DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This is a Final Office Action in response to the arguments and/or amendments filed on 3 December 2025.
Claim(s) 7, 9, and 10 is/are canceled. Claim(s) 1-6, 8, and 11-16 is/are amended. Claim(s) 21-23 is/are new.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, and 11-23 is/are currently pending and have been examined.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, and 11-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1, which is representative of claims 12 and 23, recites: a medical care subject information management system
receive the biological information of a medical care subject measured
generate, in response to receiving the biological information or the measurement information, an input
output the generated input
the progress information including information regarding a current stage among a plurality of stages in a care plan for the medical care subject, each stage of the plurality of stages representing the progress in the medical care of the medical care subject; and
The preceding recitation of the claim has had strikethroughs applied to the additional elements beyond the abstract idea to more clearly demonstrate the limitations setting forth the abstract idea. The remaining limitations describe a concept of collecting, creating, providing, and refreshing information regarding a patient’s medical care. This concept is a mental process that a care provider should follow to monitor patient care similar to the “mental process that a neurologist should follow when testing a patient for nervous system malfunctions” given in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C) as an example of managing personal behavior in the methods of organizing human activity sub-grouping. As such, these limitation set forth a method of organizing human activity. Therefore the claims are determined to recite an abstract idea. Alternatively, this concept is analogous to the examples of “observation”, “evaluation”, and “judgement” given in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III). Further, this concept as claimed does not require a scale of data beyond the mental faculties of a human being and the operations of the abstract idea can be practically performed in the human mind. As such, these limitations are determined to recite a mental process. Therefore the claims are determined to recite an abstract idea.
MPEP 2106, reflecting the 2019 PEG, directs examiners at Step 2A Prong Two to consider whether the additional elements of the claims integrate a recited abstract idea into a practical application.
Claims 1 and 23 recite the additional element of a system comprising a display unit and a device with a processor. Claim 12 recites the additional element of a non-transitory computer-readable medium that causes a computer to perform operations. These additional elements are all recited at a very high level of generality and are interpreted as generic computing devices used to implement the abstract idea. Per MPEP 2106.05(f), implementing an abstract idea on or with a generic computing device does not integrate a recited abstract idea into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two, similar to how the recitation of the computer in the claim in Alice amounted to mere instructions to apply the abstract idea on a generic computer. As such, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea(s) into a practical application.
The claims further recite the additional element of a measurement device. This additional element include any device that measures biological information on a medical care subject. At this level of generality, this additional element does not impose a meaningful limit on the claim and amounts to necessary data gathering. As such, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The claims further recite the additional element of a input screen of a display unit. This additional element only generally links the abstract idea to a technological environment of a computing device. As such, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
There are no further additional elements. When considered as a combination, the additional elements only generally link the abstract idea and insignificant extra-solution activity to a technological environment of a computing device. As such, the combination of additional elements does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Thus, as the additional elements both individually and as a combination do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, the independent claims are determined to be directed to an abstract idea.
At Step 2B of the Mayo/Alice analysis, examiners are to consider whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
As previously noted, the claims recite additional elements which may be interpreted as generic computing devices used to implement the abstract idea. However, per MPEP 2106.05(f), implementing an abstract idea on a generic computing device does not add significantly more in Step 2B, similar to how the recitation of the computer in the claim in Alice amounted to mere instructions to apply the abstract idea on a generic computer. As such, this additional element does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
As previously noted, the claims recite an additional element of a measurement device. Bae et al. (US 2008/0103698 A1) demonstrates (See at least [0008]) demonstrates that measurement devices to measure biological information of a subject were conventional long before the priority date of the claimed invention. This further supports the determination that this additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity. As this additional element is considered insignificant extra-solution activity, this additional element does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
As previously noted, the claims recite an additional element of a input screen of a display unit. Morishima (US 2002/0081997 A1) demonstrates (See at least [0073]) input screens on display units were conventional long before the priority date of the claimed invention. As this additional element was conventional, it does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
There are no further additional elements. When considered as a combination, the additional elements only generally link the abstract idea and insignificant extra-solution activity to a technological environment of a computing device. As such, the combination of additional elements does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, when considered individually and as a combination, the additional elements of the independent claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Thus the independent claims are not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-6, 8, 11, 13-22 further describe the abstract idea and so these claims continue to recite an abstract idea. Dependent claims 2-6, 8, 11, 13-22 recite no further additional elements. The previously identified additional elements, individually and as a combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application for the same reasons articulated above. As such, dependent claims 2-6, 8,11, 13-22 also are directed to an abstract idea. The previously identified additional elements, individually and as a combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons articulated above. Because the dependent claims remain directed to an abstract idea without reciting significantly more, the dependent claims are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 6, 12, 14, 16, 17, 21, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki (US 2021/0125718 A1).
Regarding Claim 1 and 12: Suzuki discloses a medical care subject information management system that is communicably connected to a reading device (See at least Fig. 1) configured to read, from a measurement device configured to measure biological information on a medical care subject, the biological information measured by the measurement device, or that comprises the reading device, the medical care subject information management system comprising:
a display unit (See at least [0041]) and a device with a processor (See at least [0041]), wherein the processor is configured to:
receive the biological information of a medical care subject measured by the measurement device, or measurement information indicating that the biological information has been measured by the measurement device (The control part 401 of the body weight scale 101 operates to instruct the measurement part 407 to measure the body weight of the user (S602), and, upon completion of the measurement, transmit a measurement completion notice containing a measurement value and a measurement time, to the smartphone 102 through the communication part 405 and via the Bluetooth connection (S603). See at least [0046]);
generate, in response to receiving the biological information or the measurement information (See at least Fig. 13), an input screen for inputting progress information related to progress of the medical care of the medical care subject; output the generated input screen to the display unit (See at least Fig. 13);
the progress information including information regarding a current stage among a plurality of stages in a care plan for the medical care subject, each stage of the plurality of stages representing the progress in the medical care of the medical care subject; and wherein the input screen is configured to allow a user to update information regarding the current stage of the medical care subject (the user inputs his/her prediction as to whether the measurement value obtained by this measurement increases or decreases as compared with a previous measurement value. As shown in FIG. 7(a), the previous measurement value may be displayed for the prediction. See at least [0049] and Fig. 7(a). Examiner’s note: The broadest reasonable interpretation of “stages in a care plan” include a weight interval, and thus the broadest reasonable interpretation of progress information includes information regarding a current weight).
Regarding Claims 3 and 14: Suzuki discloses the above limitations. Suzuki further discloses wherein the processor is configured to cause the display unit to display, as the input screen, a screen on which an option can be selected from among a plurality of options related to the progress of the medical care, and wherein the processor is further configured to update the information regarding the current stage of the medical care subject based on the option selected by the user (an input screen for prompting the user to input an index indicative of a factor related to biological information of the user at the time of the measurement, and his/her prediction as to whether the measurement value measured by the measurement increases or decreases as compared with a previous measurement value, as shown in FIG. 7(a) (S611). See at least [0047]. Also: Further, as shown in FIG. 7(d), the measurement result may be displayed in the form of a table. In this embodiment, the measurement result includes measurement times, measurement values, tags, prediction inputs, and results of the prediction correct/incorrect determination. See at least [0065]).
Regarding Claim 5 and 16: Suzuki discloses the above limitations. Suzuki further discloses wherein in response to an input of the information related to the progress of the medical care of the medical care subject via the input screen, the processor is configured to cause the display unit to display, for a stage of the plurality of stages related to the progress of the medical care, a progress screen showing time information which is information related to a time required for the medical care of the medical care subject at this stage (Further, a measurement result is presented by displaying the measurement values in the form of a transition graph. The average to be graphically displayed may be moving average. As shown in FIG. 7(b), the graph as the measurement result based on the measurement data in the period from August 09 (Sun) to August 22 (Sat). See at least [0058] and Fig. 7b).
Regarding Claim 6 and 17: Suzuki discloses the above limitations. Suzuki further discloses wherein the processor is configured to cause the display unit to display, as the progress screen for the stage of the plurality of stages related to the progress of the medical care, a screen showing, as the time information, information on the number of times of rehabilitation performed on the medical care subject in the medical care at this stage ( Further, as shown in FIG. 7(b), each plot of the graph may be indicated together with the tag associated with the plotted measurement value in a visually recognizable manner. In a case where each measurement value is associated with a plurality of tags, the tags may be prioritized so as to present only a highest-priority one of the tags, or all the tags may be displayed in characters or different colors, in a visually recognizable manner. See at least [0060]. Examiner’s note: The broadest reasonable interpretation of “rehabilitation” includes any action performed to restore someone to health through training or therapy. Suzuki’s taking of weight measurements is an action performed to restore someone to health through training, and as such reads on the limitation).
Regarding Claims 21: Suzuki discloses the above limitations. Suzuki further discloses wherein the medical care comprises at least one of: rehabilitation performed in a bed-leaving program, activities of daily living that the medical care subject is able to perform, or a current degree of rest and a degree of assistance according to a rest standard (This makes it possible to give the user an opportunity to look back and reflect on living activities of each day, and motivate the user to improve his/her habitus. Further, by presenting correct/incorrect of the prediction in a measurement result, it becomes possible for the user to become aware of whether or not user's understanding about a relationship between his/her living activity and body weight is right, and, if wrong, to correct the understanding. See at least [0068]).
Regarding Claims 22: Suzuki discloses the above limitations. Suzuki further discloses wherein the medical care comprises at least one of: rehabilitation performed in a bed-leaving program, activities of daily living that the medical care subject is able to perform, or a current degree of rest and a degree of assistance according to a rest standard (This makes it possible to give the user an opportunity to look back and reflect on living activities of each day, and motivate the user to improve his/her habitus. Further, by presenting correct/incorrect of the prediction in a measurement result, it becomes possible for the user to become aware of whether or not user's understanding about a relationship between his/her living activity and body weight is right, and, if wrong, to correct the understanding. See at least [0068]). The further limitation wherein the user is a physical therapist or a nurse describes an element outside the scope of the computer-readable medium claim.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 4, 15, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (US 2021/0125718 A1).
Regarding Claims 4 and 15: Suzuki discloses the above limitations. Additionally, Suzuki discloses wherein the processor is configured to cause the display unit to display, a screen including data indicating the plurality of stages of the care plan and information indicating the current stage among the plurality of stages in which the medical care subject is currently positioned (With regard to the prediction, the user inputs his/her prediction as to whether the measurement value obtained by this measurement increases or decreases as compared with a previous measurement value. As shown in FIG. 7(a), the previous measurement value may be displayed for the prediction. See at least [0049]). Suzuki does not expressly disclose where the input screen includes a progress image. However, Suzuki separately teaches a progress image (Further, a measurement result is presented by displaying the measurement values in the form of a transition graph. The average to be graphically displayed may be moving average. As shown in FIG. 7(b), the graph as the measurement result based on the measurement data in the period from August 09 (Sun) to August 22 (Sat). See at least [0058] and Fig. 7b).
Suzuki provides a measurement and data collection system that provides a user with prior measurement information in conjunction with an input screen, upon which the claimed invention’s use of a progress image in conjunction with an input screen can be seen as an advantage. However, Suzuki separately demonstrates that the prior art already knew of progress screens. One of ordinary skill in the art could have trivially substituted Suzuki’s progress image into the input screen of Suzuki. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such an application of Suzuki would have resulted in an improved system which would provide users with better information to better inform the user prior to their data input. As such, the substitution of Suzuki, and the claimed invention, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of the disclosures of Suzuki.
Regarding Claims 18: Suzuki discloses the above limitations. Additionally, Suzuki discloses, causing the display unit to display an input screen for inputting information related to progress of the medical care of the medical care subject, the input screen including data indicating a current progress status of the medical care of the medical care subject (With regard to the prediction, the user inputs his/her prediction as to whether the measurement value obtained by this measurement increases or decreases as compared with a previous measurement value. As shown in FIG. 7(a), the previous measurement value may be displayed for the prediction. See at least [0049]). Suzuki does not expressly disclose where the input screen includes a progress image. However, Suzuki separately teaches a progress image (Further, a measurement result is presented by displaying the measurement values in the form of a transition graph. The average to be graphically displayed may be moving average. As shown in FIG. 7(b), the graph as the measurement result based on the measurement data in the period from August 09 (Sun) to August 22 (Sat). See at least [0058] and Fig. 7b).
Suzuki provides a measurement and data collection system that provides a user with prior measurement information in conjunction with an input screen, upon which the claimed invention’s use of a progress image in conjunction with an input screen can be seen as an advantage. However, Suzuki separately demonstrates that the prior art already knew of progress screens. One of ordinary skill in the art could have trivially substituted Suzuki’s progress image into the input screen of Suzuki. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such an application of Suzuki would have resulted in an improved system which would provide users with better information to better inform the user prior to their data input. As such, the substitution of Suzuki, and the claimed invention, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of the disclosures of Suzuki.
Claim(s) 2, 8, 9, 13, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (US 2021/0125718 A1) in view of Hanlon et al. (US 2012/0072233 A1).
Regarding Claim 2 and 13: Suzuki discloses the above limitations. Suzuki further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to update the information regarding the current stage of the medical care based on information input by the user (the user inputs his/her prediction as to whether the measurement value obtained by this measurement increases or decreases as compared with a previous measurement value. As shown in FIG. 7(a), the previous measurement value may be displayed for the prediction. See at least [0049] and Fig. 7(a)).
Suzuki does not appear to disclose wherein the processor unit is configured to cause the display unit to display, as the input screen, a screen for inputting quantitative information related to the progress of the medical care of the medical care subject. However, Hanlon teaches as the input screen, a screen for inputting quantitative information related to the progress of the medical care of the medical care subject (Additionally, this page can include an entry field for the user to regularly input his or her weight. See at least [0234] and Fig. 10).
Suzuki provides a measurement and data collection system where a user estimates their weight change, which differs from the claimed invention by the substitution of Suzuki’s increase/decrease buttons for a quantitative input. However, Hanlon demonstrates that the prior art already knew of receiving quantitative weight input. One of ordinary skill in the art could have trivially substituted Hanlon’s input into the system of Suzuki. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such a substitution would have predictably resulted in a system where users would estimate they weights with number values. As such, the substitution of Hanlon, and the claimed invention, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of the disclosures of Suzuki and the teachings of Hanlon.
Regarding Claim 8: Suzuki makes obvious the above limitations. Suzuki does not appear to disclose a screen further including a goal image which is an image indicating a goal corresponding to a progress status of the medical care of the medical care subject. However, Hanlon teaches a screen further including a goal image which is an image indicating a goal corresponding to a progress status of the medical care of the medical care subject (a plurality of user data pertaining to a weight goal can be received from one or more input devices. generating, using one or more processors, one or more charts or graphs including the received user data pertaining to the weight goal. The one or more generated charts or graphs can be output onto one or more output devices. The one or more generated charts or graphs can track progress of a user toward the weight goal. See at least [0007]).
Suzuki suggests a measurement and data collection system that provides a user with prior measurement information in conjunction with an input screen, upon which the claimed invention’s display of goal information in conjunction with an input screen can be seen as an advantage. However, Hanlon demonstrates that the prior art already knew of providing goal information in progress screens. One of ordinary skill in the art could have trivially substituted Hanlon’s goal information into the input screen of Suzuki. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such an application of Hanlon would have resulted in an improved system which would better motivate users to engage with the system. As such, the substitution of Hanlon, and the claimed invention, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of the disclosures of Suzuki and the teachings of Hanlon.
Regarding Claim 19: Suzuki makes obvious the above limitations. Suzuki does not appear to disclose a screen further including a goal image which is an image indicating a goal corresponding to a progress status of the medical care of the medical care subject or a screen including, as the goal image, an image indicating at least one of a most recent achievement goal according to the progress of the medical care of the medical care subject, a final achievement goal, and an achievement goal at each stage related to the progress of the medical care. However, Hanlon teaches a screen further including a goal image which is an image indicating a goal corresponding to a progress status of the medical care of the medical care subject and a screen including, as the goal image, an image indicating at least one of a most recent achievement goal according to the progress of the medical care of the medical care subject, a final achievement goal, and an achievement goal at each stage related to the progress of the medical care (a plurality of user data pertaining to a weight goal can be received from one or more input devices. generating, using one or more processors, one or more charts or graphs including the received user data pertaining to the weight goal. The one or more generated charts or graphs can be output onto one or more output devices. The one or more generated charts or graphs can track progress of a user toward the weight goal. See at least [0007]).
Suzuki suggests a measurement and data collection system that provides a user with prior measurement information in conjunction with an input screen, upon which the claimed invention’s display of goal information in conjunction with an input screen can be seen as an advantage. However, Hanlon demonstrates that the prior art already knew of providing goal information in progress screens. One of ordinary skill in the art could have trivially substituted Hanlon’s goal information into the input screen of Suzuki. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such an application of Hanlon would have resulted in an improved system which would better motivate users to engage with the system. As such, the substitution of Hanlon, and the claimed invention, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of the disclosures of Suzuki and the teachings of Hanlon.
Claim(s) 11, 20, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (US 2021/0125718 A1) in view of Liberty (US 2014/0236612 A1).
Regarding Claim 20: Suzuki makes obvious the above limitations. As previously noted, Suzuki discloses causing the display unit to display the input screen for inputting the information related to the progress of the medical care of the medical care subject (In response to receiving a measurement completion notice containing a measurement value transmitted from the body weight scale 101, the server 103 transmits, to the smartphone 102, a measurement completion notice for instructing the smartphone 102 to display the tag input screen (S640). Then, as with the second embodiment, in response to receiving the measurement completion notice, the smartphone 102 displays a tag selection and prediction input screen (S611), and accepts a tag selection and a prediction input (S612). See at least [0083]). Suzuki does not appear to disclose where the input screen includes display contents according to an occupation of a user who has logged in the medical care subject information management system; and wherein when a user of a first occupation performs an input operation as an input person on the input screen for inputting the information related to the progress of the medical care of the medical care subject, determining to display contents on the input screen for a user of a second occupation based on an input result of the user of the first occupation, and causing the display unit to display the input screen including the determined display contents for the user of the second occupation
Liberty teaches that the input screen includes display contents according to an occupation of a user who has logged in the medical care subject information management system; and wherein when a user of a first occupation performs an input operation as an input person on the input screen for inputting the information related to the progress of the medical care of the medical care subject, determining to display contents on the input screen for a user of a second occupation based on an input result of the user of the first occupation, and causing the display unit to display the input screen including the determined display contents for the user of the second occupation (FIG. 2 illustrates a picture of an activated patient with a health care provider 205. The patient may be asked by their doctor to monitor their condition in some fashion, including monitoring glucose, activity level, weight, medication compliance, or other items. The user may use a mobile device such as a cellular phone, tablet, wearable device or other mobile computing system to report their monitoring/compliance data 201. Alternatively, the user may use a traditional desktop, laptop or other computing device to enter their monitoring data. The data may be entered into a software application such as a health care service. The monitoring data may be stored on the user's device and/or sent to the provider. See at least [0039]. Also: The health care provider may access the user's monitoring/compliance data upon providing proper authentication credentials. The health care provider's view 204 may be specific to each provider, and may show some or all of the user's compliance data (in application view 203). For example, a doctor may have access to some or all of the user's self-reported data, while a receptionist or data entry clerk may have access to limited portions thereof. Each health care provider's credentials indicate to the system who the provider is and what level of access they have to the user's self-reported data. Using the multi-access portal, the health care provider may contact the user to remind them of goals, to provide motivation or to let them know they may be placing themselves in danger by not taking their medication. The health care provider may also provide tips on how to properly comply with a given prescription or recommendation. See at least [0040]).
Suzuki suggests a measurement and data collection system, upon which the claimed invention’s display of different input screens to different users can be seen as an improvement. However, Liberty demonstrates that the prior art already knew of a health data collection system that provided different input screens to different users. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily applied the techniques of Liberty to the system of Suzuki. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such an application of Liberty would have resulted in an improved system which would provide and receive relevant data to each type of user. As such, the application of Liberty, and the claimed invention, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of the disclosures of Suzuki and the teachings of Liberty.
Regarding Claim 23: Suzuki discloses a medical care subject information management system that is communicably connected to a reading device (See at least Fig. 1) configured to read, from a measurement device configured to measure biological information on a medical care subject, the biological information measured by the measurement device, or that comprises the reading device, the medical care subject information management system comprising:
a display unit (See at least [0041]) and a device with a processor (See at least [0041]), wherein the processor is configured to:
generate an input screen for inputting progress information related to progress of the medical care of the medical care subject; output the generated input screen to the display unit (See at least Fig. 13);
wherein the progress information including information regarding a current stage among a plurality of stages in a care plan for the medical care subject, each stage of the plurality of stages representing progress in the medical care of the medical subject; and wherein the input screen is configured to allow a user to update information regarding the current stage of the medical care subject (the user inputs his/her prediction as to whether the measurement value obtained by this measurement increases or decreases as compared with a previous measurement value. As shown in FIG. 7(a), the previous measurement value may be displayed for the prediction. See at least [0049] and Fig. 7(a). Examiner’s note: The broadest reasonable interpretation of “stages in a care plan” include a weight interval, and thus the broadest reasonable interpretation of progress information includes information regarding a current weight).
Suzuki does not expressly disclose where the input screen includes display contents according to an occupation of a user who has logged in the medical care subject information management system.
Liberty teaches that a input screen including display contents according to an occupation of a user who has logged in the medical care subject information management system (FIG. 2 illustrates a picture of an activated patient with a health care provider 205. The patient may be asked by their doctor to monitor their condition in some fashion, including monitoring glucose, activity level, weight, medication compliance, or other items. The user may use a mobile device such as a cellular phone, tablet, wearable device or other mobile computing system to report their monitoring/compliance data 201. Alternatively, the user may use a traditional desktop, laptop or other computing device to enter their monitoring data. The data may be entered into a software application such as a health care service. The monitoring data may be stored on the user's device and/or sent to the provider. See at least [0039]. Also: The health care provider may access the user's monitoring/compliance data upon providing proper authentication credentials. The health care provider's view 204 may be specific to each provider, and may show some or all of the user's compliance data (in application view 203). For example, a doctor may have access to some or all of the user's self-reported data, while a receptionist or data entry clerk may have access to limited portions thereof. Each health care provider's credentials indicate to the system who the provider is and what level of access they have to the user's self-reported data. Using the multi-access portal, the health care provider may contact the user to remind them of goals, to provide motivation or to let them know they may be placing themselves in danger by not taking their medication. The health care provider may also provide tips on how to properly comply with a given prescription or recommendation. See at least [0040]).
Suzuki discloses a measurement and data collection system, upon which the claimed invention’s display of different input screens to different users can be seen as an improvement. However, Liberty demonstrates that the prior art already knew of a health data collection system that provided different input screens to different users. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily applied the techniques of Liberty to the system of Suzuki. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such an application of Liberty would have resulted in an improved system which would provide and receive relevant data to each type of user. As such, the application of Liberty, and the claimed invention, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in view of the disclosures of Suzuki and the teachings of Liberty.
Regarding Claim 11: Suzuki and Liberty makes obvious the above limitations. Additionally, Liberty teaches wherein when a user of a first occupation performs an input operation as an input person on the input screen for inputting the information related to the progress of the medical care of the medical care subject, the processor is configured to determine display contents on the input screen for a user of a second occupation based on an input result of the user of the first occupation, and to cause the display unit to display the input screen including the determined display contents for the user of the second occupation (FIG. 2 illustrates a picture of an activated patient with a health care provider 205. The patient may be asked by their doctor to monitor their condition in some fashion, including monitoring glucose, activity level, weight, medication compliance, or other items. The user may use a mobile device such as a cellular phone, tablet, wearable device or other mobile computing system to report their monitoring/compliance data 201. Alternatively, the user may use a traditional desktop, laptop or other computing device to enter their monitoring data. The data may be entered into a software application such as a health care service. The monitoring data may be stored on the user's device and/or sent to the provider. See at least [0039]. Also: The health care provider may access the user's monitoring/compliance data upon providing proper authentication credentials. The health care provider's view 204 may be specific to each provider, and may show some or all of the user's compliance data (in application view 203). For example, a doctor may have access to some or all of the user's self-reported data, while a receptionist or data entry clerk may have access to limited portions thereof. Each health care provider's credentials indicate to the system who the provider is and what level of access they have to the user's self-reported data. Using the multi-access portal, the health care provider may contact the user to remind them of goals, to provide motivation or to let them know they may be placing themselves in danger by not taking their medication. The health care provider may also provide tips on how to properly comply with a given prescription or recommendation. See at least [0040]). The motivation to combine Suzuki and Liberty is the same as explained under claim 10 above, and is incorporated herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Argument Regarding 112(f) interpretation of claims 1 and 7: Claim 1 has been amended as set forth above and no longer recite a “control unit” and claim 7 has been canceled.
Examiner’s Response: Applicant's amendments filed 3 December 2025 have been fully considered. Examiner acknowledges that the claims are no longer interpreted under 112(f).
Applicant’s Argument Regarding 112(a) Rejection of claims 1 and 7: Claim 1 has been amended as set forth above and no longer recite a “control unit” and claim 7 has been canceled.
Examiner’s Response: Applicant's amendments filed 3 December 2025 have been fully considered. The rejection under 112(a) is withdrawn.
Applicant’s Argument Regarding 102 Rejections of claims 1, 3, 5, 6, 12, 14, 16, and 17: Suzuki does not disclose or suggest, output (or outputting) the generated input screen to the display unit; the progress information including information regarding a current stage among a plurality of stages in a care plan for the medical care subject, each stage of the plurality of stages representing the progress in the medical care of the medical care subject as recited in claims 1 and 12 as amended. On the contrary, as set forth, in Suzuki the information entered is either a tag representing the situation at the time of the measurement or a prediction of weight change, rather than a stage in which the subject currently resides within a plurality of stages of a multi-step treatment plan as recited.
Examiner’s Response: Applicant's arguments filed 3 December 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner notes that the claim does not require the input be “a stage in which the subject currently resides within a plurality of stages of a multi-step treatment plan as recited” but rather encompasses any information regarding the current stage of the medical care subject. This limitation does not require the specification of a stage. Due to the breadth of these limitations, Suzuki discloses techniques which fall within the scope of the claims.
Additional Considerations
The prior art made of record and not relied upon that is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure can be found in the PTO-892 of the prior office action dated 5 September 2025.
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 Bion A Shelden whose telephone number is (571)270-0515. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 12pm-10pm EST.
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.
/Bion A Shelden/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3685 2026-03-20