DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
In re claim 3, the limitation “while some mobile monitoring device(s) do(es) not pair with any bedside monitor when working” should read “wherein some mobile monitoring device(s) do(es) not pair with any bedside monitor when working”.
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.
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.
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 limitations are:
“spot measurement device” (claim 2)
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they 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 these limitations 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 them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-20 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.
In re claim 1, the limitation “when working in the continuous monitoring mode, pair with the bedside monitor and jointly perform continuous monitoring on the patient with the bedside monitor, and transmit, to the central station or the paired bedside monitor in the second wireless transmission manner, monitoring data which is obtained during the continuous monitoring mode and physiological parameter data of the patient, which data is measured by a spot measurement device”, specifically the limitation “a spot measurement device” raises a clarity concern. As written, it is unclear if “a spot measurement device” is in reference to a second spot measurement device or if it is supposed to be in reference to the first spot measurement device recited in lines 13-14 of claim 1 (Claims 03/08/2024). For examination purposes, based on Applicant’s specification, the limitation “a spot measurement device” (Claims 03/08/2024, pg. 1, line 23) will be interpreted as “the spot measurement device”. Examiner notes that dependent claims 2-11 and 13 inherit the same deficiencies.
In re claim 7, the coexistence of limitation “a corresponding threshold” (Claims 03/08/2024, pg. 3, lines 20-21) and “a corresponding threshold” (Claims 03/08/2024, pg. 3, line 23) raises a clarity concern. Specifically, it is unclear if Applicant intends for the second instance of “a corresponding threshold” (Claims 03/08/2024, pg. 3, line 23) to be in reference to a different second corresponding threshold or the previous “a corresponding threshold” (Claims 03/08/2024, pg. 3, lines 20-21). For the purposes of examination, the second instance of “a corresponding threshold” will be interpreted as “the corresponding threshold”.
In re claim 10,
The coexistence of limitations “a current EWS score” (Claims 03/08/2024, pg. 4, line 23), “a current EWS score” (Claims 03/08/2024, pg. 5 ,line 3), and “a current EWS score” (Claims 03/08/2024, pg. 5, line 8) raises a clarity concern. Specifically, it is unclear if Applicant intends for all recitations of “a current EWS score” to be referencing the same EWS score or three different EWS scores. For examination purposes, following the first instance of the limitation “a current warning score”, all subsequent instances will be interpreted as “the current EWS score”.
Examiner notes that the same analysis above (in bullet (i)) also applies to the limitation “a preset score”.
In re claim 12, see above (In re claim 1).
In re claim 14, see above (In re claim 1). Examiner notes that dependent claims 15-20 inherit the same deficiencies.
In re claim 20, see above (In re claim 10).
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.
(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, 2, 4, 6-9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ren et al. (WO 2020/133541).
In re claim 1, Ren discloses a monitoring system (Fig. 4- Fig. 7), comprising
a bedside monitor (108; [0048]: “monitoring device is a bedside dock station 108”),
a mobile monitoring device (101; [0044]: “ECG-POD”; see Fig. 4 for an additional illustration of 101) and
a central station (Fig. 10: bottom right most box; [0052]),
wherein:
the bedside monitor is configured to monitor a patient and pair with the mobile monitoring device(Fig. 7: indicated by two icons in between box 101 and 108; [0048]);
the mobile monitoring device is worn on a body of the patient to monitor the patient for obtaining monitoring data (Fig. 4),
wherein a working mode of the mobile monitoring device comprises a continuous monitoring mode and an intermittent monitoring mode [0006],
wherein the mobile monitoring device is configured to:
when working in the intermittent monitoring mode,
perform intermittent monitoring on the patient [0028],
receive ([0048]: “The ECG-POD is…used to received patient monitoring related data collected by the NIPB-POD”), in a first wireless transmission manner (Fig. 7; [0044]: “paired via NFC”) physiological parameter data of the patient ([0044: “blood pressure”), which data is measured by a spot measurement device (102, “NIPB-POD”; Examiner notes that under the broadest reasonable interpretation a spot measurement device is being interpreted as a device capable of measuring a physiological parameter), and
transmit, to the central station (Fig. 10: bottom right most box; [0052]) in a second wireless transmission manner (Fig. 10: “WIFI”), monitoring data which is obtained during the intermittent monitoring mode and the physiological parameter data which is measured by the spot measurement device [0052]; and
when working in the continuous monitoring mode ,
pair with the bedside monitor (Fig. 7: indicated by two icons in between box 101 and 108; [0048]) and
jointly perform continuous monitoring on the patient with the bedside monitor (Fig. 7; [0044, 0048]), and
transmit, to the central station (Fig. 10; [0052]) or the paired bedside monitor (Fig. 7) in the second wireless transmission manner ([0044]: “communicate with monitoring device 103 via WMTS or WIFI”), monitoring data which is obtained during the continuous monitoring mode and physiological parameter data of the patient, which data is measured by a spot measurement device [0044, 0048, 0052].
In re claim 2, Ren discloses, further comprising the spot measurement device, which
is configured to measure at least one physiological parameter ([0044]: “blood pressure”) of the patient based on a user operation to obtain the physiological parameter data ([0044]; Examiner notes that “a user operation” would be a user operating and or setting up the “NIBP-POD”), and
is configured to enable the mobile monitoring device to obtain the physiological parameter data in the first wireless transmission manner (Fig. 7: indicated by the icons between box 102 and 101; [0044]: “paired via NFC”).
In re claim 4, Ren discloses, wherein in order to transmit, to the central station in the second wireless transmission manner, the physiological parameter data measured by the spot measurement device, the mobile monitoring device is further configured to:
transmit intermittently, to the central station in the second wireless transmission manner (Fig. 10), the physiological parameter data measured by the spot measurement device, when working in the intermittent monitoring mode [0108]; and
transmit in real time, to the central station in the second wireless transmission manner (Fig. 10), the physiological parameter data measured by the spot measurement device, when working in the continuous monitoring mode [0108].
In re claim 6, Ren discloses wherein, when working in the continuous monitoring mode but not pairing with the bedside monitor ([0032]: “…each bed side monitor can be paired with a portable monitoring device”), the mobile monitoring device is further configured to perform continuous monitoring on the patient alone , and transmit, to the central station in the second wireless transmission manner, monitoring data which is obtained during said continuous monitoring and the physiological parameter data of the patient, which data is measured by the spot measurement device (Fig. 10; [0044, 0052]).
In re claim 7, Ren discloses wherein the central station is configured to:
receive the physiological parameter data, which is measured by the spot measurement device and transmitted by the mobile monitoring device, and display, according to the patient, the received physiological parameter data ([0031]: “…main control circuit 113 calculated physiological parameters and sends calculations and waveforms to the…central station”;); and
receive the monitoring data, which is transmitted by the mobile monitoring device, process the received monitoring data ([0032]: “…data generated during mobile monitor can be…transmitted to a central station for doctors or nurses to view”), so as to obtain and display, according to the patient, at least one of physiological parameter value(s) [0034, 0035], parameter curve(s) [0035] and alarm event(s); or
determine whether the physiological parameter data exceeds a corresponding threshold, and if yes, output corresponding alarm information; or
determine whether one or more physiological parameters in the monitoring data exceed a corresponding threshold, and if yes, output corresponding alarm information.
In re claim 8, Ren discloses wherein:
during a first *preset period ([0061]: “patient condition is judged as severe”), the bedside monitor is configured to perform continuous monitoring on the patient ([0061]: “continuous monitoring required”);
after entering into a second preset period ([0061]: “patient’s condition is good”) from the first preset period, the mobile monitoring device is further configured to work in the intermittent monitoring mode ([0061]: “intermittent monitoring can be used”); and
when entering into a third preset period ([0061]: “patient condition is judged as severe”) under a condition that preset physiological parameter(s) in the monitoring data is obtained in the intermittent monitoring mode, exceed(s) corresponding threshold(s), ([0061]: parameter “exceeds threshold”) the mobile monitoring device is further configured to switch from the intermittent monitoring mode to the continuous monitoring mode [0061].
*Examiner notes that under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) a “preset period” is being interpreted as a time period that is associated with specific monitoring instructions. For example, a patient’s condition being recognized as “severe” is a period of time that adheres to specific monitoring instructions i.e., more rigorous continuous monitoring (Ren, [0061).
In re claim 9, Ren discloses
wherein the mobile monitoring device is further configured to, under trigger(s) of a first preset condition ([0083]: “T1 ≥ the first continuous mode working time”) or an instruction to switch the working mode, switch from the continuous monitoring mode to the intermittent monitoring mode ([0083]: “ when T1 ≥ the first continuous mode working time…the intermittent monitoring mode needs to be used”),
wherein the first preset condition comprises:
a duration, in which the mobile monitoring device works in the continuous monitoring mode, exceeds a preset time length ([0083]: “T1 ≥ the first continuous mode working time”, where T1 is defined as the “current continuous mode working time”);
a preset time is reached; or
the mobile monitoring device disconnects from the bedside monitor.
In re claim 11, Ren discloses
wherein
a measurement frequency for physiological parameter(s) of the mobile monitoring device in the continuous monitoring mode is higher than that in the intermittent monitoring mode [0108]; or
a frequency for transmitting monitoring data to the central station or the paired bedside monitor by the mobile monitoring device in the continuous monitoring mode is higher than that in the intermittent monitoring mode [0108]; or
the bedside monitor is configured to measure at least one of: a blood oxygen parameter, a blood pressure parameter, a pulse rate parameter, a body temperature parameter, an ECG parameter, a respiratory parameter, and a sleep parameter ([0048]: “ear temperature measurement module”);
the physiological parameter data, which is measured by the spot measurement device, comprises at least one of:
parameter data for body temperature
parameter data for blood pressure ([0044]: “blood pressure”), and
parameter data for blood sugar;
the monitoring data, which is obtained by the mobile monitoring device, comprises at least one of:
parameter data for blood oxygen,
parameter data for blood pressure,
parameter data for pulse rate,
parameter data for body temperature,
ECG parameter data ([0044]: “ECG-POD electrocardiogram monitoring module”),
respiratory parameter data,
sleep parameter data, and
exercise parameter data; or
the first wireless transmission manner is short-range communication ([0044]: “The ECG-POD and NIBP-POD can be paired via NFC”; Examiner notes that “NFC” stands for near field communication [0037]) and the first wireless transmission manner is different from the second wireless transmission manner (see above (In re claim 1)).
In re claim 12, see above (In re claim 1).
In re claim 14, see above (In re claim 1).
Ren also discloses a monitoring method [0106-0108].
In re claim 16, see above (In re claim 4).
In re claim 18, see above (In re claim 7).
In re claim 19, see above (In re claim 8).
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.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren et al. (WO 2020/133541) in view of Ikonen et al. (US 2017/0372024).
In re claim 3, Ren discloses
wherein some mobile monitoring device(s) (101) respectively pair(s) with one bedside monitor (108) and jointly work(s) with said bedside monitor when working (Fig. 7: indicated by the icons between box 101 and 108)
Ren does not disclose
wherein, in the monitoring system, a number of mobile monitoring devices is greater than a number of bedside monitor(s),
wherein some mobile monitoring device(s) respectively pair(s) with one bedside monitor and jointly work(s) with said bedside monitor when working, while some mobile monitoring device(s) do(es) not pair with any bedside monitor when working.
Ikonen discloses an analogous medical monitoring system (FIG. 4) that includes three wireless devices (10, 12, 14; [0041]: “for example body worn sensors”) and a monitor (22; [0041]: “host monitor or hub”). Al-Ali further discloses only two (10, 12) of the three wireless sensors being connected to the monitor (FIG. 4).
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 monitoring system, taught by Ren, to have a number of mobile monitoring devices be greater than the number of bedside monitors and have some mobile monitoring devices not pair with the bedside monitor when working, as taught by Ikonen. One would have been motivated to make this modification both because doing so would enable more data to be collected, and prevent patient monitoring from being disrupted, in the event that one of the mobile monitoring device becomes non-functional (Ikonen, [0024]).
In re claim 5, the proposed combination yields (all mapping directed to Ren)
wherein, when a first mobile monitoring device (Fig. 7: 101) pairs with a first bedside monitor (108) and jointly works with the first bedside monitor [0048], *the first bedside monitor is further configured to disconnect from the first mobile monitoring device and pair with a second mobile monitoring device, which is different from the first mobile monitoring device, in order to jointly work with the second mobile monitoring device.
*Regarding the limitations, “the first bedside monitor is further configured to disconnect from the first mobile monitoring device and pair with a second mobile monitoring device, which is different from the first mobile monitoring device, in order to jointly work with the second mobile monitoring device”, these limitations comprise functional language and have been given patentable weight only in how they materially alter or add structure to the apparatus of the claims. See MPEP 2114. The prior art need only be able to perform these functions in order to anticipate the claimed invention. It is clear that the system of Ren could be operated in the claimed manner if desired.
In re claim 15, the proposed combination yields
wherein a number of the mobile monitoring devices is greater than a number of the bedside monitor(s), wherein some mobile monitoring device(s) respectively pair(s) with one bedside monitor and jointly work(s) with said bedside monitor when working, while some mobile monitoring device(s) do(es) not pair with any bedside monitor when working, (see above In re claim 3).
wherein, when a first mobile monitoring device pairs with a first bedside monitor and jointly works with the first bedside monitor (see above In re claim 5),
The proposed combination does not yield
the first bedside monitor is further configured to disconnect from the first mobile monitoring device, so as to pair with a second mobile monitoring device, which is different from the first mobile monitoring device, and so as to jointly work with the second mobile monitoring device.
Ikonen further discloses the monitor of the medical device system having the ability to disconnect from a first wireless device (one of 10, 12, 14) and reconnect to a second wireless (any other device (any other one of 10, 12, 14) in the event that the first wireless device exhibits low performance and/or battery capacity [0024].
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 bedside monitor, of the proposed combination, to be further configured to disconnect from the first mobile monitoring device, so as to pair with a second mobile monitoring device, which is different from the first mobile monitoring device, as taught by Ikonen. One would have been motivated to make this modification to ensure monitoring could continue even in the event that a mobile monitoring device ran out of battery, broke, or became non-functional (Ikonen, [0023, 0043]).
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren et al. (WO 2020/133541), in view of Gegner et al. (US 2013/0338543).
In re claim 10, Ren discloses wherein:
when the mobile monitoring device does not pair with any bedside monitor ([0032]: “each bedside monitor can be paired with a portable monitoring device”) and works alone in the intermittent monitoring mode, the central station is configured to:
obtain a current health metric of the patient ([0061]: “determine a patient’s condition”; Examiner notes this is done using physiological data like heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, blood pressure, and body temperature [0060, 0061]); and
control the mobile monitoring device to
switch from the intermittent monitoring mode to the continuous monitoring mode ([0061]: “when a patient’s condition is serious…continuous monitoring is required”), or
output information, which indicates a user to pair the mobile monitoring device with one bedside monitor for working jointly and to use the continuous monitoring mode,
when the health metric is higher than a preset value ([0061]; Examiner notes that a patient’s condition is deemed “severe” if the “weight of a physiological parameter exceeds the preset weight”); or
when the mobile monitoring device does not pair with any bedside monitor ([0032]: “each bedside monitor can be paired with a portable monitoring device”) and works alone in the continuous monitoring mode, the central station is configured to:
obtain a current health metric of the patient ([0061]: “determine a patient’s condition”; Examiner notes this is done using physiological data like heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, blood pressure, and body temperature [0060, 0061])); and
control the mobile monitoring device to
switch from the continuous monitoring mode to the intermittent monitoring mode ([0061]: ““when a patient’s condition is good… intermittent monitoring can be used”), when the heath metric is lower than a preset value ([0061]: Examiner notes that a patient’s condition is deemed “good” if the “weight of a physiological parameter” does not exceed the “preset weight”); or
when the mobile monitoring device pairs with the bedside monitor ([0032]: “each bedside monitor can be paired with a portable monitoring device”) and jointly works with the bedside monitor in the continuous monitoring mode; the central station is configured to:
obtain a current health metric of the patient ([0061]: “determine a patient’s condition”; Examiner notes this is done using physiological data like heart rate, blood oxygen saturation, blood pressure, and body temperature [0060, 0061]); and
control the mobile monitoring device to
switch from the continuous monitoring mode to the intermittent monitoring mode ([0061]: “when a patient’s condition is good… intermittent monitoring can be used”) or
output information, which indicates a user to disconnect the mobile monitoring device from the paired bedside monitor,
when the health metric is lower than a preset value ([0061]: Examiner notes that a patient’s condition is deemed “good” if the “weight of a physiological parameter” does not exceed the “preset weight”).
Ren does not disclose
when the mobile monitoring device does not pair with any bedside monitor and works alone in the intermittent monitoring mode, the central station is configured to:
obtain a current EWS score of the patient; and
control the mobile monitoring device to
switch from the intermittent monitoring mode to the continuous monitoring mode, or
output information, which indicates a user to pair the mobile monitoring device with one bedside monitor for working jointly and to use the continuous monitoring mode,
when the EWS score is lower than a preset score; or
when the mobile monitoring device does not pair with any bedside monitor and works alone in the continuous monitoring mode, the central station is configured to:
obtain a current EWS score of the patient; and
control the mobile monitoring device to
switch from the continuous monitoring mode to the intermittent monitoring mode, when the EWS score is lower than a preset score; or
when the mobile monitoring device pairs with the bedside monitor and jointly works with the bedside monitor in the continuous monitoring mode; the central station is configured to:
obtain a current EWS score of the patient; and
control the mobile monitoring device to
switch from the continuous monitoring mode to the intermittent monitoring mode, or
output information, which indicates a user to disconnect the mobile monitoring device from the paired bedside monitor,
when the EWS score is lower than a preset score.
Gegner discloses an analogous monitoring system (FIG. 1: 100) used by a hospital that processes physiological data to determine whether or not a patient needs immediate medical attention (abstract: “detects deterioration”). Gegner discloses using the processed physiological data to calculate an early warning score [0029]. As shown in FIG. 2, specific physiological data used to calculate the early warning score includes heart rate, respiratory rate, temperature and consciousness level.
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 central unit, taught by Ren, to obtain an EWS of the patient, as taught by Gegner. One would have been motivated to make this modification because the EWS score of Gegner, and the health metric of Ren are functionally equivalent- as they both use physiological data to assess a patient’s current condition. Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would have the ability to pick an assessment method that would best meet their needs. Examiner notes that such a modification yield the central station responding when the “EWS score is lower/higher than a preset score”.
In re claim 20, see above (In re claim 10)
Claims 13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren et al. (WO 2020/133541), in view of Ahmed et al. (US 2021/0290184).
In re claim 13, Ren discloses
wherein the first wireless transmission manner is short range communication ([0044]: “NFC”).
wherein in order to transmit, to the central station in the second wireless transmission manner, the physiological parameter data measured by the spot measurement device, the mobile monitoring device is further configured to:
transmit, to the central station in the second wireless transmission manner, the physiological parameter data measured by the spot measurement device (Fig. 10; [0044, 0052])
Ren does not disclose
wherein in order to transmit, to the central station in the second wireless transmission manner, the physiological parameter data measured by the spot measurement device, the mobile monitoring device is further configured to:
associate the physiological parameter data measured by the spot measurement device with identification information of the patient; and
transmit, to the central station in the second wireless transmission manner, the physiological parameter data measured by the spot measurement device and the identification information of the patient.
Ahmed discloses an analogous system (Fig. 28A) for patient monitoring that includes a mobile monitoring device (2812), sensor (2810) and a server (2816). Ahmed further discloses the sensor system having the ability to wirelessly transfer physiological data to the mobile monitoring device (2184; [0036]). Once the physiological data is received by the mobile monitoring device, the mobile monitoring device associates the physiological data with patient identification information and transmits the physiological data to the server (2818, [0370]).
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 mobile monitoring device, taught by Ren, to associate the physiological parameter data measured by the spot measurement device with identification information of a patient, as taught by Ahmed. One would have been motivated to make this modification because doing so would allow a clinician to effectively monitor multiple patients at once (Ahmed, [0370]). Accordingly, such a modification would yield transmission of “the physiological parameter data measured by the spot measurement device and the identification information of the patient”.
In re claim 17, see above (In re claim 13 and In re claim 6).
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure:
Arnio et al. (US 2018/0310327) discloses a wireless patient monitoring system (FIG. 1) with a bedside monitor (15; [0029]), multiple wearable devices (3a, 3b, 3c) and a central network (30).
Al-Ali et al. (US 2022/0022748) discloses a patient monitoring system (FIG. 1) that includes wearable sensors (202A, 202B, 202C, 202D) and a bedside monitor (FIG. 2A).
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLIVIA WALKER whose telephone number is (571)272-7052. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7-4pm CT.
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, David Hamaoui can be reached at (571)-270-5625. 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.
/OLIVIA WALKER/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
/DAVID HAMAOUI/SPE, Art Unit 3796