DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 1/14/25 and 1/17/25. Claims 17-35 are pending. Claims 17-35 are rejected.
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 § 102
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 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 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; or
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 17-19, 21-24, and 26-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2009/0063183 to McNeely et al. (“McNeely”).
Claim 17. A system comprising a patient bed including: a frame (McNeely, Fig. 2 and Fig 4, #22’); circuitry (McNeely, Fig. 4, #344) carried by the frame; and a graphical user interface (McNeely, Fig. 4, #344; also see paragraph [0051]) carried by the frame and coupled to the circuitry, the graphical user interface (McNeely, Fig. 2, also Fig. 4, #360, also paragraph [0050]) displaying at least one user interface screen (McNeely, paragraph [0050], “touch sensitive displays”) that is used by a caregiver to manually enter location data (McNeely, paragraph [0100]) indicative of a location in a healthcare facility occupied by the patient bed, the circuitry being configured to transmit (McNeely, at least paragraph [0035] discusses the use of a wireless network) the location data entered by the caregiver and a bed identification (ID) from the bed (see McNeely paragraphs [0060]-[0062] which explicitly discusses “an administrator may associate beds 22 and/or surfaces 46 with locations” and in paragraph [0064] discusses “bed identifiers” which reads on Applicant’s bed ID), after the location data has been entered manually on the graphical user interface by the caregiver (it is inherent that the location data is sent by the bed after the location data is entered as it would be impossible to send the location data before the location data is known).
Claim 18. The system of claim [[16]] 17, wherein the location data comprises a room number (McNeely, paragraph [0047]).
Claim 19. The system of claim [[16]] 17, wherein the graphical user interface includes a change button that is selected to initiate a change of the location data (McNeely, paragraph [0100] discusses manual input of location data; it is inherent that “buttons” would be used on the user interface, for example the buttons shown in at least Fig. 2).
Claim 21. The system of claim [[16]] 17, further comprising at least one remote computer device that receives the location data and the bed ID for purposes of making a bed-to-room association, and wherein the patient bed is coupled to the at least one remote computer device via a network of the healthcare facility (McNeely, see at least paragraph [0002]).
Claim 22. The system of claim [[16]] 17, wherein the location data and the bed ID is transmitted off of the bed in the form of a wireless transmission (McNeely, see at least paragraph [0035]).
Claim 23. The system of claim 1[[16]] 176, wherein the circuitry also transmits bed status data off of the bed (McNeely, see at least paragraph [0112] regarding “surface status data”).
Claim 24. The system of claim [[16]] 17, wherein the location data comprises a unit data indicative of a unit of the healthcare facility occupied by the patient bed and a room number of the unit in which the patient bed is situated (McNeely, see at least paragraph [0047]).
Claim 26. The system of claim [[16]] 17, wherein the caregiver is prompted to manually enter the location data on the graphical user interface in response to the patient bed being plugged into alternating current (AC) power, unless the patient bed is already associated with the location (McNeely, paragraph [0086]).
Claim 27. The system of claim [[16]] 17, wherein the caregiver is prompted to manually enter the location data on the graphical user interface in response to a new patient arriving at the patient bed, unless the patient bed is already associated with the location (McNeely discloses manual data entry in paragraph [0100] and discloses overriding data, such as patient data, by user entry in paragraph [0085]; regarding “prompted to manually enter”, McNeely discloses “a reminder to re-enable the Care Alert template may be initiated by the nurse call system to the wireless communication devices carried by one or more of the assigned caregivers”).
Claim 28. The system of claim [[16]] 17, wherein in response to a power loss by the patient bed of more than a threshold amount of time, the caregiver is prompted to confirm that the patient bed still occupies the location previously entered using the graphical user interface or to change the location occupied by the patient bed (see McNeely paragraphs [0080]-[0081]).
Claim 29. The system of claim 28, wherein in response to a power loss by the patient bed of less than a threshold amount of time, the location previously entered using the graphical user interface is maintained by the patient bed (regarding “a threshold amount of time,” McNeely paragraph [0080] discloses “a slight delay period, such as 10 or 20 seconds”).
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 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 of this title, 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 19-20, 25, 30, 32-33, and 35-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2009/0063183 to McNeely et al. (“McNeely”), in view of US Patent Application Publication 2008/0172789 to 7,411,509 to Elliot et al. (“Elliot”).
Claim 19. The system of claim 16, wherein the graphical user interface includes a change button that is selected to initiate a change of the location data (McNeely does not explicitly disclose a “button”, however Elliot teaches details of a bed user interface, and teaches the use of “a keyboard on a touch screen” in paragraph [0045]; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a keyboard for the GUI of McNeely for the predictable benefit of “so that the user may key in the information,” as stated by Elliot, and furthermore doing so would have simply been combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable and obvious results).
Claim 20. The system of claim 19, wherein a keyboard screen appears on the graphical user interface in response to the change button being selected, the keyboard screen permitting the caregiver to type new location data indicative of a new location occupied by the patient bed (McNeely paragraph [0100] discloses manual input of location data, Elliot paragraph [0045] teaches a GUI with a keyboard).
Claim 25. The system of claim 24, wherein the graphical user interface displays a first screen that is used to select the unit of the healthcare facility occupied by the patient bed from a menu of units and a second screen that is used to select the room number from a menu of room numbers (McNeely does not explicitly disclose the use of menus on the user interface, however Elliot teaches details of a bed user interface, and teaches the use of “touch screen areas, including a menu, or the like to allow a user to input command” in paragraph [0075]; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a menu for the GUI of McNeely in order to select user data such as a room number since doing so is known in the prior art of GUIs and would have simply been combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable and obvious results).
Claim 30. A method comprising: a. displaying, on a graphical user interface (McNeely, paragraph [0050], “touch sensitive displays”) of a patient bed (McNeely, Fig. 2 and Fig 4, #22’), fields (McNeely does not explicitly disclose the use of “fields” on the user interface, however Elliot teaches details of a bed user interface, and teaches the use of “touch screen areas, including a menu, or the like to allow a user to input command” in paragraph [0075], which reads on Applicant’s “fields”; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a field for the GUI of McNeely in order to select user data such as a room number since doing so is known in the prior art of GUIs and would have simply been combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable and obvious results) that a caregiver selects to manually (McNeely, paragraph [0100] discusses manual data entry) enter location data indicative of a location in a healthcare facility occupied by the patient bed (McNeely, paragraph [0047] discusses room number, wing, etc.); b. receiving, on the graphical user interface, selections from the caregiver of the location data (as noted above, McNeely in view of Elliot make obvious manual data entry); and c. transmitting (McNeely, at least paragraph [0035] discusses the use of a wireless network), from the patient bed, the location data entered by the caregiver and a bed ID after the location data has been entered manually on the graphical user interface by the caregiver (it is inherent that the location data is sent by the bed after the location data is entered as it would be impossible to send the location data before the location data is known).
Claim 32. The method of claim 30, wherein the location data comprises at least one of a room number and a unit number (McNeely, paragraph [0047]).
Claim 33. The method of claim 30, wherein the location data comprises both of a room number and a unit number (McNeely, paragraph [0047]).
Claim 35. The method of claim 34, wherein, upon determining that the patient bed is not associated with a location, the method further comprises prompting the caregiver to enter the location data (McNeely paragraph [0085] discloses “a reminder to re-enable the Care Alert template may be initiated by the nurse call system to the wireless communication devices carried by one or more of the assigned caregivers”).
Claim 36. The method of claim 30, further comprising determining that the patient bed experienced an AC power loss; wherein, if a duration of time of the AC power loss is less than a threshold amount of time, the location data previously selected using the graphical user interface is maintained; and wherein, if the duration of time is greater than the threshold amount of time, a confirm association screen is displayed on the graphical user interface such that the caregiver can either update the patient bed to location association or confirm the existing patient bed to location association (regarding “a threshold amount of time,” McNeely paragraph [0080] discloses “a slight delay period, such as 10 or 20 seconds”).
Claims 31 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2009/0063183 to McNeely et al. (“McNeely”), and US Patent Application Publication 2008/0172789 to 7,411,509 to Elliot et al. (“Elliot”), in view of US Patent Application Publication 2014/0095197 to McNeely et al. (“McNeely ‘197).
Claim 31. The method of claim 30, further comprising receiving the location data and receiving the bed ID at a remote computer device (McNeely, at least paragraph [0035] discusses the use of a wireless network). and associating the patient bed with the location based on the location data and the bed ID in an association database (McNeely paragraph [0034] discloses “a machine-readable medium,” and “read only memory,” but does not explicitly disclose a “database”; however McNeely ‘197 teaches “the bed selected from the first menu is associated in a database of the remote computer” in Claim 21; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a database file structure with the “a machine-readable medium,” and “read only memory,” since doing so is a known method for data collection and manipulation, and would simply be the use of a known technique with a known device to yield predictable results).
Claim 34. The method of claim 30, further comprising: sending a query, from the patient bed, to a remote computer device (McNeely paragraph [0035]) to determine whether the patient bed is associated with a location in an association database (see McNeely ‘197, at least Claim 21), wherein the query is sent upon at least one of: an indication that AC power has been applied to the patient bed (McNeely, paragraph [0086]).; and an indication that a new patient has arrived at the bed.
Response to Applicant's remarks and amendments
Regarding rejections under 35 USC 112(b), Applicant has amended the claim language and the rejections have been withdrawn.
Regarding objections to claim 23, Applicant has amended the claim language and the objections have been withdrawn.
With respect to claim 17, Applicant argues on pages 7-8 of Applicant’s remarks that the cited art of McNeely does not teach the claimed invention. Specifically Applicant argues that the focus of the invention of McNeely is different than that of the instant application. While this may be true, the pertinent question is not what McNeely attempts to achieve, but rather what one of ordinary skill in the art would have known on the date of Applicant’s invention. McNeely anticipates or makes obvious the claimed invention, as is discussed in the above rejections
Applicant argues on page 8 of remarks that “the present application requires the graphical user interface to be an element of the patient bed.” McNeely explicitly discloses a user interface 360 in at least paragraph [0051]. Regarding a “graphical” user interface, see Fig. 2, #50, as well as paragraphs [0050]-[0051] which disclose the use of “various user inputs (e.g. buttons, switches, touch sensitive displays) and various user outputs (e.g. LEDs, LCD displays, speakers)”.
Applicant appears to be arguing that McNeely only anticipates manual entry of bed location data (as noted in paragraph [0100]), however this is incorrect. Paragraph [0086] of McNeely discloses “the nurse call system may re-enable the Care Alert templates automatically after bed 22 and/or surface 46 has been moved and then plugged back in”. Applicant’s argument implies that Applicant is acknowledging that the bed of McNeely automatically associates the bed location with a central nurse station, by saying “McNeely specifically contemplates manual entry of bed ID…to resolve an unsuccessful attempt to associate a bed”. Moreover, even if McNeely did not teach this feature (which is does) Applicant’s claim language does not recite that the bed location association occurs automatically.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 MYLES A THROOP whose telephone number is (571)270-5006. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Troutman can be reached on 571-270-3654. 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.
/MYLES A THROOP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673
Prosecution Insights