204.”
[0115] “A segment corresponds to a surgical procedure portion and is defined in terms of a combination of one or more features representing a combination of one or more of video, events, gestures, tasks and kinematics. A segment includes a combination of events/kinematics/video that can be represented as gestures/tasks or that can be represented directly without the intermediate gestures/tasks representations.”
Examiner’s Note: Jarc defines a segment as a stage of a surgical procedure that can be represented by a combination of forms, which includes video. The claim doesn’t define what image features are or represent. Therefore, under the BRI, the segments in video form are interpreted as image data. Segments can also be represented as tasks. The segments are eventually passed to the segmentation assessor to create feature vectors.
determine, based on the image features and a machine learning model, a step identifier for a step in a multi-step surgical procedure; ([0089] “Surgical input assessor 1002 is programmed, or otherwise configured, to gather event data, such as control inputs, kinematic information, sensor data, system events or status indications, among others, from TSS 950 and to interpret their meaning in terms of surgical effect. Segmenter 1004 is programmed, or otherwise configured, to discern the stages of surgical procedures as they are being performed, or in a post-processing mode.”
[0100] “In the example shown, segmenter 1004 is configured to selectively apply one of two classes of algorithms for segmentation assessment, namely, a real-time segmentation assessor 1200, and a post-processing-based segmentation assessor 1220.”
[0101] “In an example embodiment real-time segmentation assessor 1200 is configured as a recurrent neural network (RNN), using a long short-term memory (LSTM) RNN architecture for deep learning. As depicted, feature extractor 1202 applies filtering or other selection criteria to a sequence of assessed tasks and their corresponding parameters to create a feature vector as the input to RNN 1204.”
[0115] “A segment corresponds to a surgical procedure portion and is defined in terms of a combination of one or more features representing a combination of one or more of video, events, gestures, tasks and kinematics. A segment includes a combination of events/kinematics/video that can be represented as gestures/tasks or that can be represented directly without the intermediate gestures/tasks representations.
Examiner’s Note: Jarc defines a segment as a stage of a surgical procedure that can be represented by a combination of forms, which includes video. The claim doesn’t define what image features are or represent. Therefore, under the BRI, the segments in video form are interpreted as image data. Also, the segmentation assessor is configured as an RNN. Furthermore, the segmenter applies the segmentation assessor to discern the stages of surgical procedures. The segmentation assessor creates the feature vectors based on segments that use image data. Therefore, using the feature vectors based on image data of segments, the segmenter ultimately determines the surgical step being performed.)
determine, based on the gesture information and a second machine learning model, a performance metric that measures performance of the care provider; ([0113] “At the heart of surgeon assessor 908 is surgical technique assessor 1402, which is programmed, or otherwise configured, to analyze control inputs signaling, and the assessments by gesture assessor 1104 (where available), task assessor 1108, as well as segmenter 1004, to produce an assessment or score representing the quality of surgical performance of a surgeon operating the control inputs of TSS 950, whether they may be used during a surgical procedure, or during simulation for practice or training.”
“[