DETAILED ACTION
Double Patenting
1. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
2. Claims 1-20 are rejected under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,483,007 in view of Traughber et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0284202 (hereinafter Traughber).
Regarding claim 1 of the instant application, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,483,007 discloses a telemedicine system comprising: a cart that supports a controller coupled to a camera system, a touchscreen display, a microphone, a speaker, and a network, the controller is configured to display a user interface on the touchscreen display in response to a user input received via the touchscreen display, the user interface including at least a first selectable option that causes video captured by the camera system to be displayed on the touchscreen display when the system is not in session and a second option to transmit a request via the network, wherein the controller is configured to establish a communication session with a remote device coupled to the controller via the network, the remote device including a camera, a display, a microphone, and a speaker and, during the communication session, the controller causes the touchscreen display to display video captured by the camera of the remote device.
Further regarding claim 1 of the instant application, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,483,007 does not teach the request is for a language translation service. All the same, Traughber discloses the request is for a language translation service (from Figure 4B, see Interpreter?). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,483,007 wherein the request is for a language translation service as taught by Traughber. This modification would have improved convenience by providing patients with language barriers with an effective means to communicate with their providers as suggested by Traughber.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,483,007 and Traughber discloses in response to a user selection of the second selectable option, the user interface displays a menu of language translation options (from Figure 4C of Traughber, see How would you like to contact the interpreter).
Limitations of the present invention and corresponding U.S. Patent No. 10,483,007 are listed in the following table.
Instant Application: 18/238,835
U.S. Patent No. 10,438,007
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the camera system includes a thermal camera.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the camera system includes a thermal camera.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the camera system includes a first optical camera with a first field of view.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the camera system includes a first optical camera with a first field of view.
4. The system of claim 3, wherein the camera system includes a second optical camera with a second field of view.
4. The system of claim 3, wherein the camera system includes a second optical camera with a second field of view.
5. The system of claim 4, wherein the cart further comprises an articulating boom that supports a third optical camera coupled to the controller, the third optical camera having a third field of view.
5. The system of claim 4, wherein the cart further comprises an articulating boom that supports a third optical camera coupled to the controller, the third optical camera having a third field of view.
6. The system of claim 5, wherein the third optical camera is a pan-tilt-zoom camera.
6. The system of claim 5, wherein the third optical camera is a pan-tilt-zoom camera.
7. The system of claim 6, wherein the controller changes at least one of the pan, tilt, and zoom of the third optical camera in response to a user input provided via the touchscreen display.
7. The system of claim 6, wherein the controller changes at least one of the pan, tilt, and zoom of the third optical camera in response to a user input provided via the touchscreen display.
8. The system of claim 6, wherein the controller changes at least one of the pan, tilt, and zoom of the third optical camera in response to a user input received from the remote station.
8. The system of claim 6, wherein the controller changes at least one of the pan, tilt, and zoom of the third optical camera in response to a user input received from the remote station.
9. The system of claim 1, wherein the camera system and the touchscreen display can be panned and tilted relative to the cart.
9. The system of claim 1, wherein the camera system and the touchscreen display can be panned and tilted relative to the cart.
10. The system of claim 9, wherein the camera system and the touchscreen display are mechanically coupled such that they face in substantially the same direction and move together.
10. The system of claim 9, wherein the camera system and the touchscreen display are mechanically coupled such that they face in substantially the same direction and move together.
11. The system of claim 9, wherein the cart includes actuators configured to pan and tilt the camera system and the touchscreen display in response to commands received from the remote station.
11. The system of claim 9, wherein the cart includes actuators configured to pan and tilt the camera system and the touchscreen display in response to commands received from the remote station.
12. The system of claim 11, wherein the actuators are configured to be manually repositioned by a person in the vicinity of the cart.
12. The system of claim 11, wherein the actuators are configured to be manually repositioned by a person in the vicinity of the cart.
13. The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface displays a plurality of selectable consultation types that can be selected to request a consultation.
13. The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface displays a plurality of selectable consultation types that can be selected to request a consultation.
14. The system of claim 13, wherein selecting a first consultation type cause a consultation request to be transmitted to a first care provider and selecting a second consultation type causes a consultation request to be transmitted to a second care provider.
14. The system of claim 13, wherein selecting a first consultation type cause a consultation request to be transmitted to a first care provider and selecting a second consultation type causes a consultation request to be transmitted to a second care provider.
15. The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface includes a selectable option that causes the controller to display a medical form that can be completed via the touchscreen interface.
15. The system of claim 1, wherein the user interface includes a selectable option that causes the controller to display a medical form that can be completed via the touchscreen interface.
16. The system of claim 1, wherein the controller causes the user interface to display a prompt for a telephone number and subsequently transmits the consultation request to a telephone number provided by the user via the touchscreen interface in response to the prompt.
16. The system of claim 1, wherein the controller causes the user interface to display a prompt for a telephone number and subsequently transmits the consultation request to a telephone number provided by the user via the touchscreen interface in response to the prompt.
17. The system of claim 1, wherein the consultation request is transmitted via a Short Message Service protocol and includes a uniform resource locator.
17. The system of claim 1, wherein the consultation request is transmitted via a Short Message Service protocol and includes a uniform resource locator.
18. The system of claim 17, wherein the recipient of the consultation request can select the uniform resource locator to activate an application that establishes the communication session with the controller.
18. The system of claim 17, wherein the recipient of the consultation request can select the uniform resource locator to activate an application that establishes the communication session with the controller.
20. The system of claim 1, wherein the cart includes a removable peripheral bay that includes a plurality of communication ports coupled to the controller.
20. The system of claim 1, wherein the cart includes a removable peripheral bay that includes a plurality of communication ports coupled to the controller.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
4. Claim 16 recites the limitation "consultation request" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 17 has the same problem.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-3, 5, 6, 8-12, 15, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0127156 (hereinafter Wang) combined Utley et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0305086 (hereinafter Utley) and Welches et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0024023 (hereinafter Welches) in further view of Traughber.
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a telemedicine system comprising:
a mechanism (from Figure 1, see 12) that supports a controller (from Figure 2, see 154) coupled to a camera system (from Figure 2, see 38), a touchscreen display (from Figure 2, see 40), a microphone (from Figure 2, see 42), a speaker (from Figure 2, see 44), and a network (from Figure 1, see 18), the controller is configured to display a user interface on the touchscreen display in response to a user input received via the touchscreen display (from paragraph 0020, see allows a user to enter input by touching the monitor screen),
wherein the controller is configured to establish a communication session with a remote device (from Figure 1, see 16) coupled to the controller via the network, the remote device including a camera (from Figure 1, see 26), a display (from Figure 1, see 24), a microphone (from Figure 1, see 28), and a speaker (from Figure 1, see 30) and, during the communication session, the controller causes the touchscreen display to display video captured by the camera of the remote device (from paragraph 0016, see the robot monitor 40 is coupled to the remote camera 26 so that the patient can view the user).
Still on the issue of claim 1, Wang does not explicitly teach that the structure is a cart. All the same, Utley discloses the structure is a cart (from title, see CART). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Wang wherein the structure is a cart as taught by Utley. This modification would have improved the system’s convenience by providing a mechanism for storage and transportation as suggested by Utley.
Further regarding claim 1, the combination of Wang and Utley does not teach the user interface including at least a first selectable option that causes video captured by the camera system to be displayed on the touchscreen display when the system is not in session. All the same, Welches discloses a first selectable option that causes video captured by the camera system to be displayed (from paragraph 0055, see In some embodiments, thermal camera 105 may be controlled (e.g., turned On/Off) directly from touchscreen display 117 on the laser 125). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combination of Wang and Utley wherein the user interface including at least a first selectable option that causes video captured by the camera system to be displayed as taught by Welches. This modification would have improved safety by preventing skin or other tissue from overheating as suggested by Welches.
Again on the issue of claim 1, the combination of base references does not teach a second selectable option to transmit a request for a language translation service via the network. All the same, Traughber discloses a second selectable option to transmit a request for a language translation service via the network (from Figure 4B, see Interpreter?). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combination of base references with a second selectable option to transmit a request for a language translation service via the network as taught by Traughber. This modification would have improved convenience by providing patients with language barriers with an effective means to communicate with their providers as suggested by Traughber.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Wang and Utley as modified by Welches discloses the camera system includes a thermal camera (from abstract of Welches, see thermal camera).
Regarding claim 3, Wang discloses the camera system includes a first optical camera with a first field of view (from Figure 2, see 38).
Regarding claim 5, Wang discloses the cart further comprises an articulating boom that supports a third optical camera coupled to the controller, the third optical camera having a third field of view (from abstract, see The auxiliary camera extends from the boom so that it provides a relatively close view of a patient or other item in the room).
Regarding claim 6, Wang discloses the third optical camera is a pan-tilt-zoom camera (from paragraph 0029, see The remote operator may also move the auxiliary camera 50 by actuating the robot head 204 in the pan and/or tilt degrees of freedom).
Regarding claim 8, Wang discloses the controller changes at least one of the pan, tilt and zoom of the third optical camera in response to a user input received from the remote station (from paragraph 0029, see The remote operator may also move the auxiliary camera 50 by actuating the robot head 204 in the pan and/or tilt degrees of freedom).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Wang and Utley disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the camera system and the touchscreen display can be panned and tilted (from paragraph 0027 of Wang, see The robot 12 may have a head 204 that supports the camera 38, the monitor 40 and boom 52. The head 204 may have two degrees of freedom so that the camera 38, monitor 40 and auxiliary camera 50 can together be swiveled and pivoted as indicated by the arrows) relative to the cart (from title of Utley, see CART).
Regarding claim 10, Wang discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the camera system and the touchscreen display are mechanically coupled such that they face in substantially the same direction and move together (from paragraph 0027 of Wang, see The robot 12 may have a head 204 that supports the camera 38, the monitor 40 and boom 52. The head 204 may have two degrees of freedom so that the camera 38, monitor 40 and auxiliary camera 50 can together be swiveled and pivoted as indicated by the arrows).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Wang and Utley discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the cart (from title of Utley, see CART) includes actuators configured to pan and tilt the camera system and the touchscreen display in response to commands received from the remote station (from paragraph 0029, see The remote operator may also move the auxiliary camera 50 by actuating the robot head 204 in the pan and/or tilt degrees of freedom).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Wang and Utley discloses the system of claim 11, wherein the actuators are configured to be manually repositioned by a person (from paragraph 0029, see A person in the operating room may manually adjust) in the vicinity of the cart (from title of Utley, see CART).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Wang as modified by Utley discloses the user interface includes a selectable option that causes the controller to display a medical form that can be completed via the touchscreen interface (from paragraph 0029 of Utley, see the facilitator module may also receive data corresponding to medical forms (e.g., patient's medical records, medical charts, health history, insurance forms, Medicare forms, prescriptions, etc.) relating to the doctor D, to the patient, to the facility, etc. The facilitator module displays data corresponding to medical forms or the forms themselves on the second display 22 such that the facilitator may assist the doctor D or the patient in completing the medical forms).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of base references as modified by Traughber discloses in response to a user selection of the second selectable option, the user interface displays a menu of language translation options (from Figure 4C of Traughber, see How would you like to contact the interpreter).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Wang and Utley discloses a removable peripheral bay that includes a plurality of communication ports coupled to the controller (from paragraph 0064, see The computer 500 may interact with input/output devices via I/O Interfaces 518 and I/O Ports 510. Input/output devices can include, but are not limited to, the first display 12, the speaker 14, the camera 16, the microphone 18, the second display 22, a keyboard, a microphone, a pointing and selection device, cameras, video cards, displays, disk 506, network devices 520, and the like. The I/O Ports 510 can include but are not limited to, serial ports, parallel ports, and USB ports).
7. Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang combined Utley, Welches and Traughber in further view of Feng et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0066596 (hereinafter Feng).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of references does not teach the consultation request is transmitted via a Short Message Service protocol and includes a unform resource locator. All the same, Feng discloses the request is transmitted via a Short Message Service protocol and includes a unform resource locator (from paragraph 0024, see The initial call invitation is sent in text format via Email, SMS, IM, or other possible mechanisms associated with the intended remote party. The invitation message contains a URL corresponding to the mobile client's unique web call-me link assigned by the video conferencing system). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combination of references wherein the request is transmitted via a Short Message Service protocol and includes a unform resource locator as taught by Feng. This modification would have improved the system’s convenience by allowing for communication with out-of-network users as suggested by Feng.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of references as modified by Feng discloses the recipient of the request can select the uniform resource locator to activate an application that establishes the communication session with the controller (from paragraph 0024 of Feng, see Upon receiving the call invitation message, the receiving party is instructed to click on the embedded call-me link which will launch a web browser that loads the necessary software component and opens a video call session with the mobile client).
8. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang combined Utley, Welches and Traughber in further view of LeBeau et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0191363 (hereinafter LeBeau).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of references does not teach the controller causes the user interface to display a prompt for a telephone number and subsequently transmits the consultation request to a telephone number provided by the user via the touchscreen interface in response to the prompt. All the same, LeBeau discloses the controller causes the user interface to display a prompt for a telephone number and subsequently transmits the request to a telephone number provided by the user via the touchscreen interface in response to the prompt (from paragraph 0112, see The automatic caller may also include a dialing prompter 648. The dialing prompter 648 may display a prompt, where the displayed prompt is associated with functions that allow a user of the first computing device 602 to dial a telephone number with a single-action user-input). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combination of references wherein the controller causes the user interface to display a prompt for a telephone number and subsequently transmits the request to a telephone number provided by the user via the touchscreen interface in response to the prompt as taught by LeBeau. This modification would have improved the system’s flexibility by allowing for different ways of making a call as suggested by LeBeau.
9. Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang combined Utley, Welches and Traughber in further view of Hamm et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0060576 (hereinafter Hamm).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of references does not clearly teach the user interface displays a plurality of selectable consultation types that can be selected to request a consultation. All the same, Hamm discloses the user interface displays a plurality of selectable consultation types that can be selected to request a consultation (from paragraph 0164, see A patient starts off at an interactive graphical user interface (GUI) provided on a website, on a local computer with proprietary software or perhaps a web-based application, and then may perform a search for a doctor. The search may be a basic search for a doctor (not shown), or an advanced search may be performed with one or more search types related to the patient profile or procedures needed, such as symptoms, conditions, procedures, specialties or keywords, although this list is not exhaustive by any means. Search results are then obtained, and a filter is applied to filter the search results by doctors which are available for consultations based on additional criteria. The filter may select doctors based on whether they are "on-call" for a consultation in the near future, available immediately for a consultation such as a video conference, whether the doctor is in a certain health plan that the patient belongs to, languages spoken, gender and even location. Again, this list of filters is not exhaustive. Customized scheduling interfaces may be provided in order to schedule the consultation between the patient and the doctor). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combination of references wherein the user interface displays a plurality of selectable consultation types that can be selected to request a consultation as taught by Hamm. This modification would have improved quality by providing customized matching as suggested by Hamm.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of references as modified by Hamm discloses selecting a first consultation type causes a consultation request to be transmitted to a first care provider and selecting a second consultation type causes a consultation request to be transmitted to a second care provider (from paragraph 0164 of Hamm, see A patient starts off at an interactive graphical user interface (GUI) provided on a website, on a local computer with proprietary software or perhaps a web-based application, and then may perform a search for a doctor. The search may be a basic search for a doctor (not shown), or an advanced search may be performed with one or more search types related to the patient profile or procedures needed, such as symptoms, conditions, procedures, specialties or keywords, although this list is not exhaustive by any means. Search results are then obtained, and a filter is applied to filter the search results by doctors which are available for consultations based on additional criteria. The filter may select doctors based on whether they are "on-call" for a consultation in the near future, available immediately for a consultation such as a video conference, whether the doctor is in a certain health plan that the patient belongs to, languages spoken, gender and even location. Again, this list of filters is not exhaustive. Customized scheduling interfaces may be provided in order to schedule the consultation between the patient and the doctor).
10. Claims 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang combined Utley, Welches and Traughber in further view of Parmanto et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0246084 (hereinafter Parmanto).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of references does not clearly teach a second optical camera with a second field of view. All the same, Parmanto discloses a second optical camera with a second field of view (from Figure 4, see 453). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination of references with a second optical camera with a second field of view as taught by Parmanto. This modification would have improved the system’s flexibility by providing eye care as suggested by Parmanto.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of references does not clearly show the controller changes at least one of the pan, tilt, and zoom of the third optical camera in response to a user input provided via the touchscreen display. All the same, Parmanto discloses the controller changes at least one of the pan, tilt, and zoom of the third optical camera in response to a user input provided via the touchscreen display (from paragraph 0092, see The video-embedded camera control application 254 provides the ability for users to control remote cameras as well as local cameras. The video-embedded camera control application 254 has a unique feature of having the control embedded in the video screen and allows users to control the video naturally by zooming, panning, and tilting the remote or local cameras). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combination of base references wherein the controller changes at least one of the pan, tilt, and zoom of the third optical camera in response to a user input provided via the touchscreen display as taught by Parmanto. This modification would have improved user friendliness by providing a more natural control as suggested by Parmanto.
Conclusion
11. Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLISA ANWAH whose telephone number is 571-272-7533. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 8.30 AM to 6 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Carolyn Edwards can be reached on 571-270-7136. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300 for regular communications and 571-273-8300 for After Final communications.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-2600.
Olisa Anwah
Patent Examiner
December 9, 2025
/OLISA ANWAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692