DETAILED ACTION
Notice to Applicant
This communication is in response to the amendment submitted December 18, 2025. Claims 1, 11, and 20 are amended. Claim 3 and 13 are cancelled (Claims 8 and 18 were previously cancelled). Claims 1 – 2, 4 – 7, 9 – 12, 14 – 17, and 19 – 20 are pending examination.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 – 2, 4 – 7, 9 – 12, 14 – 17, and 19 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step One
Claims 1 – 2, 4 – 7, 9 – 12, 14 – 17, and 19 – 20 are drawn to a system, method, and non-transitory computer-readable medium, which is/are statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A Prong One
Independent claims 1, 11, and 20 recite aggregating clinical opportunities from a plurality of remote clinical vendors, wherein the clinical opportunities are patient care tasks to be performed by a pharmacy user, and wherein aggregating the clinical opportunities includes retrieving clinical opportunity data of the remote clinical vendors; ranking the clinical opportunities using one or more ranking parameters; integrating the ranked clinical opportunities into respective workflows associated with a plurality of respective pharmacies including a first remote pharmacy that manages both clinical opportunities and prescription filling workflows in a single application, wherein integrating the ranked clinical opportunities includes injecting the ranked clinical opportunities between other pharmacy tasks in the first remote pharmacy based on the respective rankings of the ranked clinical opportunities, such that the ranked clinical opportunities are presented within a task list along with the other pharmacy tasks for a pharmacy associated with the remote pharmacy; determining that a first clinical opportunity from the ranked clinical opportunities has been reserved by the first remote pharmacy; in response to determining that the first clinical opportunity from the ranked clinical opportunities has been reserved, updating a current status of the first clinical opportunity within the clinical opportunities to prevent other pharmacies of the respective pharmacies from attempting to complete the first clinical opportunity; determining that a timeout threshold has been exceeded; and in response to determining that the timeout threshold has been exceeded, again updating the current status of the first clinical opportunity within the clinical opportunities repository to make the first clinical opportunity available to the other pharmacies of the plurality of respective pharmacies.
The recited limitations, as drafted, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover certain methods of organizing human activity, as reflected in the specification, which states that the present invention relates to embedding “within existing pharmacy technology [a method and system] to provide seamless clinical opportunity integrations. Generally, the system and methods described herein provide the ability to rank (e.g. prioritize) clinical opportunities”. (paragraph 17 of the published specification). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The present claims cover certain methods of organizing human activity because they address a need “... that as clinical service requirements increase for pharmacy users, so too will the number of vendors and/or systems with which pharmacy users need to interact. For example, a pharmacy user that is expected to complete multiple different clinical opportunities each day will likely need to switch between multiple user interfaces and/or systems, greatly reducing efficiency and placing a greater burden on the pharmacy user.” (paragraph 19 of the published specification). This problem is addressed “[when] the system and methods described herein integrate clinical opportunity management with existing pharmacy workflows.” (paragraph 17 of the published specification).
Step 2A Prong Two
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are abstract but for the inclusion of the additional elements including:
Claim 1: “management system”, “processor”, “one or more memories having storing computer executable instructions, that when executed by the processor”, “repository”
Claims 2, 5 – 6, 9, 12, 15: “management system”
Claim 4: “management system”, “user device”, “user interface”, “automatically”
Claim 7: “management system”, “user device”, “automatically”, “user interface”
Claim 11: “processor”, “repository”, “links to navigate to remote systems”, “management system”
Claim 14: “user interface”, “automatically”, “management system”,\
Claim 16: “processors”
Claim 17: “user device”, “management system”, “automatically”, “user interface”
Claim 20: “A non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by one or more processors”, “system”
These features are additional elements that are recited at a high level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instruction to apply the exception using generic computer components. See: MPEP 2106.05(f).
The additional elements are merely incidental or token additions to the claim that do not alter or affect how the process steps or functions in the abstract idea are performed. Therefore, the claimed additional elements do not add meaningful limitations to the indicated claims beyond a general linking to a technological environment. See: MPEP 2106.05(h).
The combination of these additional elements is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Hence, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims are directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A Prong Two: NO).
Step 2B
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, using the additional elements
to perform the abstract idea amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic components cannot provide an inventive concept. See MPEP 2106.05(f). 14. Further, the claimed additional elements, identified above, are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they are generic components that are not integrated into the claim because they are merely incidental or token additions to the claim that do not alter or affect how the process steps or functions in the abstract idea are performed. Therefore, the claimed additional elements do not add meaningful limitations to the indicated claims beyond a general linking to a technological environment. See: MPEP 2106.05(h).
Further, the claimed additional elements, identified above, are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they are generic components that are configured to perform well-understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the industry. See: MPEP 2106.05(d). Said additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and provide conventional functions that do not add meaningful limits to practicing the abstract idea. The published specification supports this conclusion as follows:
[0030] POMS 200 is shown to include a processing circuit 202 that includes a processor 204 and a memory 210. Processor 204 can be a general-purpose processor, an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), one or more field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs ), a group of processing components, or other suitable electronic processing structures. In some embodiments, processor 204 is configured to execute program code stored on memory 210 to cause POMS 200 to perform one or more operations, as described below in greater detail. It will be appreciated that, in embodiments where POMS 200 is part of another computing device (e.g., clinical services platform 102), the components of POMS 200 may be shared with, or the same as, the host device. For example, if POMS 200 is implemented via clinical services platform 102, then POMS 200 may utilize the processing circuit, processor(s ), and/or memory of clinical services platform 102 to perform the functions described herein.
[0031] Memory 210 can include one or more devices (e.g., memory units, memory devices, storage devices, etc.) for storing data and/or computer code for completing and/or facilitating the various processes described in the present disclosure. In some embodiments, memory 210 includes tangible ( e.g., non-transitory), computer-readable media that stores code or instructions executable by processor 204. Tangible, computer-readable media refers to any physical media that is capable of providing data that causes POMS 200 to operate in a particular fashion. Example tangible, computer-readable media may include, but is not limited to, volatile media, non-volatile media, removable media and nonremovable media implemented in any method or technology for storage of information such as computer readable instructions, data structures, program modules or other data. Accordingly, memory 210 can include RAM, ROM, hard drive storage, temporary storage, non-volatile memory, flash memory, optical memory, or any other suitable memory for storing software objects and/or computer instructions. Memory 210 can include database components, object code components, script components, or any other type of information structure for supporting the various activities and information structures described in the present disclosure. Memory 210 can be communicably connected to processor 204, such as via processing circuit 202, and can include computer code for executing (e.g., by processor 204) one or more processes described herein.
Viewing the limitations as an ordered combination, the claims simply instruct the additional elements to implement the concept described above in the identification of abstract idea with routine, conventional activity specified at a high level of generality in a particular technological environment.
Hence, the claims as a whole, considering the additional elements individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (Step 2B: NO).
Dependent claim(s) 2, 4 – 7, 9 – 10, 12, 14 – 17, and 19 when analyzed as a whole, considering the additional elements individually and/or as an ordered combination, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitation(s) fail(s) to establish that the claim(s) is/are not directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. These claims fail to remedy the deficiencies of their parent claims above, and are therefore rejected for at least the same rationale as applied to their parent claims above, and incorporated herein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The rejection of Claim(s) 1 — 20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parab et al., herein after Parab (U.S. Publication Number 2021/0233650 A1) in view of Barr et al., herein after Barr (Barr, B. E.A., Dan, L., Yoo, L., & Ho, C. (2016, Winter). Vaccine medication incidents in the community. [SMP Canada, 22-30) are withdrawn based upon the Non-Final Office Action mailed October 1, 2025.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant's arguments filed December 18, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant’s remarks have been addressed in the order in which they were presented.
Rejections - 35 USC § 101
The Applicant argues the amended claims recite a technological solution to a technological problem by improving the efficiency with which clinical opportunities are made available to pharmacies. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Examiner submits Core Wireless “identifies as problematic the conventional user interfaces in which “a user may need to scroll around and switch views many times to find the right data/functionality.”” The solution provided by the invention was claimed to require “an application summary that can be reached directly from the menu,” specifying a particular manner by which the summary window must be accessed. The claim further requires the application summary window list a limited set of data, “each of the data in the list being selectable to launch the respective application and enable the selected data to be seen within the respective application.” This claim limitation restrains the type of data that can be displayed in the summary window. Finally, the claim recites that the summary window “is displayed while the one or more applications are in an un-launched state,” a requirement that the device applications exist in a particular state. These limitations disclose a specific manner of displaying a limited set of information to the user, rather than using conventional user interface methods to display a list or an index of workflow tasks on a computer. Thus, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTINE K RAPILLO whose telephone number is (571)270-3325. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 - 4 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Fonya Long can be reached at 571-270-5096. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/K.K.R/Examiner, Art Unit 3682
/ROBERT A SOREY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3682