DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This action is in response to the application filed 12/27/2024.
Claims 1-18 were canceled and claims 19-38 were added 12/27/2024.
Claims 19-38 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 19-38 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.
Claims 19-38 are drawn to a method, non-transitory computer readable medium, and a computer system which are statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
Independent claims 19, 30, and 36 recite obtaining first information corresponding to a clinician including and configured to provide a first therapy to a first patient, wherein the first information includes at least a location; obtaining second information corresponding to the clinician and configured to provide a second therapy to the first patient, wherein the second information includes at least a location; determining is in proximity based at least in part on the first information and second information; detecting a first notification generated; causing to present a human perceivable manifestation of the first notification; receiving an acknowledgement via of the first notification; and causing, based on receiving the acknowledgement to suppress human perceivable manifestations of the first notification for a predetermined period of time.
The recited limitations, as drafted, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover certain methods of organizing human activity, as reflected in the specification, which states that “the subject technology includes a system and method for providing alarms, alerts, or notifications (all three generally referred to as "notifications") of networked patient care devices to a user (e.g., clinician) at a particular patient care device (e.g., a patient care device, which the user is operating)” (see: specification paragraph 28). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. The present claims cover certain methods of organizing human activity because they address a need to avoid “cause stress and strain to patients and clinicians” (see: specification paragraph 28). This problem is addressed when “the system and method described herein reduce alarm strain and stress by efficiently and effectively providing alarms to the user” (see: specification paragraph 28). Alerting a user (clinician) based on patient data is a certain method of organizing human activity. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea(s) (Step 2A Prong One: YES).”
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims are abstract but for the inclusion of the additional elements including “medical devices”, “first medical device”, “second medical device”, “first display”, “second display”, “non-transitory computer readable medium”, “device”, “computer system”, “one or more processors”, “memory” and “processor”, “computer” are recited at a high level of generality (e.g., that the determining, selecting, and displaying is performed using generic computer components with instructions are executed to perform the claimed limitations). Such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. See: MPEP 2106.05(f).
Hence, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims are directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A Prong Two: NO).
The claims do 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, using the additional elements to perform the abstract idea amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic component cannot provide an inventive concept. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
Further, the claimed additional elements, identified above, are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because they are generic components that are configured to perform well-understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the industry. See MPEP 2106.05(d). Said additional elements are recited at a high level of generality and provide conventional functions that do not add meaningful limits to practicing the abstract idea. The originally filed specification supports this conclusion at Figure 1, Figure 3 and
Paragraph 32, where “In various implementations, user interface device 54 is a touch screen for displaying information to a user and allowing a user to input information by touching defined areas of the screen. Additionally or in the alternative, user interface device 54 could include any means for displaying and inputting information, such as a monitor, a printer, a keyboard, softkeys, a mouse, a track ball and/or a light pen. Data input device 60 may be a bar code reader capable of scanning and interpreting data printed in bar coded format. Additionally or in the alternative, data input device 60 can be any device for entering coded data into a computer, such as a device(s) for reading a magnetic strips, radio-frequency identification (RFID) devices whereby digital data encoded in RFID tags or smart labels ( defined below) are captured by the reader 60 via radio waves, PCM CIA smart cards, radio frequency cards, memory sticks, CDs, DVDs, or any other analog or digital storage media. Other examples of data input device 60 include a voice activation or recognition device or a portable personal data assistant (PDA). Depending upon the types of interface devices used, user interface device 54 and data input device 60 may be the same device. Although data input device 60 is shown in FIG. 1 to be disposed within interface unit 14, it is recognized that data input device 60 may be integral within pharmacy system 34 or located externally and communicating with pharmacy system 34 through an RS-232 serial interface or any other appropriate communication means. Auxiliary interface 62 may be an RS-232 communications interface, however any other means for communicating with a peripheral device such as a printer, patient monitor, infusion pump or other medical device may be used without departing from the subject technology. Additionally, data input device 60 may be a separate functional module, such as modules 16, 18, 20 and 22, and configured to communicate with controller 14, or any other system on the network, using suitable programming and communication protocols.”
Paragraph 41, where “In some implementations, the database 56 internal to the PCD 12, and/or the external database 37 includes PCD 12 specific data for the manifestations of notifications. The PCD 12 specific data includes information corresponding to one or more components (e.g., speakers, displays, illuminating devices (e.g., LEDs), haptic devices, etc.) of the PCD 12 and/or manifestations of the notifications that the PCD 12 is capable of presenting. For example, the PCD 12 specific data can indicate that the PCD 12 does not have any speakers and therefore cannot present audio manifestations of the notification. Alternatively, the PCD 12 specific data can indicate that the PCD 12 is in communication with at least one functional model 16, 18, 20, 22 that includes a speaker and the PCD 12 can be configured to present the audio manifestations of the notification via the functional model's speaker.”
Paragraph 47, where “The system 200 includes a network l 0, server 30, one or more device terminals 32, and one or more PCDs 12. The one or more PCDs 12 may be associated with one or more users 210 (e.g., clinicians) and/or patients 220. For purposes of this disclosure, a user 210 is a clinician or other authorized user of a PCD 12 or other medical device, and a patient 220 is an individual using or otherwise receiving medical treatment from a PCD 12 or other medical device. The server 30, one or more device terminals 32, and/or one or more PCDs 12 (generally referred to as "communicatively coupled devices") are communicatively coupled via network 10, which allows the communicatively coupled devices to coordinate and manage notifications between the network of patient care devices.”
Paragraph 48, where “To coordinate and manage notifications between the network of patient care devices, the server 30, device terminals 32, and/or PCDs 12, either alone or in combination, identify one or more PCDs 12 associated ,with a user 210 and/or patient 220. For example, in some implementations, the server 30 identifies that a first user 2 l 0-1 is associated with a first, second, third, and nth PCD (12-1, 12-2, 12-3, and 12-n; where n is an integer greater than zero); a second user 210-2 is associated with the first”
Paragraph 128, where “Some implementations include electronic components, such as microprocessors, storage and memory that store computer program instructions in a machine-readable or computer readable medium (alternatively referred to as computer-readable storage media, machine-readable media, or machine-readable storage media). Some examples of such computer-readable media include RANI, ROM, read-only compact discs (CD-ROM), recordable compact discs (CD-R), rewritable compact discs (CD-RW), read-only digital versatile discs (e.g., DVD-ROM, dual-layer DVD-RONI), a variety of recordable/rewritable DVDs (e.g., DVD-RA1\/I, DVD-R\V, DVD+RW, etc.), Dash memory (e.g., SD cards, mini-SD cards, micro-SD cards, etc.), magnetic and/or solid state hard drives, read-only and recordable Blu-Ray-1-0 discs, ultra density optical discs, any other optical or magnetic media, and floppy disks. The computer-readable media can store a computer program that is executable by at least one processing unit and includes sets of instructions for performing various operations”
Paragraph 127, where “These features described above can be implemented in computer software, firmware or hardware. The techniques can be implemented using one or more computer program products. Programmable processors and computers can be included in or packaged as mobile devices. The processes and logic flows can be performed by one or more programmable processors and by one or more programmable logic circuitry. General and special purpose computing devices and storage devices can be interconnected through communication networks”
Paragraph 89, where “A respective notification of a non-selected medical is not generated by the non-selected medical device. More specifically the method includes identifying the patient room that the clinician is in and providing the first and/or second notifications (based on the notification priorities) to the clinician via the medical device that the clinician is proximate to”
Viewing the limitations as an ordered combination, the claims simply instruct the additional elements to implement the concept described above in the identification of abstract idea with route, conventional activity specified at a high level of generality in a particular technological environment.
Hence, the claims as a whole, considering the additional elements individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (Step 2B: NO).
Dependent claims 20-29, 31-35 and 27-38 when analyzed as a whole, considering the additional elements individually and/or as an ordered combination, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitations fail to establish that the claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Dependent claims 20-25, 27, 29, 31-32, 35 and 37-38 recite determining, ranking and displaying notification data using the generic computing devices as shown above.
Dependent claims 26 and 33 further recite “an infusion pump” which is a measurement device that networks with a generic computer as shown in paragraph 46 and does not provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 28 and 34 further recites “third medical device” and “third display” which are generically recited in the specification paragraphs 41 and 48, to the point where the third medical device does not provide significantly more than the abstract idea.
These claims fail to remedy the deficiencies of their parent claims above, and therefore rejected for at least the same rationale as applied to their parent claims above, and incorporated herein.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-28 are allowable over the prior art. Similar to its parent application 17/528089, the prior art of Muhsin (US 2021/0012906 A1), Abrol (US 2021/0059616 A1), Blomquist (US 20140351712 A1), Tsoukalis (US 20210151162 A1), and Gu (WO 2012152200 A1) do not explicitly teach the claim limitations of proximity notifications of a first medical device and second medical device that are configured to provide a first therapy and second therapy to a patient at the respective medical devices and also include that the second medical device acknowledges the first notification, and then the first medical device suppresses human perceivable manifestations of the first notification for a predetermined period of time. A new prior art search was conducted and found the prior art of Sobie (US 20200401992 A1) that teaches using a network to find proximal medical devices in a medical facility, however it did not teach that the first and second medical devices were configured to provide a first and second therapy to each respective patient when obtaining proximity notifications.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY A SASS whose telephone number is (571)272-4774. The examiner can normally be reached 7AM-5PM (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, JASON DUNHAM can be reached at 571-272-8109. 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.
/KIMBERLY A. SASS/Examiner, Art Unit 3686
Prosecution Insights