Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
In the amendments filed 27, February 2026:
Claim 2 is cancelled
Claims 17-20 are new
Claims 1, 3, 6 are amended
Claims 1, 3-20 are pending
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, 3-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
The claim recites a device, which are within a statutory category.
Step 2A1
The limitations of:
Claim 1
display data including expected procedure schedule information indicating an expected procedure schedule set for each of a plurality of procedures included in a surgery and progress information indicating progress of each of a plurality of procedures included in a current surgery, and wherein the expected procedure schedule information is generated based on acquired past procedure information,
as drafted, is a process that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers certain methods of organizing human activity (i.e., managing personal behavior including following rules or instructions) but for recitation of generic computer components. The claims encompass a series of rules or instructions for a person or persons to follow, with or without the aid of a computer, to generating and displaying procedure schedules in the manner described in the identified abstract idea, supra. The rules or instructions are the claimed steps of “displaying and generating” as indicated supra.
Other than reciting generic computer components (discussed infra), i.e., a device implemented by a data processor (computer), the claimed invention amounts to managing personal behavior or interaction between people. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior or interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A2
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional element of a medical support device comprising a processor and memory that implements the identified abstract idea. The medical support device comprising a processor and memory are not described by the applicant and is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., a generic server performing generic computer functions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim further recites the additional element of a display. The display merely generally links the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. MPEP 2106.04(d)(I) indicates that generally linking an abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use cannot provide a practical application. Accordingly, even in combination, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a medical support device comprising a processor and memory to perform the noted steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept (“significantly more”).
Also, as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of a display was determined to generally link the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. This has been re-evaluated under the “significantly more” analysis and has also been found insufficient to provide significantly more. MPEP 2106.05(A) indicates that generally linking an abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use cannot provide significantly more. As such the claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 3-20 are similarly rejected because they either further define/narrow the abstract idea and/or do not further limit the claim to a practical application or provide as inventive concept such that the claims are subject matter eligible even when considered individually or as an ordered combination.
Claim(s) 3 merely describe(s) acquiring information and generating information from that acquisition, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 4 merely describe(s) what the patient information contains, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 5 merely describe(s) what the medical professional information contains, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 6 merely describe(s) what the past procedure information contains, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 7 merely describe(s) calculating the median value, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 8 merely describe(s) acquiring past overall required time information and adjusting schedule information based on the data acquisition, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 9-10 merely describe(s) acquiring progress information, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 11 merely describe(s) acquiring current procedure information and generating progress information, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 12 merely describe(s) acquiring current procedure information, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 9-10,12 also includes the additional element of “communication equipment” which is analyzed the same as the “a display” and does not provide a practical application or significantly more for the same reasons.
Claim(s) 13 merely describe(s) acquiring medical professional information and generating schedule information, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 14 merely describe(s) generating notifications, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 15 merely describe(s) linking expected procedure schedule information with the progress information, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 16 merely describe(s) updating the expected procedure schedule information, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 17 merely describe(s) the display data, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 18 merely describe(s) the display, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 19 merely describe(s) the display data, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 20 merely describe(s) the medical support device and updating the schedule information, which further defines the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 20 also includes the additional element of “communication device” which is analyzed the same as the “a display” and does not provide a practical application or significantly more for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The Examiner notes that the rejection will reference the translated documents (attached) corresponding to any foreign documents recited in the rejection.
Claims 1, 3-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over GHIVIZZANI et al (US Publication No. 20140067413) in view of ASSELMANN et al (US Publication No. 20220165403).
Regarding Claim 1
GHIVIZZANI teaches a medical support device comprising:
at least one processor [GHIVIZZANI at Para. 0017 the server 11 illustratively comprises a processor 14, and a memory 15 cooperating therewith.];
and a memory configured to store at least one instruction executable by the processor, wherein when the at least one instruction is executed by the processor [GHIVIZZANI at Para. 0017 the server 11 illustratively comprises a processor 14, and a memory 15 cooperating therewith.],
[ … ] … and progress information indicating progress of each of a plurality of procedures included in a current surgery [GHIVIZZANI at Para. 0024 teaches the management system 10 provides communication and tracking for use in healthcare facility Ors 16a-16d. The management system 10 tracks and displays OR schedule data on one or more displays (one illustrated) 13, as well as desktop computers 12n, and mobile devices (cellular access terminals). The OR schedule data may include a full OR schedule, i.e. case descriptions 24, personnel 25, rooms 21, times 22, and notes 27, location of all peroperative patients 26, progress of the individual activities involved in preparing each individual patient for surgery and in performing the surgical procedure],
GHIVIZZANI does not teach the medical support device causes a display to display data including expected procedure schedule information indicating an expected procedure schedule set for each of a plurality of procedures included in a surgery … [ … ]
[ … ] … and wherein the expected procedure schedule information is generated based on acquired past procedure information.
ASSELMANN teaches the medical support device causes a display to display data including expected procedure schedule information indicating an expected procedure schedule set for each of a plurality of procedures included in a surgery [ASSELMANN at Para. 0351 teaches as described by way of example below, schedule 2100 may include an interface for displaying a scheduled time associated with completion of the ongoing surgical procedure, as well as scheduled times for starting and finishing future surgical procedures. Schedule 2100 may be implemented using any suitable approach (e.g., as a standalone software application, as a website, as a spreadsheet, or any other suitable computer-based application or a paper-based document). An example schedule 2100 may include a list of procedures and list of starting and finishing times associated with a particular procedure. Additionally or alternatively, schedule 2100 may include a data structure configured to represent information related to a schedule of at least one operating room and/or related to a schedule of at least one surgical procedure, such as a scheduled time associated with completion of the ongoing surgical procedure, as well as scheduled times for starting and finishing future surgical procedures (plurality of procedures in a surgery interpreted as procedures in a surgery on a particular patient; list of procedures and times with a particular procedure interpreted as plurality of procedures in a surgery on a particular patient)] and
wherein the expected procedure schedule information is generated based on acquired past procedure information [ASSELMANN at Para. 0246 teaches the stored data may be based on prior surgical procedures. Stored data may include any data derived directly or indirectly from images of previous surgical procedures. This data may include, for example, patient characteristics, surgeon characteristics (e.g., a skill level), and/or surgical procedure characteristics (e.g., an identifier of a surgical procedure, an expected duration of a surgical procedure); ASSELMANN at Para. 0352 teaches a surgical schedule may include timing information associated with a prospective surgery, such as start time, finish time, expected length, and date of the prospective surgery; ASSELMANN at Para. 0367 teaches disclosed embodiments may further involve determining an expected finish time of the at least one particular prospective surgical procedure based on the assigning of the particular surgeon. A schedule may include a start time and an expected finish time for a particular prospective surgical procedure. Based on analysis performed on surgical video or based on surgical time records associated with prior procedures, the system may predict for a particular surgeon the amount of time it will take to complete the surgery; ASSELMANN at Para. 0371 teaches some embodiments may involve updating an expected finish time of the at least one particular prospective surgical procedure based on the suggested additional surgeon. With an additional surgeon added to the team, the surgery may move more quickly, which may have an added benefit of freeing the operating room sooner. Using artificial intelligence or statistical models applied to historical data of prior surgeries performed by each assigned surgeon working alone or the two assigned surgeons working together, the system may predict a new finish time for the surgical procedure].
It would have been prima facie obvious skill in the art, at the time of effective filing, to combine progress of tracking of GHIVIZZANI with the procedures of ASSELMANN with the motivation to improve efficiency and accuracy of surgical observations.
Regarding Claim 3
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the past procedure information is acquired based on at least one of patient information indicating a patient of the current surgery and medical professional information indicating a medical professional involved in the current surgery [ASSELMANN at Para. 0106 teaches in some aspects of the disclosed embodiments, patient-related personal information may be received, and during a time when the grouping of video frames is presented, patient-related personal information may be displayed. Patient-related personal information may include information about the patient, such as age, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, marital status, geographic location, preexisting medical conditions, prior medical treatments, historic test results, information based on an analysis of electronic medical record of the patient, and so forth].
Regarding Claim 4
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 3,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the patient information includes at least one of age information indicating an age of the patient, sex information indicating a sex of the patient, and medical history information indicating a medical history of the patient [ASSELMANN at Para. 0106 (see Claim 3 for explanation)].
Regarding Claim 5
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 3,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the medical professional information includes at least one of belonging information indicating a belonging of the medical professional, classification information indicating a classification of the medical professional, and experience information of the medical professional regarding the current surgery [ASSELMANN at Para. 0109 teaches aspects of this disclosure may include receiving a plurality of additional surgical videos from a plurality of surgical procedures performed by other medical professionals. For example, rather than display only videos of surgical procedures performed by a particular medical professional or group of medical professionals, the system my retrieve for display, frames from other professionals. Retrieval criteria may include selection of other medical professionals who share with a particular medical professional one or more characteristics, such as an age, a sex, an experience level, a skill level, or any other measurable characteristic].
Regarding Claim 6
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the past procedure information includes past required time information indicating a required time of each procedure included in the past surgery [ASSELMANN at Para. 0356 teaches for instance, based on an analysis of a historical data for a given healthcare professional for a given type of surgery, an expected completion time may be estimated (e.g., the expected completion time may be an average completion time determined from the historical data for a given healthcare professional for a given type of surgery). Furthermore, using historic data for a given healthcare professional for a given type of surgery other statistics may be determined (e.g., standard deviation from the expected completion time, correlation of the expected completion time with other characteristics of a surgical procedure, such as an age of a patient or a time of the day the surgery is performed, and/or other statistic generated from historic completion times], expected required time information indicating a required time of each procedure included in the current surgery is generated based on the past required time information [ASSELMANN at Para. 0356], and the expected procedure schedule information includes the expected required time information [ASSELMANN at Para. 0356].
Regarding Claim 7
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 6,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the expected required time information is a median value of required times of the procedure included in the past surgery [ASSELMANN at Para. 0356 (see Claim 6 for explanation; average completion time interpreted as median value)].
Regarding Claim 8
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 7,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein past overall required time information indicating a required time of the overall past surgery is further acquired [ASSELMANN at Para. 0358 teaches some embodiments may involve determining requirements for the at least one particular prospective surgical procedure, the requirements including a required skill level of a participating surgeon based on the patient characteristics associated with the at least one particular prospective surgical procedure and an expected amount of time to perform the at least one particular prospective surgical procedure], and the expected procedure schedule information is corrected based on a total required time that is a total of the required times indicated by the past required time information, and the required time of the overall past surgery [ASSELMANN at Para. 0356 (see Claim 6 for explanation)].
Regarding Claim 9
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the progress information is acquired from communication equipment configured to be communicable with the medical support device [ASSELMANN at Para. 0073 teaches in an example embodiment, device 321 may transmit data to a data-receiving device using a wireless communication or using a wired communication. In an example embodiment, device 321 may use WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC communication, inductive communication, or any other suitable wireless communication for transmitting data to a data-receiving device].
Regarding Claim 10
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 9,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the progress information is acquired from the communication equipment at least at a timing at which the procedure included in the current surgery is completed [ASSELMANN at Para. 0311 teaches in some embodiments, the location information may be received based on triggers associated with a medical procedure, such as the beginning of a procedure, the end of a procedure, a detected intraoperative event during the procedure, or various other triggers. As another example, the location information may be triggered manually, for example, by a medical professional, a patient, an administrator, or other individuals].
Regarding Claim 11
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein current procedure information regarding each of the plurality of procedures included in the current surgery is acquired, and the progress information is generated based on the current procedure information [ASSELMANN at Para. 0052 teaches analyzing the received video frames to identify surgical events may involve any form of electronic analysis using a computing device. In some embodiments, computer image analysis may include using one or more image recognition algorithms to identify features of one or more frames of the video footage], and the progress information is generated based on the current procedure information [GHIVIZZANI at Para. 0007 teaches more specifically, the local status interface may include a plurality of buttons associated with respective activities for the procedure associated with the respective operating room. The at least one performance characteristic may comprise a colorized indicator for timely performance for the procedure associated with the respective operating room. The global status interface may include a progress bar indicating a current progress of the procedure associated with the respective operating room].
Regarding Claim 12
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 11,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the current procedure information is acquired from communication equipment configured to be communicable with the medical support device [ASSELMANN at Para. 0073 (see Claim 9 for explanation)].
Regarding Claim 13
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein a plurality of pieces of the medical professional information indicating a medical professional involved in the current surgery and including classification information indicating a classification of the medical professional is acquired, sub-expected procedure schedule information of each medical professional is generated based on the classification information, and the display data includes the sub-expected procedure schedule information [ASSELMANN at Para. 0342 teaches assigning surgical teams or individual members of a surgical team to prospective surgeries may involve publishing a schedule or otherwise notifying a surgical team or individual surgical team member of an assignment to a prospective surgery, providing instruction and/or information to a system that facilitate scheduling, such as a calendar].
Regarding Claim 14
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein notification information for a medical professional scheduled to perform an upcoming procedure is notified according to progress of a procedure before the upcoming procedure [ASSELMANN at Para. 0329 teaches in some embodiments, the information may be provided during the medical procedure. For example, this may include generating an alert or notification for a physician performing the medical procedure, which may inform the physician of a correct procedure to follow, an update to the procedure, a recommended response to an adverse event, a recommended medical tool, a recommended medical technique, a recommendation to stop a medical procedure, a notification or reminder of an underlying condition or other health information of the patient, or various other patient-related information that may be useful to a physician during a medical procedure].
Regarding Claim 15
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the expected procedure schedule information regarding the procedure linked to the progress information and included in the current surgery is displayed near the progress information [ASSELMANN at Para. 0351 teaches as described by way of example below, schedule 2100 may include an interface for displaying a scheduled time associated with completion of the ongoing surgical procedure, as well as scheduled times for starting and finishing future surgical procedures. Schedule 2100 may be implemented using any suitable approach (e.g., as a standalone software application, as a website, as a spreadsheet, or any other suitable computer-based application or a paper-based document). An example schedule 2100 may include a list of procedures and list of starting and finishing times associated with a particular procedure. Additionally or alternatively, schedule 2100 may include a data structure configured to represent information related to a schedule of at least one operating room and/or related to a schedule of at least one surgical procedure, such as a scheduled time associated with completion of the ongoing surgical procedure, as well as scheduled times for starting and finishing future surgical procedures].
Regarding Claim 16
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the expected procedure schedule information is updated based on the progress information at a prescribed timing [ASSELMANN at Para. 0371 teaches some embodiments may involve updating an expected finish time of the at least one particular prospective surgical procedure based on the suggested additional surgeon. With an additional surgeon added to the team, the surgery may move more quickly, which may have an added benefit of freeing the operating room sooner. Using artificial intelligence or statistical models applied to historical data of prior surgeries performed by each assigned surgeon working alone or the two assigned surgeons working together, the system may predict a new finish time for the surgical procedure. Alternatively, assigning an additional surgeon may increase the expected amount to time, such as when one of the particular surgeon or additional surgeon is assigned to the particular prospective surgical procedure based on a training requirement. The prediction of the new ending time may be determined in a manner similar to the manner described above.].
Regarding Claim 17
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the display data includes a current time tracker overlaid on the expected procedure schedule information, the current time tracker indicating a current position in the surgery relative to the expected procedure schedule [ASSELMANN at Para. 0353 teaches FIG. 21 shows an example schedule 2100 that may include a listing of procedures such as procedures A-C (e.g., surgical procedures, or any other suitable medical procedures that may be performed in an operating room for which schedule 2100 is used). For each procedure A-C, a corresponding starting and finishing times may be determined. For example, for a past procedure A, a starting time 2121A and a finishing time 2121B may be the actual starting and finishing times. (Since procedure A is completed, the schedule 2100 may be automatically updated to reflect actual times); ASSELMANN at Para. 0255 teaches as another example, the actual timing or length of events may be compared with expected times based on the type of surgical procedure or even (interpreted as current position in the surgery relative to the expected procedure schedule].
Claim 18, 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over GHIVIZZANI, ASSELMANN as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of ) in view of Souissi et al (US Publication No. 20220020476)
Regarding Claim 18
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN do not teach wherein the display is an external display, and the processor is configured to cause the external display to display the expected procedure schedule information and the progress information.
Souissi teaches wherein the display is an external display, and the processor is configured to cause the external display to display the expected procedure schedule information and the progress information [Souissi at Para. 0042 teaches schedule board is run as an application that drives a large display like a TV screen. A preferred method is to run the schedule board as an application (or as a browser application) on a large smart TV. Schedule board gets up to date data from schedule server via the Internet and displays the schedule. This is illustrated by FIG. 2.].
It would have been prima facie obvious skill in the art, at the time of effective filing, to combine the references of GHIVIZZANI, ASSELMANN with the display of Souissi with the motivation to reduce the need for manual coordination work between different staff members [Souissi at Para. 0010].
Regarding Claim 20
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach wherein the medical support device is configured to communicate with a communication device that obtains image data, medication data, patient physiological information, or current procedure information [ASSELMANN at Para. 007 teaches cameras 311A and 311B may be connected via data connection 319A and 319B to a data transmitting device 321. In an example embodiment, device 321 may transmit data to a data-receiving device using a wireless communication or using a wired communication. In an example embodiment, device 321 may use WiFi, Bluetooth, NFC communication, inductive communication, or any other suitable wireless communication for transmitting data to a data-receiving device. The data-receiving device may include any form of receiver capable of receiving data transmissions. Additionally or alternatively, device 321 may use optical signals to transmit data to the data-receiving device (e.g., device 321 may use optical signals transmitted through the air or via optical fiber). In some embodiments, device 301 may include local memory for storing at least some of the data received from sensors 311A and 311B. Additionally, device 301 may include a processor for compressing video/image data before transmitting the data to the data-receiving device; ASSLEMANN at Para. 0286 teaches at step 1910, process 1900 may include receiving a plurality of video frames associated with at least one surgical procedure. Receiving video frames may be performed via a communication from a computer system through a network], and the schedule information is updated in real time [GHIVIZZANI at Para. 0016 teaches for example, the global status interface may include a plurality of characteristics associated with the plurality of operating rooms including a scheduled procedure start time, a procedure description, assigned personnel, associated notes, and real-time color-indicated progress of perioperative activities.; GHIVIZZANI at Para. 0036 teaches the current status monitors and displays, in real time, the intended start and completion times of the key activities involved in the perioperative care of surgical patients, the actual starting and completion of the activities involved in the perioperative care of surgical patients, and analyzes and reports on the time-based performance of perioperative activities] … [ … ]
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN do not teach [ … ] … based on the image data, medication data, patient physiological information, or current procedure information.
Souissi teaches [ … ] … based on the image data, medication data, patient physiological information, or current procedure information [Souissi at Para. 0033 teaches systems provided herein reduce or eliminate manual efforts in rescheduling and in keeping schedule board up to date. Patient status (e.g. checked-in, ready for surgery) is shown and is overlaid on the schedule board so surgeons, staff and coordinators have an enhanced view of the upcoming schedule].
It would have been prima facie obvious skill in the art, at the time of effective filing, to combine the references of GHIVIZZANI, ASSELMANN with the data of Souissi with the motivation to reduce the need for manual coordination work between different staff members [Souissi at Para. 0010].
Claim 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over GHIVIZZANI, ASSELMANN as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of TREMPER et al (US Publication No. 20130245481).
Regarding Claim 19
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN teach the medical support device according to claim 1,
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN further teach [ … ] … the abnormality information being generated based on transition information indicating a transition of the patient physiological information in a previously performed surgery [ASSELMANN at Para. 0235 teaches at step 1620, process 1600 may include accessing stored data based on prior surgical procedures. Stored data may include any data derived directly or indirectly from images of previous surgical procedures. At step 1630, process 1600 may include predicting at least one expected future event in the ongoing surgical procedure. Predicting an expected future event may be performed through use of the disclosed computer visual analysis and artificial intelligence techniques to identify an intraoperative event in the ongoing surgical procedure and referencing stored data representing relationships between intraoperative events and predicted outcomes].
GHIVIZZANI/ASSELMANN do not teach wherein the display data includes abnormality information indicating a time at which a value indicated by patient physiological information is expected to become an abnormal value, … [ … ]
TEMPER teaches wherein the display data includes abnormality information indicating a time at which a value indicated by patient physiological information is expected to become an abnormal value [TEMPER at Para. 0063 teaches if the predicted SBP in the next time interval (e.g., 4-5 minutes) is predicted (using a linear prediction) to be less than 50 mmHg (configurable), the system then looks to see if the inspired anesthetic agent concentration has decreased (this decrease in agent concentration shows that the anesthesia provider has noted the decrease in SBP and has taken the appropriate action of decreasing the anesthetic dose). If the inspired agent concentration has not decreased (meaning appropriate action has not been taken), the system alerts to the potential of hypertension. It should be understood that this same principle of predicting future physiological status, based on the presence or lack of some type of medical intervention or event, can apply to additional monitoring signals, test results, or other measured data], … [ … ]
It would have been prima facie obvious skill in the art, at the time of effective filing, to combine the references of GHIVIZZANI, ASSELMANN with the data of TEMPER with the motivation to improve real time clinical decision support.
Response to Arguments
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101
Regarding the rejection of Claims 1, 3-20, the Examiner has considered the Applicant’s arguments; however, the arguments are not persuasive. Any arguments inadvertently not addressed are unpersuasive for at least the following reasons. Applicant argues:
Specifically, the Office action contends that the claims are directed toward "certain methods of organizing human activity" without significantly more. Applicant respectfully disagrees. Foremost, the claimed subject matter does not recite an abstract idea. The Office alleges that "generat[ing] display data including expected procedure schedule information" is a method of organizing human activity. The MPEP identifies types of activities considered to be those within the category of organizing human activity, including: "fundamental economic principles or practices," "commercial or legal interactions," or "managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people." Causing information to appear on a display is none of these. Rather, it is a technical process performed by a processor and related to electronic interaction between the processor and a display. That is, causing a display to display requires a multi-stage data transformation where a process generates visual data that is transmitted to a display, and the display interprets that data to render a visual representation of the data.
During the interview, the Examiner alleged that generating display data "is not strictly a technical process" and could be understood as "writing on a chalkboard." But this interpretation is unreasonably broad and inconsistent with the plain language of the claims. Specifically, the claims expressly recite that the function is performed by "at least one processor" and "a memory configured to store at least one instruction executable by the processor." Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claims cannot cover a person "generating a display" on a chalkboard, as the processor is an express claim element that must be given effect. To the extent the action dismisses these elements as a physical aid, the action is conflating analysis rules for mental processes with those for organizing human activity. That is, each category of abstract ideas have distinct boundaries and distinct analytical frameworks, and it is improper to borrow the more permissive rules from one category to expand the reach of another. More particularly, while "[t]he courts do not distinguish between mental processes that are performed entirely in the human mind and mental processes that require a human to use a physical aid," there is no such rule for organizing human activity. See MPEP § 2106.04(a)(III); cf MPEP § 2106.04(a)(II). Here, the action's basis for finding the claim feature to be organizing human activity requires reading out express elements of the claim to make it broader than what is actually recited. This is not proper.
In short, a processor causing a display to show information is a technical process, and not a method of organizing human activity. The claims expressly require technical elements including a processor and memory, and therefore under the broadest reasonable interpretation cannot disregard these express claim elements. Accordingly, claim 1 is not directed toward "certain methods of organizing human activity" because it does not recite any such idea.
Regarding (a, c), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. MPEP 2106. 04(a)(2)(II) states that a claimed invention is directed to certain methods of organizing human activity if the identified claim elements contain limitations that encompass fundamental economic principles or practices, commercial or legal interactions, or managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions). The Examiner submits that the identified claim elements represent a series of rules or instructions for a person or persons, with or without the aid of a computer, to follow to generate and display procedure schedules. The Examiner submits that healthcare itself is inherently represents the organization of human activity. Applicant has not pointed to anything in the claims that fall outside of this characterization. Because the claim elements fall under a series of rules or instructions for a person or persons to follow to generate and display procedure schedules, the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea.
Regarding (b), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Taking the additional elements out of the Claim is a requirement under the 2-step Alice Corp process. Not doing so goes against the Examination process outlined in the MPEP. Furthermore, the Examiner respectfully points to Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 119 USPQ2d 1739 (Fed. Cir. 2016), which provides a similar analysis to the limitations of generating and displaying data.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102/103
Regarding the rejection of Claims 1, 3-20, the Examiner has considered the Applicant’s arguments; however, the arguments are not persuasive. Applicant argues:
These cited sections of Asselmann relate to using that past data for predicting outcomes. There is no mention of using this data for determining schedule information or providing that information to a user via display. For instance, while Asselmann [0362] describes assigning a particular surgeon to at least one particular prospective surgical procedure, nothing in Asselman actually describes generating a schedule data based on this updated information. In other words, while Asselmann might change the underlying data in a database, Asselmann does not generate a schedule based on this information or cause a display to display the generated schedule. Merely changing the underlying data is not the same as generating a schedule.
Regarding (a), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Given the Broadest reasonable interpretation of expected procedure schedule information, the prior art of ASSELAMNN at Para. 0351 teaches the limitation involving the displaying of this information. Furthermore, the Examiner provided further clarification by providing additional citations to the original citations in regards to the limitation of generating the expected procedure schedule information based on acquired past procedure information.
Regarding the rejection of newly added Claims 17-20, the Examiner has considered the Applicant’s arguments; however, these arguments are moot given the new grounds of rejection as necessitated by amendment.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon in the present basis of rejection are noted in the attached PTO 892 and include:
Martino et al (US Publication No. 20220399103) discloses systems and methods for monitoring medical perioperative time periods by surgical and non-surgical procedure
Rassman et al (US Publication No. 4937743) discloses a method for the prospective scheduling, periodic monitoring and dynamic management of a plurality of interrelated and interdependent resources using a computer system.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 JONATHAN C EDOUARD whose telephone number is (571)270-0107. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 730 - 430.
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, Robert Morgan can be reached on (571) 272 - 6773. 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.
/JONATHAN C EDOUARD/Examiner, Art Unit 3683
/JASON S TIEDEMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3683
Prosecution Insights