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 .
Status of the Application
Claims 1-19 and 21 are currently pending in this case and have been examined and addressed below. This communication is a Final Rejection in response to the Amendments to the Claims and Remarks filed on 01/05/2026.
Claims 1-2, 7, 9-12, 15-16, and 19 are currently amended.
Claim 20 is cancelled.
Claim 21 is added.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/05/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is 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 – 19 and 21 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: Claims 1-8 and 21 are drawn to a process. Claims 9-14 and 15-19 are drawn to a machine. As such, claims 1-19 and 21 are drawn to one of the statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A - Prong One: In prong one of step 2A, the claim(s) is/are analyzed to evaluate whether it/they recite(s) a judicial exception.
Independent Claim 1: A computer-implemented method, comprising:
presenting, at a user device registered to a user, a first user interface comprising a health category section and a health records section that comprises a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items of the user;
receiving, at the user device, a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item;
responsive to receiving the first selection, accessing, by the user device, a personal health ontology stored on the user device, wherein the personal health ontology comprises a customized mapping between health record data and a standardized health sub- ontology;
using, by the user device, the personal health ontology to retrieve the health record data stored on the user device and associated with the first type of health record item; and presenting, at the user device, a second user interface that includes a portion of the health record data.
Independent Claim 9: One or more non-transitory computer-readable storage devices comprising computer-executable instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a user device, cause the user device to perform operations comprising:
presenting, at the user device registered to a user, a first user interface comprising a health category section and a health records section that comprises a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items of the user;
receiving, at the user device, a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item;
responsive to receiving the first selection, accessing, by the user device, a personal health ontology stored on the user device, wherein the personal health ontology comprises a customized mapping between health record data and a standardized health sub- ontology;
using, by the user device, the personal health ontology to retrieve the health record data stored on the user device and associated with the first type of health record item;
and presenting, at the user device, a second user interface that includes a portion of the health record data.
Independent Claim 15: A user device, comprising:
a memory configured to store computer-executable instructions;
and one or more processors in communication with the memory and configured to access the memory and execute the computer-executable instructions to at least:
present, at the user device registered to a user, a first user interface comprising a health category section and a health records section that comprises a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items of the user;
receive, at the user device, a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item;
responsive to receiving the first selection, access, by the user device, a personal health ontology stored on the user device, wherein the personal health ontology comprises a customized mapping between health record data and a standardized health sub-ontology;
use, by the user device, the personal health ontology to retrieve the health record data stored on the user device and associated with the first type of health record item;
and present, at the user device, a second user interface that includes a portion of the health record data.
(Examiner notes: The above claim terms underlined are additional elements that fall under Step 2A - Prong Two analysis section detailed below)
These steps amount to methods of organizing human activity which includes functions relating to interpersonal and intrapersonal activities, such as managing relationships or transactions between people, social activities, and human behavior; satisfying or avoiding a legal obligation; advertising, marketing, and sales activities or behaviors; and managing human mental activity (MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C) citing the abstract idea grouping for methods of organizing human activity for managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people). Therefore, presenting a health category section and a health records section with health record items, receiving a type of health record item, assessing a personal health ontology, using the personal health ontology to retrieve the health record data, and presenting a portion of the health record data are directed to managing personal interactions or personal behavior.
The dependent claim 2 is directed to the health record data is associated with a user profile corresponding the user.
The dependent claim 3 is directed to the personal health ontology represents associations between the health record data and one or more concept nodes.
The dependent claim 4 is directed to filtering the health record data based on recency and alphabetically.
The dependent claim 5 is directed to organizes the portion of the health record data into a plurality of selectable record entries representing when respective health record data was collected.
The dependent claim 6 is directed to receiving a second selection of a first selectable record entry of the plurality of selectable record entries and responsive to receiving the second selection, using the personal health ontology to retrieve particular health record data associated with the first selectable record entry.
The dependent claim 7 is directed to organizes the portion of the health record data into a plurality of selectable record concepts.
The dependent claim 8 is directed to receiving a second selection of a first selectable record concept of the plurality of selectable record concepts and responsive to receiving the second selection, using the personal health ontology to retrieve particular health record data associated with the first selectable record concept, and presenting a detailed view of the particular health data.
The dependent claim 10 is directed to the personal health ontology is based on the standardized health sub-ontology and at least one of standard health code terminology.
The dependent claim 11 is directed to the personal health ontology represents associations between the health record data and one or more concept nodes of the standardized health sub-ontology.
The dependent claim 13 is directed to organizes the portion of the health record data into a plurality of selectable record entries representing when respective health record data was collected.
The dependent claim 14 is directed to receiving a second selection of a first selectable record entry of the plurality of selectable record entries, responsive to receiving the second selection, using the personal health ontology to retrieve particular health record data associated with the first selectable record entry, and presenting a detailed view of the particular health record data.
The dependent claim 16 is directed to the health record data is associated with a user profile corresponding to the user.
The dependent claim 17 is directed to filtering the health record data based on recency and alphabetically.
The dependent claim 18 is directed to organizes the portion of the health record data into a plurality of selectable record entries representing when respective health record data was collected.
The dependent claim 19 is directed to organizes the portion of the health record data into a plurality of selectable record concepts.
The dependent claim 21 is directed to traversing the personal health ontology to define a set of predefined paths and accessing the personal health ontology based at least in part on the set of predefined paths.
Each of these steps of the preceding dependent claims 2-8, 10-14, 16-19, and 21 only serve to further limit or specify the features of independent claims 1, 9, and 15 accordingly, and hence are nonetheless directed towards fundamentally the same abstract idea as the independent claim and utilize the additional elements analyzed below in the expected manner.
As such, the Examiner concludes that the preceding claims recite an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong One: YES).
Step 2A - Prong Two: In prong two of step 2A, an evaluation is made whether a claim recites any additional element, or combination of additional elements, that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. An “additional element” is an element that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception (i.e., an element/limitation that sets forth an abstract idea is not an additional element). The phrase “integration into a practical application” is defined as requiring an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, and 15 recite the use of a user device, in this case to presenting a health category section and a health records section, receiving a first type of health record item, assessing a personal health ontology, using the personal health ontology to retrieve health record data, and presenting the portion of health record data, only recites the user device as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2)).
Claims 1, 9, and 15 recite the use of a first user interface. The claims also recite the use of a set of selectable user interface elements, in this case to, represent a first type of health record item. Additionally, the claims recite the use of a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element, in this case to represent a first type of health record item. Furthermore, claims 1, 9, and 15 recite The use of a personal health ontology and health record stored on the user device. The first user interface, set of selectable user interface elements, a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, and the personal health ontology and health record stored on the user device are only recited as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2)).
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, 13, 15, 17, 18, and 19 recite the use of a second user interface, as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2)).
Claim 3 recites he use of a curated health sub-ontology stored on the user device, only as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2)).
Claims 4 and 17 recite the use of a second user interface comprising a first filter and a second filter, only as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2)).
Claims 6, 8, and 14 recite the use of a third user interface, only as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2)).
Claims 9 and 14 recite the use of one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage devices comprising computer-executable instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a user device, cause the user device, in this case to presenting a health category section and a health records section, receiving a first type of health record item, assessing a personal health ontology, using the personal health ontology to retrieve health record data, and presenting the portion of health record data, only recites the One or more non-transitory computer-readable storage devices comprising computer-executable instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a user device, cause the user device as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2)).
Claim 11 recites the use of a standardized health sub-ontology stored on the user device, only recites the standardized health sub-ontology stored on the user device as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2)).
Claim 12 recites the use of a standardized health sub-ontology and the personal health ontology are stored in a database on the user device, only as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2)).
Claim 15 recites the use of a memory configured to store computer-executable instructions and one or more processors in communication with the memory and configured to access the memory and execute the computer-executable instructions, in this case, to present a health category section and a health records section, receive a first type of health record item, assess a personal health ontology, using the personal health ontology to retrieve health record data, and present the portion of health record data, only recites the memory configured to store computer-executable instructions and one or more processors in communication with the memory and configured to access the memory and execute the computer-executable instructions as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2)).
The Examiner has therefore determined that the additional elements, or combination of additional elements, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claim(s) is/are directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong two: NO).
Step 2B: In step 2B, the claims are analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is/are sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the identified additional elements, such as user device, first user interface, a set of selectable user interface elements, a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element, second user interface, personal health ontology and health record stored on the user device, curated health sub-ontology stored on the user device, second user interface comprising a first filter and a second filter, third user interface, One or more non-transitory computer-readable storage devices comprising computer-executable instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a user device, cause the user device, standardized health sub-ontology stored on the user device, standardized health sub-ontology and the personal health ontology are stored in a database on the user device, memory configured to store computer-executable instructions, one or more processors in communication with the memory and configured to access the memory and execute the computer-executable instructions in independent claims 1, 9, and 15 and dependent claims 2-8, 10-14, 16-19, and 21 are equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer. Each of these elements is only recited as a tool for performing steps of the abstract idea, such as the use of the computer and data processing devices to apply the algorithm. These additional elements therefore only amount to mere instructions to perform the abstract idea using a computer and are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (MPEP 2016.05(f) see for additional guidance on the “mere instructions to apply an exception”). Each additional element under Step 2A, Prong 2 is analyzed in light of the specification’s explanation of the additional element’s structure. The claimed invention’s additional elements are directed to generic computer component and functions being used to perform the abstract idea.
Applicant’s own disclosure in paragraphs [0056-0057] acknowledges that “a user device 108, which is any suitable electronic user device capable of communicating with other electronic devices over a network such as the Internet, a cellular network, or any other suitable network. In some examples, the user device 108 may be a smartphone or other user device on which specialized applications can operate…user devices such as the user device 108 may interact with the EHR system 114 using any suitable interfaces such as gateway application programming interfaces (API) or via patient portals including graphical user interfaces”. Paragraphs [0193] and [0231] discloses “data may be presented on one or more user interface cards or with respect to other user interface elements…and…user interface elements (e.g., the filters 2810)”. Additionally, the disclosure acknowledges in paragraphs [0052] and [0124] that “the personal health ontology is leveraged to create graphical filters to automatically highlight certain differences in test result data (e.g., a type of test used to obtain the data)…and…an attribute filter (e.g., reference terminology code lookup)”. Paragraphs [0003] and [0044] disclose that “a standard health coding ontology, the standard health coding ontology including a set of health codes…and…curated health ontology is a concept-based ontology that is organized by nodes representing health concepts (e.g., concept nodes)… a robust standard health coding ontology such as the SNOMED Clinical Terms (CT) standard or other similar health coding ontology”. Paragraph [0048] discloses that the ” personal health ontology may represent an index that maps items from the user’s health record to concept nodes in the curated health sub-ontology. The personal health ontology can be queried (e.g., by the user device or some other system) to obtain information about specific aspects of the user’s health record. For example, the personal health ontology can be queried by a third-party application to determine whether any active medications represented in the health record are within a drug interaction categories (e.g., contraindicated, serious, significant, or minor)”. Additionally, in paragraph [0162] the disclosure acknowledges that the “health record storage 112 may include any suitable logical and/or physical divisions such as separate databases, memory modules, and the like to enable storage of the health records 1004, the personal health ontology 1102, and the curated health sub-ontology 1002. In some examples, the personal health ontology 1102 and the curated health sub-ontology 1002 are stored in the same database”. Paragraphs [0260] and [0267] discloses “the user device 108 may include at least one memory 3214 and one or more processing units (or processor(s)) 3216. The processor(s) 3216 may be implemented as appropriate in hardware, computer-executable instructions, firmware, or combinations thereof. Computer-executable instruction or firmware implementations of the processor(s) 3216 may include computer-executable or machine-executable instructions written in any suitable programming language to perform the various functions described…and…memory 3242 may store program instructions that are loadable and executable on the processor(s) 3244, as well as data generated during the execution of these programs. Depending on the configuration and type of service provider computer 3202, the memory 3242 may be volatile (such as RAM) and/or non-volatile (such as ROM, flash memory, etc.). The service provider computer 3202 may also include additional removable storage and/or non-removable storage 3246 including, but not limited to, magnetic storage, optical disks, and/or tape storage. The disk drives and their associated non-transitory computer-readable media may provide non-volatile storage of computer-readable instructions, data structures, program modules, and other data for the computing devices. In some implementations, the memory 3242 may include multiple different types of memory, such as SRAM, DRAM, or ROM. While the volatile memory described herein may be referred to as RAM, any volatile memory that would not maintain data stored therein once unplugged from a host and/or power would be appropriate. The memory 3242 and the additional storage 3246, both removable and non-removable, are both additional examples of non-transitory computer-readable storage media”.
The Examiner has therefore determined that no additional element, or combination of additional claims elements is/are sufficient to ensure the claim(s) amount to significantly more than the abstract idea identified above (Step 2B: NO).
Therefore, claims 1-19 and 21 are not eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-13, 15-16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dandala (US-20180032679-A1)[hereinafter Dandala], in view of CBS Detroit, ("Capzule Introduces Time Line To Health Data On iPad")[hereinafter CBS Detroit], in view of LEE et al. (US-20190361908-A1)[hereinafter Lee].
As per Claim 1, Dandala discloses a computer-implemented method in paragraphs [0044] (a computer-implemented method), comprising: presenting, at a user device registered to a user, a first user interface comprising a health category section and a health records section that comprises a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items of the user in paragraphs [0003] and [0044] and [0048] and Figure 5 (presenting, at a user device, a first user interface including medical problems (synonymous to a health category section) and medical entities (synonymous to health record sections), wherein medical entities include medications, medical procedures, and laboratory procedures, that include a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items); receiving, at the user device, a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item in paragraphs [0048-0051] (receiving a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element represents a first type of health record item (Examiner notes that when a medical problem is selected, a medical entity is also selected, similarly when a medical entity is selected, a medical problem is selected)); responsive to receiving the first selection, accessing, by the user device, a personal health ontology stored on the user device in paragraphs [0003] and [0026-0028] and [0050] and [0052] and [0056] (in response to selecting the first selection, accessing a personal health ontology stored on the user device), using, by the user device, the personal health ontology to retrieve the health record data stored on the user device and associated with the first type of health record item in paragraphs [0046-0047] and [0052] (using a personal health ontology to retrieve electronic medical record or EMR data (synonymous to health record data) stored on the user device and associated with the first type of health record item); and presenting, at the user device, a second user interface that includes a portion of the health record data in paragraphs [0068] and Figure 11 (presenting, at the user device, a second user interface that includes a summary of the EMR (synonymous to a portion of the health record data)).
Dandala discloses the concept of presenting a health category section and a health records section to allow the user to select a set of health record items, but Dandala does not disclose the health record items belonging to the patient, or the user associated with the user device. However, CBS Detroit discloses presenting, at a user device registered to a user, a first user interface comprising a health category section and a health records section that comprises a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items of the user in the 1st - 4th paragraphs (presenting, at a user device registered to a user, Capzule PHR (synonymous to a first user interface) including health category section and personal health records section that allows the users to select multiple sets of health data of the user (Examiner notes that Capzule PHR is an universal app that allows users to select and visualize their health records data)); receiving, at the user device, a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item in the 1st - 4th paragraphs (receiving, at the user device, a user selection of the health data (Examiner notes that a user selection of health data on the app indicates a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item)).
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the user device associated with user or patient of the secondary reference(s) for the user device associated with the medical professional of the primary reference. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Dandala and CBS Detroit do not disclose the following limitations. However, Lee discloses wherein the personal health ontology comprises a customized mapping between health record data and a standardized health sub- ontology in paragraphs [0027-0031] (mapping the medical data set (synonymous to health record data) and SNOMED CT ontology (synonymous to a standardized health sub-ontology)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention of a method that presents a health category and health records sections, receives a user selection of a health record item, access a personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping a health record data and a standardized health sub-ontology, use the personal health ontology to retrieve and present the health record data, as disclosed by Dandala and CBS Detroit, to be combined with the personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping between the health record data and standardized health sub-ontology, as disclosed by Lee, for the purpose of avoiding the drawback of existing medical information that may not be acknowledged due to the different forms of medical terms or data formats [0006-0007].
As per Claim 2, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, Dandala also discloses wherein the health record data is associated with a user profile corresponding to the user in paragraph [0046] (the EMR data is associated with a patient identifier (synonymous to a user profile) corresponding to the user).
As per Claim 3, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, Dandala also discloses wherein the personal health ontology represents associations between the health record data and one or more concept nodes of a curated health sub-ontology stored on the user device in paragraphs [0026-0028] and [0056-0058] (the personal health ontology represents associations between the EMR data and standardized terms (synonymous to one or more concept nodes) of a curated health sub-ontology stored on the user device).
As per Claim 5, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, Dandala also discloses wherein the second user interface organizes the portion of the health record data into a plurality of selectable record entries representing when respective health record data was collected in paragraphs [0068-0069] and Figure 11 (the second user interface includes the summary with a timeline view of the EMR data (synonymous to the portion of the health record data organized into a plurality of selectable record entries representing when respective health record data was collected)).
As per Claim 7, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, Dandala also discloses wherein the second user interface organizes the portion of the health record data into a plurality of selectable record concepts in paragraphs [0048] and [0056-0058] and [0067-0068] and Figures 8-10 (the second user interface includes the summary with a plurality of pairs for the standardized terms (synonymous to a plurality of selectable record concepts), wherein the pair includes non-standardized terms relating to medical problems and medical entities).
As per Claim 8, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 7, further comprising: Dandala also discloses receiving a second selection of a first selectable record concept of the plurality of selectable record concepts in paragraphs [0056-0058] and [0067] and Figures 8-10 (receiving a second selection of an input pair of standardized terms (synonymous to a first selectable record concept) of the plurality of pairs for the standardized terms); responsive to receiving the second selection, using the personal health ontology to retrieve particular health record data associated with the first selectable record concept in paragraphs [0056-0058] and [0067] and Figures 8-10 (in response to receiving the input pair, using the personal health ontology to retrieve entity-relation-score for input pair (synonymous to particular health record data associated with the first selectable record concept)); and presenting, at the user device, a third user interface that includes a detailed view of the particular health record data in paragraphs [0048] and [0067-0069] and Figure 10 (presenting, at the user device, a third user interface that includes the highlighted medical entities that are related in the summary (Examiner notes that the summary shows a detailed view of the entity-relation-score for the input pair by highlighting when the medical entities are related)).
As per Claim 9, Dandala discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage devices comprising computer-executable instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a user device, cause the user device to perform operations in paragraphs [0052-0053] and [0072] (a computer readable storage medium including instructions, that when executed by one or more processors of a user device, cause the user device to perform operations) comprising: presenting, at the user device registered to a user, a first user interface comprising a health category section and a health records section that comprises a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items of the user in paragraphs [0003] and [0044] and [0048] and Figure 5 (presenting, at a user device, a first user interface including medical problems (synonymous to a health category section) and medical entities (synonymous to health record sections), wherein medical entities include medications, medical procedures, and laboratory procedures, that include a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items); receiving, at the user device, a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item in paragraphs [0048-0051] (receiving a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element represents a first type of health record item (Examiner notes that when a medical problem is selected, a medical entity is also selected, similarly when a medical entity is selected, a medical problem is selected)); responsive to receiving the first selection, accessing, by the user device, a personal health ontology stored on the user device in paragraphs [0003] and [0026-0028] and [0050] and [0052] and [0056] (in response to selecting the first selection, accessing a personal health ontology stored on the user device); using, by the user device, the personal health ontology to retrieve the health record data stored on the user device and associated with the first type of health record item in paragraphs [0046-0047] and [0052] (using a personal health ontology to retrieve electronic medical record or EMR data (synonymous to health record data) stored on the user device and associated with the first type of health record item); and presenting, at the user device, a second user interface that includes a portion of the health record data in paragraphs [0068] and Figure 11 (presenting, at the user device, a second user interface that includes a summary of the EMR (synonymous to a portion of the health record data)).
Dandala discloses the concept of presenting a health category section and a health records section to allow the user to select a set of health record items, but Dandala does not disclose the health record items belonging to the patient, or the user associated with the user device. However, CBS Detroit discloses presenting, at the user device registered to a user, a first user interface comprising a health category section and a health records section that comprises a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items of the user in the 1st - 4th paragraphs (presenting, at a user device registered to a user, Capzule PHR (synonymous to a first user interface) including health category section and personal health records section that allows the users to select multiple sets of health data of the user (Examiner notes that Capzule PHR is an universal app that allows users to select and visualize their health records data)); receiving, at the user device, a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item in the 1st - 4th paragraphs (receiving, at the user device, a user selection of the health data (Examiner notes that a user selection of health data on the app indicates a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item)).
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the user device associated with user or patient of the secondary reference(s) for the user device associated with the medical professional of the primary reference. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Dandala and CBS Detroit do not disclose the following limitations. However, Lee discloses wherein the personal health ontology comprises a customized mapping between health record data and a standardized health sub- ontology in paragraphs [0027-0031] (mapping the medical data set (synonymous to health record data) and SNOMED CT ontology (synonymous to a standardized health sub-ontology)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention of a non-transitory computer-readable storage device that presents a health category and health records sections, receives a user selection of a health record item, access a personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping a health record data and a standardized health sub-ontology, use the personal health ontology to retrieve and present the health record data, as disclosed by Dandala and CBS Detroit, to be combined with the personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping between the health record data and standardized health sub-ontology, as disclosed by Lee, for the purpose of avoiding the drawback of existing medical information that may not be acknowledged due to the different forms of medical terms or data formats [0006-0007].
As per Claim 10, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage devices of claim 9, Dandala also discloses wherein the personal health ontology is based at least in part on the standardized health sub-ontology and at least one standard health coding terminology in paragraph [0056] (the personal health ontology is based on common standardized coding systems (synonymous to the standardized health sub-ontology) and standardized health coding terms).
As per Claim 11, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage devices of claim 9, Dandala also discloses wherein the personal health ontology represents associations between the health record data and one or more concept nodes of the standardized health sub- ontology stored on the user device in paragraphs [0026-0028] and [0056-0058] (the personal health ontology represents associations between the EMR data and standardized terms (synonymous to one or more concept nodes) of common standardized coding systems stored on the user device).
As per Claim 12, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage devices of claim 11, Dandala also discloses wherein the standardized health sub-ontology and the personal health ontology are stored in a database on the user device in paragraphs [0040-0042] and [0056] (the common standardized coding systems and the personal health ontology are stored in ontology repositories or domain ontology (synonymous to a database) on the user device).
As per Claim 13, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage devices of claim 9, Dandala also discloses wherein the second user interface organizes the portion of the health record data into a plurality of selectable record entries representing when respective health record data was collected in paragraphs [0068-0069] and Figure 11 (the second user interface includes the summary with a timeline view of the EMR data (synonymous to the portion of the health record data organized into a plurality of selectable record entries representing when respective health record data was collected)).
As per Claim 15, Dandala discloses a user device in paragraphs [0003] and [0052] (a user interface device), comprising: a memory configured to store computer-executable instructions in paragraphs [0052-0054] and [0072] (a memory that stores instructions); and one or more processors in communication with the memory and configured to access the memory and execute the computer-executable instructions in paragraphs [0052-0054] and [0072] (one or more processors coupled with the memory and accesses the memory and executes the instructions) to at least: present, at the user device registered to a user, a first user interface comprising a health category section and a health records section that comprises a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items of the user in paragraphs [0003] and [0044] and [0048] and Figure 5 (presenting, at a user device, a first user interface including medical problems (synonymous to a health category section) and medical entities (synonymous to health record sections), wherein medical entities include medications, medical procedures, and laboratory procedures, that include a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items); receive, at the user device, a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item in paragraphs [0048-0051] (receiving a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element represents a first type of health record item (Examiner notes that when a medical problem is selected, a medical entity is also selected, similarly when a medical entity is selected, a medical problem is selected)); responsive to receiving the first selection, access, by the user device, a personal health ontology stored on the user device in paragraphs [0003] and [0026-0028] and [0050] and [0052] and [0056] (in response to selecting the first selection, accessing a personal health ontology stored on the user device); use, by the user device, the personal health ontology to retrieve the health record data stored on the user device and associated with the first type of health record item in paragraphs [0046-0047] and [0052] (using a personal health ontology to retrieve electronic medical record or EMR data (synonymous to health record data) stored on the user device and associated with the first type of health record item); and present, at the user device, a second user interface that includes a portion of the health record data in paragraph [0068] and Figure 11 (presenting, at the user device, a second user interface that includes a summary of the EMR (synonymous to a portion of the health record data)).
Dandala discloses the concept of presenting a health category section and a health records section to allow the user to select a set of health record items, but Dandala does not disclose the health record items belonging to the patient, or the user associated with the user device. However, CBS Detroit discloses present, at the user device registered to a user, a first user interface comprising a health category section and a health records section that comprises a set of selectable user interface elements representing a set of health record items of the user in the 1st - 4th paragraphs (presenting, at a user device registered to a user, Capzule PHR (synonymous to a first user interface) including health category section and personal health records section that allows the users to select multiple sets of health data of the user (Examiner notes that Capzule PHR is an universal app that allows users to select and visualize their health records data)); receive, at the user device, a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item in the 1st - 4th paragraphs (receiving, at the user device, a user selection of the health data (Examiner notes that a user selection of health data on the app indicates a first selection of a first selectable user interface element of the set of selectable user interface elements, the first selectable user interface element representing a first type of health record item)).
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the user device associated with user or patient of the secondary reference(s) for the user device associated with the medical professional of the primary reference. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Dandala and CBS Detroit do not disclose the following limitations. However, Lee discloses wherein the personal health ontology comprises a customized mapping between health record data and a standardized health sub-ontology in paragraphs [0027-0031] (mapping the medical data set (synonymous to health record data) and SNOMED CT ontology (synonymous to a standardized health sub-ontology)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention of a user device that presents a health category and health records sections, receives a user selection of a health record item, access a personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping a health record data and a standardized health sub-ontology, use the personal health ontology to retrieve and present the health record data, as disclosed by Dandala and CBS Detroit, to be combined with the personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping between the health record data and standardized health sub-ontology, as disclosed by Lee, for the purpose of avoiding the drawback of existing medical information that may not be acknowledged due to the different forms of medical terms or data formats [0006-0007].
As per Claim 16, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the user device of claim 15, Dandala also discloses wherein the health record data is associated with a user profile corresponding to the user in paragraph [0046] (the EMR data is associated with a patient identifier (synonymous to a user profile) corresponding to the user).
As per Claim 18, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the user device of claim 15, Dandala also discloses wherein the second user interface organizes the portion of the health record data into a plurality of selectable record entries representing when respective health record data was collected in paragraphs [0068-0069] and Figure 11 (the second user interface includes the summary with a timeline view of the EMR data (synonymous to the portion of the health record data organized into a plurality of selectable record entries representing when respective health record data was collected)).
As per Claim 19, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the user device of claim 15, Dandala also discloses wherein the second user interface organizes the portion of the health record data into a plurality of selectable record concepts in paragraphs [0056-0058] and [0067-0068] and Figures 8-10 (the second user interface includes the summary with a plurality of pairs for the standardized terms (synonymous to a plurality of selectable record concepts), wherein the pair includes non-standardized terms relating to medical problems and medical entities).
Claims 4 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dandala (US-20180032679-A1)[hereinafter Dandala], in view of CBS Detroit, ("Capzule Introduces Time Line To Health Data On iPad")[hereinafter CBS Detroit], in view of LEE et al. (US-20190361908-A1)[hereinafter Lee], in view of Sparandara (US-20120130741-A1)[hereinafter Sparandara].
As per Claim 4, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1.
Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee do not disclose the following limitations. However, Sparandara discloses wherein the second user interface comprises a first filter for filtering the health record data based on recency and a second filter for filtering the health record data alphabetically in paragraphs [0036-0038] and [0044] and [0054] and [0057] and [0101] (the filters component user interface (synonymous to the second user interface) includes a first filter for filtering the medical results data (synonymous to health record data) based on recency and a second filter for filtering the medical results data alphabetically).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention of a method that presents a health category and health records sections, receives a user selection of a health record item, access a personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping a health record data and a standardized health sub-ontology, use the personal health ontology to retrieve and present the health record data, as disclosed by Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee, to be combined with the second interface including a first filter to filter the health record data based recency and a second filter to filter the health record data alphabetically, as disclosed by Sparandara, for the purpose of improving the ability to aggregate and display patient information at one time [0005-0006].
As per Claim 17, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the user device of claim 15.
Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee do not disclose the following limitations. However, Sparandara discloses wherein the second user interface comprises a first filter for filtering the health record data based on recency and a second filter for filtering the health record data alphabetically in paragraphs [0036-0038] and [0044] and [0054] and [0057] and [0101] (the filters component user interface (synonymous to the second user interface) includes a first filter for filtering the medical results data (synonymous to health record data) based on recency and a second filter for filtering the medical results data alphabetically).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention of a user device that presents a health category and health records sections, receives a user selection of a health record item, access a personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping a health record data and a standardized health sub-ontology, use the personal health ontology to retrieve and present the health record data, as disclosed by Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee, to be combined with the second interface including a first filter to filter the health record data based recency and a second filter to filter the health record data alphabetically, as disclosed by Sparandara, for the purpose of improving the ability to aggregate and display patient information at one time [0005-0006].
Claims 6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dandala (US-20180032679-A1)[hereinafter Dandala], in view of CBS Detroit, ("Capzule Introduces Time Line To Health Data On iPad")[hereinafter CBS Detroit], in view of LEE et al. (US-20190361908-A1)[hereinafter Lee], in view of Karres (US-20150095016-A1)[hereinafter Karres].
As per Claim 6, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 5.
Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee do not disclose the following limitations. However, Karres discloses further comprising: receiving a second selection of a first selectable record entry of the plurality of selectable record entries in paragraphs [0027-0029] and [0048] and [0069-0070] and Figures 3 and 6 (receiving a selection of a clinical document input (synonymous to a second selection of a first selectable record entry) of the plurality of selectable clinical document inputs (synonymous to the plurality of selectable record entries)); and responsive to receiving the second selection, using the personal health ontology to retrieve particular health record data associated with the first selectable record entry in paragraphs [0030-0033] and [0048-0051] and [0069] and Figures 3 and 6 (in response to the selection of a clinical document (synonymous to the second selection), using the PCS engine (synonymous to the personal health ontology), referred as Ontological NLP, to retrieve medical and billing codes (synonymous to particular health record data) associated with the selection of a clinical document); and presenting, at the user device, a third user interface that includes a detailed view of the particular health record data in paragraphs [0069-0071] and [0073] and Figures 3 and 6 (presenting, at the workstation (synonymous to a user device), a graphical user interface (synonymous to a third user interface) that includes a detailed view of the medical and billing codes).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention of a method that presents a health category and health records sections, receives a user selection of a health record item, access a personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping a health record data and a standardized health sub-ontology, use the personal health ontology to retrieve and present the health record data, as disclosed by Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee, to be combined with receiving a selection of a record entry, using the personal health ontology to retrieve health record data associated with the record entry, and displaying the associated health record data on a third interface, as disclosed by Karres, for the purpose of increasing efficiency and improving clinical documentation [0004].
As per Claim 14, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage devices of claim 13, further comprising additional computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors of the user device, cause the user device to perform additional operations.
Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee do not disclose the following limitations. However, Karres discloses receiving a second selection of a first selectable record entry of the plurality of selectable record entries in paragraphs [0027-0029] and [0048] and [0069-0070] and Figures 3 and 6 (receiving a selection of a clinical document input (synonymous to a second selection of a first selectable record entry) of the plurality of selectable clinical document inputs (synonymous to the plurality of selectable record entries)); and responsive to receiving the second selection, using the personal health ontology to retrieve particular health record data associated with the first selectable record entry in paragraphs [0030-0033] and [0048-0051] and [0069] and Figures 3 and 6 (in response to the selection of a clinical document (synonymous to the second selection), using the PCS engine (synonymous to the personal health ontology), referred as Ontological NLP, to retrieve medical and billing codes (synonymous to particular health record data) associated with the selection of a clinical document); and presenting, at the user device, a third user interface that includes a detailed view of the particular health record data in paragraphs [0069-0071] and [0073] and Figures 3 and 6 (presenting, at the workstation (synonymous to a user device), a graphical user interface (synonymous to a third user interface) that includes a detailed view of the medical and billing codes).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention of a non-transitory computer-readable storage device that presents a health category and health records sections, receives a user selection of a health record item, access a personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping a health record data and a standardized health sub-ontology, use the personal health ontology to retrieve and present the health record data, as disclosed by Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee, to be combined with receiving a selection of a record entry, using the personal health ontology to retrieve health record data associated with the record entry, and displaying the associated health record data on a third interface, as disclosed by Karres, for the purpose of increasing efficiency and improving clinical documentation [0004].
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dandala (US-20180032679-A1)[hereinafter Dandala], in view of CBS Detroit, ("Capzule Introduces Time Line To Health Data On iPad")[hereinafter CBS Detroit], in view of LEE et al. (US-20190361908-A1)[hereinafter Lee], in view of David Riaño et al.( "An ontology-based personalization of health-care knowledge to support clinical decisions for chronically ill patients")[hereinafter Riaño].
As per Claim 21, Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1.
Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee do not disclose the following limitations. However, Riaño discloses further comprising, prior to receiving the first selection, traversing the personal health ontology to define a set of predefined paths, and wherein accessing the personal health ontology comprises accessing the personal health ontology based at least in part on the set of predefined paths in the 4th paragraph in section 2.1 Health-care ontologies on page 431, section 3. The case profile ontology on pages 432-435, Figure 4 on page 434 (use a functional interface to navigate the case profile ontology (synonymous to the personal health ontology) to define the predefined paths and accessing the case profile ontology is based on the set of predefined paths).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary still in the art to include in the a method that presents a health category and health records sections, receives a user selection of a health record item, access a personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping a health record data and a standardized health sub-ontology, use the personal health ontology to retrieve and present the health record data of Dandala, CBS Detroit, and Lee with traversing the personal health ontology to define a set of predefined paths and accessing the personal health ontology based on the set of predefined paths as taught by Riaño since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictably a method that presents a health category and health records sections, receives a user selection of a health record item, access a personal health ontology that includes a customized mapping a health record data and a standardized health sub-ontology, use the personal health ontology to retrieve and present the health record data, traverse the personal health ontology to define a set of predefined paths and access the personal health ontology based on the set of predefined paths.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Page 10-11, filed 01/05/2026 with respect to claims 1, 9, and 15 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the amended limitations integrate the abstract idea into a practical application by providing an improvement to quickly and efficiently access complex health data and present it in a way easily consumable by a user. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims do not recite an improvement to the processing and storage savings technology. The claims merely recite presenting a health category section and a health records section with health record items, receiving a type of health record item, assessing a personal health ontology, using the personal health ontology to retrieve the health record data, and presenting a portion of the health record data are directed to managing personal interactions or personal behavior, which are a part of the abstract idea. An improvement to the abstract ideas of presenting a health category section and a health records section with health record items, receiving a type of health record item, assessing a personal health ontology, using the personal health ontology to retrieve the health record data, and presenting a portion of the health record data are directed to managing personal interactions or personal behavior does not amount to an improvement to technology or a technical field (see MPEP § 2106.05(a)(II) stating “it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the abstract idea itself (e.g. a recited fundamental economic concept) is not an improvement in technology."). The courts indicated in TLI Communications, 823 F.3d at 612-13, 118 USPQ2d at 1747-48, that gathering and analyzing information using conventional techniques and providing the output is not sufficient to show an improvement to technology. The claim language and instant application fails to provide details regarding how a computer aids the method, the extent to which the computer aids the method, or the significance of a computer to the performance of the method. Here, the improvement is to presenting a health category section and a health records section with health record items, receiving a type of health record item, assessing a personal health ontology, using the personal health ontology to retrieve the health record data, and presenting a portion of the health record data are directed to managing personal interactions or personal behavior. There is no indication in the disclosure that the involvement of a computer assists in improving the technology for the outlined problem statement. Merely adding generic computer components to perform the method is not sufficient.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 11-13, filed 01/05/2026 with respect to claims 1-20 have been fully considered.
With regards to claims 1-20, Applicant argues that Dandala does not disclose the amended limitations of the claims. Examiner finds this persuasive. Therefore, the rejection of 09/11/2025 has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration a new grounds of rejection is made over Dandala, in view of CBS Detroit, and in view of Lee.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
C. Cenan, "A proposed architecture and ontology for a software system for managing patient’s health record," (2008) teaches on a system that uses an ontology used to manage a patient’s health record.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRYSTEN N WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)272-5116. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8 - 5 pm, ET.
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 on (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.
/K.N.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3682
/FONYA M LONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3682
Prosecution Insights