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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 11-16 and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0210918 to Brand et al. in view of U.S. Patent 10,589,014 to Gassman.
As to claim 11, Brand discloses a connected health system, comprising:
one or more machines configured to transmit one or more events associated with one or more tasks (Brand see field location information derived from sensors [0307] or information about traffic conditions derived from publicly available data [0308]);
one or more monitoring devices configured to receive information corresponding to a plurality of tasks comprising the one or more tasks; and a computing system, comprising: one or more processors; and a non-transitory computer-readable medium having processor-executable instructions stored thereon, wherein the processor-executable instructions (Brand [0102] see server), when executed, facilitate:
receiving the one or more events from the one or more machines (Brand [0308] see at least “Information about traffic conditions may be derived from publicly available data, including traffic tracking websites or government websites that show construction or emergency closures”);
determining, based on the one or more events and existing schedules, priorities and assignments of the plurality of tasks (Brand see level of urgency [0502]-[0053]);
determining, based on the priorities and assignments of the plurality of tasks, updated schedules for the plurality of tasks (Brand see level of urgency [0502]-[0053]); and
sending the updated schedules to the plurality of monitoring devices (Brand [0315] see at least “one or more field professional may be instructed to initiate a location-agnostic task before driving to a location associated with a second location-based task”).
However, Brand does not explicitly teach a plurality of dialysis machines that provide dialysis treatment for one or more patient’s involving diffusion and osmosis exchanges between dialysate and blood; one or more tasks to be performed using the one or more dialysis machines, determining that at least one task of the plurality of tasks requires that at least one dialysis machine of the one or more dialysis machines be in a specific status. Gassman discloses a dialysis machine configured to provide dialysis treatment for one or more patient’s involving diffusion and osmosis exchanges between dialysate and blood; one or more tasks to be performed using the one or more dialysis machines, determining that at least one task of the plurality of tasks requires that at least one dialysis machine of the one or more dialysis machines be in a specific status (Gassman column 3 lines 10-47 column 4 lines 52-67 and column 5 lines 1-20) contacting the first dialysis machine to get the first dialysis machine to achieve the first specific status and contact the second dialysis machine to get the second dialysis machine to achieve the second specific status (Gassman column 4 lines 52-67 and column 5 lines 1-9 and column 5 lines 40-65 see also claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing of the invention by applicant to utilize tasks in a dialysis machine as in Gassman in the system of Brand to reduce time required by humans to monitor the machines.
As to claim 12, see the discussion of claim 11, additionally, Brand discloses wherein each event of the one or more events comprises at least one of:
a number of response steps necessary based on the particular event (Brand [0315]).
As to claim 13, see the discussion of claim 11, additionally, Brand discloses wherein determining, based on the one or more events and existing schedules, the priorities and assignments of the plurality of tasks further comprises:
sorting, based on the one or more events, priorities of the one or more machines (Brand [0502]-[0503] and [0315]); and
determining, based on the priorities of the one or more machines, the priorities and assignments of the plurality of tasks (Brand [0502]-[0503] and [0315]).
Gassman teaches a plurality of dialysis machines (Gassman column 4 lines 52-67 and column 5 lines 1-9 and column 5 lines 40-65 see also claim 1).
As to claim 14, see the discussion of claim 11, additionally, Brand discloses wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed, further facilitate:
receiving information from a medical information system (MIS), the information indicating a test to be performed (Brand [0290] see blood sample); and
integrating the test to the existing schedules, wherein the integrating the test to the existing schedules further comprises at least one of:
integrating the test into an existing work flow (Brand [0290]).
As to claim 15, see the discussion of claim 11, additionally, Brand discloses wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed, further facilitate:
receiving information from a medical information system (MIS), the information indicating that a patient has been rerouted to another clinic (Brand [0311]); and
rescheduling one or more tasks of the plurality of tasks corresponding to the patient (Brand [0311]).
As to claim 16, see the discussion of claim 11, additionally, Brand discloses wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed, further facilitate:
monitoring, for each task of the plurality of tasks, progress of the respective task and a status of a respective clinician assigned to the respective task (Brand [0121]);
generating, based on the monitoring results, metrics for the respective clinician corresponding to the respective task of the plurality of tasks (Brand [0121]); and
determining recommended training for the respective clinician (Brand [0121] “This module supports the analysis of expected demands side-by-side with allocated resources, checking the impact of various resource-management decisions on the organization's capability to meet demands (including “what-if” analysis” and managing different alternative scenarios concurrently), and communicating the planning decisions so that they are used in further operations-scheduling, workforce management, training etc.”)
As to claim 21, see the discussion of claim 11, additionally, Gassman discloses the system wherein each of the first and second specific status comprises one or more of: completed systems test intra treatment (Gassman column 3 lines 10-47 column 4 lines 52-67 and column 5 lines 1-20).
As to claim 22, see the discussion of claim 11, additionally, Gassman discloses the system wherein after first specific status is achieved at the at least one dialysis machine, prompting a first user to perform a next task at the first dialysis machine (Gassman column 3 lines 10-47 column 4 lines 52-67 and column 5 lines 1-20).
After the second specific status is achieved at the second dialysis machine, prompting a second user to perform a next task at the second dialysis machine (Gassman column 3 lines 10-47 column 4 lines 52-67 and column 5 lines 1-20).
As to claim 24, see the discussion of claim 11, Gassman discloses switching a state of a dialysis machine (Gassman column 4 lines 52-67) as well as processes including hemodiafiltration and dialysis (Gassman column 3 lines 10-20). Brand and Gassman do not teach switching from online hemodiafiltration to hemodialysis. It would have been a matter of simple substitution to
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0210918 to Brand et al. in view of U.S. Patent 10,589,014 to Gassman in view of OFFICIAL NOTICE
As to claim 23, see the discussion of claim 11 however, Brand and Gassman do not explicitly teach that the first and second specific status comprises stable conductivity. Examiner takes official notice that dialysis machines capable of determining stable conductivity are exceedingly well known in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize this status in the system of Brand and Gassman to ensure safe operation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that the reference teaches a machine that communicates with a dialysis machines via a caregiver device while the claim describes “a central management system leverages its knowledge of an entire connected health system to proactively coordinate and control the operation of multiple dialysis machines (including first and second dialysis machines) based on their respective tasks and machine specific statuses.” The claim recites “determining that a first task of the plurality of tasks requires that the first dialysis machine be in a first specific status and a second task of the plurality of tasks requires that the second dialysis machine be in a second specific status; contacting the first dialysis machine to get the first dialysis machine to achieve the first specific status and contact the second dialysis machine to get the second dialysis machine to achieve the second specific status” Gassman discloses determining that a first task of the plurality of tasks requires that the first dialysis machine be in a first specific status and a second task of the plurality of tasks requires that the second dialysis machine be in a second specific status this is equivalent to Gassman at column 5 lines 40-67 where a server receives notification see the same or different task (such as post a disinfection procedure or self test prior to hemodialysis) of a first and second medical fluid delivery system (hemodialysis machine see column 3 lines 10-20). The limitation contacting the first dialysis machine to get the first dialysis machine to achieve the first specific status and contact the second dialysis machine to get the second dialysis machine to achieve the second specific status is equivalent to the communication sent via a care provider device to contact a first and second dialysis machine that instructs the machine to perform the task (see remote commands, such as a self-test routine, at column 4 lines 52-67 and column 5 lines 1-8, see also lines 40-55). The claim language “to achieve the …specific status” merely provides an intended use of the communication, it does limit the claim to a central management system that controls a dialysis machine without human intervention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eliza Lam whose telephone number is (571)270-7052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-4:30PST.
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, Peter Choi can be reached on 469-295-9171. 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.
/ELIZA A LAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3681