DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR
1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued
examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the
finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's
submission filed on November 17, 2025 has been entered.
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 1-9, 11-15, 17-19, and 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Claims 1-9, 11-15, 17-19, and 24-26 are within the four statutory categories. However, as will be shown below, claims 1-9, 11-15, 17-19, and 24-26 are nonetheless unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1, 11, and 17 are representative of the inventive concept and recite:
Claim 1
A biological information storage system comprising:
a memory configured to store biological information of a patient undergoing surgery at one or more of an automatic timing and at a timing designated by one or more medical workers, the stored biological information of the patient undergoing surgery including one or more of a heart rate, a pulse rate, a respiratory rate, a blood pressure, and a body temperature of the patient;
a monitor configured to display the biological information;
a computer configured to:
execute processing of causing the monitor to display a plurality of surgery processes, the plurality of surgery processes being performed by a plurality of medical workers,
to arrange a plurality of selection processes selected from among the plurality of surgery processes as the scheduled surgery processes in time series in a procedure of the surgery, the plurality of selection processes each being a medical act which is performed by the one or more medical workers,
and to display a plurality of complication risks that may occur after an end of surgery of the patient based on the stored biological information of the patient for the plurality of selection processes;
store the biological information of the patient in the memory for each of the plurality of selection processes during the surgery is started at the one or more of the automatic timing and at the timing designated by the medical worker;
generate a report based on the stored biological information of the patient and a risk prediction model, the risk prediction model being a prediction algorithm created based on data obtained by a combination of information regarding the patient including the stored biological information of the patient and past complications that have occurred after an end of a surgery;
and provide notification in a case where a probability of the risk predicted by the risk prediction model is equal to or greater than a threshold value, the notification being displayed on the monitor for one or more of the plurality of complication risks that may occur after the surgery of the patient has ended based on the stored biological information of the patient for the plurality of selection processes,
and wherein the notification includes highlighting the one or more of the plurality of complication risks on the monitor that may occur after the surgery of the patient has ended based on the stored biological information of the patient and the stored biological information to be noted.
*Claims 11 and 17 recite similar limitations as claim 1, but for a non-transitory computer-readable medium and method, respectively.
Step 2A Prong One
The broadest reasonable interpretation of these steps includes mental processes because the
highlighted components can practically be performed by the human mind (in this case, the process of
generating and highlighting ) or using pen and paper. Other than reciting generic computer components/functions such as “storage system”, “memory configured to store”, “monitor”, “computer”, and “non-transitory computer-readable medium storing” nothing in the claims precludes the highlighted portions from practically being performed in the mind. For example, in claim 1, but for the system language, the claim encompasses the user processing data and organizing it. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, but for the recitation of generic computer components/functions, then it falls within “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Additionally, the mere nominal recitation of a generic computer does not take the claim limitation out of the mental process grouping. Thus, the claim recites a mental process. The recitation of generic computer components/functions of providing, arranging, and displaying can also cover behavioral or interactions between people, and/or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (i.e. social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions), hence the claim falls under “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity”. The types of identified abstract ideas are considered together as a single abstract idea for analysis purposes.
Dependent claims 2-9, 12-15, 18-19, and 24-26 recite additional subject matter which further narrows or defines the abstract idea embodied in the claims (such as claim 6, reciting a trained model used to determine risk of surgery complications but for recitation of generic computer components/functions).
Step 2A Prong Two
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the
following additional limitations:
Claim 1 recites : “a memory configured to store biological information of a patient undergoing surgery at one or more of an automatic timing and at a timing designated by one or more medical workers, the stored biological information of the patient undergoing surgery including one or more of a heart rate, a pulse rate, a respiratory rate, a blood pressure, and a body temperature of the patient”, “a monitor configured to display the biological information”, “a computer configured to execute processing of causing the monitor to display a plurality of surgery processes, the plurality of surgery processes being performed by a plurality of medical workers”, “store the biological information of the patient in the memory for each of the plurality of selection processes during the surgery is started at the one or more of the automatic timing and at the timing designated by the medical worker”, “model”, “prediction algorithm”, “display”
In particular, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, other than the abstract idea per se, because the additional elements amount to no more
limitations which:
Amount to mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The limitations
are recited as being performed by “a memory configured to store biological information of a patient undergoing surgery at one or more of an automatic timing and at a timing designated by one or more medical workers, the stored biological information of the patient undergoing surgery including one or more of a heart rate, a pulse rate, a respiratory rate, a blood pressure, and a body temperature of the patient”, “a monitor configured to display the biological information”, “a computer configured to execute processing of causing the monitor to display a plurality of surgery processes, the plurality of surgery processes being performed by a plurality of medical workers”, “model”, and “prediction algorithm”. These limitations are recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. The model and algorithm are used to generally apply the abstract idea without limiting how it functions.
Add insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) to the abstract idea such as the
recitation of “store the biological information of the patient in the memory for each of the plurality of selection processes during the surgery is started at the one or more of the automatic timing and at the timing designated by the medical worker” and “display”.
Claims 2, 5, 12, 15, and 18 recites input/inputting
Claims 6, 8, and 9 recite model
In particular, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, other than the abstract idea per se, because the additional elements amount to no more
limitations which:
Amount to mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)). The limitations
are recited as being performed by a trained model. These limitations are recited at a high level of generality and amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. The trained model is used to generally apply the abstract idea without limiting how it functions.
Add insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) to the abstract idea such as the
recitation of input/inputting.
Dependent claims 3-4, 7, 13-14, 19, and 24-26 do not include any additional elements beyond those already recited in independent claims 1, 11, and 17 and dependent claims 2, 5-6, 8-9, 12, 15, and 18, hence do not integrate the aforementioned abstract idea into a practical application. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer improves any other technology. Their collective function merely provides conventional computer implementation and do not impose a meaningful limit to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B
Claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more
than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to discussion of integration of the
abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements: A system in claim 1; amount to no
more than mere instructions to apply an exception to the abstract idea. Additionally, the additional
limitations, other than the abstract idea per se amount to no more than limitations which amount
to elements that have been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional activity in
particular fields as demonstrated by the recitation of an additional element such as:
Display(claims 1-3, 11-13, and 17-19) which is an electronic device for the visual presentation of data (Para 0040, Shukla(US 20220317432 A1) discloses: “The display unit may be any special-purpose or conventional display device (e.g., a computer monitors) that may output graphical images to operator.”) in a manner that would be well-understood, routine, and conventional.
Store/Storing (claims 1-11, 16-17, and 20) which means to retain or enter information for future electronic retrieval (Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015)) in a manner that would be well-understood, routine, and conventional.
Input/Inputting (claims 2, 5, 12, 15, and 18) which means to put data into a computer (Para (81), Nielsen(US 10523978 B1) discloses: “The device can include at least one input device 1010 able to receive conventional input from a user. This conventional input can include, for example, a push button, touch pad, touch screen, wheel, joystick, keyboard, mouse, trackball, keypad or any other such device or element whereby a user can input a command to the device.”) in a manner that would be well-understood, routine, and conventional.
Dependent claims 3-4, 7, 13-14, 19, and 24-26 do not include any additional elements beyond those already recited above in independent claims 1, 11, and 17 and dependent claims dependent claims 2, 5-6, 8-9, 12, 15, and 18. Therefore, they are not deemed to be significantly more than the abstract idea because, as stated above, the limitations of the aforementioned dependent claims amount to no more than generally linking the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use, and/or do not recite and additional elements not already recited in independent claim 1, hence do not amount to “significantly more” than the abstract idea. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea identified above. Furthermore, looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually, and there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology, and their collective function merely provide conventional computer implementation.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-9, 11-15, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nawana(US20190110784A1) in view of Wolf(US20200273581A1) and Moore(US20090172773A).
Claim 1
Nawana discloses:
A biological information storage system comprising: a memory(Para, 0109, Nawana discloses memory) configured to store the biological information(Figure 2, #300, Nawana discloses diagnosis and treatment database which can be used to store biological information) of a patient undergoing surgery(Para 0025, Nawana discloses: “surgical procedure on a patient” [PATIENT UNDERGOING SURGERY]) at one or more of an automatic timing(Para 0127, Nawana discloses a treatment module can read and write information to a database) and at a timing designated by one or more medical workers(Para 0129, Nawana discloses information can be entered into a database by a patient or other user(can be medical worker)), the stored biological information of the patient undergoing surgery including one or more of a (Para 0130, Wolf discloses gathered data including heart rate of patient), a pulse rate, a respiratory rate, a (Figure 15, Nawana discloses a display unit, which can be a monitor) configured to display the biological information(Figure 15, Nawana discloses the displaying of biological information measured for a patient); a computer configured to execute processing of causing the monitor to display(Para 0150, Nawana discloses a display screen which shows a list of possible treatment options) a plurality of surgery processes(Para 0029, Nawana discloses : “plurality of available invasive treatments”[PLURALITY OF SURGERY PROCESSES]), the plurality of surgery processes being performed by a plurality of medical workers(Para 0174, Nawana discloses surgeons authorized to perform surgery), to arrange a plurality of selection processes selected(Para 0029, Nawana discloses: “allows selection of an invasive treatment.”[SELECTION PROCESS]) from among the plurality of surgery(Figure 2, Nawana discloses: “surgery”) processes(Para 0029, Nawana discloses : “plurality of available invasive treatments”) as the scheduled surgery(Para 0187, Nawana discloses: “scheduled surgery”) processes in time series(Para 0255, Nawana discloses: “timeline” [TIMELINE CAN BE TIME SERIES]…”) in a procedure of the surgery(Figure 2, Nawana discloses: “surgery”) the plurality of selection processes each being a medical act which is performed by the one or more medical workers(Para 0029, Nawana discloses : “plurality of available invasive treatments”[INVASIVE TREATMENTS ARE PERFORMED BY MEDICAL WORKERS]), and to display a plurality of complication risks that may occur after an end of surgery of the patient(Figure 32B, Wolf displays a plurality of risk complications(C1-C4) based on the stored biological information of the patient(Para 0129, Nawana discloses patient EMR and historical treatments[EMR AND HISTORICAL TREATMENT RECORDS CAN BE BIOLOGICAL INFORMATION] can be used compile outcome predictions) for the plurality of selection processes, to store the biological information(Figure 15, Nawana discloses biological information measured for a patient) of the patient in the memory for each of the plurality of selection processes(Col. 7, Line 9, Nawana discloses: “allows selection of an invasive treatment for the patient from a plurality of available invasive treatments…”[SELECTION PROCESS]) during the surgery(Para 0174, Nawana discloses procedure database making data available during a surgical procedure) at the one or more of the automatic timing and at the timing designated by the medical worker; and generate a report(Col. 72, Line 12, Nawana discloses: “generate a report”) based on the stored biological information(Figure 15, Nawana discloses biological information measured for a patient) the patient and a (Para 0761, Wolf discloses: “identifying the indication of the deviation and providing the notification…”) the one or more of the plurality of complication risks on the monitor that may occur after the surgery of the patient has ended based on the stored biological information of the patient and the stored biological information to be noted.
Nawana does not explicitly disclose:
Blood pressure
Body temperature
Display a plurality of complication risks that may occur after an end of surgery of the patient
risk prediction model, the risk prediction model being a prediction algorithm created based on data obtained by a combination of information regarding the patient including the stored biological information of the patient and past complications that have occurred after an end of a surgery; and provide notification in a case where a probability of the risk predicted by the risk prediction model is equal to or greater than a threshold value, the notification being displayed on the monitor for one or more of the plurality of complication risks that may occur after the surgery of the patient has ended
highlighting
Wolf discloses:
blood pressure(Para 0130, Wolf discloses blood pressure)
body temperature(Para 0130, Wolf discloses temperature of patient)
display a plurality of complication risks that may occur after an end of surgery of the patient(Figure 32B, Wolf displays a plurality of risk complications(C1-C4)
risk prediction model, the risk prediction model being a prediction algorithm created based on data obtained by a combination of information regarding the patient including the stored biological information of the patient and past complications that have occurred after an end of a surgery(Para 0756, Figure 36, Figure 35A, Wolf discloses: “ model to predict post-discharge risk[RISK PREDICTION MODEL] based on historical data or procedures/outcomes[PAST COMPLICATIONS] and video captured during a surgical procedure, which can include patient characteristics[PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS CAN INCLUDE BIOLOGICAL INFORMATION]); and provide notification(Para 0761, Wolf discloses: “identifying the indication of the deviation and providing the notification…”) in a case where a probability of the risk predicted by the risk prediction model is equal to or greater than a threshold value(Para 0755, Wolf discloses: “a selected threshold may be based on one or more selected outcomes…”), the notification being displayed on the monitor for one or more of the plurality of complication risks that may occur after the surgery of the patient has ended(Figure 32B, Wolf discloses surgical outcome statistics of various risks)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art to have modified the system for surgical planning, of Nawana to add displaying of complication risks, risk prediction model, blood pressure, and body temperature, as taught by Wolf. One of ordinary skill would have been so motivated to provide a means to visually accentuate data that would impact the health of a patient and provide a means to predict a complication risk to improve quality of post-op care for the patient using vitals such as body temperature and blood pressure, but in this case for post discharge risk prediction(Para 0004, Wolf discloses: “Therefore, there is a need for unconventional approaches that efficiently and effectively analyze surgical videos to enable a surgeon to view surgical events, provide decision support, and/or facilitate postoperative activity.”).
Wolf does not explicitly disclose:
highlighting
Moore discloses:
highlighting(Para 0207, Moore, discloses: “results may be returned that include commercial and non-commercial result sets, which may be distinguished on the screen, such as by screen location, … or by another indicator of the distinction, such as color, font, underlining, italics, boldface type, highlighting [HIGHLIGHT], or the like.”)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art to have modified the system for surgical planning of Nawana to add highlighting of pertinent data, as taught by Moore. One of ordinary skill would have been so motivated to provide a means to visually accentuate data that may impact outcome of the surgery, but in this case, for syndicating surgical data in a healthcare environment(Para 0060, Moore discloses: “There is a need for a new global business ecosystem, within which innovation by millions of people will be embraced, in order to meet the challenge. In order to stimulate the formation and rapid evolution of such a business ecosystem, there will have to be systematic development of general purpose software, systems and protocols specifically engineered to enable the flexible participation of billions in the healthcare industry.”).
Claim 2
Nawana discloses:
The biological information storage system according to claim 1, wherein the computer is configured to: execute processing of adding the selection process selected or input(Figure 5, Col. 14, Line 5, Nawana discloses: “input of data to the diagnosis, surgical planning, support, and management system.”) later to the plurality of selection processes(Col. 7, Line 9, Nawana discloses: “allows selection of an invasive treatment for the patient from a plurality of available invasive treatments…”[SELECTION PROCESS]) selected;
rearrange(Col. 70, Line 35, Nawana discloses: “Different types of data can be displayed to a user other than the information shown on the user interface 148, such as time durations of certain steps of the surgical procedure, a total time duration of the surgical procedure, information gathered by the equipment tracking module 232.” [CHANGING SHOWN DATA TYPES CAN BE CONSIDERED REARRANGING]) the plurality of selection processes(Col. 7, Line 9, Nawana discloses: “allows selection of an invasive treatment for the patient from a plurality of available invasive treatments…”[SELECTION PROCESS]) selected once and the selection process(Col. 7, Line 9, Nawana discloses: “allows selection of an invasive treatment for the patient from a plurality of available invasive treatments…”[SELECTION PROCESS]) selected or input(Figure 5, Col. 14, Line 5, Nawana discloses: “input of data to the diagnosis, surgical planning, support, and management system.”) later in time series(Col. 62, Line 1, Nawana discloses: “timeline” [TIMELINE CAN BE TIME SERIES]…”) in the procedure of the surgery(Figure 2, Nawana discloses: “surgery”);
and cause the monitor(Figure 15, Nawana discloses a display unit[MONITOR CAN BE DISPLAY UNIT]) to display the rearranged(Col. 70, Line 35, Nawana discloses: “Different types of data can be displayed to a user other than the information shown on the user interface 148, such as time durations of certain steps of the surgical procedure, a total time duration of the surgical procedure, information gathered by the equipment tracking module 232.” [CHANGING SHOWN DATA TYPES CAN BE CONSIDERED REARRANGING]) selection processes(Col. 7, Line 9, Nawana discloses: “allows selection of an invasive treatment for the patient from a plurality of available invasive treatments…”[SELECTION PROCESS]).
Claim 3
Nawana discloses:
The biological information storage system according to claim 1, wherein after the surgery is started, the computer is configured to execute processing of causing the monitor(Figure 15, Nawana discloses a display unit) to display the biological information(Figure 15, Nawana discloses biological information measured for a patient) in a designation process(Col. 70, Line 35, Nawana discloses: “Different types of data can be displayed to a user other than the information shown on the user interface 148, such as time durations of certain steps of the surgical procedure, a total time duration of the surgical procedure, information gathered by the equipment tracking module 232.” [INFORMATION GATHERED BY EQUIPMENT TRACKING MODULE CAN BE DISPLAYED WITH STEPS OF SURGICAL PROCEDURE]) designated from among the selection processes(Col. 7, Line 9, Nawana discloses: “allows selection of an invasive treatment for the patient from a plurality of available invasive treatments…”[SELECTION PROCESS]) that have ended in a progress of the surgery(Figure 2, Nawana discloses: “surgery”).
Claim 4
Nawana discloses:
The biological information storage system according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of selection processes(Col. 7, Line 9, Nawana discloses: “allows selection of an invasive treatment for the patient from a plurality of available invasive treatments…”[PLURALITY OF SELECTION PROCESSES]) include a predetermined course of the surgery(Col.76, Line 17, Nawana discloses: “treatment plan (e.g., a surgical treatment)” [SURGICAL TREATMENT PLAN CAN INCLUDE PREDETERMINED COURSE OF SURGERY]).
Claim 5
Nawana discloses:
The biological information storage system according to claim 1, wherein the monitor includes a touch panel, and touch panel is configured to input information(Para 0131, Nawana discloses touch screen, which allows for input of information) regarding the patient before the surgery is started into the computer regarding the patient(Col. 24, Line 30, Nawana discloses: “The variety of symptoms can be stored in the diagnosis database 310 for selection based on a user's input and for display to the user.”[INPUT OF PATIENT INFORMATION]) before the surgery is started(Col. 21, Line 55, Nawana discloses: “pre-op” [PRE-OP CAN BE CONSIDERED BEFORE SURGERY]).
Claim 6
Nawana discloses:
The biological information storage system according to claim 1, further comprising: a risk prediction unit configured to predict a risk of a complication that occurs after the surgery is ended based on the biological information(Figure 15, Nawana discloses biological information measured for a patient) stored in the storage unit(Figure 2, #300, Nawana discloses diagnosis and treatment database which can be a storage unit) and a trained model(Col. 60, Line 9, Nawana discloses: “…improving the system's predictive algorithms through continual learning [LEARNING PREDICTIVE ALGORITHM CAN BE TRAINED MODEL].”) stored in advance in the storage unit(Figure 2, #300, Nawana discloses diagnosis and treatment database which can be a storage unit).
Claim 7
Nawana discloses:
The biological information storage system according to claim 6, wherein the complication includes at least one of acute kidney injury, acute respiratory distress syndrome, cerebral infarction, non-occlusive mesenteric ischemia, postoperative hypotension, or infection(Col. 72, Line 6, Nawana discloses: “infection rates”).
Claim 8
Nawana discloses:
The biological information storage system according to claim 6, wherein after the surgery is started, the risk prediction unit is further configured to predict, based on the stored biological information(Figure 15, Nawana discloses biological information measured for a patient) of the patient, a future event risk(Col. 56, Line 45, Nawana discloses: “risk”) that occurs in a case where a scheduled process(Col. 40, Line 48, Nawana discloses: “scheduled surgery”[SCHEDULED SURGERY CAN BE A SCHEDULED PROCESS]) designated from among the selection processes(Col. 7, Line 9, Nawana discloses: “allows selection of an invasive treatment for the patient from a plurality of available invasive treatments…”[SELECTION PROCESS]) which are not still started in a progress of the surgery is performed(Col. 29, Line 39, Nawana discloses: “if there are clear markers that indicate that the condition will only worsen with time and that surgical intervention will be necessary, then a less invasive surgery can be done early before the condition worsens and results in more pain…” [DETERMINING RISK BEFORE SURGERY])
Claim 9
Nawana discloses:
The biological information storage system according to claim 6, wherein after the surgery is started, the risk prediction unit model is further configured to predict, based on the stored biological information(Figure 15, Nawana discloses biological information measured for a patient) of the patient, a future event risk(Col. 56, Line 45, Nawana discloses: “risk”) that occurs in a case where an unscheduled process different from the selection process(Col. 7, Line 9, Nawana discloses: “allows selection of an invasive treatment for the patient from a plurality of available invasive treatments…”[SELECTION PROCESS]) is performed(Col. 56, Line 42, Nawana discloses: “predict deviation from the model within a certain, predetermined degree of tolerance and trigger the alert before the surgery has gone too far off model [SELECTED PROCESS] or too close to a higher risk or incorrect area of the patient…”[ALERT CAN CREATE THE NEED FOR AN UNSCHEDULED PROCESS])
Claims 11 and 17
Claims 11 and 17 recite similar limitations as claim 1. See claim 1 analysis.
Claims 12 and 18
Claims 12 and 18 recites similar limitations as claim 2. See claim 2 analysis.
Claims 13 and 19
Claims 13 and 19 recites similar limitations as claim 3. See claim 3 analysis.
Claim 14
Claim 14 recites similar limitations as claim 4. See claim 4 analysis.
Claim 15
Claim 15 recites similar limitations as claim 5. See claim 5 analysis.
Claim 24
Nawana and Wolf do not explicitly disclose:
The biological information storage system according to The biological information storage system according to wherein the computer is configured to indicate a current time point in the plurality of the selection processes during the surgery on the monitor with a triangular mark.
Moore discloses:
The biological information storage system according to The biological information storage system according to wherein the computer is configured to indicate a current time point in the plurality of the selection processes during the surgery on the monitor with a triangular mark(Para 0207, Moore discloses: “which may be distinguished on the screen, such as by screen location, by an icon[ICON CAN BE TRIANGULAR MARK] that identifies them as such, or by another indicator of the distinction, such as color, font, underlining, italics, boldface type, highlighting, or the like.”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art to have modified the system for surgical planning of Nawana to add highlighting via triangular mark of pertinent data, as taught by Moore. One of ordinary skill would have been so motivated to provide a means to visually accentuate data that may impact outcome of the surgery, but in this case, for syndicating surgical data in a healthcare environment(Para 0060, Moore discloses: “There is a need for a new global business ecosystem, within which innovation by millions of people will be embraced, in order to meet the challenge. In order to stimulate the formation and rapid evolution of such a business ecosystem, there will have to be systematic development of general purpose software, systems and protocols specifically engineered to enable the flexible participation of billions in the healthcare industry.”).
Claims 25 and 26
Claims 25 and 26 recite similar limitations as claim 24. See claim 24 analysis.
Response to Arguments
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101
(Page 18) Regarding the assertion that amended claims 1, 11, and 17 include additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The highlighting step can be considered a mental process because it can be done using pen/paper and is carried out by generic computers/computer functions. The additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, other than the abstract idea per se, because the additional elements amount to no more limitations which amount to mere instructions to apply an exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) and add insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) to the abstract idea. Please refer to 101 analysis above.
(Page 18) Regarding the assertion that the claims add specific limitations other than what is well-understood, routine, and conventional activity.
Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The claims do not add specific limitations other than what is well-understood, routine, or conventional activity. Please refer to 101 analysis above.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Garbey(US10499831B2): Garbey discloses a system for monitoring medical procedures in operating environments through the use of various types of sensors. The disclosures of the invention are similar to this pending instant application. (Specifications, page 16)
Shelton(US11633237B2): Shelton discloses a computer system which determines information pertaining to a surgical procedure based on data received from a surgical device during a procedure. The disclosures of the invention are similar to this pending instant application. (Specifications, page 19)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHERYL GOPAL PATEL whose telephone number is (703)756-1990. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 5:30am to 2:30pm PST.
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, Kambiz Abdi can be reached at 571-272-6702. 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.
/S.G.P./
Examiner, Art Unit 3685
/SCOTT D GARTLAND/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3685