DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to communications filed 15 September 2026.
Claims 1-20 are subject to examination.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 15 September 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 8-12 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silva-Craig et al. (US-7593972-B2) hereinafter Craig in view of Seguin (US-20230070895-A1) further in view of Blackwell et al. (US-10261945-B1) hereinafter Blackwell further in view of McGroddy-Goetz et al. (US-9037797-B2) hereinafter Goetz.
Regarding claim 1, Craig discloses,
A device for improving data reliability ([3:13-39] method and system for application service provider based redundant archive services for medical archies and/or imaging systems, see [15:4-15] embodiments allow reliable access to medical data), the device comprising:
a networking interface providing access to (i) a centralized record including data corresponding to an entity ([4:32-5:10] remote data store 120 … may be … central data storage system … front-end connection 130 is … ethernet connection, internet, wireless, or other network connection … back-end connection 135 is substantially similar to the front-end connection, see [FIG. 1] 130 and 135 are connections, wherein 135 to remote data store 120, see also [6:59-7:3] data is archived at the remote data store 120 at the director which corresponds to the data source 110 (i.e. entity)) and (ii) one or more sensors configured to sense one or more phenomena associated with the entity ([5:66-6:21] data, such as an image or other medical data is obtained using medical diagnostic equipment (i.e. sensor) … x-ray, ultrasound, magnetic resonance, computerized tomography … reports, demographic data, scheduling data (i.e. sensing one or more medical health diagnostics, e.g. phenomena, via media diagnostic equipment));
one or more processors ([5:11-29] status monitor 140 includes a processor); and
one or more memories communicatively coupled with the networking interface ([4:10-21] data source 110 … includes memory, see [FIG. 1] coupled via 130), the one or more sensors ([5:66-6:21] data, such as an image or other medical data is obtained using medical diagnostic equipment (i.e. sensor) … x-ray, ultrasound, magnetic resonance, computerized tomography … reports, demographic data, scheduling data (i.e. sensing one or more medical health diagnostics, e.g. phenomena, via media diagnostic equipment)), and the one or more processors ([4:32-52] remote data store 120 also includes a processor), storing (i) a local record of cached data that is different from the centralized record ([4:32-53] the remote data store 120 may be cached and stored at a plurality of locations (i.e. different from the centralized record)) and (ii) computer-executable instructions thereon that ([4:53-5:10] front-end connection facilitates the bi-directional transmission and/or reception of instructions … between the data source 110 and the status monitor 140 and the access authenticator 145 … back-end connection 135 is substantially similar … facilitates … instructions), when executed by the one or more processors ([5:11-29] status monitor 140 includes a processor), cause the device to:
receive, via the networking interface ([4:53-5:10] front-end connection facilitates the bi-directional transmission and/or reception of files … other data … between the data source 110 and the status monitor 140 and the access authenticator 145 … back-end connection 135 is substantially similar … facilitates … files … other data), a set of measurements of the one or more phenomena sensed by the one or more sensors ([5:66-6:21] data, such as an image or other medical data is obtained using medical diagnostic equipment (i.e. sensor) … x-ray, ultrasound, magnetic resonance, computerized tomography … reports, demographic data, scheduling data (i.e. sensing one or more medical health diagnostics, e.g. phenomena, via media diagnostic equipment)),
Craig does not explicitly disclose:
determine an event corresponding to the entity based on the set of measurements, the event indicating a change in a patient environment or a patient physical condition, or relating to an action taken by a patient or a practitioner,
update the centralized record with event data associated with the event,
determine a portion of the event data is relevant to a potential short-term medical event, and
responsive to determining the portion of the event data is relevant to the potential short-term medical event, cache the portion of the event data in the local record.
However, Seguin discloses:
determine an event corresponding to the entity based on the set of measurements ([0057] computing device 102 may receive the sensor data … process the data received from the connected device using one or more algorithms designed and/or trained to determine a medical diagnosis, condition and/or event), the event indicating a change in a patient environment or a patient physical condition ([0150] indicating that the user has a high heart rate … output 1414 indicating that the user has a high risk for cardiac event … output that the user has atrial fibrillation), or relating to an action taken by a patient or a practitioner,
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig in view of Seguin to have determined an event corresponding to the entity based on the set of measurements that indicate a change in a patient environment/physical condition or related to an action taken by a patient/practitioner. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to provide automated medical monitoring and/or diagnosis (Seguin, [0007]).
Craig-Seguin do not explicitly disclose:
update the centralized record with event data associated with the event,
determine a portion of the event data is relevant to a potential short-term medical event, and
responsive to determining the portion of the event data is relevant to the potential short-term medical event, cache the portion of the event data in the local record.
However, Blackwell discloses:
update the centralized record with event data associated with the event ([5:59-6:10] collect monitoring data (i.e. measurements) … include time-series data related to the performance of physical and/or software components … such as performance (i.e. event) … also include information about attributes, characteristics, or properties [6:11-26] data collectors … can store the collected monitoring data in the local data stores … provide the collected monitoring data to the central analysis system, see [6:58-7:11] element is centrally stored in the central data store in addition to being locally stored), and
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig-Seguin in view of Blackwell to have determined an event corresponding to the entity based on the set of measurements and updated the centralized record with event data associated with the event. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to have data-storage redundancy as compared to a fully centralized approach to be reduced and speed of query execution as compared to a fully federated approach be greatly increased (Blackwell, [4:24-42]).
Craig-Seguin-Blackwell do not explicitly disclose:
determine a portion of the event data is relevant to a potential short-term medical event, and
responsive to determining the portion of the event data is relevant to the potential short-term medical event, cache the portion of the event data in the local record.
However, Goetz discloses:
determine a portion of the event data is relevant to a potential short-term medical event ([9:8-47] monitor the file or index of the patient appointment database for an appointment date parameter … value of these parameters monitored reach a certain threshold (i.e. short-term appointment time or short-term critical condition)), and
responsive to determining the portion of the event data is relevant to the potential short-term medical event ([9:8-47] monitor the file or index of the patient appointment database for an appointment date parameter … value of these parameters monitored reach a certain threshold (i.e. short-term appointment time or short-term critical condition)), cache the portion of the event data in the local record ([9:8-47] access all patient records in the patient database forty-eight hours before the scheduled appointment date … store these records locally in the cache server … specific patient records are to be cached locally at the cache server if the values of these parameters monitored reach a certain threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig-Seguin-Blackwell in view of Goetz to have determined a portion of the event data relevant to a potential short-term medical event to cache it in the local record. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to increase the availability of network-stored data when it is needed and provide a method for intelligent caching (Goetz, [1:22-36]).
Regarding claim 8, Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz disclose:
The device of claim 1, set forth above,
Craig discloses:
wherein the one or more memories further store a record continuity management engine ([3:13-39] method and system for application service provider based redundant archive services for medical archies and/or imaging systems, see [15:4-15] embodiments allow reliable access to medical data, see [FIG. 1]), and wherein the computer-executable instructions ([4:53-5:10] front-end connection facilitates the bi-directional transmission and/or reception of instructions … between the data source 110 and the status monitor 140 and the access authenticator 145 … back-end connection 135 is substantially similar … facilitates … instructions), when executed by the one or more processors ([5:11-29] status monitor 140 includes a processor), cause the device to execute the record continuity management engine to:
determine (i) the event data to be stored in the centralized record ([4:32-5:10] remote data store 120 … may be … central data storage system … front-end connection 130 is … ethernet connection, internet, wireless, or other network connection … back-end connection 135 is substantially similar to the front-end connection, [5:66-6:21] data, such as an image or other medical data is obtained using medical diagnostic equipment (i.e. sensor) … x-ray, ultrasound, magnetic resonance, computerized tomography … reports, demographic data, scheduling data (i.e. sensing one or more medical health diagnostics, e.g. phenomena, via media diagnostic equipment) see [FIG. 1] 130 and 135 are connections, wherein 135 to remote data store 120, see also [6:59-7:3] data is archived at the remote data store 120 at the director which corresponds to the data source 110 (i.e. entity)) and
Craig does not explicitly disclose:
(ii) the portion of the event data to be cached in the local record based on one or more measurements from the set of measurements causing the event;
update the centralized record with the event data associated with the event; and
cache the portion of the event data in the local record.
However, Blackwell discloses:
(ii) the portion of the event data to be cached in the local record based on one or more measurements from the set of measurements causing the event ([5:59-6:10] collect monitoring data (i.e. measurements) … include time-series data related to the performance of physical and/or software components … such as performance (i.e. event) … also include information about attributes, characteristics, or properties);
update the centralized record with the event data associated with the event ([6:11-26] data collectors … can store the collected monitoring data in the local data stores … provide the collected monitoring data to the central analysis system, see [6:58-7:11] element is centrally stored in the central data store in addition to being locally stored); and
cache the portion of the event data in the local record ([5:44-58] storing metrics derived from data elements in the local data store … store in the cache).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig in view of Blackwell to have determined an event corresponding to the entity based on the set of measurements, updated the centralized record with event data associated with the event, and cached at least a portion of the event data in the local record. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to have data-storage redundancy as compared to a fully centralized approach to be reduced and speed of query execution as compared to a fully federated approach be greatly increased (Blackwell, [4:24-42]).
Regarding claim 9, Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz disclose:
The device of claim 8, set forth above,
Craig-Seguin do not explicitly disclose:
wherein the record continuity management engine includes a ML model trained to receive training sensor measurements and training events as inputs to output training record updates.
However, Blackwell discloses:
wherein the record continuity management engine includes a ML model trained to receive training sensor measurements and training events as inputs to output training record updates ([8:12-35] central analysis system 140 can train itself using a machine learning algorithm … perfect its application of the storage-location scheme over time).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig-Seguin in view of Blackwell to have the record continuity management engine include a ML model trained to receive training sensor measurements and training events as inputs to output training record updates. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to perfect the application of storage-location scheme over time by a machine learning algorithm (Blackwell, [8:12-35]).
Regarding claim 10, Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz disclose:
The device of claim 1, set forth above,
Craig discloses:
wherein the one or more sensors include (i) a heart rate sensor, (ii) a blood pressure sensor, (iii) an ambient light sensor, (iv) an audio sensor ([5:66-6:20] ultrasound image), (v) a motion sensor ([5:66-6:20] magnetic resonance image), (vi) a pressure sensor, (vii) a breathing rate sensor, or (viii) a dispensing apparatus sensor.
Regarding claim 11, Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz disclose:
The device of claim 1, wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the device, set forth above, to:
Craig-Seguin do not explicitly disclose:
periodically upload portions of the local record to a cloud-based record that is different from the centralized record.
However, Blackwell discloses:
periodically upload portions of the local record to a cloud-based record that is different from the centralized record ([9:31-47] information handling system may … reside in a cloud, see [5:44-6:10] storing metrics derived from data elements in the local data store … store in the cache (i.e. the local being residing in a cloud, e.g. local record is different than centralized record) … collect this monitoring data in real-time, periodically … store the monitoring data in the local data stores (i.e. in the cloud), see also [1:47-67] data element is centrally stored or is federated).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig-Seguin in view of Blackwell to have periodically uploaded portions of the local record to a cloud-based record that is different from the centralized record. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to have data-storage redundancy as compared to a fully centralized approach to be reduced and speed of query execution as compared to a fully federated approach be greatly increased (Blackwell, [4:24-42]).
Regarding claims 12/20, 17-18 and 19, they do not further define nor teach over the limitations of claims 1, 8-9 and 11, therefore, claims 12/20, 17-18 and 19 are rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above as in claims 1, 8-9 and 11.
Claim(s) 2-3 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silva-Craig et al. (US-7593972-B2) hereinafter Craig in view of Seguin (US-20230070895-A1) further in view of Blackwell et al. (US-10261945-B1) hereinafter Blackwell further in view of McGroddy-Goetz et al. (US-9037797-B2) hereinafter Goetz further in view of Krishnan et al. (US-11848027-B2) hereinafter Krishnan.
Regarding claim 2, Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz disclose:
The device of claim 1, set forth above,
Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz do not explicitly disclose:
wherein the one or more memories further store a situational awareness engine, and wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the device to execute the situational awareness engine to:
analyze the data corresponding to the entity that is stored in the centralized record to determine one or more threshold values;
compare the set of measurements with the one or more threshold values; and
determine that at least one measurement in the set of measurements fails to satisfy at least one threshold value of the one or more threshold values, wherein failing to satisfy the at least one threshold value indicates the event.
However, Krishnan discloses:
wherein the one or more memories further store a situational awareness engine ([12:66-13:7] local ML model), and wherein the computer-executable instructions ([14:1-38] instructions), when executed by the one or more processors ([14:1-38] for execution), cause the device to execute the situational awareness engine to:
analyze the data corresponding to the entity that is stored in the centralized record to determine one or more threshold values ([12:66-13:7] threshold may be predetermined … configured by the central server … and/or learned by the ML model, see [10:65-11:6] forward the parameter information for the ML model to the central server … to classify the sensor data from machine);
compare the set of measurements with the one or more threshold values ([12:66-13:7] generate anomaly scores as sensor data … in response to the anomaly score being over a threshold (i.e. requires to compare measurements to threshold to determine if it is over)); and
determine that at least one measurement in the set of measurements fails to satisfy at least one threshold value of the one or more threshold values ([12:66-13:7] generate anomaly scores as sensor data … in response to the anomaly score being over a threshold (i.e. requires to compare measurements to threshold to determine if it is over, wherein over is failing to satisfy)), wherein failing to satisfy the at least one threshold value indicates the event ([12:66-13:7] alert may be generated (i.e. over the threshold as above indicates an alert)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz in view of Krishnan to have analyzed the data corresponding to the entity that is stored in the centralized record to determine one or more threshold values, compare the set of measurements with the one or more threshold values, and determine at least one measurement failing to satisfy a threshold to indicate the event. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to generate alerts in response to an anomaly score being over a threshold. (Krishnan, [12:66-13:7]).
Regarding claim 3, Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz-Krishnan disclose:
The device of claim 2, set forth above,
Craig-Seguin does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the situational awareness engine includes a machine learning (ML) model trained to receive training sensor measurements and training entity data as inputs to output training events.
However, Blackwell discloses:
wherein the situational awareness engine includes a machine learning (ML) model trained to receive training sensor measurements and training entity data as inputs to output training events ([8:12-35] central analysis system 140 can train itself using a machine learning algorithm … perfect its application of the storage-location scheme over time).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig-Seguin in view of Blackwell to have the record continuity management engine include a ML model trained to receive training sensor measurements and training events as inputs to output training events. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to perfect the application of storage-location scheme over time by a machine learning algorithm (Blackwell, [8:12-35]).
Regarding claims 13-14, they do not further define nor teach over the limitations of claims 2-3, therefore, claims 13-14 are rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above as in claims 2-3.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silva-Craig et al. (US-7593972-B2) hereinafter Craig in view of Seguin (US-20230070895-A1) further in view of Blackwell et al. (US-10261945-B1) hereinafter Blackwell further in view of McGroddy-Goetz et al. (US-9037797-B2) hereinafter Goetz further in view of Menschik et al. (US-7523505-B2) hereinafter Menschik.
Regarding claim 4, Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz disclose:
The device of claim 1, set forth above,
Craig discloses:
wherein the entity is a first entity [6:59-7:3] data is archived at the remote data store 120 at the director which corresponds to the data source 110 (i.e. entity), see [4:10-21] PACS, diagnostic imaging system, server, terminal, or other medical data storage system (i.e. a first entity)), and wherein the computer-executable instructions ([4:53-5:10] front-end connection facilitates the bi-directional transmission and/or reception of instructions … between the data source 110 and the status monitor 140 and the access authenticator 145 … back-end connection 135 is substantially similar … facilitates … instructions), when executed by the one or more processors ([5:11-29] status monitor 140 includes a processor), further cause the device to:
Craig does not explicitly disclose:
transmit a notification to one or more second entities indicating the event.
However, Menschik discloses:
transmit a notification to one or more second entities indicating the event ([24:31-25:10] notifies the agent at the selected destination to expect the data transfer … patient data is available from multiple sources … sent to the agents associated with each of those sources).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig in view of Menschik to have transmitted a notification to one or more second entities indicating the event. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to provide for patient-centric organization of patient medical data strewn across an arbitrary number of medical institutions, and facilitates the finding and viewing of potentially critical patient medical records (Menschik, [9:21-52]).
Claim(s) 5 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silva-Craig et al. (US-7593972-B2) hereinafter Craig in view of Seguin (US-20230070895-A1) further in view of Blackwell et al. (US-10261945-B1) hereinafter Blackwell further in view of McGroddy-Goetz et al. (US-9037797-B2) hereinafter Goetz further in view of Menschik et al. (US-7523505-B2) hereinafter Menschik further in view of Moore et al. (US-20070233199-A1) hereinafter Moore.
Regarding claim 5, Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz-Menschik disclose:
The device of claim 4,
Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz-Menschik do not explicitly disclose:
wherein the one or more memories further store a treatment awareness engine, and the computer-executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the device to execute the treatment awareness engine to:
determine a treatment based on the event;
determine the one or more second entities to receive the notification based on (i) the event and (ii) the treatment; and
generate the notification based on (i) the event, (ii) the treatment, and (iii) the one or more second entities.
However, Moore discloses:
wherein the one or more memories further store a treatment awareness engine ([0045] computer 14 … generate a run report detailing the treatment of patient), and the computer-executable instructions ([0013] instructions), when executed by the one or more processors ([0013] cause a programmable processor (i.e. when executed)), further cause the device to execute the treatment awareness engine to:
determine a treatment based on the event ([0017] medical event information generated by devices that no longer accompany the patient may be transferred from device to device with the patient, allowing … a more complete record of the condition and treatment of the patient);
determine the one or more second entities to receive the notification based on (i) the event and (ii) the treatment ([FIG. 4] e.g. detecting device is medical device and correct patient to receive medical event information, provide selected treatment, e.g. therapy); and
generate the notification based on (i) the event, (ii) the treatment, and (iii) the one or more second entities ([0041] prepare reports detailing the treatment … caregiver associated with either of defibrillators 12A and 12B may generate a run report … by a local emergency medical services (EMS) system).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz-Menschik in view of Moore to have determined a treatment based on the event to determine one or more second entities to receive the notification and generate the notification. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to provide techniques for wireless communication of medical event information between medical devices that treat a particular patient (Moore, [0007]).
Regarding claim 16, it does not further define nor teach over the limitations of claim 5, therefore, claim 16 is rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above as in claim 5.
Claim(s) 6-7 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silva-Craig et al. (US-7593972-B2) hereinafter Craig in view of Seguin (US-20230070895-A1) further in view of Blackwell et al. (US-10261945-B1) hereinafter Blackwell further in view of McGroddy-Goetz et al. (US-9037797-B2) hereinafter Goetz further in view of Gonzales, JR. (US-20220293284-A1) hereinafter Gonzales.
Regarding claim 6, Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz disclose:
The device of claim 1, wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the device, set forth above, to:
Craig discloses:
responsive to determining that the event has concluded ([5:66-6:21] data, such as an image or other medical data is obtained using medical diagnostic equipment (i.e. sensor) … x-ray, ultrasound, magnetic resonance, computerized tomography … reports, demographic data, scheduling data (i.e. sensing one or more medical health diagnostics, e.g. phenomena, via media diagnostic equipment)), (i) upload the document to the centralized record ([4:32-5:10] remote data store 120 … may be … central data storage system … front-end connection 130 is … ethernet connection, internet, wireless, or other network connection … back-end connection 135 is substantially similar to the front-end connection, see [FIG. 1] 130 and 135 are connections, wherein 135 to remote data store 120, see also [6:59-7:3] data is archived at the remote data store 120 at the director which corresponds to the data source 110 (i.e. entity)), and (ii) cache the document in the local record ([4:32-53] the remote data store 120 may be cached and stored at a plurality of locations (i.e. different from the centralized record)) and (ii) computer-executable instructions thereon that ([4:53-5:10] front-end connection facilitates the bi-directional transmission and/or reception of instructions … between the data source 110 and the status monitor 140 and the access authenticator 145 … back-end connection 135 is substantially similar … facilitates … instructions).
Craig does not explicitly disclose:
responsive to determining that the event has initiated, execute an automated documentation engine to (i) determine a document to be at least partially completed in response to the event, and (ii) initiate creation of the document to indicate one or more measurements from the set of measurements;
periodically evaluate one or more subsequent measurements received from the one or more sensors during the event to enrich, by the automated documentation engine, the document with at least one measurement of the one or more subsequent measurements; and
However, Gonzales discloses:
responsive to determining that the event has initiated, execute an automated documentation engine ([0122] system and method … avoidable days reports can be generated on-demand) to (i) determine a document to be at least partially completed in response to the event ([0124] text entry fields will also auto-fill with selectable matching text … starting date range for the report, and (ii) initiate creation of the document to indicate one or more measurements from the set of measurements ([0124] avoidable days report is populated by data entered at the avoidable days entry along with patient data, such as medical records number … etc.);
periodically evaluate one or more subsequent measurements received from the one or more sensors during the event to enrich, by the automated documentation engine ([0122] system and method … avoidable days reports can be generated on-demand), the document with at least one measurement of the one or more subsequent measurements ([0045] runs a specialized program periodically to receive information from a hospital or customer facility … accumulate the received data and push it into the proper storage entries associated with the facility that transferred the data to the data processor and storage software used in the present system); and
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig in view of Gonzales to have executed an automated documentation engine to determine a document to be at least partially completed in response to the event and initiate creation of the document as well as periodically evaluate one or more subsequent measurements to enrich the document. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to periodically receive information from a hospital or customer facility and push it into the proper storage entries associated with the facility (Gonzales, [0045]).
Regarding claim 7, Craig-Seguin-Blackwell-Goetz-Gonzales disclose:
The device of claim 6, set forth above,
Craig-Seguin do not explicitly disclose:
wherein the automated documentation engine includes a ML model trained to receive training sensor measurements and training events as inputs to output training documents.
However, Blackwell discloses:
wherein the automated documentation engine includes a ML model trained to receive training sensor measurements and training events as inputs to output training documents ([8:12-35] central analysis system 140 can train itself using a machine learning algorithm … perfect its application of the storage-location scheme over time).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Craig-Seguin in view of Blackwell to have the record continuity management engine include a ML model trained to receive training sensor measurements and training events as inputs to output training documents. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to perfect the application of storage-location scheme over time by a machine learning algorithm (Blackwell, [8:12-35]).
Regarding claim 15, it does not further define nor teach over the limitations of claim 6, therefore, claim 15 is rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above as in claim 6.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bennett et al. (US-8725533-B2) POLICY-DRIVEN RELOCATION OF ELECTRONIC HEALTHCARE RECORDS IN A NETWORK ENVIRONMENT;
Case et al. (US-12210498-B1) SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR AUTOMATED CLUSTERING OF SUBJECT DATA.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alex Tran whose telephone number is (571)272-8173. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM 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, Kamal Divecha can be reached at (571)272-5863. 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.
/Alex Tran/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights