/9DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This communication is in response to applicant’s response filed on 06/09/2026.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 12, 14 and 16 have been amended. Claims 2, 5, 10 and 13 have been cancelled. Claims 17-19 are newly added. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-9, 11, 12 and 14-19 are now pending and examined herein.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a data retrieving module,” “a data analyzing module,” “a data visualization module,” in claims 1 and 9, and “a mission scheduling module,” and “a schedule control unit” in claims 6 and 14. “a data retrieving module,” and “a mission scheduling module,” as in claim 19
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-9, 11, 12 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim limitations “a data retrieving module,” “a data analyzing module,” “a data visualization module,” in claims 1 and 9, and “a mission scheduling module,” and “a schedule control unit” in claims 6 and 14. “a data retrieving module,” and “a mission scheduling module,” as in claim 19 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-9, 11, 12 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim limitations “a data retrieving module,” “a data analyzing module,” “a data visualization module,” in claims 1 and 9, and “a mission scheduling module,” and “a schedule control unit” in claims 6 and 14. “a data retrieving module,” and “a mission scheduling module,” as in claim 19 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The claims invoke 35 U.S.C. §112(f) (or pre-AIA §112, sixth paragraph) because they recite a nonce phrases for performing a specified function without reciting sufficient structure for performing that function. The written description does not clearly link or associate any specific structure, material, or algorithm to these claimed functions. In particular, the specification does not describe, in sufficient detail, the algorithms or specific steps performed by the modules to achieve the claimed functions, nor does it provide adequate disclosure of corresponding hardware or software structure.
As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to reasonably ascertain the full scope of the claimed invention or make and use the invention without undue experimentation. Therefore, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112(a) for lack of written description and enablement.
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, 3, 4, 6-9, 11, 12 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1 Analysis:
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-9, 11, 12 and 14-19 are directed to a method, apparatus, or system for managing a medical quality indicator and therefore falls into one of the four statutory categories.
(Step 1: Yes, the claim falls into one of the four statutory categories).
Step 2A analysis: Prong one:
The independent Claims 1 and 9, taking Claim 1 as example, recite the following limitations: providing a target medical information database, a data retrieving module, a data analyzing module and a data visualization module, wherein the data retrieving module is connected to the target medical information database, the data analyzing module is connected to the target medical information database, and the data visualization module is connected to the data analyzing module; using the data retrieving module to obtain required data from one or more original medical information database in response to (i) a viewing request of the medical quality indicator, or (ii) an update frequency of the medical quality indicator defined in a data update frequency control table, wherein, after preprocessing according to an operational definition of the medical quality indicator, the required data is stored in the target medical information database as a plurality of structured data, each structured data including patient data of a patient, clinic index data of the patient, and indicator factor data of the medical quality indicator, wherein the data retrieving module converts heterogeneous data from the one or more primary databases into a unified dataset structure of patient-clinic index-indicator factor,; using the data retrieving module to determine selectively retrieves, based on a hot data interval of the medical quality indicator defined in the data update frequency control table, the required data present in the hot data interval, wherein the hot data interval is defined based on a clinical lifecycle characteristic of the medical quality indicator specifying a duration during which medical records are subject to modification using the data analyzing module to perform data confirmation and data exclusion on the plurality of structured data according to the operational definition, and to perform computation on the plurality of structured data according to the viewing request to obtain a set of statistical data; and using the data visualization module to display the set of statistical data through a user interface; wherein the operational definition specifies one or more data items required for evaluating the medical quality indicator, and the data retrieving module obtains the required data from one or more corresponding original medical information databases according to the data items; wherein a cold data interval is further defined in the data update frequency control table, and the method further comprises: determining whether both data of the required data present in the hot data interval and data of the required data present in the cold data interval are stored as structured data in the target medical information database to reduce search resource consumption on the one or more primary databases; if not, obtaining the missing data and storing it as structured data in the target medical information database; and if yes, obtaining only the data of the required data present in the hot data interval and storing it as structured data in the target medical information database, or updating the plurality of structured data stored in the target medical information database accordingly.
Independent claim 19 recites: load a mission description list recording an upstream mission name for each of the plurality of medical quality indicators;(b) identify a downstream medical quality indicator that requires a subset of data from an upstream medical quality indicator defined by the upstream mission name; and(c) direct the data retrieving module to extract the subset of data directly from an existing upstream dataset stored in the target database without re-querying one or more primary databases; whereby search resource consumption on the one or more primary databases is reduced by reusing the existing upstream dataset for multiple downstream indicators.
Claims 1 and 9 describes collecting data from multiple medical information databases (data retrieving module), converting heterogeneous data into a unified structure, storing and updating structured data based on intervals (hot/cold data), analyzing the data to confirm, exclude, and compute statistical results (data analyzing module), displaying results through a user interface (data visualization module) and managing data retrievals and updates to optimize performance. Accordingly, the claims recite “certain methods of organizing human activity,” which falls within the judicial exception of an abstract idea. (Step 2A – Prong one: Yes, the claim is abstract).
Claims 19 describes Loading a list of tasks (mission description list), Identifying dependencies (downstream indicators requiring upstream data), directing the system to reuse existing data rather than re-querying database. This is a form of managing and optimizing workflow or information processing, which is a “certain methods of organizing human activity,” which falls within the judicial exception of an abstract idea. (Step 2A – Prong one: Yes, the claim is abstract).
Step 2A Analysis: Prong two:
Claims recite additional elements beyond the abstract idea. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claims recite: a mission scheduling module, a target database, a data retrieving module, a data analyzing module, a data visualization module, and a user interface. These additional elements are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing generic computer functions), such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exceptions using a generic computer component.
The Applicants specification indicates “a target database” “stores medical data” (0021)
The Applicants specification indicates “a data retrieving module” is “connected to the target database” (0021) and “obtains required data from one or more primary database for medical data according to an operational definition of the medical quality indicator, and preprocesses the required data and stores it as a plurality pieces of structured data of the medical quality indicator in the target database” (0021)
The Applicants specification indicates “a data analyzing module” is “connected to the target database” (0021) and “performs a data confirmation and data exclusion with respect to the plurality pieces of structured data according to the operational definition, and performs a computation to the plurality pieces of structured data according to the viewing request to obtain a set of statistical data.”
The Applicants specification indicates a data visualization module “ is connected to the target database” (0021) and “used for displaying the set of statistical data through a user interface” (0023)
The Applicants specification indicates a user interface is something that data can be displayed with (0013)
The Applicants specification indicates a mission scheduling module “is connected to the data retrieving module” (0038) and “arranges the data retrieving module 120 to retrieve or update data for multiple medical quality indicator performs.” (0053)
The Applicants specification indicates a schedule control unit is a part of the mission scheduling module and triggers the data retrieving module (0053)
Accordingly, these additional elements when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore Claims 1, 6, 9, and 14 are directed to an abstract idea without practical application. (Step 2A – Prong two: No, the additional elements are not integrated into a practical application).
Step 2B
The present claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to more than the abstract idea because the additional elements or combination of elements: (1) do not improve the functioning of a computer or any other technology or technical field, and (2) merely use the additional elements for implementing the abstract idea.
A. Improvements to the Functioning of a Computer or To Any Other Technology or Technical
Field. MPEP 2106.05(a)
The additional elements of Claims 1, 6, 9, and 14 do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and only use those elements for performing the abstract idea and not more than the judicial exception itself. None of the claims recite an “inventive concept” because the additional elements fail to improve the functioning of a computer or any other technology or technical field (See MPEP 2106.05(a)).
The Applicants specification indicates “a target database” “stores medical data” (0021)
The Applicants specification indicates “a data retrieving module” is “connected to the target database” (0021) and “obtains required data from one or more primary database for medical data according to an operational definition of the medical quality indicator, and preprocesses the required data and stores it as a plurality pieces of structured data of the medical quality indicator in the target database” (0021)
The Applicants specification indicates “a data analyzing module” is “connected to the target database” (0021) and “performs a data confirmation and data exclusion with respect to the plurality pieces of structured data according to the operational definition, and performs a computation to the plurality pieces of structured data according to the viewing request to obtain a set of statistical data.”
The Applicants specification indicates a data visualization module “ is connected to the target database” (0021) and “used for displaying the set of statistical data through a user interface” (0023)
The Applicants specification indicates a user interface is something that data can be displayed with (0013)
The Applicants specification indicates a mission scheduling module “is connected to the data retrieving module” (0038) and “arranges the data retrieving module 120 to retrieve or update data for multiple medical quality indicator performs.” (0053)
The Applicants specification indicates a schedule control unit is a part of the mission scheduling module and triggers the data retrieving module (0053)
The claimed additional elements are used in a conventional manner to receive data, retrieve data, process data, store data, update data, etc., and the specification does not disclose any specific technical improvement in how these functions are performed.
The use of a computer or processor to merely automate or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself. There is no indication that the additional limitations alone or in combination improves the functioning of a computer or any other technology, improves another technology or technical field, or effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing.
There is no indication in the claims or specification that the invention improves the performance, efficiency, security, or functionality of a computer system beyond using generic components to perform a judicial exception. The claims do not improve how computers store, receive, analyze, update, display or process data, nor do they enhance any other technical field.
Thus, because the claims fail to recite an improvement to the functioning of a computer or any other technology or technical field, they do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
B. Instructions to Implement the Judicial Exception. MPEP 2106.05(f)
The additional elements of Claims 1, 6, 9, and 14 do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and only use those elements for performing the abstract idea and mere instructions to perform the abstract idea using a computer is not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions using one or more processors, a database, data modules, user interfaces, etc., are equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer.
Similarly, the limitations of using a one or more processing elements, an administrator portal, a mobile application, a server, etc., (Claims 1-16) are recited at a high level of generality and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). (Step 2B: No, the claims do not provide significantly more).
In conclusion, the claims are directed to the abstract idea for managing a medical quality indicator and to store, receive, analyze, update, display or process data etc.. The claims do not provide an inventive concept, because the claims do not recite additional elements or a combination of elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception of the claims. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology or contains instructions to implement the judicial exception, and the collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation. Therefore, whether taken individually or as an ordered combination, the claims are nonetheless rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to nonstatutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 11, 12, 14 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 20040078236 (“Stoodley”) in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20230054862 (“Ramesh”).
With respect to Claims 1 and 9,
Stoodley teaches A system for managing a medical quality indicator, comprising: a target database for medical data; (“A healthcare data analysis system comprising: a database having patient data…”) (Stoodley [Claim 36]) Stoodley teaches A method for managing a medical quality indicator, comprising: providing a target medical information database, (“A method implemented in a computer system for organizing healthcare patient data in a database…”) (Stoodley [Claim 13])
a data retrieving module connected to the target database, (“…and a means for retrieving the particular patient data…”) (Stoodley [0023]) (Examiner note: Means for retrieving patient data is interpreted as a data retrieving module connected to the target database)
wherein, in response to a request for viewing the medical quality indicator or based on an update frequency of the medical quality indicator defined in a data update frequency control table, the data retrieving module is configured to obtain required data from one or more primary database for medical data according to an operational definition of the medical quality indicator, (The type of requested output of information from the search results is selected by choosing from a series of "search for" options 190, such as "patients," "demographics," "complications," "details," "outcomes," "images," and "TCDs." When the user station receives a search request from a user, the database searches each table for data matching the criteria. The identifier for the matched data is recognized and the "search for" data with the same identifier is retrieved…”) (Stoodley [0153]) and (“The present database stores data that may be retrieved to perform multiple tasks by the system. “) (Stoodley [0019])
wherein the data retrieving module converts heterogeneous data from the one or more primary databases into a unified dataset structure of patient-clinic index-indicator factor, preprocesses the required data, and stores the preprocessed data as a plurality of structured data in the target database, each structured data including patient data of a patient, clinical index data of the patient, and indicator factor data of the medical quality indicator; (“Transformation of raw clinical data into comprehensive information provides invaluable knowledge to perform a wide variety of tasks.”) (Stoodley [0007]) (Examiner note: Transforming raw data into comprehensive information is interpreted as preprocessing required data) and (“The storage unit stores the patient data…”) (Stoodley [0157]) and (“A patient's encounters from the first presentation for a particular healthcare issue until the absolute completion of treatment and follow-up may be tracked as a "patient management cycle". Some encounter types include referral interview, outpatient consultation, outpatient procedure, inpatient consultation, inpatient procedure, hospital admission, emergency admission, diagnostic study, etc”) (Stoodley [0069]) (Examiner note: Tracking encounter types of a patient is interpreted as storing clinical index data, Applicant specification states “…the clinical index data includes outpatient, emergency department, inpatient, or a combination thereof.” (0008)) and (“…lengths of intensive care, hospital stay and outcome score.”) (Stoodley [0148]) (Examiner note: Length of stay is interpreted as indicator factor data)
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Ramesh
Ramesh teaches and the data retrieving module, based on a hot data interval of the medical quality indicator defined in the data update frequency control table, selectively retrieves the required data present in the hot data interval, wherein the hot data interval is defined based on a clinical lifecycle characteristic of the medical quality indicator specifying a duration during which medical records are subject to modification (“As described in more detail, herein, embodiments can further optimize execution of workloads in mobile computing system by writing data associated with the workloads to the memory devices based on characteristics of that data such as access frequencies of data involved in execution of the workloads. Access frequency of the data can refer to a quantity of accesses (e.g., reads, writes, etc.) involving the data in execution of the workloads. Access frequency of the data can be referred to herein in terms of “hot data” and “cold data.” “Cold data,” as used herein, means that a particular memory object has not been accessed for a long duration relative to other memory objects read from a memory device. “Hot data,” as used herein, means that a particular memory object has been accessed frequently relative to other memory objects read from a memory device.”) (Ramesh [0026]) and (“For example, if certain data involved in execution of a workload is determined to be “hot,” such data can be written to a memory device that includes a media type that is well suited for making data quickly accessible.”) (Ramesh [0027])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include data retrieving based on hot and cold data, as taught by Ramesh with the motivation to “improve resource usage and/or data precision by allowing for the dynamic range of the data to varied based on the application and/or computation for which the data will be used” (Ramesh [0085]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add ability to retrieve data based on hot and cold data.
Stoodley teaches a data analyzing module connected to the target database, configured to performs data confirmation and data exclusion on the plurality of structured data according to the operational definition, (“The present invention relates generally to the storage, retrieval and analysis of healthcare information using a computer, and more particularly to computer-based systems for analyzing a comprehensive collection of healthcare patient data”) (Stoodley [0003]) (Examiner note: Computer-based systems for analyzing data is interpreted as a data analyzing module) and (“Alternatively, the central server may receive the personal data and remove this data from the data set prior to storing the data. In other cases, the central server may store the personal data but restrict access to the sensitive data, such as by removing the personal data from the selected data prior to sending the data to a user station.”) (Stoodley [0164]) (Examiner note: Removing personal data is interpreted as performing data exclusion according to operational definition.) and (“…billing including data collection and validation…) (Stoodley [0019]) (Examiner note: Data validation is interpreted as data confirmation)
and to performs computation on the plurality of structured data according to the viewing request to obtain a set of statistical data; (“The database performs the requested computations, such as itemizing total numbers of matching "search for" data. The output may be posted as graphic representations, such as pie charts, bar charts, graphs, etc. of the results or in the form of lists or spreadsheet tables.”) (Stoodley [0154])
a data visualization module connected to the data analyzing module and configured to display the set of statistical data through a user interface; (“…a display that is in communication with the processor is provided.”) (Stoodley [0023]) (Examiner note: A display is interpreted as a data visualization module) and (“In particular applications, the patient data that are extracted from a query search is analyzed by the database and the statistical results are optionally displayed, such as a graph form, e.g. pie chart, bar chart, etc.”) (Stoodley [0133])
Stoodley does not teach the limitations taught by Ramesh. Ramesh teaches wherein the operational definition specifies one or more data items required for evaluating the medical quality indicator, and the data retrieving module obtains the required data from one or more corresponding primary databases according to the data items; (“As described in more detail, herein, embodiments can further optimize execution of workloads in mobile computing system by writing data associated with the workloads to the memory devices based on characteristics of that data such as access frequencies of data involved in execution of the workloads. Access frequency of the data can refer to a quantity of accesses (e.g., reads, writes, etc.) involving the data in execution of the workloads. Access frequency of the data can be referred to herein in terms of “hot data” and “cold data.” “Cold data,” as used herein, means that a particular memory object has not been accessed for a long duration relative to other memory objects read from a memory device. “Hot data,” as used herein, means that a particular memory object has been accessed frequently relative to other memory objects read from a memory device.”) (Ramesh [0026]) (Examiner note: Access frequency is interpreted as a defined data item for evaluating the medical quality indicator. Making data more accessible based on characteristics such as hot or cold is interpreted as obtaining required data according to data items for retrieving data)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include definitions for evaluating the medical quality indicator, as taught by Ramesh with the motivation to “improve resource usage and/or data precision by allowing for the dynamic range of the data to varied based on the application and/or computation for which the data will be used” (Ramesh [0085]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include definitions for evaluating the medical quality indicator.
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Ramesh
Ramesh teaches wherein a cold data interval is further defined in the data update frequency control table, (“Access frequency of the data can refer to a quantity of accesses (e.g., reads, writes, etc.) involving the data in execution of the workloads. Access frequency of the data can be referred to herein in terms of “hot data” and “cold data.” “Cold data,” as used herein, means that a particular memory object has not been accessed for a long duration relative to other memory objects read from a memory device. “Hot data,” as used herein, means that a particular memory object has been accessed frequently relative to other memory objects read from a memory device.”) (Ramesh [0026]) (Examiner note: Cold data being data not accessing data for a long duration relative to other memory objects is interpreted as a cold data interval and A quantity of accesses is interpreted as the data update frequency control table)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a cold data interval in the update frequency control table, as taught by Ramesh with the motivation to “improve resource usage and/or data precision by allowing for the dynamic range of the data to varied based on the application and/or computation for which the data will be used” (Ramesh [0085]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a cold data interval in the update frequency control table.
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Ramesh
Ramesh teaches the data retrieving module first determines whether both data of the required data present in the hot data interval and data of the required data present in the cold data interval are stored as structured data in the target database, to reduce search resource consumption on the one or more primary databases, and if not, obtains the missing data and stores it as structured data in the target database, and if yes, obtains only the data of the required data present in the hot data interval and stores it as structured data in the target database, or updates the plurality of structured data stored in the target database accordingly. (“In some embodiments, data that is classified as hot data can be written to the SLC portion 335 while data that is classified as cold data can be written to the TLC portion 337, or vice versa, as part of optimizing performance of the memory system 304 during execution of the application and corresponding workloads. By selectively writing portions of data involved in execution of the application to different memory portions (e.g., to a SLC portion 335 and/or a TLC portion 337) of the NAND memory device 333, performance of the computing system…can be improved in comparison to some approaches.”) (Ramesh [0088]) (Examiner note: Data stored as cold or hot data in different memories based on workloads and system efficiency) and (“For example, if data corresponding to a particular workload is stored in the memory device 223, the controller 220 and/or the processor 222 can, in response to a determination that the workload may be more efficiently executed (e.g., optimized) using a different memory device, cause at least a portion of the data corresponding to the particular workload to be written to the memory device 225 and/or to the memory device 227.”) (Ramesh [0071]) (Examiner note: Changing where data is stored based on optimization is interpreted as determining whether or not structured data is present in the targeted database and if it is not then rewriting the data into the target database)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a module that can retrieve hot and cold data and include a module that if the data retrieved is not included in the hot data to be written into memory as hot data, as taught by Ramesh with the motivation to “improve resource usage and/or data precision by allowing for the dynamic range of the data to varied based on the application and/or computation for which the data will be used” (Ramesh [0085]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a module that can retrieve hot and cold data and include a module that if the data retrieved is not included in the hot data to be written into memory as hot data.
With respect to Claim 3,
Stoodley and Ramesh teach the limitations of Claim 1
Stoodley teaches wherein the patient data includes medical record number, hospitalization number, inspection sheet number, name, gender, birthday, or a combination thereof, and serves as a primary key for the unified dataset structure to correlate disparate medical records into the plurality of structured data.. (“Another screen provides demographic data for a patient. FIG. 7 depicts one embodiment of demographics screen 230. Fields for demographic data may include "name", "age", "contact details", insurance details, such as the "insurance company name" field 232 to be used during billing related tasks, the facility providing treatment, as the "hospital" field 234, with the treating facility's patient identifier, as the "record number" field 236, the "professional(s) providing treatment", and the "referring doctor".”) (Stoodley [0100]) (Examiner note: See also Fig. 7 for “date of birth” patient data and other relevant displayed patient data)
With respect to Claim 4,
Stoodley and Ramesh teach the limitations of Claim 1
Stoodley teaches wherein the clinical index data includes comprises one or more of outpatient data, emergency department data, and inpatient data, and is configured as a visit-based index that links the patient data to the indicator factor data within the unified dataset structure. (“A patient's encounters from the first presentation for a particular healthcare issue until the absolute completion of treatment and follow-up may be tracked as a "patient management cycle". Some encounter types include referral interview, outpatient consultation, outpatient procedure, inpatient consultation, inpatient procedure, hospital admission, emergency admission, diagnostic study, etc”) (Stoodley [0069]) (Examiner note: Tracking the data for the type of patient encounter is interpreted as clinical index data)
With respect to Claim 6,
Stoodley and Ramesh teach the limitations of Claim 1
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Ramesh
Ramesh teaches further comprising further comprising a mission scheduling module connected to the data retrieving module and configured to schedule data retrieval or update for a plurality of medical quality indicators (“In some embodiments, data that is classified as hot data can be written to the SLC portion 335 while data that is classified as cold data can be written to the TLC portion 337, or vice versa, as part of optimizing performance of the memory system 304 during execution of the application and corresponding workloads. By selectively writing portions of data involved in execution of the application to different memory portions (e.g., to a SLC portion 335 and/or a TLC portion 337) of the NAND memory device 333, performance of the computing system…can be improved in comparison to some approaches.”) (Ramesh [0088]) (Examiner note: Writing data into different storages based on characteristics such as hot or cold data is interpreted as arranging data that is retrieved based on medical quality indicators)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a module that can arrange data that is retrieved, as taught by Ramesh with the motivation to “improve resource usage and/or data precision by allowing for the dynamic range of the data to varied based on the application and/or computation for which the data will be used” (Ramesh [0085]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a module that can arrange data that is retrieved.
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Ramesh
Ramesh teaches the mission scheduling module having a mission description list, wherein the mission scheduling module manages data dependencies between upstream indicators and downstream indicators to enable data reuse without re-querying the one or more primary databases. (“In some embodiments, data that is classified as hot data can be written to the SLC portion 335 while data that is classified as cold data can be written to the TLC portion 337…”) (Ramesh [0085]-[0088) (Examiner note: The Applicant’s specification states that the mission description list records the medical quality indicators (0053), classifying data as hot or cold is interpreted as recording a medical quality indicator)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a mission scheduling module, as taught by Ramesh with the motivation to “improve resource usage and/or data precision by allowing for the dynamic range of the data to varied based on the application and/or computation for which the data will be used” (Ramesh [0085]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a mission scheduling module.
Stoodley teaches a schedule control unit. (Examiner note: The Applicant’s specification explains that the schedule control unit triggers the data retrieving module to retrieve or update data (0053)) (“ The present healthcare patient data analysis system and method for its use may facilitate numerous different tasks and the patient data may be available for retrieval”) (Stoodley [0133]) (Examiner note: Data is available for retrieval) and (“…the patient data that are extracted from a query search is analyzed by the database and the statistical results are optionally displayed, such as a graph form, e.g. pie chart, bar chart, etc.”) (Stoodley [0133]) (Examiner note: The search functionality used of retrieving the data is interpreted as a schedule control unit)
With respect to Claim 11,
Stoodley and Ramesh teach the limitations of Claim 9
Stoodley teaches wherein the patient data includes medical record number, hospitalization number, inspection sheet number, name, gender, birthday, or a combination thereof, and serves as a primary key for the unified dataset structure to correlate disparate medical records into the plurality of structured data.. (“Another screen provides demographic data for a patient. FIG. 7 depicts one embodiment of demographics screen 230. Fields for demographic data may include "name", "age", "contact details", insurance details, such as the "insurance company name" field 232 to be used during billing related tasks, the facility providing treatment, as the "hospital" field 234, with the treating facility's patient identifier, as the "record number" field 236, the "professional(s) providing treatment", and the "referring doctor".”) (Stoodley [0100]) (Examiner note: See also Fig. 7 for “date of birth” patient data and other relevant displayed patient data)
With respect to Claim 12,
Stoodley and Ramesh teach the limitations of Claim 9
Stoodley teaches wherein the clinical index data includes comprises one or more of outpatient data, emergency department data, and inpatient data, and is configured as a visit-based index that links the patient data to the indicator factor data within the unified dataset structure. (“A patient's encounters from the first presentation for a particular healthcare issue until the absolute completion of treatment and follow-up may be tracked as a "patient management cycle". Some encounter types include referral interview, outpatient consultation, outpatient procedure, inpatient consultation, inpatient procedure, hospital admission, emergency admission, diagnostic study, etc”) (Stoodley [0069]) (Examiner note: Tracking the data for the type of patient encounter is interpreted as clinical index data)
With respect to Claim 14,
Stoodley and Ramesh teach the limitations of Claim 9
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Ramesh
Ramesh teaches wherein a mission scheduling module is further provided, the mission scheduling module being connected to the date retrieving module and configured to schedule data retrieval or updates for a plurality of medical quality indicators, (“In some embodiments, data that is classified as hot data can be written to the SLC portion 335 while data that is classified as cold data can be written to the TLC portion 337, or vice versa, as part of optimizing performance of the memory system 304 during execution of the application and corresponding workloads. By selectively writing portions of data involved in execution of the application to different memory portions (e.g., to a SLC portion 335 and/or a TLC portion 337) of the NAND memory device 333, performance of the computing system…can be improved in comparison to some approaches.”) (Ramesh [0088]) (Examiner note: Writing data into different storages based on characteristics such as hot or cold data is interpreted as arranging data that is retrieved based on medical quality indicators)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a module that can arrange data that is retrieved, as taught by Ramesh with the motivation to “improve resource usage and/or data precision by allowing for the dynamic range of the data to varied based on the application and/or computation for which the data will be used” (Ramesh [0085]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a module that can arrange data that is retrieved.
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Ramesh
Ramesh teaches the mission scheduling module having a mission description list wherein the mission scheduling module manages data dependencies between upstream indicators and downstream indicators to enable data reuse without re-querying the one or more primary databases. (“In some embodiments, data that is classified as hot data can be written to the SLC portion 335 while data that is classified as cold data can be written to the TLC portion 337…”) (Ramesh [0085]- [0088]) (Examiner note: The Applicant’s specification states that the mission description list records the medical quality indicators (0053), classifying data as hot or cold is interpreted as recording a medical quality indicator)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a mission scheduling module, as taught by Ramesh with the motivation to “improve resource usage and/or data precision by allowing for the dynamic range of the data to varied based on the application and/or computation for which the data will be used” (Ramesh [0085]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a mission scheduling module.
Stoodley teaches and a schedule control unit. (Examiner note: The Applicant’s specification explains that the schedule control unit triggers the data retrieving module to retrieve or update data (0053)) (“ The present healthcare patient data analysis system and method for its use may facilitate numerous different tasks and the patient data may be available for retrieval”) (Stoodley [0133]) (Examiner note: Data is available for retrieval) and (“…the patient data that are extracted from a query search is analyzed by the database and the statistical results are optionally displayed, such as a graph form, e.g. pie chart, bar chart, etc.”) (Stoodley [0133]) (Examiner note: The search functionality used of retrieving the data is interpreted as a schedule control unit)
With respect to Claim 17 and 18:
Stoodley does not teach this limitation. Ramesh teaches wherein the hot data interval is dynamically defined according to a clinical record stabilization period specified in the operational definition, the stabilization period corresponding to a duration during which medical records are subject to clinical modification. (“Access frequency of the data can be referred to herein in terms of “hot data” and “cold data.”) (Ramesh [0026]-[0080]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include the hot data interval is dynamically defined according to a clinical record stabilization period specified in the operational definition, the stabilization period corresponding to a duration during which medical records are subject to clinical modification, as taught by Ramesh with the motivation to “improve resource usage and/or data precision by allowing for the dynamic range of the data to varied based on the application and/or computation for which the data will be used” (Ramesh [0085]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a description list with a hot data interval.
Claims 7, 8, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 20040078236 (“Stoodley”) in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20230054862 (“Ramesh”) in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20220107947 (“Clark”).
With respect to Claim 7,
Stoodley and Ramesh teach the limitations of Claim 6
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Clark
Clark teaches wherein the mission description list records an update frequency, (“In other aspects, for the future queries which are not successful at obtaining update data, the system re-queries the data store computer to obtain the update data at a frequency which has been adjusted based on queries initiated when expected update data indicated updated data was not expected to be available.”) (Clark [0048]) (Examiner note: Update data frequency at a chosen rate is interpreted as recording an update frequency)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a mission description list with an update frequency, as taught by Clark with the motivation “to have a system capable of learning and improving performance over time based on results and successful or failed access attempts.” (Clark [0031]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a description list with an update frequency.
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Clark
Clark teaches a retry frequency, (“A retry frequency count is set to determine how often to retry the system…”) (Examiner note: A retry frequency count is interpreted as a retry frequency) (Clark [0062])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a mission description list with a retry frequency, as taught by Clark with the motivation “to have a system capable of learning and improving performance over time based on results and successful or failed access attempts.” (Clark [0031]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a description list with a retry frequency.
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Ramesh
Ramesh teaches a hot data interval (“Access frequency of the data can be referred to herein in terms of “hot data” and “cold data.”) (Ramesh [0026])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a description list with a hot data interval, as taught by Ramesh with the motivation to “improve resource usage and/or data precision by allowing for the dynamic range of the data to varied based on the application and/or computation for which the data will be used” (Ramesh [0085]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a description list with a hot data interval.
and an upstream mission name for each of the plurality of medical quality indicators. (“The system should allow for searching across multiple layers of variables. In particular, there is a desire for a computer-based system that allows for storage and manipulation of a highly descriptive body of patient data that is useful in conducting multiple tasks.”) (Stoodley [0015]) (Examiner note: An individual search is interpreted as an upstream mission name)
Stoodley teaches wherein the schedule control unit uses the upstream mission name to identify an existing upstream dataset and prevents the data retrieving module from performing a redundant search on the one or more primary databases for data already present in the existing upstream dataset. (Stoodley [0085]-[0133])
With respect to Claim 8,
Stoodley and Ramesh teach the limitations of Claim 6
Stoodley teaches wherein the schedule control unit is configured to activate the data retrieving module to perform data retrieval or update by calculating a data demand interval and generating a to- do list that excludes data already stored in the target database, thereby reducing the number of data searches performed on the one or more primary databases. (Examiner note: The Applicant’s specification explains that the schedule control unit triggers the data retrieving module to retrieve or update data (0053)) (“ The present healthcare patient data analysis system and method for its use may facilitate numerous different tasks and the patient data may be available for retrieval”) (Stoodley [0133]) (Examiner note: Data is available for retrieval) and (“…the patient data that are extracted from a query search is analyzed by the database and the statistical results are optionally displayed, such as a graph form, e.g. pie chart, bar chart, etc.”) (Stoodley [0133]) (Examiner note: The search functionality used of retrieving the data is interpreted as a schedule control unit)
With respect to Claim 15,
Stoodley and Ramesh teach the limitations of Claim 14
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Clark
Clark teaches wherein the mission description list records an update frequency, (“In other aspects, for the future queries which are not successful at obtaining update data, the system re-queries the data store computer to obtain the update data at a frequency which has been adjusted based on queries initiated when expected update data indicated updated data was not expected to be available.”) (Clark [0048]) (Examiner note: Update data frequency at a chosen rate is interpreted as recording an update frequency)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a mission description list with an update frequency, as taught by Clark with the motivation “to have a system capable of learning and improving performance over time based on results and successful or failed access attempts.” (Clark [0031]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a description list with an update frequency.
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Clark
Clark teaches a retry frequency, (“A retry frequency count is set to determine how often to retry the system…”) (Examiner note: A retry frequency count is interpreted as a retry frequency) (Clark [0062])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a mission description list with a retry frequency, as taught by Clark with the motivation “to have a system capable of learning and improving performance over time based on results and successful or failed access attempts.” (Clark [0031]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a description list with a retry frequency.
Stoodley does not teach the limitation taught by Ramesh
Ramesh teaches a hot data interval (“Access frequency of the data can be referred to herein in terms of “hot data” and “cold data.”) (Ramesh [0026])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Stoodley to include a description list with a hot data interval, as taught by Ramesh with the motivation to “improve resource usage and/or data precision by allowing for the dynamic range of the data to varied based on the application and/or computation for which the data will be used” (Ramesh [0085]). In the combination of elements, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art include a description list with a hot data interval.
and an upstream mission name for each of the plurality of medical quality indicators. (“The system should allow for searching across multiple layers of variables. In particular, there is a desire for a computer-based system that allows for storage and manipulation of a highly descriptive body of patient data that is useful in conducting multiple tasks.”) (Stoodley [0015]) (Examiner note: An individual search is interpreted as an upstream mission name)
Stoodley teaches wherein the schedule control unit uses the upstream mission name to identify an existing upstream dataset and prevents the data retrieving module from performing a redundant search on the one or more primary databases for data already present in the existing upstream dataset. (Stoodley [0085]-[0133])
With respect to Claim 16,
Stoodley and Ramesh teach the limitations of Claim 14
Stoodley teaches wherein the schedule control unit is configured to activate the data retrieving module to perform data retrieval or update by calculating a data demand interval and generating a to-do list that excludes data already stored in the target database, thereby reducing the number of data searches performed on the one or more primary databases. (Examiner note: The Applicant’s specification explains that the schedule control unit triggers the data retrieving module to retrieve or update data (0053)) (“ The present healthcare patient data analysis system and method for its use may facilitate numerous different tasks and the patient data may be available for retrieval”) (Stoodley [0133]) (Examiner note: Data is available for retrieval) and (“…the patient data that are extracted from a query search is analyzed by the database and the statistical results are optionally displayed, such as a graph form, e.g. pie chart, bar chart, etc.”) (Stoodley [0133]) (Examiner note: The search functionality used of retrieving the data is interpreted as a schedule control unit)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wei (US 20210020274 A1).
With respect to Claim 19:
Wei teaches a system for managing a plurality of medical quality indicators, comprising: a mission scheduling module connected to a data retrieving module and a target database, the mission scheduling module configured to:(a) load a mission description list recording an upstream mission name for each of the plurality of medical quality indicators;(b) identify a downstream medical quality indicator that requires a subset of data from an upstream medical quality indicator defined by the upstream mission name; and(c) direct the data retrieving module to extract the subset of data directly from an existing upstream dataset stored in the target database without re-querying one or more primary databases ;whereby search resource consumption on the one or more primary databases is reduced by reusing the existing upstream dataset for multiple downstream indicators. (By disclosing, [0014] The terms “upstream” and “downstream” are to be understood in terms of a direction of generic information flow, in the context of a sample analysis cycle, where information about a patient propagate and evolves along the direction of the flow from a point where a user, such as a clinician, requests a sample analysis to a point where a corresponding sample analysis result is returned to the user, wherein the relevant information is carried through the sample analysis cycle in different forms, e.g. starting with a request for a sample analysis in a request form and a unique identifier attributed to this request, a sample taken from a patient in respect of the sample analysis request and linked to the associated unique identifier, a measurement result provided by the medical device in respect of that sample, the measurement result as processed throughout the medical device management system, a record in a medical facility information system, and eventually a sample analysis result for assisting the clinician in the diagnosis of a state of the patient. A measurement result may also originate at the medical analysis device itself, e.g. in the course of calibration and/or quality control (QC) routines to be performed on a regular basis for each of the medical analysis devices 110 in order to ensure proper functioning of the devices and comply with regulatory requirements. Such measurements are typically performed on suitable calibration/QC samples stored in the medical devices 110. Such medical device specific measurements are typically initiated in the course of a scheduled routine or upon request by an operator, e.g. through a user interface 129 of the medical device management system 120. Also in this case, a unique identifier is assigned to a measurement result produced by a device specific measurement, and the measurement result is collected by the medical device management system 120 through input interface 115. The measurement result is processed in the medical device management system 120 and output at output interface 135 as sample analysis data. The sample analysis data is delivered to a medical facility information system 150, such as a laboratory information system (LIS) where the patient sample analysis data may be presented in electronic records 159. Also this sample analysis data that is based on medical analysis device specific measurement results can be accessed from suitable terminals 161, 162, 163, which are connected to the medical facility information system 150 through links 151, 152, 153.
[0076] The measurement results provided by the medical devices 110 are processed in the medical device management system 120 in processing modules 121, 122, 124, 126 arranged along a data path extending from an upstream end at the input interface 115 to a downstream end at the output interface 135. The processing modules 121, 122, 124, 126 are connected by data path sections 123, 125, 127 adapted for transferring the measurement results after processing in one processing module to a subsequent processing module further downstream, or for presentation as sample analysis data at the output interface 135. See at least paragraphs [0014-0083])
Response to Arguments
As to the remark, Applicant asserted that
Applicant respectfully submits claim 1 is not directed to the alleged exception according to the Revised Guidance. Accordingly, it is submitted that claim 1 and claim 9 (for the same reasons as claim 1) and the dependent claims thereof are directed to patent-eligible subject matter, and that reconsideration and withdrawal of this rejection are respectfully requested.
Stoodley completely lacks the specific data transformation feature-converting heterogeneous data into the "unified dataset structure of patient-clinic index-indicator factor". Furthermore, neither Stoodley nor Ramesh teaches defining a retrieval interval based on a "clinical lifecycle characteristic" tied to the period when medical records are clinically modifiable. Ramesh relies on machine-level access counts, whereas the present invention relies on the clinical realities of medical charting (e.g., a post- surgery stabilization window).
Ramesh is non-analogous art. Fundamental difference in technical problem and mechanism and No motivation Combine
Examiner respectfully traverses Applicant’s remark for the following reasons:
With respect to (a) Examiner would like to point out to applicant that the claim recites: Retrieving medical data from databases based on update frequency. Preprocessing and storing structured data (patient data, clinical index data, indicator factor data). Performing computations to obtain statistical data. Displaying statistical data through a user interface. These steps are essentially: Data collection (from primary medical databases). Data processing (preprocessing, structuring, computing statistics). Data presentation (displaying through a UI). Under MPEP 21060.04 guidance, these are examples of abstract ideas: Organizing and analyzing information (data retrieval, processing, statistical computation). Presenting information (data visualization). To pass prong-2, the claim must integrate the abstract idea into a practical application — e.g., improve computer functionality, use a particular machine in a non‑conventional way, or apply the idea in a way that is more than generic computer implementation. Here: The claim recites generic computing elements (modules, databases, UI), “data retrieving module,” “data analyzing module,” and “data visualization module” etc. — but these are generic computer components. The claim does not recite a specific algorithm or unconventional mechanism for implementing them. Therefore claims are directed toward ineligible subject matter under 101.
With respect to (b) Examiner would like to point out to applicant that Stoodley does teaches storing structured data corresponding to medical quality indicators. Stoodley [0157]) and (“A patient's encounters from the first presentation for a particular healthcare issue until the absolute completion of treatment and follow-up may be tracked as a "patient management cycle". Some encounter types include referral interview, outpatient consultation, outpatient procedure, inpatient consultation, inpatient procedure, hospital admission, emergency admission, diagnostic study, etc”) (Stoodley [0069]) (Examiner note: Tracking encounter types of a patient is interpreted as storing clinical index data, Applicant specification states “…the clinical index data includes outpatient, emergency department, inpatient, or a combination thereof.” (0008)) and (“…lengths of intensive care, hospital stay and outcome score.”) (Stoodley [0148]) (Examiner note: Length of stay is interpreted as indicator factor data) Stoodley does teaches an update frequency of the medical quality indicator defined in a data update frequency control table (The type of requested output of information from the search results is selected by choosing from a series of "search for" options 190, such as "patients," "demographics," "complications," "details," "outcomes," "images," and "TCDs." When the user station receives a search request from a user, the database searches each table for data matching the criteria. The identifier for the matched data is recognized and the "search for" data with the same identifier is retrieved…”) (Stoodley [0153]) and (“The present database stores data that may be retrieved to perform multiple tasks by the system. “) (Stoodley [0019])
With respect to (c) Examiner would like to point out to applicant that,
Examiner relied upon Ramesh, in same field, hot/cold intervals. Access frequency of the data can refer to a quantity of accesses (e.g., reads, writes, etc.) involving the data in execution of the workloads. Access frequency of the data can be referred to herein in terms of “hot data” and “cold data.” “Cold data,” as used herein, means that a particular memory object has not been accessed for a long duration relative to other memory objects read from a memory device. “Hot data,” as used herein, means that a particular memory object has been accessed frequently relative to other memory objects read from a memory device.”) (Ramesh [0026]) and (“For example, if certain data involved in execution of a workload is determined to be “hot,” such data can be written to a memory device that includes a media type that is well suited for making data quickly accessible.”) (Ramesh [0027])
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, primary reference teaches medical quality indicators. Stoodley [0157]). Ramesh is also processing the medical related data and discloser of Ramesh used to fill specific gap of Stoodley which is explain in above rejection with motivation for combining both references.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEHA PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1492. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Tariq Hafiz can be reached at (571) 272-5350. 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.
/NEHA PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3699
Prosecution Insights