DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This action is a final rejection
Claims 12-14, 17-26 are pending
Claims 1-11, 15-16 were cancelled
Claims 12, 23 were amended
Claims 12-14, 17-26 are rejected under 35 USC § 101
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s claim for a domestic priority date of 3-21-2023
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 4-28-2023, 5-24-2023 and 11-27-2024 are 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.
Claims 12-14, 17-26 are not patent eligible because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Analysis
First, claims are directed to one or more of the following statutory categories: a process, a machine, a manufacture, and a composition of matter. Regarding claims 12-14, 17-26 the claims recite an abstract idea of determining and monitoring complication risks during surgical procedures.
Independent Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 101 based on the following analysis.
-Step 1 (Does the claim fall within a statutory category? YES): claim 12 recites a surgical care system.
-Step 2A Prong One (Does the claim fall within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas?: YES): The claimed invention:
non-invasively measure a level of a glucose in a body of a patient during a surgical procedure … during the surgical procedure on the patient;
each data entry includes at least one
a plurality of standard waveforms, each of the standard waveforms corresponding to a level of the glucose;
receive the …response signals during the surgical procedure on the patient;
match an input waveform from one or more of the … response signals to one of the standard waveforms in the standard waveform database to measure a level of the glucose in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure
receive a measurement of a level of the blood oxygen in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure; and
determine an associated risk of surgical complication based on the level of the glucose and the level of the blood oxygen, by using important parts of real-time waveforms of the glucose and the blood oxygen, to determine the level of the glucose and the level of the blood oxygen, and by using the associated levels of the glucose and the blood oxygen in combination against the analyte risk
send an alert to medical staff that triggers an adjustment of the surgical procedure in response to the associated risk of surgical complication as determined exceeding a defined threshold, wherein the first predetermined risk is triggered when the glucose level is in the first glucose range and the blood oxygen level is in the first blood oxygen range
belong to the grouping of mental processes under concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion) as it recites determining and monitoring complication risks during surgical procedures. (refer to MPP 2106.04(a)(2)). Alternatively it belongs to certain methods of organizing human activity under managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people as it recites determining and monitoring complication risks during surgical procedures. (refer to MPP 2106.04(a)(2)). Accordingly this claim recites an abstract idea.
-Step 2A Prong Two (Are there additional elements in the claim that imposes a meaningful limit on the abstract idea? NO). Claim 12 recites:
a non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device
using radio frequency signals during a surgical procedure
the non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device comprising a transmit antenna configured to transmit radio frequency signals in a range from 500 MHZ to 300 GHZ into the body of the patient during the surgical procedure
one or more receive antennas configured to obtain modified radio frequency signals returning from the body of the patient as a result of the radio frequency signals transmitted into the body of the patient and modified by the body of the patient during the surgical procedure;
an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the modified radio frequency signals returning from the patient to digital response signals during the surgical procedure;
an analyte risk database including a plurality of separate data entries;
a standard waveform database
a processor;
digital response signals
machine learning;
Amounting to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea. (refer to MPEP 2106.05(f)). Accordingly, the claim as a whole does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Support may be found in the specification [0020, 0040] where standard generic components are used in the implementation of the abstract idea.
-Step 2B (Does the additional elements of the claim provide an inventive concept?: NO. As discussed previously with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, claim 12 recites:
a non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device
using radio frequency signals during a surgical procedure
the non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device comprising a transmit antenna configured to transmit radio frequency signals in a range from 500 MHZ to 300 GHZ into the body of the patient during the surgical procedure
one or more receive antennas configured to obtain modified radio frequency signals returning from the body of the patient as a result of the radio frequency signals transmitted into the body of the patient and modified by the body of the patient during the surgical procedure;
an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the modified radio frequency signals returning from the patient to digital response signals during the surgical procedure;
an analyte risk database including a plurality of separate data entries;
a standard waveform database
a processor;
digital response signals
machine learning;
Amounting to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea. (refer to MPEP 2106.05(f)) Accordingly, the claim does not provide an inventive concept (significantly more than the abstract idea) and hence the claim is ineligible.
Independent Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 101 based on the following analysis.
-Step 1 (Does the claim fall within a statutory category? YES): claim 23 recites a surgical care system.
-Step 2A Prong One (Does the claim fall within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas?: YES): The claimed invention:
non-invasively measure a level of a glucose in a body of a patient during a surgical procedure … during the surgical procedure on the patient;
each data entry includes at least one
a plurality of standard waveforms, each of the standard waveforms corresponding to a level of the glucose;
receive the …response signals during the surgical procedure on the patient;
match an input waveform from one or more of the … response signals to one of the standard waveforms in the standard waveform database to measure a level of the glucose in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure
receive a measurement of a level of the sodium in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure,; and
determine an associated risk of surgical complication based on the level of the glucose and the level of the sodium, by using important parts of real-time waveforms of the glucose and the sodium, to determine the level of the glucose and the level of the sodium, and by using the associated levels of the glucose and the sodium in combination against the analyte risk
send an alert to medical staff configured to trigger an adjustment during the surgical procedure in response to the associated risk of surgical complication as determined exceeding a defined threshold, wherein the first predetermined risk is triggered when the glucose level is in the first glucose range and the blood oxygen level is in the first blood oxygen range
belong to the grouping of mental processes under concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion) as it recites determining and monitoring complication risks during surgical procedures. (refer to MPP 2106.04(a)(2)). Alternatively it belongs to certain methods of organizing human activity under managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people as it recites determining and monitoring complication risks during surgical procedures. (refer to MPP 2106.04(a)(2)). Accordingly this claim recites an abstract idea.
-Step 2A Prong Two (Are there additional elements in the claim that imposes a meaningful limit on the abstract idea? NO). Claim 23 recites:
a non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device
using radio frequency signals during a surgical procedure
the non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device comprising a transmit antenna configured to transmit radio frequency signals in a range from 500 MHZ to 300 GHZ into the body of the patient during the surgical procedure
one or more receive antennas configured to obtain modified radio frequency signals returning from the body of the patient as a result of the radio frequency signals transmitted into the body of the patient and modified by the body of the patient during the surgical procedure;
an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the modified radio frequency signals returning from the patient to digital response signals during the surgical procedure;
an analyte risk database including a plurality of separate data entries;
a standard waveform database
a processor;
digital response signals
machine learning;
Amounting to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea. (refer to MPEP 2106.05(f)). Accordingly, the claim as a whole does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Support may be found in the specification [0020, 0040] where standard generic components are used in the implementation of the abstract idea.
-Step 2B (Does the additional elements of the claim provide an inventive concept?: NO. As discussed previously with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, claim 23 recites:
a non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device
using radio frequency signals during a surgical procedure
the non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device comprising a transmit antenna configured to transmit radio frequency signals in a range from 500 MHZ to 300 GHZ into the body of the patient during the surgical procedure
one or more receive antennas configured to obtain modified radio frequency signals returning from the body of the patient as a result of the radio frequency signals transmitted into the body of the patient and modified by the body of the patient during the surgical procedure;
an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the modified radio frequency signals returning from the patient to digital response signals during the surgical procedure;
an analyte risk database including a plurality of separate data entries;
a standard waveform database
a processor;
digital response signals
machine learning;
Amounting to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea. (refer to MPEP 2106.05(f)) Accordingly, the claim does not provide an inventive concept (significantly more than the abstract idea) and hence the claim is ineligible.
Dependent Claims:
Step 2A Prong One: The following dependent claims recites additional limitations that further define the abstract idea of determining and monitoring complication risks during surgical procedures. The claim limitations include:
Claim 13: wherein … non-invasively obtain the measured level of the blood oxygen in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure.
Claim 14: obtain the measured level of the blood oxygen in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure;
Claim 17: adjust the measured level of the blood oxygen in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure based on the measured level of the glucose in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure prior to determining the associated risk of surgical complication based on the measured level of the oxygen in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure and the measured level of the glucose in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure.
Claim 18: wherein the measured level of the blood oxygen in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure is measured;
Claim 19: wherein the adjustment of the measured level of the glucose occurs ..to determine the level of the glucose and the level of the blood oxygen
Claim 20: wherein the plurality of separate data entries include a second data entry having a second range of glucose different from the first range of glucose and one or more second predetermined risks of surgical complication different from the first predetermined risk of surgical complication
Claim 21: The surgical care system of claim 20, wherein the second range of glucose is 150-200 mg/dL
Claim 22: wherein the plurality of separate data entries include a second data entry having a single analyte range and one or more second predetermined risks of surgical complication different from the first predetermined risk of surgical complication, the single analyte range being a second glucose range of 150 - 200 mg/dL;
Claim 24: wherein the plurality of separate data entries include a second data entry having a single analyte range and one or more second predetermined risks of surgical complication different from the first predetermined risk of surgical complication, the single analyte range being a glucose range that is the same as the first range of glucose;
Claim 25: wherein the plurality of separate data entries include a third data entry having a single analyte range and one or more third predetermined risks of surgical complication different from the first predetermined risk of surgical complication and from the one more second predetermined risks of surgical complication, the single analyte range being a glucose range that is the same as the first range of glucose
Claim 26:
wherein the first predetermined risk of surgical complication is seizure,
the one or more second predetermined risks of surgical complication include at least one of surgical site infection, myocardial infarction, myocardial infarction, and stroke, and
the one or more third predetermined risks of surgical complication include at least one of perioperative major coronary event, surgical site infection, and pneumonia;
Step 2A Prong Two (Are there additional elements in the claim that imposes a meaningful limit on the abstract idea? NO). The following dependent claims recite mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea. (refer to MPEP 2106.05(f)). Accordingly, the claims as a whole do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims include:
Claim 13: the non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device is further configured.
Claim 14: a second non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device;
Claim 17: the processor is configured;
Claim 18: a pulse oximeter,;
Claim 19: machine learning;
Step 2B (Does the additional elements of the claim provide an inventive concept?: NO). As discussed previously with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the following dependent claims recite mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea. (refer to MPEP 2106.05(f)). Accordingly, the claim does not provide an inventive concept (significantly more than the abstract idea) and hence the claim is ineligible. The claims include:
Claim 13: the non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device is further configured.
Claim 14: a second non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device;
Claim 17: the processor is configured;
Claim 18: a pulse oximeter;
Claim 19: machine learning.
Prior Art Made of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure, and is listed in the attached form PTO-892 (Notice of References Cited). Unless expressly noted otherwise by the Examiner, all documents listed on form PTO-892 are cited in their entirety.
Shariati (US 20090137887 A1) – ANALYTE SENSOR- teaches: Systems and methods of use for continuous analyte measurement of a host's vascular system. The continuous glucose measurement system includes a vascular access device, a sensor and sensor electronics, the system being configured for insertion into communication with a host's circulatory system.
SHELTON (WO 2022157706 A1) – PREDICTIVE BASED SYSTEM ADJUSTMENTS BASED ON BIOMARKER TRENDING - teaches: A computing system and/or a method may be provided for using a risk assessment to provide a notification. The computing system may comprise a processor. The processor may be configured to perform the method. A biomarker may be received for a patient from a sensing system. A data collection that includes pre-surgical data may be received for a patient. A probability of a patient outcome due to a surgery performed on the patient may be determined using the biomarker and the data collection. A notification may be sent to a user. The notification may indicate that the probability of the surgical complication may exceed a threshold.
ABRAHAMSON (WO 2009082286 A1) – IMPLANTABLE ANALYTE RF SPECTROSCOPY MEASURING SYSTEM - teaches: An analyte measuring system (1) comprises and implantable medical device (100; 400) having a RF signal source (120; 420) arranged for generating a RF signal and a transmitting antenna (300) for transmitting the RF signal into a surrounding tissue (10) in a subject body (5). The system (1) has a receiving RF antenna (310) for receiving the RF signal from the tissue (10) and a signal processor (130; 530) arranged for generating an estimate of a concentration of an analyte in the tissue (10) based on a spectrum analysis of the received RF signal.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant amended independent claim 12 and 23 as posted in the above analysis with additions underlined and deletions as
In response to applicant's arguments regarding claim rejection under 35 U.S.C § 101:
Several steps are taken in the analysis as to whether an invention is rejected under 101. The first step is to determine if the claim falls within a statutory category. In this case it does for claims 12 and 23 since both claims recite a surgical care system.
The second step under 2A prong one is to determine if the claims recite an abstract idea, which would be the case if the invention can be grouped as either: a) mathematical concepts; (b) mental processes; or (c) certain methods of organizing human activity (encompassing (i) fundamental economic principles, (ii) commercial or legal interactions or (iii) managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people). The current invention is classified as an abstract idea since it may be grouped as a mental process. Alternatively The current invention is classified as an abstract idea since it may be grouped as certain methods of organizing human activity under managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people as it recites determining and monitoring complication risks during surgical procedures. (refer to MPP 2106.04(a)(2))
The third step under 2A Prong Two is to determine if additional elements in the claim imposes a meaningful limit on the abstract idea in order to integrate it into a practical idea. The current invention does not represent a practical idea since the additional elements amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a generic computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea.
the fourth step under 2B is to determine if additional elements of the claim provide an inventive concept. An invention may be classified as an inventive concept if a computer-implemented processes is determined to be significantly more than an abstract idea (and thus eligible), where generic computer components are able in combination to perform functions that are not merely generic, and non-conventional even if generic computer operations on a generic computing device is used to implement the abstract idea. The current invention does not represent an inventive concept since the additional elements amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a generic computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea
Regarding Step 2A Prong One:
The Applicant submits that claims 12 and 23, as currently amended, are not directed to an abstract idea. Specifically the Applicant argues that the claims recite in part, a processor sending a warning to medical staff configured to trigger an adjustment during the surgical procedure in response to the associated risk of surgical complication as determined exceeding a defined threshold. The sending of an alert to make an adjustment during a surgical procedure (e.g., adjust a patient's position, etc.) is more than just an abstract idea. For example, the sending of an alert that triggers an adjustment during a medical procedure is not a mental process as it could not be done in a person's mind. For example, the sending of an alert that triggers an adjustment during a medical procedure is more than organizing human activity as triggering an adjustment by the medical staff during a procedure is more than just organizing human activity or relationship or interactions between people. Thus, claims 12 and 23 recite features that are not metal activities or organizing of human activity as asserted in the rejection
The Examiner disagrees since the Applicant’s argument is not persuasive. The method to select the abstract idea is to strip the additional elements from the claims.
As seen below the recited boldened words constitute the abstract idea after stripping the un-boldened additional elements of amended limitation of independent claim 12:
a non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device that is configured to non-invasively measure a level of a glucose in a body of a patient during a surgical procedure using radio frequency signals during the surgical procedure on the patient,
the non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device comprising:
a transmit antenna configured to transmit radio frequency signals in a range from 500 MHZ to 300 GHZ intothe body of the patient during the surgical procedure and
one or more receive antennas configured to obtain modified radio frequency signals returning from the body of the patient as a result of the radio frequency signals transmitted into the body of the patient and modified by the body of the patient during the surgical procedure,
an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the modified radio frequency signals returning from the patient to digital response signals during the surgical procedure.
an analyte risk database including a plurality of separate data entries, each data entry includes at least one
a standard waveform database including a plurality of standard waveforms, each of the standard waveforms corresponding to a level of the glucose
a processor, configured to:
receive the digital response signals during the surgical procedure on the patient;
match an input waveform from one or more of the digital response signals to one of the standard waveforms in the standard waveform database to measure a level of the glucose in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure;
receive a measurement of a level of the blood oxygen in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure;
determine an associated risk of surgical complication based on the level of the glucose and the level of the blood oxygen, by using important parts of real-time waveforms of the glucose and the blood oxygen, by using machine learning to determine the level of the glucose and the level of the blood oxygen, and by using the associated levels of the glucose and the blood oxygen in combination against the analyte risk database;
send an alert to medical staff that triggers an adjustment of the surgical procedure in response to the associated risk of surgical complication as determined exceeding a defined threshold, wherein the first predetermined risk is triggered when the glucose level is in the first glucose range and the blood oxygen level is in the first blood oxygen range
As seen below the recited boldened words constitute the abstract idea after stripping the un-boldened additional elements of added independent claim 23.
a non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device that is configured to noninvasively measure a level of a glucose in a body of a patient during a surgical procedure using radio frequency signals during the surgical procedure on the patient,
the non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device comprising:
a transmit antenna configured to transmit the radio frequency signals in a range from 500 MHZ to 300 GHZ into the body of the patient during the surgical procedure,
one or more receive antennas configured to obtain modified radio frequency signals returning from the body of the patient as a result of the radio frequency signals transmitted into the body of the patient and modified by the body of the patient during the surgical procedure, and
an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the modified radio frequency signals returning from the patient to digital response signals during the surgical procedure;
an analyte risk database including a plurality of separate data entries, each data entry includes at least one predetermined risk of surgical complication and at least one analyte range, the plurality of separate data entries including a first data entry having a first glucose range, a first sodium range, and a first predetermined risk of surgical complication, the first glucose range being 150 - 200 mg/dL, and the first sodium range being less than 130 mEq/L;
a standard waveform database including a plurality of standard waveforms, each of the standard waveforms corresponding to a level of the glucose;
a processor, configured to:
receive the digital response signals during the surgical procedure on the patient;
match an input waveform from one or more of the digital response signals to one of the standard waveforms in the standard waveform database to measure a level of the glucose in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure;
receive a measurement of a level of the sodium in the body of the patient during the surgical procedure
determine an associated risk of surgical complication based on the level of the glucose and the level of the sodium, by using important parts of real-time waveforms of the glucose and the sodium, by using machine learning to determine the level of the glucose and the level of the sodium, and by using the associated levels of the glucose and the sodium in combination against the analyte risk database; and
send an alert to medical staff that triggers an adjustment of the surgical procedure in response to the associated risk of surgical complication as determined exceeding a defined threshold, wherein the first predetermined risk is triggered when the glucose level is in the first glucose range and the blood oxygen level is in the first blood oxygen range
The selected abstract idea (boldened limitations) of claims 12 and 23 can be implemented by pencil and paper and thus belong to the grouping of mental processes under concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion) as it recites determining and monitoring complication risks during surgical procedures. (refer to MPP 2106.04(a)(2)). Alternatively they belongs to certain methods of organizing human activity under managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people as it recites determining and monitoring complication risks during surgical procedures. (refer to MPP 2106.04(a)(2)). Accordingly independent claims 12 and 23 recite an abstract idea
Regarding Step 2A Prong Two.
The Applicant argues Claims 12 and 23 are directed to patentable subject matter at least because the claims integrate the exception into a practical application. Claim 12 specifies sending a warning to medical staff configured to trigger an adjustment during the surgical procedure in response to the associated risk of surgical complication as determined exceeding a defined threshold. This is a specific non-mental action that is to result in an adjustment being made during surgical procedure. Thus, claims 12 and 23 imposes meaningful limits by specifying a specific type of alert that is to cause the medical staff to act during the surgical procedure, such that the features of claim 12 and 23 incorporate any alleged abstract idea into a practical application. As such, claims 12 and 23 are directed to patentable subject matter
The Examiner does not find the Applicant’s arguments to be persuasive. Based on the analysis of this Office Action there are no additional elements in independent claims 12 and 23 that impose a meaningful limit on the abstract idee, since the additional elements amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea. (refer to MPEP 2106.05(f)). Accordingly, the claim as a whole does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Support may be found in the specification [0020, 0040] where standard generic components are used in the implementation of the abstract idea, and information flow back and forth between the sensor and processor is generic and offers no additional improvement in the functioning of a computer.
Specifically the additional elements pertaining to claim 12 recite the following limitations that amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea:
a non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device
using radio frequency signals during a surgical procedure
the non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device comprising a transmit antenna configured to transmit radio frequency signals in a range from 500 MHZ to 300 GHZ into the body of the patient during the surgical procedure
one or more receive antennas configured to obtain modified radio frequency signals returning from the body of the patient as a result of the radio frequency signals transmitted into the body of the patient and modified by the body of the patient during the surgical procedure;
an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the modified radio frequency signals returning from the patient to digital response signals during the surgical procedure;
an analyte risk database including a plurality of separate data entries;
a standard waveform database
a processor;
digital response signals
machine learning;
Similarly, the additional elements pertaining to claim 23 recite the following limitations that amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea:
a non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device
using radio frequency signals during a surgical procedure
the non-invasive radio frequency analyte monitoring device comprising a transmit antenna configured to transmit radio frequency signals in a range from 500 MHZ to 300 GHZ into the body of the patient during the surgical procedure
one or more receive antennas configured to obtain modified radio frequency signals returning from the body of the patient as a result of the radio frequency signals transmitted into the body of the patient and modified by the body of the patient during the surgical procedure;
an analog-to-digital converter configured to convert the modified radio frequency signals returning from the patient to digital response signals during the surgical procedure;
an analyte risk database including a plurality of separate data entries;
a standard waveform database
a processor;
digital response signals
machine learning;
A colloquial interpretation of a practical idea such as sending a warning to medical staff configured to trigger an adjustment during the surgical procedure in response to the associated risk of surgical complication as determined exceeding a defined threshold is not enough to classify the claims as integrated into a practical application
In order to integrate the abstract idea into a practical idea the Applicant could demonstrate at least one of the conditions enumerated below applies:
Improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field - see MPEP 2106.05(a)
Applying the judicial exception with, or by use of, a particular machine - see MPEP 2106.05(b)
Effecting a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing - see MPEP 2106.05(c)
Applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception - see MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo
The Applicant has not demonstrated any of the above listed conditions. As a result the Examiner restates the rejection of the invention under 35 USC §101.
In conclusion the invention as a whole does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, nor does it amount to significantly more, indicative of an inventive concept and hence the claims remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
For reasons of record and as set forth above, the examiner maintains the rejection of claims 12-14, 17-26 as being directed to a judicial exception without significantly more, and thereby being directed to non-statutory subject matter under 35 USC §101. In reaching this decision, the Examiner considered all evidence presented and all arguments actually made by Applicant.
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 PIERRE L MACCAGNO whose telephone number is (571)270-5408. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 to 5:00.
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, Mamon Obeid can be reached at (571)270-1813. 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.
/PIERRE L MACCAGNO/Examiner, Art Unit 3687
/MAMON OBEID/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3687