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
Applicant is advised that should claim 14 be found allowable, claim 16 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claims fail to fall within a statutory category of invention. It is directed to a program itself, not a process occurring as a result of executing the program, a machine programmed to operate in accordance with the program nor a manufacture structurally and functionally interconnected with the program in a manner which enables the program to act as a computer component and realize its functionality. It’s also clearly not directed to a composition of matter. Therefore, it is non-statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yaeli et al. (US 2019/0272654 A1) in view of Gauthier et al. (US 2017/0039233 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yaeli discloses a method for presenting information along plural stages of patient care, the method comprising: initializing an interactive flow diagram based on data (Figure 1 and paragraph 0066, beginning the creation of a cohort clinical pathway directed acyclic graph (DAG)), the interactive flow diagram based on an underlying data model, the interactive flow diagram comprising nodes comprising an aggregated visual representation of key-value pairs, columns comprising a stacked bar visualization of the nodes, and links between the nodes; (Figure 4 and paragraphs 0114 and 0116, Sankey-based diagram computed from the cohort clinical pathway DAG for visualizing patient data nodes as columns with a height and/or thickness related to the patient data values and links between the nodes) displaying the interactive flow diagram; (Paragraph 0106, presentation of the Sankey-based visual diagram) and dynamically updating the interactive flow diagram based on user interactions, the interactions resulting in updates to the underlying data model that change an arrangement of at least one of the nodes, the columns, or the links (Paragraph 0109, manual selections by a user can adjust the visual diagram).
Yaeli does not clearly disclose updating the interactive flow diagram based on user interactions with the interactive flow diagram. Gauthier discloses modifying a display of a Sankey diagram according to user selection and dragging of nodes (Paragraph 0069). Gauthier’s technique of modifying a display of a Sankey diagram according to user selection and dragging of nodes would have been recognized by one of ordinary skill in the art to be applicable to the Sankey-based diagram of patient data and the results would have been predictable in the modification of a display of a Sankey-based diagram of patient data according to user selection and dragging of nodes. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2, Yaeli discloses receiving the data from one or a combination of a spread sheet data or an analytics database (Paragraph 0089, database of statistics).
Regarding claim 3, Gauthier discloses providing aggregated information based on user input over one of the nodes, the aggregated information providing further detail about the one of the nodes (Paragraph 0166, clicking of a node to obtain additional details).
Regarding claim 4, Gauthier discloses isolating a sub-population of one of the nodes based on user input at the one of the nodes (Paragraph 0159, clicking on a node to trigger an expansion of a display of all child nodes).
Regarding claim 5, Yaeli in view of Gauthier discloses providing demographics in graphs adjacent the interactive flow diagram based on user selection of one of the nodes (Gauthier, paragraphs 0169-0170, display of charts of secondary data adjacent to the Sankey diagram for a clicked node where the data can be patient data associated with the Sankey diagram, Yaeli, paragraph 0114).
Regarding claim 6, Gauthier discloses repositioning or removing one of the columns based on user input corresponding to drag-and-drop functionality (Paragraph 0069, selection and dragging of nodes for repositioning in the display).
Regarding claim 7, Gauthier discloses filtering one or more nodes or one or more graphs based on user selection of the one or more nodes (Paragraph 0159, clicking on a node causes all associated child nodes to be displayed).
Regarding claim 8, Gauthier discloses highlighting differences between two or more sub-populations based on user selection of the two or more sub-populations for a given one of the columns (Paragraph 0159, coloring of parent and child nodes differently).
Regarding claim 9, Yaeli discloses providing information for an individual patient for a selected cohort (Paragraphs 0013 and 0038, individual patients of a cohort).
Regarding claim 10, Yaeli discloses wherein the interactive flow diagram further comprises treatment pathways and/or outcomes of treatments (Figure 4 and paragraphs 0038, 0070, 0074 and 0114, treatment and outcome parameters for nodes).
Regarding claim 11, Yaeli in view of Gauthier discloses wherein the displaying comprises displaying the interactive flow diagram in a single view (Yaeli, paragraph 0106 and Gauthier, figure 31, presentation of the Sankey diagram).
Regarding claim 12, Yaeli in view of Gauthier discloses wherein the displaying comprises displaying the interactive flow diagram as a standalone analytics tool, or one or a combination of in conjunction with an existing analytics application as a custom chart or in conjunction with a patient management application (Paragraphs 0001-0002, GUIs for constructing clinical pathways for treating a patient).
Regarding claim 13, Yaeli in view of Gauther does not clearly disclose wherein patient management application comprises a lung cancer orchestrator. However, Yaeli discloses GUIs for constructing clinical pathways for treating, for example, congestive heart failure for a patient (Paragraphs 0001-0002). Lung cancer is another known condition that can be treated for a patient. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the GUIs of Yaeli for constructing clinical pathways for treating lung cancer for a patient.
Regarding claim 14, Yaeli in view of Gauther discloses a computer program product comprising a set of instructions executable by a computing device for performing the method of claim 1 (See rejection of claim 1 and Yaeli, paragraph 0005, computer program product).
Regarding claim 15, Yaeli in view of Gauthier discloses a computing device, comprising: a memory comprising instructions; and one or more processors configured by the instructions to implement the method of claim 1 (See rejection of claim 1 and Yaeli, paragraph 0005, memory storing code for execution on a processor).
Regarding claim 16, similar reasoning as discussed in claim 14 is applied.
Regarding claim 17, similar reasoning as discussed in claim 15 is applied.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ishii et al. (US 2023/0032564 A1) discloses emphatic display of selected edges of a Sankey diagram.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHI HOANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3417. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, JASON CHAN can be reached at (571)272-3022. 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.
/PHI HOANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619