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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
Claims 1-20 are currently pending in this case and have been examined and addressed below. This communication is a Non-Final Rejection in response to the Claims filed on 04/26/2024.
Claim 21 is currently canceled and not considered at this time.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 04/26/2024, 10/31/2024, 09/03/2025, 11/10/2025, 05/05/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 1-20 are rejected because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Claims 1-19 fall within the statutory category of a process. Claim 20 falls within the statutory category of an apparatus or system.
Step 2A, Prong One
As per Claim 1, the limitations of receiving the measurements and a local device identifier from the local machine; automatically classifying each of the measurements as one of an artifact, a potential problem or a normal measurement and assigning a corresponding tag to the respective measurement; verifying the classification of the measurements; presenting the measurements and verified classifications; and initiate a challenge and response request in response to the measurements meeting predefined criteria, said challenge and response request including an alert, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people. The steps of receiving measurements and local device identifier, classifying the measurements, assigning a tag, verifying the classification of measurements, presenting the measurements and classifications, and initiate a challenge and response request are concepts performed by a physician in the act of monitoring a physiological condition. Monitoring a physiological condition of a person using measured physiological data is activity performed by a physician in the interactions with a patient in the treatment of a patient. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing interactions between people and managing personal behavior or relationships, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Similarly, as per Claim 20, the limitations of measuring physiological signals form a body and generating an output including at least a first measurement; receiving the measurement and generating a personalized output including at least the first measurement and a local device identifier; receive and process the personalized output; automatically classify the first measurement as an artifact, potential problem or as having no apparent evidence of abnormality, assign a corresponding tag to the first measurement according to said classification; present the first measurement and the corresponding tag for verification; and present the verified first measurement and the corresponding tag; and initiate a challenge and response request in response to the measurements meeting predefined criteria, the request including an alert under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people. The steps of measuring physiological signals and outputting measurements, generating measurements and local device identifier, classifying the measurements, assigning a tag, verifying the classification of measurements, presenting the measurements and classifications, and initiate a challenge and response request are concepts performed by a physician in the act of monitoring a physiological condition. Monitoring a physiological condition of a person using measured physiological data is activity performed by a physician in the interactions with a patient in the treatment of a patient. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing interactions between people and managing personal behavior or relationships, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements and combination of additional elements do not impose meaningful limits on the judicial exception. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements – a monitoring device, a local device, a remote server which comprises a processing module, a review portal, and a clinician portal. The elements are recited at a high-level of generality, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Claim 1 also recites the additional elements of collecting measurements representing physiological signals of the body and transmitting the measurements from the monitoring device to a local device. Transmitting measurements from monitoring device to local device amounts to mere instructions to apply the exception because it invokes computers as a tool to perform in its ordinary capacity for tasks including transmitting data, as per MPEP 2106.05(f)(2). The step of collecting measurements representing physiological signals of the body amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity, as in MPEP 2106.05(g), because it is mere data gathering in conjunction with the abstract idea where the limitation amounts to necessary data gathering and outputting, (i.e., all uses of the recited judicial exception require such data gathering or data output). See Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968; OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1092-93 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (presenting offers and gathering statistics amounted to mere data gathering). Examiner notes that Claim 1 recites that the steps of collecting measurements and transmitting the measurements are optional, which indicates they are not required by the claim. Therefore, although they are addressed above, they do not impact subject matter eligibility. Because the additional elements do not impose meaningful limitations on the judicial exception, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements when considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. As discussed above with the respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a monitoring device, a local device, a remote server which comprises a processing module, a review portal, and a clinician portal to perform the method of the invention amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computing component. The system including the a monitoring device, a local device, a remote server which comprises a processing module, a review portal, and a clinician portal are recited at a high level of generality and are recited as generic computer components by reciting a wearable device including a sensor which can be of any suitable sensor (Specification [0042-0043]), a local device and remote server as including one or more processors (specification [0046], [0051]), and a processing module, review portal, and clinician portal as virtual machines on a suitable computing device such as a desktop computer, laptop, mobile device (specification [0064]), which do not add meaningful limitations to the abstract idea beyond mere instructions to apply an exception. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims also include the additional element of transmitting the measurements from the monitoring device to a local device which is an element that is well-understood, routine and conventional computer functions in the field of data management because they are claimed at a high level of generality and include receiving or transmitting data, which have been found to be well-understood, routine and conventional computer functions by the Court (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i) Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014) ("Unlike the claims in Ultramercial, the claims at issue here specify how interactions with the Internet are manipulated to yield a desired result‐‐a result that overrides the routine and conventional sequence of events ordinarily triggered by the click of a hyperlink." (emphasis added)). The claims also recite collecting measurements representing physiological signals of the body which is found to be well-understood, routine, and conventional by the courts similar to determining the level of a biomarker in blood by any means, Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968; Cleveland Clinic Foundation v. True Health Diagnostics, LLC, 859 F.3d 1352, 1362, 123 USPQ2d 1081, 1088 (Fed. Cir. 2017), as per MPEP 2106.05(d)(II). Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of the computer or improves another technology. The claims do not amount to significantly more than the underlying abstract idea.
Dependent Claims
Dependent Claims 2-19 add further limitations which are also directed to an abstract idea. Claims 2-6, 8-9 provide limitations which further limit or specify the elements of Claim 1 and are therefore directed to the same abstract idea. Claim 7 includes initiating the challenge and response request at a predetermined interval which falls into the abstract grouping of certain methods of organizing human activity for the same reasons as Claim 1. Claims 10 includes issuing a flag at a clinician portal which amounts to data outputting on the computer component. Mere data outputting amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity, which is well-understood, routine, and conventional in data processing as presenting offers and gathering statistics, see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II). Claim 11 provides limitations which further limit or specify the elements of Claim 10 and are therefore directed to the same abstract idea. Claim 12 includes an alert persisting until a predetermined response is provided. This describes managing personal behavior or interactions between people for managing alerts, which falls into the abstract grouping of certain methods of organizing human activity. Claims 13-17 provide limitations which further limit or specify the elements of Claim 12 and are therefore directed to the same abstract idea. Claim 18 includes communicating input in response to an alert, which describes managing personal behavior or interactions between people for managing alerts, which falls into the abstract grouping of certain methods of organizing human activity. Claim 19 includes an evaluation of an input in response to the alert, which describes managing personal behavior or interactions between people for managing alerts, which falls into the abstract grouping of certain methods of organizing human activity. Because the additional elements do not impose meaningful limitations on the judicial exception and the additional elements are well-understood, routine and conventional functionalities in the art, the claims are directed to an abstract idea and are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2018/0116598 A1), hereinafter Lee, in view of Goh et al. (US 2008/0194926 A1), hereinafter Goh.
As per Claim 1, Lee teaches a method for dynamic monitoring of a physiological condition from physiological signals collected from a body, the method comprising:
optionally, collecting, by a monitoring device, measurements representing said physiological signals of the body ([0017] medical device includes sensors which collect physiological data from the patient including measurements of blood pressure; [0019] device including sensors for sensing physiological signals including ECG signals) Examiner notes that this limitation is optional and therefore not required by the claim language;
optionally, transmitting the measurements from the monitoring device to a local device ([0019] transmit the blood pressure data to adherent device) Examiner notes that this limitation is optional and therefore not required by the claim language;
receiving, at a remote server, the measurements from the local device ([0020] transmit the captured physiological data to an external processing center/gateway);
automatically classifying each of the measurements as one of an artifact, a potential problem or a normal measurement and assigning a corresponding tag to the respective measurement at a processing module of the remote server ([0020] classifying the captured physiological data as normal/abnormal at an external processing center; [0031] classify data as normal or abnormal; [0038] monitored physiological data is compared to a threshold to designate the data as a trigger event, i.e. assign a tag);
verifying the classification of the measurements at a reviewer portal of the remote server accessible to a review technician ([0020] physiological data reviewed by physician/expert to verify classification; [0024] remote center comprises back-end operation for human experts to verify data; [0035] data is stored at the remote monitoring center where it is reviewed by physician/expert);
presenting the measurements and verified classifications at a clinician portal accessible to a clinician (see Fig. 2, 204 display results to medical professional for review [0032-0033] data transmitted to remote monitoring center for review, display (at the remote center) data for review by medical professional);
wherein one or more of the monitoring device, the local device, the processing module, the reviewer portal and the clinician portal is configured to initiate a challenge and response request at the local device in response to the measurements meeting predefined criteria, said challenge and response request including an alert issued at the local device ([0020] based on verification by physician/expert of the classification of data as abnormal, initiate a next step including an alert; [0018] adherence device prompts an alert to a user).
However, Lee May not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by Goh: receiving, the measurements and a local device identifier ([0027] measuring device has a unique identifier stored thereon; [0029] transmit the unique device identifier to the receiver to associated with a patient; [0030] transmit the signal, measured physiological parameter, and measuring device identifier to the receiver unit).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of receiving measurements with the associated local device identifier from Goh with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee in order to distinguish between data packets received from simultaneous transmissions from different transceivers (Goh, [0011]).
As per Claim 20, Lee teaches an interactive health monitoring system, the monitoring system comprising:
a monitoring device arranged for measuring physiological signals from a body and generating an output including at least a first measurement ([0017] medical device includes sensors which collect physiological data from the patient including measurements of blood pressure; [0019] device including sensors for sensing physiological signals including ECG signals);
a local device arranged for receiving said output and generating a personalized output including at least the first measurement ([0019] transmit the blood pressure data to adherent device);
a remote server configured to receive and process said personalized output ([0020] transmit the captured physiological data to an external processing center/gateway), said remote server comprising:
a processing module arranged to automatically classify the first measurement as an artifact, a potential problem or as having no apparent evidence of abnormality (NAEOA), the processing module configured to assign a corresponding tag to the first measurement according to said classification ([0020] classifying the captured physiological data as normal/abnormal at an external processing center; [0031] classify data as normal or abnormal; [0038] monitored physiological data is compared to a threshold to designate the data as a trigger event, i.e. assign a tag);
a review portal arranged to present the first measurement and the corresponding tag for verification ([0020] physiological data reviewed by physician/expert to verify classification; [0024] remote center comprises back-end operation for human experts to verify data; [0035] data is stored at the remote monitoring center where it is reviewed by physician/expert); and
a clinician portal arranged to present the verified first measurement and the corresponding tag (see Fig. 2, 204 display results to medical professional for review [0032-0033] data transmitted to remote monitoring center for review, display (at the remote center) data for review by medical professional);
wherein one or more of the monitoring device, the local device, the processing module, the reviewer portal and the clinician portal is configured to initiate a challenge and response request at the local device in response to the measurements meeting predefined criteria, said challenge and response request including an alert issued at a user interface of the local device ([0020] based on verification by physician/expert of the classification of data as abnormal, initiate a next step including an alert; [0018] adherence device prompts an alert to a user).
However, Lee May not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by Goh: receiving, the measurements and a local device identifier ([0027] measuring device has a unique identifier stored thereon; [0029] transmit the unique device identifier to the receiver to associated with a patient; [0030] transmit the signal, measured physiological parameter, and measuring device identifier to the receiver unit).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of receiving measurements with the associated local device identifier from Goh with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee in order to distinguish between data packets received from simultaneous transmissions from different transceivers (Goh, [0011]).
As per Claim 3, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. Lee also teaches wherein the monitoring device comprises at least one sensor configured for collecting the measurements representing said physiological signals of the body (Abstract medical device comprises sensors for monitoring ECG signals).
As per Claim 4, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. Lee also teaches wherein said predefined criteria comprises the measurement being classified as a potential problem ([0030] each physiological level includes threshold levels to classify the measurements as normal or abnormal).
As per Claim 5, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. Lee also teaches wherein said predefined criteria comprises a measurement corresponding to a lack of activity ([0017] medical device measures physiological parameters including activity level data; [0035] determining the measurement is low activity level based on comparison to baseline data).
As per Claim 19, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. Lee also teaches wherein said automatically classifying each of the measurements as one of an artifact, a potential problem or a normal measurement includes an evaluation of an input provided at a user interface of the local device in response to the alert ([0029] classifying events may be in response to a manual trigger of capturing physiological data by a patient based on patient onset of symptoms; [0041] classify the data as normal/abnormal in response to the patient-triggered events).
Claims 2 and 6-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2018/0116598 A1), in view of Goh (US 2008/0194926 A1), in view of Bui et al. (US 2003/0130590 A1), hereinafter Bui.
As per Claim 2, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. However, Lee and Goh may not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by Bui: teaches wherein the alert issued at the local device comprises an audible alert, a vibrating alert, a digital image, or a message provided at a management application of the local device ([0056] visual and aural ALERT/ALARM conditions).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of an audible or visual alert from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 6, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. However, Lee and Goh may not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by Bui: wherein said predefined criteria comprises a failed measurement ([0063] alert is sounded when an equipment failure is detected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of determining a failed measurement from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 7, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. However, Lee and Goh may not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by Bui: wherein the local device is arranged to initiate the challenge and response request at a predetermined interval ([0129] alarms and alerts are sent at a preset interval).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of send an alarm at a predetermined interval from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 8, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. However, Lee and Goh may not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by Bui: wherein said predefined criteria comprises a query input at the reviewer portal or the clinician portal ([0126] alarm instructions include physiological data test limit which is set by the caregiver; [0156] caregiver uses remote control software and communications unit to communicate from the remote location with the patient monitor including programming the alarms to establish the instructions which include the physiological data limits).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of determining abnormal condition of a user based on input by a clinician from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 9, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. However, Lee and Goh may not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by Bui: wherein said predefined criteria comprises a measurement corresponding to an emergency medical condition ([0063] alert is sounded when monitored physiological variable measurement is outside prescribed limits (Examiner interprets outside of prescribed limits as an emergency condition),[0078] emergency message or alert is sent when an emergency condition is detected; [0125] ALARMs treated with urgency).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of determining an abnormal condition based on measurements which correspond to an emergency condition from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 10, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. However, Lee and Goh may not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by Bui: wherein initiation of a challenge and response request at the local device causes a flag to issue at the clinician portal ([0132] the action in an Alert condition is to contact the caregiver; [0134] where the Alert condition results in an auditory warning or display visual warning on a monitor).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of sending an alert to a clinician from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 11, Lee, Goh, and Bui discloses the method of Claim 10. Bui also teaches wherein the flag comprises a challenge and response request directed to the clinician ([0060] the display provides ALERT/ALARM messages to be provided to the recipient including YES/NO keys to allow a caregiver to respond to questions).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of sending an alert to a physician includes a notification message from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 12, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. However, Lee and Goh may not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by Bui: wherein the alert issued at the local device persists until a predetermined response is provided at the local device ([0060] silence key allows user to silence alarm ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of an alarm which persists until receiving a response from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 13, Lee, Goh, and Bui discloses the method of Claim 12. Bui also teaches wherein the predetermined response comprises an input at the local device and/or the monitoring device ([0128-0129] alarms/alerts are stopped by response from user including patient disabling warning using a HOLD or MUTE button on the monitoring device; [0132] response to ALERT is patient response to the message on the display).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of waiting for an input to end alarm from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 14, Lee, Goh, and Bui discloses the method of Claim 12. However, Lee and Goh may not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by Bui: wherein the predetermined response comprises subsequent measurements received at the monitoring device that do not meet the predefined criteria ([0097] in response to subsequent frames being received as acceptable which resets the timeout alarm and timer).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of receiving further measurements that do not meet criteria to end alarm from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 15, Lee, Goh, and Bui discloses the method of Claim 12. Bui also teaches wherein the predetermined response comprises a de-escalation communication provided by the reviewer portal or the clinician portal ([0158] alarm is triggered and remains until communication from caregiver is received to release the alarm, i.e. de-escalate).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of clinician provides a de-escalation by providing communication from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 16, Lee, Goh, and Bui discloses the method of Claim 12. Bui also teaches wherein in response to the alert at the local device persisting for a predetermined period, a second challenge and response is initiated at the local device including a second alert ([0063] an ALERT is to be responded to quickly, i.e. within a predetermined time, or an ALARM is triggered).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of providing a second alert in response to the first alert persisting for a period of time from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 17, Lee, Goh, and Bui discloses the method of Claim 12. Bui also teaches wherein in response to the alert persisting for a predetermined period, the measurements are assigned a high priority level and presented at the clinician portal without verification at the reviewer portal ([0104] when measurement is above high limit, set a flag and begin timer, if measurement remains above high limit for time period of the timer then set the high alarm, i.e. high priority level).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of assigning a high priority to an alert when it persists for a set time from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
As per Claim 18, Lee and Goh discloses the method of Claim 1. However, Lee and Goh may not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by Bui: wherein an input provided at a user interface of the local device in response to the alert is communicated to the clinician portal and/or the reviewer portal ([0131] Alarm condition is determined and input received from patient on the user interface to contact the caregiver, see Fig. 1 where the patient monitor communicates with caregiver at remote location).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the present invention to combine the known concept of communicating input by the patient in response to an alarm from Bui with the monitoring of a physiological condition from Lee and Goh in order to provide home monitoring of a patient which frees up resources of healthcare professionals (Bui, [0003]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
McCombie et al. (US 2014/0163393 A1) teaches a wearable monitor for collecting physiological measurements and sending alerts based on determined threshold values.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Evangeline Barr whose telephone number is (571)272-0369. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00 am to 4:00 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, Fonya Long can be reached at 571-270-5096. 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.
/EVANGELINE BARR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3682
Prosecution Insights