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
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claims 1-20 have been rejected.
Priority
The instant application claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. § 120, 121, or 365(c). Accordingly, the effective filing date for the instant application is 19 December 2018 claiming benefit to Provisional Applications 62/781,879; 62/781,831; 62/826,195, 62/826,187; 62/868,360; 62/868,387.
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 1-20 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.
Step 1 – Statutory Categories of Invention:
Claims 1-20 are drawn to a system , which are statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A – Judicial Exception Analysis, Prong 1:
Independent claim 1 recites a system for caregiver assistance in part performing the steps of receive status data indicating a current state of a patient support apparatus; (i) display rounding information, the rounding information relating to a patient associated with the patient support apparatus; and (ii) forward a completion indication, the completion indication generated in response to a caregiver manipulating the user input when the caregiver has completed a rounding task associated with the patient; and automatically forward both the completion indication and the status data to [medical records] in response to receiving the completion indication.
Independent claim 8 recites a system for caregiver assistance in part performing the steps of monitor caregiver rounding tasks and to receive status data from a patient support apparatus indicating a current state of the patient support apparatus and to receive patient support apparatus configuration data indicating a desired state of the patient support apparatus; determine if the current state of the patient support apparatus is or is not in compliance with the patient support apparatus configuration data; (a) display a non-compliance indication if the current state of the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the patient support apparatus configuration data, and (b) receive rounding data via the user input from a caregiver associated with the patient support apparatus.
Independent claim 14 recites a system for caregiver assistance in part performing the steps of monitor caregiver rounding tasks and to receive status data indicating a current state of a patient support apparatus; (i) display rounding information, the rounding information relating to a patient associated with the patient support apparatus; and (ii) forward a completion indication, the completion indication generated in response to a caregiver manipulating the user input when the caregiver has completed a rounding task associated with the patient; and automatically forward both the completion indication and the status data to [medical records] in response to receiving the completion indication.
These steps of monitoring, logging, and communicating caregiver rounding duty behaviors as they relate to a patient’s bed amount to methods of organizing human activity which includes functions relating to interpersonal and intrapersonal activities, such as managing relationships or transactions between people, social activities, and human behavior (MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C) citing the abstract idea grouping for methods of organizing human activity for managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people – also note MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(II) stating certain activity between a person and a computer may fall within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping).
Dependent claim 2 recites, in part, determine if the current state of the patient support apparatus is or is not in compliance with a desired state, and to forward a non-compliance indication if the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the desired state.
Dependent claim 3 recites, in part, simultaneously display both the non-compliance indication and the rounding information; and issue a reminder to the caregiver to change a setting on the patient support apparatus in order to cause the current state of the patient support apparatus to be in compliance with the desired state, the reminder being issued prior to forwarding of the completion indication.
Dependent claim 4 recites, in part, prevent forwarding the completion indication if the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the desired state.
Dependent claim 5 recites, in part, receive a caregiver command to change a setting on the patient support apparatus, to send the caregiver command, and send the caregiver command, the caregiver command instructing the patient support apparatus to change at least one setting in order to bring the current state of the patient support apparatus into compliance with the desired state.
Dependent claim 6 recites, in part, require an acknowledgement input from the caregiver prior to forwarding the completion indication if the current state of the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the desired state wherein if the acknowledgement input is not received [the device] does not forward the completion indication.
Dependent claim 7 recites, in part, wherein the completion indication is generated in response to the caregiver manipulating the user input to input rounding data; transmit verification data, and the verification data verifies that the caregiver is physically present adjacent the patient support apparatus when the portable electronic device receives the rounding data from the caregiver; and forward the verification data.
Dependent claim 9 recites, in part, wherein the rounding data includes an answer to a question asked by the caregiver of a patient associated with the patient support apparatus; wherein the question relates to at least one of the following: a pain level of the patient, a current position of the patient, a desire by the patient to visit a restroom, or a desire by the patient to have an object moved closer to the patient; display a rounding screen related to a rounding action to be performed by the caregiver; and display the non-compliance indication on the rounding screen.
Dependent claim 10 recites, in part, transmit verification data, the verification data verifying that the caregiver is physically present adjacent the patient support apparatus when the remote electronic device receives the rounding data from the caregiver; and in response to the caregiver manipulating the user input.
Dependent claim 11 recites, in part, issue a reminder to the caregiver to change a setting on the patient support apparatus in order to cause the current state of the patient support apparatus to be in compliance with the patient support apparatus configuration data; issue the reminder prior to forwarding the rounding data.
Dependent claim 12 recites, in part, receive a caregiver command to change a setting on the patient support apparatus; to send the caregiver command the caregiver command instructing to change at least one setting in order to bring the current state of the patient support apparatus into compliance with the patient support apparatus configuration data.
Dependent claim 13 recites, in part, wherein the setting relates to an exit detection system integrated into the patient support apparatus and the caregiver command is a command to arm the exit detection system. Examiner notes that under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, an exit detection system may include a physical human monitoring if a patient leaves a bed and therefore is treated as an abstract idea. If considered an additional element under Step 2A Prong 2 and Step 2B, the exit detection system would amount to an attempt to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, and does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words "apply it" (MPEP 2106.05(f)(I) see Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1356, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1743-44 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Intellectual Ventures I v. Symantec, 838 F.3d 1307, 1327, 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Network, Inc., 790 F.3d 1343, 1348, 115 USPQ2d 1414, 1417 (Fed. Cir. 2015)).
Dependent claim 15 recites, in part, determine if the current state of the patient support apparatus is or is not in compliance with a desired state, and to forward a non-compliance indication if the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the desired state.
Dependent claim 16 recites, in part, simultaneously display both the non-compliance indication and the rounding information.
Dependent claim 17 recites, in part, prevent forwarding of the completion indication if the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the desired state.
Dependent claim 18 recites, in part, receive a caregiver command to change a setting on the patient support apparatus to send the caregiver command, and the caregiver command instructing the patient support apparatus to change at least one setting in order to bring the current state of the patient support apparatus into compliance with the desired state.
Dependent claim 19 recites, in part, require an acknowledgement input from the caregiver prior to forwarding the completion indication if the current state of the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the desired state wherein if the acknowledgement input is not received [do] not forward the completion indication.
Dependent claim 20 recites, in part, wherein the completion indication is generated in response to the caregiver manipulating the user input to input rounding data.
Each of these steps of the preceding dependent claims only serve to further limit or specify the features of independent claims 1, 8, or 14 accordingly, and hence are nonetheless directed towards fundamentally the same abstract idea as the independent claim and utilize the additional elements analyzed below in the expected manner.
Step 2A – Judicial Exception Analysis, Prong 2:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements within the claims only amount to instructions to implement the judicial exception using a computer [MPEP 2106.05(f)].
Claims 1 recite a server configured to execute a caregiver assistance application. Claim 8 recites a rounding server configured to execute a caregiver assistance application. Claim 14 recites a rounding server configured to execute a caregiver assistance application. The specification does not have specific structure for the rounding server configured to execute a caregiver assistance application. The use of a rounding server, in this case to execute the caregiver assistance application, only recites the caregiver assistance application as a tool to apply data to an algorithm and report the results (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2) see case involving a commonplace business method or mathematical algorithm being applied on a general purpose computer within the “Other examples.. i.”) amounting to instruction to implement the abstract idea using a general purpose computer. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. V. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 1357 (2014).
Claims 1 recite a portable electronic device configured to wirelessly communicate with the caregiver assistance application, the portable electronic device including a display and a user input. Claim 8 recites the caregiver assistance application further configured to communicate with a remote electronic device comprising a display, a user input, and a web browser configured to be able to access a particular Uniform Resources Locator (URL) associated with the caregiver assistance application. Claim 14 recites communicate with a remote electronic device comprising a display, a user input, and a web browser configured to be able to access a particular Uniform Resources Locator (URL) associated with the caregiver assistance application. The specification defines the electronic device as any electronic device that can access the caregiver assistance system via a conventional web browser (see the Detailed Description in ¶ 00108-110). The electronic device executing the caregiver assistance application via a web server is only recited as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2) see case requiring the use of software to tailor information and provide it to the user on a generic computer within the “Other examples.. v.”).
Claims 1 and 14 recite an electronic medical records server. The specification notes that the electronic medical server is conventional (see the Detailed Description in ¶ 0097). The use of the electronic medical records, in this case to store a patient’s associated caregiver rounding data, is only recited as a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2) see case requiring the use of software to tailor information and provide it to the user on a generic computer within the “Other examples.. v.”).
Claims 5, 12, and 18 recite a send the caregiver command to the patient support apparatus. Claims 7 and 10 recite a transmit verification data to the patient support apparatus. The limitations are only recited as a tool which only serves to output data determined by the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(g) - insignificant post-solution activity that amounts to mere data output) and is therefore not a practical application of the recited judicial exception.
The above claims, as a whole, are therefore directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B – Additional Elements that Amount to Significantly More:
The present claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to more than the abstract idea because the additional elements or combination of elements amount to no more than a recitation of instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer.
Claims 1 recite a server configured to execute a caregiver assistance application. Claim 8 recites a rounding server configured to execute a caregiver assistance application. Claim 14 recites a rounding server configured to execute a caregiver assistance application.
Claims 1 recite a portable electronic device configured to wirelessly communicate with the caregiver assistance application, the portable electronic device including a display and a user input. Claim 8 recites the caregiver assistance application further configured to communicate with a remote electronic device comprising a display, a user input, and a web browser configured to be able to access a particular Uniform Resources Locator (URL) associated with the caregiver assistance application. Claim 14 recites communicate with a remote electronic device comprising a display, a user input, and a web browser configured to be able to access a particular Uniform Resources Locator (URL) associated with the caregiver assistance application.
Claims 1 and 14 recite an electronic medical records server.
Each of these elements is only recited as a tool for performing steps of the abstract idea, such as the use of the storage mediums to store data, the computer and data processing devices to apply the algorithm, and the display device to display selected results of the algorithm. These additional elements therefore only amount to mere instructions to perform the abstract idea using a computer and are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (MPEP 2016.05(f) see for additional guidance on the “mere instructions to apply an exception”).
Each additional element under Step 2A, Prong 2 is analyzed in light of the specification’s explanation of the additional element’s structure. The claimed invention’s additional elements do not have sufficient structure in the specification to be considered a not well-understood, routine, and conventional use of generic computer components. Note that the specification can support the conventionality of generic computer components if “the additional elements are sufficiently well-known that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of such additional elements to satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 112(a)” (Berkheimer in III. Impact on Examination Procedure, A. Formulating Rejections, 1. on p. 3).
Claims 5, 12, and 18 recite a send the caregiver command to the patient support apparatus. Claims 7 and 10 recite a transmit verification data to the patient support apparatus. The courts have decided that receiving or transmitting data over a network as well-understood, routine, conventional activity when claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II) other types of activities example i. receiving or transmitting data over a network, OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network).
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation.
Claims 1-20 are therefore rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huster et al. (US Patent Application No. 20150033295)[hereinafter Huster].
Claim 1 is rejected because Huster teaches on all elements of the claim:
a caregiver assistance system comprising is taught in the Summary in ¶ 0032, ¶ 0036-37, in the Figures at fig. 9 reference characters 316, and 364 (teaching on a central caregiver tracking/scheduling system for monitoring patient care compliance data from a remote caregiver electronic device)
a server configured to execute a caregiver assistance application, the caregiver assistance application configured to receive status data indicating a current state of a patient support apparatus; and is taught in the Summary in ¶ 0032-33, ¶ 0036-37, and in the Figures at fig. 9 reference character 364 (teaching on a central caregiver tracking/scheduling application server for receiving and storing caregiver interaction data with a patient and patient bed status)
a portable electronic device configured to wirelessly communicate with the caregiver assistance application is taught in the Summary in ¶ 0034-36, in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0062, ¶ 0064, ¶ 0085, ¶ 0090, and in the Figures at fig. 9 reference character 316 (teaching on a caregiver interface (treated as synonymous to a caregiver assistance application) on a caregiver's mobile tablet computing device in communication with a patient's electronic medical record)
the portable electronic device including a display and a user input, the portable electronic device further configured to is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0095 and in the Summary in ¶ 0032-33 (teaching on the caregiver interface including a tablet device with a display, user input for controlling the interface, and touch screen)
(i) display rounding information on the display, the rounding information relating to a patient associated with the patient support apparatus; and is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0080-81 and in the Figures at fig. 5 reference character 24 (teaching on the caregiver entering rounding completion data into the mobile universal caregiver device)
(ii) forward a completion indication to the caregiver assistance application, the completion indication generated in response to a caregiver manipulating the user input when the caregiver has completed a rounding task associated with the patient; and is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0066, ¶ 0080, ¶ 0163-164, and in the Figures at fig. 9 (teaching on forwarding the rounding completion data entered by the caregiver into the mobile universal caregiver device to the central caregiver tracking/scheduling system and the patient electronic health record )
wherein the caregiver assistance application is configured to automatically forward both the completion indication and the status data to an electronic medical records server in response to receiving the completion indication from the portable electronic device is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0066, ¶ 0080, ¶ 0163-164, and in the Figures at fig. 9 (teaching on forwarding the rounding completion data entered by the caregiver into the mobile universal caregiver device to the central caregiver tracking/scheduling system via the web-based application and the patient electronic health record).
Claim 14 is rejected because Huster teaches on all elements of the claim:
a caregiver assistance system comprising is taught in the Summary in ¶ 0032, ¶ 0036-37, in the Figures at fig. 9 reference characters 316, and 364 (teaching on a central caregiver tracking/scheduling system for monitoring patient care compliance data from a remote caregiver electronic device)
a rounding server configured to execute a caregiver assistance application, the caregiver assistance application configured to monitor caregiver rounding tasks and to receive status data indicating a current state of a patient support apparatus and is taught in the Summary in ¶ 0032-33, ¶ 0036-37, and in the Figures at fig. 9 reference character 364 (teaching on a central caregiver tracking/scheduling application server for receiving and storing caregiver interaction data with a patient and patient bed status)
to communicate with a remote electronic device comprising a display, a user input, and a web browser configured to be able to access a particular Uniform Resources Locator (URL) associated with the caregiver assistance application, the caregiver assistance application further configured to cause the remote electronic device to perform the following after accessing the particular URL is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0095, ¶ 0161-162, and in the Summary in ¶ 0032-33 (teaching on the caregiver interface including a tablet device with a display, user input for controlling the interface, and touch screen wherein the caregiver interface displays the central caregiver tracking/scheduling application via a web-based (treated as synonymous to a URL access) application)
(i) display rounding information on the display, the rounding information relating to a patient associated with the patient support apparatus; and is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0080-81 and in the Figures at fig. 5 reference character 24 (teaching on the caregiver entering rounding completion data into the mobile universal caregiver device)
(ii) forward a completion indication to the caregiver assistance application, the completion indication generated in response to a caregiver manipulating the user input when the caregiver has completed a rounding task associated with the patient; and is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0066, ¶ 0080, ¶ 0163-164, and in the Figures at fig. 9 (teaching on forwarding the rounding completion data entered by the caregiver into the mobile universal caregiver device to the central caregiver tracking/scheduling system and the patient electronic health record )
wherein the caregiver assistance application is configured to automatically forward both the completion indication and the status data to an electronic medical records server in response to receiving the completion indication from the remote electronic device is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0066, ¶ 0080, ¶ 0163-164, and in the Figures at fig. 9 (teaching on forwarding the rounding completion data entered by the caregiver into the mobile universal caregiver device to the central caregiver tracking/scheduling system via the web-based application and the patient electronic health record).
Claim 20 is rejected because Huster teaches on all elements of the claim 14 and Huster also teaches the following:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 14 wherein the completion indication is generated in response to the caregiver manipulating the user input to input rounding data into the remote electronic device is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0066, ¶ 0080, ¶ 0163-164, and in the Figures at fig. 9 (teaching on the caregiver entering rounding task including altering a setting on a patient bed via (treated as synonymous to sending) the caregiver tracking/scheduling system application on the mobile device and the caregiver tracking/scheduling system application controlling the bed position accordingly).
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 8-13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tallent et al (US Patent Application No. 20170027787)[hereinafter Tallent] in view of Huster et al. (US Patent Application No. 20150033295)[hereinafter Huster].
As per claim 8, Tallent teaches on the following limitations of the claim:
the caregiver assistance application further configured to determine if the current state of the patient support apparatus is or is not in compliance with the patient support apparatus configuration data is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0136-137 , ¶ 0164, and ¶ 0146 (teaching on the care message including standard of care check list including patient bed settings for compliance with the predefined care standard (treated as synonymous to compliance with a predefined state) wherein a warning message would display if the current state is contraindicated within the graphical user interface)
(a) display a non-compliance indication if the current state of the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the patient support apparatus configuration data, and is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0136-137 , ¶ 0164, and ¶ 0146 (teaching on the care message including standard of care check list including patient bed settings for compliance with the predefined care standard (treated as synonymous to compliance with a predefined state) wherein a warning message would display if the current state is contraindicated within the graphical user interface as well as the doctors instructions (treated as synonymous to the rounding information)).
Tallent fails to teach the following limitation of claim 1. Huster, however, does teach the following:
a caregiver assistance system comprising is taught in the Summary in ¶ 0032, ¶ 0036-37, in the Figures at fig. 9 reference characters 316, and 364 (teaching on a central caregiver tracking/scheduling system for monitoring patient care compliance data from a remote caregiver electronic device)
a rounding server configured to execute a caregiver assistance application, the caregiver assistance application configured to monitor caregiver rounding tasks and to receive status data from a patient support apparatus indicating a current state of the patient support apparatus and is taught in the Summary in ¶ 0032-33, ¶ 0036-37, and in the Figures at fig. 9 reference character 364 (teaching on a central caregiver tracking/scheduling application server for receiving and storing caregiver interaction data with a patient and patient bed status)
to receive patient support apparatus configuration data indicating a desired state of the patient support apparatus is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0066, ¶ 0080, and ¶ 0163-164, and in the Figures at fig. 9 (teaching on the caregiver entering rounding task including altering a setting on a patient bed to a desired position)
the caregiver assistance application further configured to communicate with a remote electronic device comprising a display, a user input, and a web browser configured to be able to access a particular Uniform Resources Locator (URL) associated with the caregiver assistance application, the caregiver assistance application further configured to cause the remote electronic device to perform the following after accessing the particular URL is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0095, ¶ 0161-162, and in the Summary in ¶ 0032-33 (teaching on the caregiver interface including a tablet device with a display, user input for controlling the interface, and touch screen wherein the caregiver interface displays the central caregiver tracking/scheduling application via a web-based (treated as synonymous to a URL access) application)
(b) receive rounding data via the user input from a caregiver associated with the patient support apparatus is taught in the Summary in ¶ 0032-33, ¶ 0036-37, and in the Figures at fig. 9 reference character 364 (teaching on a central caregiver tracking/scheduling application server for receiving and storing caregiver interaction data with a patient and patient bed status).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would combine the bed position monitoring caregiver rounding duty of Tallent with the caregiver application interface and remote server architecture of Huster with the motivation of “permit[ting] a mobile computing device to act as a user interface for a patient Support apparatus and transfer computing requirements for the patient Support apparatus to a remote server to reduce the processing load on the patient Support apparatus” (Huster in the Background in ¶ 0003).
As per claim 9, the combination of Tallent and Huster discloses all of the limitations of claim 8. Tallent also discloses the following:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 8 wherein the rounding data includes an answer to a question asked by the caregiver of a patient associated with the patient support apparatus wherein the question relates to at least one of the following: a pain level of the patient, a current position of the patient, a desire by the patient to visit a restroom, or a desire by the patient to have an object moved closer to the patient is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0102, ¶ 0146, and in the Claims at claim 38 (teaching on the caregiver’s rounding instructions including questions regarding the patient’s state including assessing the pain level of the patient)
wherein the remote electronic device is configured to display a rounding screen related to a rounding action to be performed by the caregiver; and wherein the remote electronic device is further configured to display the non-compliance indication on the rounding screen is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0136-137 , ¶ 0164, and ¶ 0146 (teaching on the care message including standard of care check list including patient bed settings for compliance with the predefined care standard (treated as synonymous to compliance with a predefined state) wherein a warning message would display if the current state is contraindicated within the graphical user interface as well as the doctors instructions (treated as synonymous to the rounding information)).
As per claim 10, the combination of Tallent and Huster discloses all of the limitations of claim 8. Tallent also discloses the following:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 8 wherein the remote electronic device is further transmit verification data to the patient support apparatus, the verification data verifying that the caregiver is physically present adjacent the patient support apparatus when the remote electronic device receives the rounding data from the caregiver; and wherein the remote electronic device is further configured to transmit the verification data to the patient support apparatus in response to the caregiver manipulating the user input is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0089-90 (teaching on the caregiver rounding duty platform only forwarding patient charting data (treated as synonymous to an indication of rounding completion) to the electronic medical record when the caregiver verifies his/her presence within a certain proximity to the patient bed (treated as synonymous to the caregiver's presence adjacent to the bed) via a RFID tag and transceiver, a biometric sensor mounted on said bed, or a PIN typed into a screen mounted on said bed)
As per claim 11, the combination of Tallent and Huster discloses all of the limitations of claim 8. Tallent also discloses the following:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 8 wherein the remote electronic device is further configured to issue a reminder to the caregiver to change a setting on the patient support apparatus in order to cause the current state of the patient support apparatus to be in compliance with the patient support apparatus configuration data is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0136-137 , ¶ 0164, and ¶ 0146 (teaching on the care message including standard of care check list including patient bed settings for compliance with the predefined care standard (treated as synonymous to compliance with a predefined state) wherein a warning message is displayed if the current state is contraindicated within the graphical user interface and said warning message may not be cleared until subsequent caregiver action is taken, such as until the bed position is corrected (treated as synonymous to a reminder))
the remote electronic device being configured to issue the reminder prior to forwarding the rounding data to the caregiver assistance application is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0136-137 , ¶ 0164, and ¶ 0146 (teaching on the care message including standard of care check list including patient bed settings for compliance with the predefined care standard (treated as synonymous to compliance with a predefined state) wherein a warning message is displayed if the current state is contraindicated within the graphical user interface and said warning message may not be cleared until subsequent caregiver action is taken, such as until the bed position is corrected (treated as synonymous to a reminder))
As per claim 12, the combination of Tallent and Huster discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Tallent fails to teach the following; Huster, however, does disclose:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 8 wherein the remote electronic device is configured to receive a caregiver command to change a setting on the patient support apparatus, to send the caregiver command to the caregiver assistance application, and wherein the caregiver assistance application is configured to send the caregiver command to the patient support apparatus, the caregiver command instructing the patient support apparatus to change at least one setting in order to bring the current state of the patient support apparatus into compliance with the patient support apparatus configuration data is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0066, ¶ 0080, ¶ 0163-164, and in the Figures at fig. 9 (teaching on the caregiver entering rounding task including altering a setting on a patient bed via (treated as synonymous to sending) the caregiver tracking/scheduling system application on the mobile device and the caregiver tracking/scheduling system application controlling the bed position accordingly)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would combine the bed position monitoring caregiver rounding duty of Tallent with the caregiver application interface and remote server architecture for controlling the bed of Huster with the motivation of “permit[ting] a mobile computing device to act as a user interface for a patient Support apparatus and transfer computing requirements for the patient Support apparatus to a remote server to reduce the processing load on the patient Support apparatus” (Huster in the Background in ¶ 0003).
As per claim 13, the combination of Tallent and Huster discloses all of the limitations of claim 12. Tallent also discloses the following:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 12 wherein the setting relates to an exit detection system integrated into the patient support apparatus and the caregiver command is a command to arm the exit detection system is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0095-96 (teaching on an Out-Of-Bed mode wherein the mode determines if an alarm condition exists (treated as synonymous to compliance conditions with the bed configuration)).
Claims 2-7 and 15-19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huster et al. (US Patent Application No. 20150033295)[hereinafter Huster] in view of Tallent et al (US Patent Application No. 20170027787)[hereinafter Tallent].
As per claim 2, Huster discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Huster fails to teach the following; Tallent, however, does disclose:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 1 wherein the caregiver assistance application is further configured to determine if the current state of the patient support apparatus is or is not in compliance with a desired state, and to forward a non-compliance indication to the portable electronic device if the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the desired state is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0136-137 , ¶ 0164, and ¶ 0146 (teaching on the care message including standard of care check list including patient bed settings for compliance with the predefined care standard (treated as synonymous to compliance with a predefined state) wherein a warning message would display if the current state is contraindicated within the graphical user interface).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would combine the caregiver rounding device connected to a remote server architecture of Huster to the particular patient bed related rounding tasks of Tallent with the motivation of “enhancing the connectivity between hospital beds and other computer systems and applications” wherein the connectivity of caregiver actions with said patient bed “improves patient safety and enhances patient outcomes” (Tallent in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0137).
As per claim 3, the combination of Huster and Tallent discloses all of the limitations of claim 2. Huster fails to teach the following; Tallent, however, does disclose:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 2 wherein the portable electronic device is further configured to perform the following: simultaneously display both the non-compliance indication and the rounding information on the display; and is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0136-137 , ¶ 0164, and ¶ 0146 (teaching on the care message including standard of care check list including patient bed settings for compliance with the predefined care standard (treated as synonymous to compliance with a predefined state) wherein a warning message would display if the current state is contraindicated within the graphical user interface as well as the doctors instructions (treated as synonymous to the rounding information))
issue a reminder to the caregiver to change a setting on the patient support apparatus in order to cause the current state of the patient support apparatus to be in compliance with the desired state, the reminder being issued prior to forwarding of the completion indication to the caregiver assistance application is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0136-137 , ¶ 0164, and ¶ 0146 (teaching on the care message including standard of care check list including patient bed settings for compliance with the predefined care standard (treated as synonymous to compliance with a predefined state) wherein a warning message is displayed if the current state is contraindicated within the graphical user interface and said warning message may not be cleared until subsequent caregiver action is taken, such as until the bed position is corrected (treated as synonymous to a reminder)).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would combine the caregiver rounding device connected to a remote server architecture of Huster to the particular patient bed related rounding tasks of Tallent with the motivation of “enhancing the connectivity between hospital beds and other computer systems and applications” wherein the connectivity of caregiver actions with said patient bed “improves patient safety and enhances patient outcomes” (Tallent in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0137).
As per claim 4, the combination of Huster and Tallent discloses all of the limitations of claim 2. Huster fails to teach the following; Tallent, however, does disclose:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 2 wherein the portable electronic device is further configured to prevent forwarding the completion indication to the caregiver assistance application if the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the desired state is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0136-137 , ¶ 0164, and ¶ 0146 (teaching on displaying a locked a warning message if the current state is contraindicated within the graphical user interface and said warning message may not be cleared until subsequent caregiver action is taken, such as until the bed position is corrected and therefore preventing the forwarding of the information until the task is properly completed)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would combine the caregiver rounding device connected to a remote server architecture of Huster to the monitoring of particular patient bed related rounding tasks of Tallent with the motivation of “enhancing the connectivity between hospital beds and other computer systems and applications” wherein a failure to complete a rounding duty is not marked complete and thus “aid[ing] in remembering the status of each patient and what doctor's orders are currently in effect for the various patients that caregivers are caring for during their shift” (Tallent in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0138).
As per claim 5, the combination of Huster and Tallent discloses all of the limitations of claim 2. Huster also discloses:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 2 wherein the portable electronic device is configured to receive a caregiver command to change a setting on the patient support apparatus, to send the caregiver command to the caregiver assistance application, and wherein the caregiver assistance application is configured to send the caregiver command to the patient support apparatus, the caregiver command instructing the patient support apparatus to change at least one setting in order to bring the current state of the patient support apparatus into compliance with the desired state is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0066, ¶ 0080, ¶ 0163-164, and in the Figures at fig. 9 (teaching on the caregiver entering rounding task including altering a setting on a patient bed via (treated as synonymous to sending) the caregiver tracking/scheduling system application on the mobile device and the caregiver tracking/scheduling system application controlling the bed position accordingly).
As per claim 6, the combination of Huster and Tallent discloses all of the limitations of claim 2. Huster also discloses:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 2 wherein the portable electronic device is configured to require an acknowledgement input from the caregiver prior to forwarding the completion indication to the caregiver assistance application if the current state of the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the desired state wherein if the acknowledgement input is not received the portable electronic device does not forward the completion indication to the caregiver assistance application is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0066, ¶ 0080, ¶ 0163-164, and in the Figures at fig. 9 (teaching on the caregiver entering rounding task including altering a setting on a patient bed via (treated as synonymous to sending) the caregiver tracking/scheduling system application on the mobile device wherein rounding data is not sent to the mobile device until the caregiver input the data on the tablet).
As per claim 7, the combination of Huster and Tallent discloses all of the limitations of claim 2. Huster also discloses:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 1 wherein the completion indication is generated in response to the caregiver manipulating the user input to input rounding data into the portable electronic device is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0066, ¶ 0080, ¶ 0163-164, and in the Figures at fig. 9 (teaching on the caregiver entering rounding task including altering a setting on a patient bed via (treated as synonymous to sending) the caregiver tracking/scheduling system application on the mobile device and the caregiver tracking/scheduling system application controlling the bed position accordingly).
Huster fails to teach the following; Tallent, however, does disclose:
wherein the portable electronic device is further configured to transmit verification data to the patient support apparatus, and the verification data verifies that the caregiver is physically present adjacent the patient support apparatus when the portable electronic device receives the rounding data from the caregiver; and wherein the patient support apparatus is further configured to forward the verification data to the caregiver assistance application is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0089-90 (teaching on the caregiver rounding duty platform only forwarding patient charting data (treated as synonymous to an indication of rounding completion) to the electronic medical record when the caregiver verifies his/her presence within a certain proximity to the patient bed (treated as synonymous to the caregiver's presence adjacent to the bed) via a RFID tag and transceiver, a biometric sensor mounted on said bed, or a PIN typed into a screen mounted on said bed).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would combine the caregiver rounding device connected to a remote server architecture of Huster to the monitoring of particular patient bed related rounding tasks of Tallent with the motivation of “enhancing the connectivity between hospital beds and other computer systems and applications” wherein a failure to complete a rounding duty is not marked complete and thus “aid[ing] in remembering the status of each patient and what doctor's orders are currently in effect for the various patients that caregivers are caring for during their shift” (Tallent in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0138).
As per claim 15, Huster discloses all of the limitations of claim 14. Huster fails to teach the following; Tallent, however, does disclose:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 14 wherein the caregiver assistance application is further configured to determine if the current state of the patient support apparatus is or is not in compliance with a desired state, and to forward a non-compliance indication to the remote electronic device if the patient support apparatus is not in compliance with the desired state is taught in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0136-137 , ¶ 0164, and ¶ 0146 (teaching on the care message including standard of care check list including patient bed settings for compliance with the predefined care standard (treated as synonymous to compliance with a predefined state) wherein a warning message would display if the current state is contraindicated within the graphical user interface).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would combine the caregiver rounding device connected to a remote server architecture of Huster to the particular patient bed related rounding tasks of Tallent with the motivation of “enhancing the connectivity between hospital beds and other computer systems and applications” wherein the connectivity of caregiver actions with said patient bed “improves patient safety and enhances patient outcomes” (Tallent in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0137).
As per claim 16, the combination of Huster and Tallent discloses all of the limitations of claim 15. Huster fails to teach the following; Tallent, however, does disclose:
the caregiver assistance system of claim 15 wherein the remote electronic device is further configured to simultaneously display both the non-compliance indication and the rounding information on the display is taught in the Detailed Descriptio