Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/935,155

MEDICAL DEVICE APPLICATION MANAGEMENT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 01, 2024
Examiner
OLSHANNIKOV, ALEKSEY
Art Unit
2118
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Welch Allyn Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 3m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allowance Rate
195 granted / 353 resolved
At TC average
Strong +52% interview lift
Without
With
+52.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
379
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.5%
-31.5% vs TC avg
§103
60.9%
+20.9% vs TC avg
§102
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
§112
16.7%
-23.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 353 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTON This non-final rejection is responsive to the claims filed 01 November 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 10, and 17 are independent claims. 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Offenhartz (US 2008/0120557 A1) hereinafter known as Offenhartz in view of St. Pierre (US 2016/0132957 A1) hereinafter known as St. Pierre. Regarding independent claim 1, Offenhartz teaches: at least one processing device; and (Offenhartz: ¶[0103]-¶[0104]; Offenhartz teaches processing device with memory.) a memory device storing instructions which, when executed by the at least one processing device, cause the at least one processing device to: (Offenhartz: ¶[0103]-¶[0104]; Offenhartz teaches processing device with memory.) provide a user interface engine; (Offenhartz: Fig. 1A and ¶[0012]; Offenhartz teaches a configurator 110 which produces a web interface.) receive a custom resource definition of the user interface engine for an application configured for execution … ; (Offenhartz: Fig. 1A and ¶[0009]; Offenhartz teaches an application using a library module 104, which uses configuration data for the application. ¶[0015] further teaches the metadata and configuration data can be XML. ¶[0022] further teaches that product teams can publish application metadata along with the release of their products, which is then used to render a comprehensive configuration view. ¶[0090] further teaches that client applications can specify a data set describing their requirements.) process the custom resource definition; (Offenhartz: Fig. 1B and ¶[0012]-¶[0013]; Offenhartz teaches using the data to show possible configuration selection to a user. Fig. 1B shows the processed output, i.e. selectable lists and fields for a constructed web UI.) launch a configuration portal; (Offenhartz: ¶[0017]-¶[0020]; Offenhartz teaches that end users can launch the administrator to view and modify the configuration of their installed applications. The administrator is a graphical utility intended to present users with an organized, complete view of the configurable data which drives their various applications.) dynamically render a user interface in the configuration portal, the user interface being rendered based on the custom resource definition; (Offenhartz: Fig. 1B and ¶[0013]; Offenhartz teaches rendering the constructed web UI.) receive configuration inputs on the user interface; and (Offenhartz: Fig.1B and ¶[0013], ¶[0027], and ¶[0074]-¶[0075]; Offenhartz teaches receiving configuration inputs and the user being able to save configuration settings.) persist the configuration inputs into a catalogue database that causes the application to be executed … based on the configuration inputs. (Offenhartz: ¶[0010]-¶[0013], ¶[0031], and ¶[0074]-¶[0075]; Offenhartz teaches the configuration data being used to set up and configure applications.) Offenhartz does not explicitly teach but St. Pierre teaches: … on a medical device; (St. Pierre: ¶[0023]-¶[0026]; St. Pierre teaches configuring medical devices, such as executing multiple workflows or profiles.) … on a medical device; (St. Pierre: Fig. 8 and ¶[0032]; St. Pierre configuration files being sent via a network to store the files.) Offenhartz and St. Pierre are in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, as the references are directed to configuring devices. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine interface configuration based on configuration data for an application as taught in Offenhartz with configuring a medical device as taught in St. Pierre. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Offenhartz to include teachings of St. Pierre, because the combination would allow supporting the different functionalities, as suggested by St. Pierre: ¶[0024]. Regarding claim 2, Offenhartz in view of St. Pierre further teaches the system of claim 1. Offenhartz further teaches: wherein the user interface engine provides an interface specification between the application and the configuration portal for obtaining configuration data for the application. (Offenhartz: ¶[0031]; Offenhartz further teaches that the configuration manager can be an extension of a configuration API. The API allows the application to easily load from or write to configuration XML files. ¶[0093] further teaches that the client application can publish a template of its own so that the manager can display it properly and provide validation.) Regarding claim 3, Offenhartz in view of St. Pierre further teaches the system of claim 1. Offenhartz further teaches: wherein the application and the configuration portal operate asynchronously with respect to one another. (Offenhartz: Fig. 1A and ¶[0011], ¶[0031], and ¶[0084]; Offenhartz teaches storing the configuration data in the storage 105 and further teaches the app loading from config files. Offenhartz teaches the application and configuration portal acting asynchronously from each other.) Regarding claim 4, Offenhartz in view of St. Pierre further teaches the system of claim 1. Offenhartz further teaches: wherein the memory device stores additional instructions which, when executed by the at least one processing device, cause the at least one processing device to: receive one or more changes to the custom resource definition; and update the user interface displayed in the configuration portal based on the one or more changes to the custom resource definition, wherein the user interface is updated without modifying the configuration portal. (Offenhartz: ¶[0013]-¶[0014] and ¶[0022]; Offenhartz teaches a web UI for a new application can easily be create without modifying configuration code just by using different metadata for new application.) Regarding claim 5, Offenhartz in view of St. Pierre further teaches the system of claim 1. St. Pierre further teaches: wherein the user interface rendered in the configuration portal enables a plurality of configurations for execution of the application. (Offenhartz: ¶[0015]; Offenhartz teaches that the data can be used for multiple instances of the application.) Regarding claim 6, Offenhartz in view of St. Pierre further teaches the system of claim 1. Offenhartz further teaches: wherein the configuration inputs define at least one inbound connection and at least one outbound connection for the application. (Offenhartz: Fig. 1B; Offenhartz teaches a port and a database connection for the application.) Regarding claim 7, Offenhartz in view of St. Pierre further teaches the system of claim 1. St. Pierre further teaches: further comprising: the medical device, and wherein the medical device includes a sensor for capturing physiological data from a patient. (St. Pierre: ¶[0023]; St. Pierre teaches a medical device that is functionally connected to one or more sensors that enable monitoring of at least one physiological parameter associated with the patient.) Regarding claim 8, Offenhartz in view of St. Pierre further teaches the system of claim 7. St. Pierre further teaches: wherein the configuration inputs determine how the physiological data captured by the sensor of the medical device is persisted in a database. (St. Pierre: ¶[0026]; St. Pierre teaches being able to configure the device to measure and monitor different types of physiological parameters.) Regarding claim 9, Offenhartz in view of St. Pierre further teaches the system of claim 7. St. Pierre further teaches: wherein the medical device is a patient monitoring device or a hospital bed. (St. Pierre: ¶[0002] and ¶[0023]; St. Pierre teaches a patient monitoring device.) Regarding claims 10-20, these claims recite a method and a computer-readable non-transitory storage media that performs the function of claims 1-9; therefore, the same rationale for rejection applies. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX OLSHANNIKOV whose telephone number is (571)270-0667. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6. 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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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. /ALEKSEY OLSHANNIKOV/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 01, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12749899
DISTRIBUTED-POWER-SOURCE CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 4m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12743197
METHODS, MEDIUMS, AND SYSTEMS FOR PROCESSING CUSTOM FIELD FORMULAS
3y 8m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12736934
INDUSTRIAL CONTROL SYSTEM CONNECTIVITY WITH RELATIONAL DEPENDENCY MAPPING
3y 2m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12736951
PARTIAL-FORM MODEL-FREE ADAPTIVE DISTURBANCE COMPENSATION CONTROL IN THE PRESENCE OF UNMEASURABLE DISTURBANCES
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12730438
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR RECURRING INDUSTRIAL AUTOMATION PROJECT DESIGN VALIDATION
3y 6m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
55%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+52.3%)
3y 2m (~1y 3m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 353 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month