DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
The action is in response to claims dated 3/10/2026
Claims pending in the case: 21, 26-31, 33-35, 40-45, 47-56
Cancelled claims: 1-20, 22-25, 32, 36-39, 46
Applicant has filed a terminal disclosure in this application to address the double patenting rejection in the prior office action. The e-terminal disclaimer is hereby acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 21, 26-31, 33-35, 40-45, 47-56 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gannon (US 20110072379).
Regarding claim 21, Gannon teaches, one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing executable instructions (Gannon: [18]) that, when executed by one or more processors, cause a system to:
receive, from a plurality of infusion pumps, by at least one data processor, infusion data indicative of a plurality of infusion events and respective event times (Gannon: Fig. 2-4, [56, 59, 74]: receive infusion pump data) ;
identify, based on the infusion data, the plurality of infusion events, and respective event times, the plurality of infusion events including an infusion start event and infusion stop event (Gannon: Fig. 213, [74]: view of infusion data; [67]: start and end time);
receive, from a device, an infusion data request for information for a patient identified in the infusion data request (Gannon: Fig. 8 [68]: data for a patient may be requested from a device by using patient search; Fig. 3, [42-43]: infusion data may also be communicated to user device for display); and
cause the device to display, via the graphical user interface related solely to the patient (Gannon: Fig. 8 [68]: display data of the requested patient only as illustrated in Fig. 8), at least a portion of the infusion data from the plurality of infusion pumps for the patient (Gannon: Fig. 8 items 810, 810-835, 845-860; [68]: display infusion data of the requested patient; Fig. 12-13, [72, 74]: display infusion data of only the patients selected by using the filters on top section of the interface as illustrated in the figure),
wherein, in response to a user interaction with the infusion data for an infusion pump among the plurality of infusion pumps, the device displays, via an overlay element, a … view showing at least one parameter indicative of a treatment delivered to the patient by the infusion pump over a temporal window (Gannon: Fig. 8: interface showing infusion data upon requested for a single patient with infusion information in sub-sections; Fig. 12, [72]: When a user hovers over on infusion data displayed on the interface additional information is overlaid. It is noted here that it would be obvious to have this feature of displaying additional information on the interface displaying data for a single patient as well);
Although Gannon does not specifically teach, overlay with timeline view, Gannon teaches displaying of infusion data may be done using a timeline view (Gannon: Fig. 8, [68]: infusion data over time in a timeline view) Gannon also teaches using overlays for displaying additional information (Gannon: Figs 12, [72]);
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the text information displayed in the overlay in Gannon with a timeline view of the data as depicted in the timeline section of the user interface illustrated in Fig. 8, to achieve the predictable result of using any one of the different formats disclosed by Gannon to present information in an overlay (see Gannon [78]);
Regarding claim 26, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 21 above and further teaches, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the system to:
cause the device to include, on the graphical user interface, a graphical user interface element corresponding to an infusion pump of the plurality of infusion pumps, wherein after detection of an interaction with the graphical user interface element, the graphical user interface displays information about an infusion related to a patient performed by the infusion pump of the plurality of infusion pumps (Gannon: Fig. 12 [72]: overlay with details on the infusion for the selected infusion pump)
Regarding claim 27, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 21 above and further, receive a patient identifier associated with a patient; and identify the plurality of infusion events based on the patient identifier, wherein the plurality of infusion events includes only events associated with the patient identifier. (Gannon: Fig. 3 item 350, [56, 74]: receive information from the infusion pump for a patient; [26-27]: medication and patient data; [67-68]: patient name, age, DOB etc.; Fig. 8, [68]: data on a specific patient).
Regarding claim 28, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 21 above and further, receive a characteristic of an infusion pump; identify the plurality of infusion events based on the characteristic of the infusion pump, wherein the plurality of infusion events includes only events generated by infusion pumps with the characteristic (Gannon: Fig. 13, [74]: receive infusion information; Fig. 8 illustrates that the infusion data displayed as per characteristic indicating volume and time).
Regarding claim 29, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 28 above and further, wherein the characteristic of the infusion pump is an infusion pump type (Gannon: Fig. 13, [74]: receive infusion information; Fig 8 illustrates that the infusions may be displayed as per characteristic (vasoactive/vasopressin)).
Regarding claim 30, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 29 above and further, wherein the infusion pump type a large volume infusion pump or a syringe pump (Gannon: [30]: “For example, infusion pumps 212 and 214 might include various different types of infusion pumps that are manufactured by various different vendors”). The examiner takes official notice that a large volume infusion pump or a syringe pump are common types of infusion pump types known in the art. Examiner had attached documentation by FDA supporting the notice in the prior office action.
Regarding claim 31, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 28 above and further teaches, wherein the characteristic of the infusion pump is a pump location (Gannon: Fig. 8, [68]: Patient information section with room information indicating pump location as illustrated in figure).
Regarding claim 33, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 21 above and further, wherein store infusion event rules associating a type of infusion event with a display color; and select the display color based on the infusion event rules; and cause the device to include the display color on the graphical user interface such that the display color identifies the type of infusion event (Gannon: [44]: color coding by event type; color indicating severity of infusion events).
Regarding claim 34, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 21 above and further, determine a location of an infusion event, and cause the device to display, on the graphical user interface, the location of the infusion event related to the patient (Gannon: Fig. 8, [68]: Patient information section with room information as illustrated in figure indicates where the infusions are being administered (event); [44]: alters display identified infusion events that required attention).
Regarding claim 35, Gannon teaches, An infusion system comprising: an infusion pump including: a wireless network communication device; a first processor; and a first non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions executable by the first processor (Gannon: [17-18]) to cause the infusion pump to:
receive an order indicating a medication or other fluid to be infused into a patient over a defined period of time or according to a predetermined sequence (Gannon: [27, 29, 34, 36]: receive infusion order);
monitor an amount of the medication or other fluid infused into the patient (Gannon: [46]: monitor infusion status);
receive a user input comprising an adjustment to the medication or other fluid to be infused into the patient (Gannon: [438, 5]: user may edit data);
wirelessly transmit data characterizing the adjustment (Gannon: [38, 45]: transmit update as per edit); and
a second non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions executable by a second processor (Gannon: [17-18]) to cause a remote device separate from and in communication with the infusion pump to:
receive, from a plurality of infusion pumps, infusion data comprising the data characterizing the adjustment (Gannon: Fig. 2-4, 13, [56, 59, 74]: receive infusion information and its characteristic);
identify, based on the infusion data, a plurality of infusion events and respective event times, the plurality of infusion events including an infusion start event, an infusion stop event (Gannon: Fig. 213, [74]: view of infusion data; [67]: start and end time); and
receive, from a device, an infusion data request for information for a patient identified in the infusion data request (Gannon: Fig. 3, [42-43]:infusion data communicated to user device for display; Fig. 8 [68]: data for a patient may be requested by using patient search ); and
cause the device to display, via the graphical user interface related solely to the patient (Gannon: Fig. 8 [68]: display data of the requested patient only), at least a portion of the infusion data from the plurality of infusion pumps for the patient (Gannon: Fig. 12-13, [72, 74]: display infusion data), wherein, in response to a user interaction with the infusion data for the infusion pump, the device displays, via an overlay element, a … view showing at least one parameter indicative of a treatment delivered to the patient over a temporal window (Gannon: Figs 12, [72]: When a user hovers over on infusion data displayed on the interface additional information such as dose rate, volume (treatment parameters) is overlaid);
Although Gannon does not specifically teach, overlay with timeline view, Gannon teaches displaying of infusion data may be done using a timeline view (Gannon: Fig. 8, [68]: infusion data over time in a timeline view);
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the text information displayed in the overlay in Gannon with a timeline view of the data as depicted in the timeline section of the user interface illustrated in Fig. 8, to achieve the predictable result of using any one of the different formats disclosed by Gannon to present information in an overlay (see Gannon [78]).
Regarding Claim(s) 40-45, 47-48, this/these claim(s) is/are similar in scope as claim(s) 26-31, 33-34 respectively. Therefore, this/these claim(s) is/are rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding claim 49, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 35 above and further, wherein the instructions executable by the second processor cause the remote device to: cause the device to display, via the graphical user interface, a patient location section including information identifying a location of the patient (Gannon: Fig. 8, [67-68]: identify patient information including location and display it on the top section of the GUI as illustrated in Fig. 8 ).
Regarding claim 50, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 35 above and further, wherein the instructions executable by the second processor cause the remote device to: cause the device to display, via the graphical user interface, an indicator of a floor location (Gannon: Fig. 8, [67-68]: identify patient information including room location and display it on the top section of the GUI as illustrated in Fig. 8). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to include the floor information along with the room number.
Regarding claim 51, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 35 above and further, wherein the instructions executable by the second processor cause the remote device to: cause the device to display, via the graphical user interface, the timeline view including a patient status of the patient (Gannon: Fig. 8, [68]: timeline section indicating status of medication infusions).
Regarding claim 52, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 35 above and further, wherein the instructions executable by the second processor cause the remote device to: cause the device to display, via the graphical user interface, administered medication for the patient (Gannon: Fig. 8: infusion status section on GUI).
Regarding claim 53, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 35 above and further, wherein the instructions executable by the second processor cause the remote device to: cause provision of a report including the infusion data (Gannon: [27]: examination reports).
Regarding claim 54, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 35 above and further, wherein the plurality of infusion events includes an infusion pause (Gannon: Fig. 8, [26, 39-40, 59]: generates various data which may include infusion pause).
Regarding claim 55, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 35 above and further, wherein the plurality of infusion events includes a medication container change (Gannon: [26, 72, 74]: generates various data which may include container status).
Regarding claim 56, Gannon teaches the invention as claimed in claim 35 above and further, wherein the instructions executable by the second processor cause the remote device to: cause the device to display, via the graphical user interface, a first visual indicator corresponding to a first event type for a first event of the plurality of infusion events, and a second visual indicator corresponding to a second event type for a second event of the plurality of infusion events (Gannon: Fig. 12: [40-44]: different types of icons using color coding used for different events).
Response to Arguments
Applicant has submitted terminal disclaimer in response to the double patenting rejection. The double patenting rejection is therefore respectfully withdrawn.
Applicants’ prior art arguments have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior arts do not teach “in response to a user interaction with the infusion data for an infusion pump among the plurality of infusion pumps,…”.. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The applicant argues that since Gannon teaches the overlay feature when the interface is being used to display information of multiple patients, teachings in Gannon would not read on the limitations as claimed. The interface in Gannon is displayed in response to the filter selecting one or more patients from the filter displayed on top portion of the interface. The examiner finds that it would be obvious that the interface may be used to display any number of patients from 0 to max based on the filter criteria. Besides if only one patient is registered, then the information displayed will be of a single patient. The applicant’s arguments that the features used in displaying on an interface displaying multiple patient data may not be obvious to use on an interface displaying only one patient data is not persuasive.
Gannon not only teaches all the information being displayed, Gannon also teaches all forms of displaying the information as claimed in at least one of the interfaces described and illustrated in Gannon. The limitations claim displaying information on interface using ways taught in Gannon and very well known in the art. In [78] Gannon specifically recites “Many different arrangements of the various components depicted, … are possible without departing from the scope of the claims below. Embodiments of our technology have been described with the intent to be illustrative rather than restrictive. Alternative embodiments will become apparent to readers of this disclosure”. The examiner finds that the limitations as claimed are obvious variations of teachings in Gannon. The examiner finds that based on the teachings in Gannon, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to display information using timeline and overlay as claimed. The limitations as claimed does not appear to have any inventive concept not known in the art.
Conclusion
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 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 MANDRITA BRAHMACHARI whose telephone number is (571)272-9735. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 11 am to 8 pm EST.
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, Tamara Kyle can be reached on 571 272 4241. 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.
/Mandrita Brahmachari/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2144
Prosecution Insights