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 .
This communication is in response to the amendment received on 06/24/2026. Claims 1-2, 4-8, 10, 13-14, 18-19, 22, 24-29, 32-39, 42-48, 50-52 and 55-78 remain pending in this application.
The claim objections for claims 1 and 32 have been withdrawn in light of the amendments.
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 1-2, 4-10, 12-19, 22, 24-29 and 32-58 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1:
Claims 1-2, 4-10, 12-19, 22, 24-29 and 40-58 are drawn to a method which is within the four statutory categories (i.e. process). Claims 32-39 are drawn to a device (system) which is within the four statutory categories (i.e. machine).
Step 2A, Prong 1:
Claims 1, 32 and 66 have been amended and provided below with markings separating abstract elements from the additional limitations, wherein the bolded style represents the additional limitations beyond the abstract idea, and remaining limitations are directed to the abstract ideas as discussed below:
Claim 1:
“retrieving patient-related data from at least one data source;
processing at least a portion of the patient-related data using one or more data tables and configuration structures to generate data for presentation in one or more presentation tables or display tables tied to a medical information display, the configuration structures defining a layout of the medical information display and identifying panels, tabs, panel positions, and one or more data sources for the panels or tabs;
generating, based on the patient-related data and the one or more presentation tables or display tables, the medical information display comprising a plurality of adjustable display panels and a patient flowsheet, the patient flowsheet integrating patient medical history into a table that presents the patient's medical history by visit;
displaying the medical information display on a display screen;
presenting, on the display screen and without replacing the medical information, an ordering display panel in addition to the adjustable display panels and the patient flowsheet, or other displayed patient-related medical information, wherein the ordering display panel is displayed while at least one row, column, field, or panel entry of the patient flowsheet corresponding to a medical order or to a detected discrepancy remains visible to a user, and wherein the ordering display panel remains available for user interaction;
populating order information in the ordering display panel for the medical order;
executing by a rules engine or inference engine, one or more rules by identifying rules related to the order information and retrieving supporting data as needed from one or more patient, insurance, clinical, financial, or imaging data repositories to detect at least one pattern, error, anomaly, or inconsistency between the order information and patient-related medical information, including detecting an inconsistency between the order information and at least one of (i) structured data and unstructured clinical documentation within a patient record, and (ii) patient-related data originating from a plurality of independent systems or medical practices sharing care of the patient;
generating, in response to the executing, an alert indicating the detected patterns, errors, anomalies, or inconsistencies;
displaying the alert adjacent to, overlaid on, or highlighting corresponding medical information or order information in the medical information display or the ordering display panel, while the ordering display panel remains available for user interaction and said row, column, field, or panel entry of the patient flowsheet , or said other displayed patient-related medical information remains visible to the user, without requiring navigation away from the medical information display or the ordering display panel;
finalizing the medical order via the ordering display panel; and
inputting the finalized order into the at least one data source.”
Claim 32:
“retrieving patient-related data from at least one data source;
accessing a plurality of guidelines from disparate sources or guideline jurisdictions;
using natural language processing and rules-based parsing to contextually parse language of the plurality of guidelines and generate a unified summary including an overview, similarities, and differences or conflicts among the plurality of guidelines;
processing at least a portion of the patient-related data and at least a portion of the unified summary using one or more data tables and configuration structures to generate data for presentation in one or more presentation tables or display tables tied to a medical information display, the configuration structures defining a layout of the medical information display and identifying panels, tabs, panel positions, and one or more data sources for the panels or tabs;
generating, based on the patient-related data and the one or more presentation tables or display tables, the medical information display comprising a plurality of adjustable display panels and a patient flowsheet presenting patient medical history by visit;
displaying the medical information display on a display screen;
presenting, on the display screen and without replacing the medical information display, an ordering display panel in addition to the adjustable display panels and the patient flowsheet, wherein the ordering display panel is displayed while at least one row, column, field, or panel entry of the patient flowsheet, or other displayed patient-related medical information, corresponding to a medical order or to a detected discrepancy remains visible to a user, and wherein the ordering display panel remains available for user interaction;
receiving order information for the medical order via the ordering display panel, or auto- populating order information in the ordering display panel, wherein the order information is entered, selected or auto-populated based on at least one of user interaction with the ordering display panel, patient-related data, patient-related data or the unified summary;
executing by a rules engine or inference engine, one or more rules by identifying rules related to the order information and retrieving supporting data as needed from one or more patient, insurance, clinical, financial, imaging, or guideline data repositories to evaluate the order information against at least one of the patient-related data and the unified summary;
generating an alert indicating at least one detected inconsistency, pattern, error, or anomaly based on the evaluating;
displaying the alert adjacent to, overlaid on, or highlighting corresponding medical information, guideline information, or order information in the medical information display or the ordering display panel while the ordering display panel remains available for user interaction and said row, column, field, or panel entry of the patient flowsheet, or said other displayed patient- related medical information, remains visible to the user without requiring navigation away from the medical information display or the ordering display panel;
finalizing the medical order via the ordering display panel; and
inputting the finalized medical order into the at least one data source.”
Claim 66:
“at least one processor;
at least one interface configured to communicate with one or more data sources; and
a memory coupled to the at least one processor and storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, configure the system to perform operations comprising:
retrieving patient-related data for a selected patient from the one or more data sources via the at least one interface;
processing at least a portion of the patient-related data using one or more data tables and configuration structures to generate data for presentation in one or more presentation tables or display tables tied to a medical information display, the configuration structures defining a layout of the medical information display and identifying panels, tabs, panel positions, and one or more data sources for the panels or tabs;
generating, based on the patient-related data and the one or more presentation tables or display tables, the medical information display comprising a plurality of adjustable display panels and a patient flowsheet, the patient flowsheet integrating patient medical history into a table that presents a patient's medical history by visit;
causing the medical information display to be displayed on a display screen;
presenting, on the display screen and without replacing the medical information display, an ordering display panel in addition to the adjustable display panels and the patient flowsheet, wherein the ordering display panel is displayed while at least one row, column, field, or panel entry of the patient flowsheet, or other displayed patient-related medical information, corresponding to a medical order or to a detected discrepancy remains visible to a user, and wherein the ordering display panel remains available for user interaction;
populating order information in the ordering display panel for the medical order;
executing, by a rules engine or inference engine, one or more rules by identifying rules related to the order information and retrieving supporting data as needed from one or more patient, insurance, clinical, financial, or imaging data repositories to detect at least one pattern, error, anomaly, or inconsistency between the order information and patient-related medical information, including detecting an inconsistency between the order information and at least one of (i) structured data and unstructured clinical documentation within a patient record, and (ii) patient-related data originating from a plurality of independent systems or medical practices sharing care of the selected patient;
generating, in response to the executing, an alert indicating the detected pattern, error, anomaly, or inconsistency;
causing the alert to be displayed adjacent to, overlaid on, or highlighting corresponding medical information or order information in the medical information display or the ordering display panel, while the ordering display panel remains available for user interaction and said row, column, field, or panel entry of the patient flowsheet, or said other displayed patient-related medical information, remains visible to the user, without requiring navigation away from the medical information display or the ordering display panel;
finalizing the medical order via the ordering display panel; and
inputting the finalized medical order into the one or more data sources via the at least one interface.”
The limitations of “retrieving patient-related data…,accessing a plurality of guidelines from disparate sources or guideline jurisdictions, identifying rules related information and retrieving supporting data…to detect at least one pattern, error, anomaly, or inconsistency between the order information and patient-related medical information, including detecting an inconsistency between the order information and at least one of (i) structured data and unstructured clinical documentation within a patient record, and (ii) patient-related data originating from a plurality of independent systems or medical practices sharing care of the patient…, finalizing the medical order…, inputting the finalized order…” correspond to “certain methods of organizing human activity”. This is a method of managing interactions between people, such as user following rules and instructions. The mere nominal recitation of a generic processor does not take the claims out of the methods of organizing human interactions grouping. Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea.
The limitations of “detect at least one pattern, error, anomaly, or inconsistency between the order information and patient-related medical information,…” also correspond to an abstract idea of “mental processes”, since detecting (or determining) an inconsistency covers performance of the limitation in mind (or user using pen and paper) for the recitation of generic computer components (generic processor, memory and data sources).
The limitations of “executing by a rules engine or inference engine, one or more rules by identifying rules related to the order information and retrieving supporting data as needed from one or more patient, insurance, clinical, financial, or imaging data repositories to detect at least one pattern, error, anomaly, or inconsistency between the order information and patient-related medical information…”, “using natural language processing and rules-based parsing to contextually parse language of the plurality of guidelines and generate a unified summary including an overview, similarities, and differences or conflicts among the plurality of guidelines” correspond to mathematical relationships, therefore the limitation falls within the “mathematical concept” grouping of abstract ideas.
The dependent claims also recite an abstract idea of “certain methods of organizing human activity”. The limitations correspond to the abstract idea (a method of managing interactions between people, such as user following rules and instructions) are:
Claim 10: detection of patterns, errors, and anomalies, and inconsistencies includes detecting an order inconsistent with at least one preferred practice plan, insurance regulations, clinical research study, clinical decision support, compliance regulatory rules, and authorization status
Claim 13: detecting patterns, errors, anomalies, and inconsistencies includes at least one of checking the order information for compliance with regulations, comparing the order information to options based on preferred practice plans and clinical decision support, comparing the order information to [[a]] information in a clinical research system, checking the order information for mistakes, checking the order information for contradictory documentation, checking the order information for errors, checking the order information for discrepancies, or checking the order information for compliance insurance regulations, or checking the order information for an authorization, or checking the order information for cost-effective and medically equivalent alternatives evaluating costs and pricing
Claim 34: detecting inconsistencies, patterns, errors, or anomalies includes detecting an internal inconsistency between laterality specified in the order information and laterality reflected in at least one of examination findings, imaging findings, procedure history, diagnosis data, or clinical notes
Claim 50: detecting, … a change in patient-related data from the first medical practice, from a different medical practice, or from the patient via a patient portal, the detecting comprising comparing the change to previously stored patient-related data or order information associated with the patient
Claim 62: identifying, based on the order information and at least one of patient-related medical information, insurance information, clinical guideline information, authorization information, claim information, medical necessity information, or unstructured clinical documentation, at least one medical necessity report, chart information, document, correspondence, or other information responsive to at least one of a claim, insurance submission, authorization request, referral request, medical necessity request, coverage determination, billing request, or insurance company request, and populating or transmitting at least a portion of the medical necessity report, chart information, document, correspondence, or other information using structured data fields corresponding to the patient-related medical information, order information, authorization information, claim information, medical necessity information, or supporting clinical documentation to an electronic health records system, practice management system, claims-based system, insurance company system, clearinghouse system, authorization system, referral system, billing system, or medical necessity verification system
Claim 77: identify, based on the order information and at least one of patient-related medical information, insurance information, clinical guideline information, authorization information, claim information, medical necessity information, or unstructured clinical documentation,…
The dependent claims also recite an abstract idea of “mathematical concepts”. The limitations correspond to the abstract idea (mathematical relationships) are:
Claim 35: the rules engine comprises a natural language processing engine configured to process structured and unstructured clinical, financial, and regulatory data
Claim 36: the rules engine or inference engine is configured to parse clinical notes, examination findings, and diagnostic information, compare clinical information to at least one of clinical guidelines, insurance rules, and practice patterns, and generate alerts or alternative order suggestions based on detected discrepancies before the medical order is finalized via the ordering display panel
Claim 39: the rules engine or inference engine detects discrepancies between proposed orders and patient-related data originating from different medical providers
Claim 43: applying natural language processing and rules-based parsing to contextually parse language of the plurality of guidelines and generate a unified summary including an overview, similarities, and differences or conflicts among the plurality of guidelines
Claim 45: parsing unstructured clinical documentation using a natural language processing engine configured to process structured and unstructured clinical, financial, and regulatory data, wherein the engine identifies potential diagnostic or procedural codes not present in existing structured data and displays discrepancies and recommended codes in the medical information display or the ordering display panel before the medical order is finalized to a user
Claim 46: the rules engine or inference engine comprises a natural language processing engine configured to process structured and unstructured clinical, financial, and regulatory data, and wherein the rules engine or inference engine is configured to parse clinical notes, examination findings, and diagnostic information, apply an inference engine to compare clinical information to at least one of clinical guidelines, insurance rules, and practice patterns, identify discrepancies between proposed orders and patient medical information, and generate at least one of alerts, recommendations, auto-populated order information, and alternative order suggestions in response to discrepancies before the medical order is finalized via the ordering display panel
Claim 47: the rules engine or inference engine comprises a natural language processing engine configured to process at least one of clinical guidelines, clinical decision support guidelines, financial guidelines, clinical data, and clinical documentation interpreting guidelines, clinical data, and clinical documentation, and wherein detecting inconsistencies, patterns, errors, and anomalies between the order information and medical information and generating an alert comprises processing patient-related data and clinical notes through an inference engine configured to compare clinical information to guidelines, identifying commonalities and discrepancies between patient-related data and at least one guideline, plan, or order, and generating alerts, recommendations, auto-populated order information, or alternative orders based on the identified commonalities and discrepancies before the medical order is finalized via the ordering display panel
Claim 50: detecting, by the rules engine or inference engine, a change in patient-related data from the first medical practice, from a different medical practice, or from the patient via a patient portal, the detecting comprising comparing the change to previously stored patient-related data or order information associated with the patient
Claim 52: alerting one of the first user or the additional user to a modification of the medical information by a user
Claim 55: the rules engine or inference engine identifies rules related to the order information, retrieves supporting data from one or more patient, insurance, clinical, financial, or imaging data repositories, and generates or presents the alert using at least one of a cognitive engine, natural language processing, adaptive learning techniques, clinical decision support processing, inference engine processing
Claim 58: accessing a plurality of guidelines from disparate sources or guideline jurisdictions, using applying natural language processing and rules-based parsing to parse language of the plurality of guidelines and generate a unified summary including an overview, similarities, and differences or conflicts among the plurality of guidelines, and displaying at least a portion of the unified summary in association with the alert
Claim 61: the rules engine or inference engine generates or presents, before the medical order is finalized, at least one of an order, an alternative order suggestion, a recommended order modification, a recommendation, or auto-populated order information based on at least one of patient-related medical information, insurance information, clinical guideline information, preferred practice pattern information, unstructured clinical documentation, patient-related data represented in or used to generate the one or more presentation tables or display tables, or output of a natural language processing engine, rules engine, inference engine, or cognitive clinical decision support system, and wherein the medical order is finalized via the ordering display panel after user review or confirmation via the ordering display panel
Claim 63: the patient-related data includes clinical notes parsed by a natural language processing or cognitive documentation engine, and wherein at least one of the unified summary and the evaluating by the rules engine or inference engine uses the parsed clinical notes in evaluating the order information or generating or presenting an alert, recommendation, alternative order suggestion, or auto-populated order information
Claim 64: the rules engine or inference engine generates or presents, before the medical order is finalized, at least one of an order, an alternative order suggestion, a recommended order modification, a recommendation, or auto-populated order information based on at least one of patient-related medical information, insurance information, clinical guideline information, the unified summary, preferred practice pattern information, unstructured clinical documentation, patient-related data represented in or used to generate the one or more presentation tables or display tables, or output of a natural language processing engine, rules engine, inference engine, or cognitive clinical decision support system, and wherein the medical order is finalized via the ordering display panel after user review or confirmation via the ordering display panel
Claim 65: the natural language processing engine parses unstructured clinical documentation to identify at least one of (i) potential diagnostic or procedural codes not present in structured data for a patient, (ii) discrepancies between the unstructured clinical documentation and the structured data, and (iii) information used to generate or present an order, alternative order suggestion, recommendation, or auto-populated order information, and wherein detecting the pattern, error, anomaly, or inconsistency comprises comparing the order information to the identified codes, discrepancies, or information before finalizing the medical order
Claim 73: the rules engine or interface engine detects inconsistencies between order information and patient-related data originating from different medical providers
The processor recited in the claims is described in the current specification as a generic computing component. In particular, the current specification recites “In some embodiments, the system 30 can include at least one computing device, including one or more processors 32. Some processors 32 can include processors 32 residing in one or more conventional server platforms….” In [0217] and “…Further, in some embodiments, one or more components of the network 39a, 39b can include a number of client devices which can be personal computers 40 including for example desktop computers 40d, laptop computers 40a, 40e, digital assistants and/or personal digital assistants (shown as 40c), cellular phones or mobile phones or smart phones (shown as 40b), or smart watch, pagers, digital tablets, internet appliances, and other processor-based devices…” in [0221].
After considering all claim elements, both individually and in combination and in ordered combination, it has been determined that the claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Claims 2, 4-8, 10, 13-14, 18-19, 22, 24-29, 33-39, 42-48, 50-52, 55-65 and 67-78 are ultimately dependent from claims 1, 32, 66 and include all the limitations of claims 1, 32, 66. Therefore, claims 2, 4-8, 10, 13-14, 18-19, 22, 24-29, 33-39, 42-48, 50-52, 55-65 and 67-78 recite the same abstract idea. Claims 2, 4-8, 10, 13-14, 18-19, 22, 24-29, 33-39, 42-48, 50-52, 55-65 and 67-78 describe a further limitation regarding the basis for detecting inconsistency between the order information and medical information. These are all just further describing the abstract idea recited in claims 1, 32, 66, without adding significantly more.
Step 2A, Prong 2:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the independent claims recite the additional elements shown above in “bolded” style.
The dependent claims also recite additional elements that are shown below in the “bolded” style:
Claim 5: the patient flowsheet integrates patient medical history into a longitudinal arrangement of rows and columns over a plurality of visits or encounter times for the patient, and wherein the ordering display panel remains visible and available for user interaction with a corresponding row, column, field, or panel entry of the patient flowsheet while order information for the medical order is populated and finalized
Claim 7: the alert comprises at least one of highlighting displayed information selected from the group consisting of medical services, clinical data, examination data, symptoms, medicine, diagnostic test, images, injections, procedure, claim information, insurance regulations, and authorizations
Claim 8: the alert is generated in response to the order information and medical information that includes data from at least two separate data sources, one of which is an electronic health records system and at least one practice management system, patient portal, co-management system, clinical research system, healthcare information technology system, a health information exchange, picture archiving and communication system, claims-based system, insurance company system, laboratory system, prescription medication software, image management system, practice management system
Claim 14: orders generated by user interaction are displayed in the medical information display for visualization by the user of the order with medical information over time
Claim 18: at least one instance of the patient- related data is represented in at least one data field by an icon, indicator, graphical marker, visual cue, or displayed visual representation identifying an existence of underlying patient data, and wherein interaction with the icon, indicator, graphical marker, visual cue, or displayed visual representation generates a visual representation of the underlying data without leaving the medical information display
Claim 19: the rules engine or inference engine is configured to highlight multiple instances of medical information or to provide suggestions, recommendations, or auto-populated order information to guide interaction by a user with the ordering display panel
Claim 22: populating orders into at least one electronic health records system, practice management system, patient portal, co- management system, claims-based system, insurance company system, laboratory, clinical research system, diagnostic test ordering systems, image management system, and prescription medication software; and further scheduling an appointment or appointment reminder for at least one of a medical service, procedure, injection, medication, diagnostic test, image studies, or office visit
Claim 24: the ordering display panel is generated within the medical information display
Claim 27: processing at least a portion of the patient-related data using the one or more data tables and configuration structures in advance to generate the one or more presentation tables or display tables prior to display of the medical information display
Claim 28: the ordering display panel comprises retrieving at least a portion of the patient-related medical information from the one or more presentation tables or display tables to minimize retrieval time
Claim 38: the unified summary including the overview, similarities, and differences or conflicts among the plurality of guidelines is displayed simultaneously with the ordering display panel
Claim 42: at least one of the medical information display and the ordering display panel is specific to a medical specialty
Claim 50: triggering an alert in the medical information display or the ordering display panel via the rules engine or the inference engine based on the change in patient-related data
Claim 51: creating, sending, or receiving a message or alert to a user
Claim 57: using at least a portion of the patient-related data and using the one or more data tables and configuration structures in advance of display to generate the one or more presentation tables or display tables, and storing at least one of the one or more presentation tables or display tables to minimize retrieval time when populating the medical information display or the ordering display panel
Claim 59: generating, from at least one of the one or more presentation tables or display tables, a multi-patient summary view that presents, in a single view, a plurality of patients receiving shared treatment by a plurality of medical practices, each entry of the multi-patient summary view including an indicator of at least one detected pattern, error, anomaly, or inconsistency requiring a medical order, and wherein selection of an entry opens the medical information display and the ordering display panel for the corresponding patient with the alert displayed adjacent to, overlaid on, or highlighting corresponding medical information
Claim 60: an information display presenting historical patient-related data in one or more rows and columns over time to be presented on at least one display screen; and the ordering display panel, comprising at least one of a panel, window, or section, to be presented on at least one display screen, the ordering display panel configured to receive order information to order medications or injections, order diagnostic or therapeutic tests or procedures, or schedule office visits or other appointments for the patient, while at least a portion of the historical patient-related data and information for a current visit for the patient remain visible and interactive on at least one display screen
Claim 67: the one or more data tables comprise transactional tables and reporting tables storing patient-related data
Claim 68: the configuration structures comprise XML code that identifies collections of panels and tabs for the medical information display, panel identifiers linking panels to tabs, panel positions, and corresponding data sources for sections of the medical information display
Claim 69: a local database storing a subset of patient-related data for patients having appointments within a predetermined time window
Claim 70: the system comprises a central controlling server platform and a plurality of geographically distributed edge server platforms
Claim 71: the one or more data sources comprise at least one of an electronic medical record system, a practice management system, a health information exchange system, a picture archiving and communication system, a laboratory system, an ePrescribing system, an insurance verification system, a referral system, a preauthorization system, a claim status system, a clinical research system, a patient portal, a preferred practice patterns data source, a clinical decision support system, or an artificial intelligence engine
Claim 72: interaction with the medical information display or the ordering display panel triggers auto-population or presentation of information into or on at least one of (a) the medical information display, (b) the ordering display panel, and (c) a medical record for the selected patient in an external electronic medical record system, the auto-populated or presented information including at least one of order information, an alternative order suggestion, a recommendation, or auto-populated order information, without requiring navigation away from the medical information display
Claim 73: the system is configured to present patient-related data from a plurality of medical providers for the selected patient to support shared treatment of the patient, …
Claim 74: the instructions further configure the system to present a multi-patient summary view that includes entries for a plurality of patients receiving shared treatment by a plurality of medical providers, each entry indicating at least one detected pattern, error, anomaly, or inconsistency for the corresponding patient, and wherein selection of an entry causes the system to open the medical information display and the ordering display panel for the selected patient
Claim 75: the instructions further configure the system to: cause the patient flowsheet to integrate patient medical history into a longitudinal arrangement of rows and columns over a plurality of visits or encounter times for the selected patient; and maintain the ordering display panel available for user interaction while at least a corresponding row, column, field, or panel entry of the patient flowsheet, or other displayed patient- related medical information, remains visible while order information for the medical order is populated and finalized
Claim 76: the instructions further configure the system to generate or present, before the medical order is finalized, at least one of an order, an alternative order suggestion, a recommended order modification, a recommendation, or auto-populated order information based on at least one of patient-related medical information, insurance information, clinical guideline information, preferred practice pattern information, unstructured clinical documentation, patient-related data represented in or used to generate the one or more presentation tables or display tables, or output of a natural language processing engine, rules engine, inference engine, or cognitive clinical decision support system, and to finalize the medical order via the ordering display panel after user review or confirmation via the ordering display panel
Claim 77: the instructions further configure the system to identify,…and populate or transmit…to an electronic health records system, practice management system, claims-based system, insurance company system, clearinghouse system, authorization system, referral system, billing system, or medical necessity verification system
Claim 78: the at least one interface is configured to communicate with at least one external data source using a standardized message-based or application-programming-interface-based protocol to receive, parse, standardize, route, or transmit at least one of patient-related data, order information, claim information, authorization information, referral information, insurance information, medical necessity information, chart information, document information, correspondence information, supporting clinical documentation, or finalized medical order information into one or more structured data fields used by the one or more data tables, presentation tables, display tables, ordering display panel, alert, or an external destination system.
These additional elements are hardware and software elements, these limitations are not enough to qualify as “practical application” being recited in the claims along with the abstract idea since these elements are merely invoked as a tool to apply instructions of the abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and mere instructions to apply/implement/automate an abstract idea in a particular technological environment and merely limiting the use of an abstract idea to a particular field or technological environment do not provide practical application for an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f) & (h)).
Accordingly, these 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. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B:
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, the additional element of using a processor to perform detecting an inconsistency step amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
The claims recite a rules engine and “the rules engine is based on artificial intelligence, adaptive learning engine techniques, natural language processing programs or conventional business logic”. The current specification recites “Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the inference engine may implement conventional artificial intelligence techniques such as those provided commercially by Watson Health and Truven Health Analytics, Inc. to process received data in connection with data repositories to provide diagnostic feedback and the like.” in [0324]. Accordingly, using rules engine to detect an inconsistency between the order information and medical information process is a well-understood, routine and conventional activity known in the industry and claims are directed to mere instruction to apply an exception.
The claims recite “presenting, on the display screen and without replacing the medical information, an ordering display panel in addition to the adjustable display panels and the patient flowsheet, or other displayed patient-related medical information, wherein the ordering display panel is displayed while at least one row, column, field, or panel entry of the patient flowsheet corresponding to a medical order or to a detected discrepancy remains visible to a user, and wherein the ordering display panel remains available for user interaction”, “displaying the alert adjacent to, overlaid on, or highlighting corresponding medical information or order information in the medical information display or the ordering display panel, while the ordering display panel remains available for user interaction and said row, column, field, or panel entry of the patient flowsheet , or said other displayed patient-related medical information remains visible to the user” and the features of “displaying a panel in addition to other display panels and medical information remains visible to a user, and also displaying an alert adjacent to, overlaid on, or highlighting corresponding medical information, while ordering display panel remains available for user interaction…” correspond to a well-understood, routine and conventional activity known in the filed as evidenced by Henderson et al. (hereinafter Henderson) (US 9582838 B1). In particular, Henderson discloses:
“…a mini-screen dashboard that can be used with the larger known dashboard methods and systems. The mini-screen dashboard does not replace the monitoring of all status on larger dashboards, such as the physiological conditions and statuses of individual patients. Instead, it uses the same information that are used for the patients being monitored on these larger dashboards and collects the information together in a new and different way so that there can be a very small mini-screen dashboard that stays in the foreground of the computer screens that caregivers and other healthcare clinicians may use for a variety of tasks that may take them away from monitoring one of the larger standard dashboards.” in col. 3, lines 36-51,
“…allowing the mini-screen dashboard to always be shown on the foreground of the monitor screen without being obtrusive. This foreground display causes the mini screen dashboard to remain visible on the screen or screens where the system users perform the majority of their job requirements…” in col. 4, lines 46-55,
“…alternative identifiers may be used to particularly note that there is an alert item that the user needs to review. For example, as shown in FIG. 3, an exclamation point () could be used in combination with the patient number. For time-critical alerts, a countdown clock may be displayed… The system can change of color or otherwise highlight the alert items and can also change the boxes to be opaque for the alert items. Additionally, when an alert first appears, the system can also add an alert mini screen proximate to the mini-screen dashboard…” in col. 48-52.
The claims are not patent eligible.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments will be addressed below in the order in which they appear.
Argument 1: Claim 1 is directed to a specific improvement in computer functionality:
Applicant argues that claim 1 recites a specific data architecture, the feature of “processing at least a portion of the patient-related data using one or more data tables and configuration structures to generate data for presentation in one or more presentation tables or display tables tied to medical information display, the configuration structures defining a layout of the medical information display and identifying panels, tabs, panel positions, and one or more data sources for panels or tabs” correspond to a particular arrangement of data structures, not a generic computer functions. Applicant argues that claim 1 recites a specific manner of presenting information that improves the interface and displaying a limited set of information improves the operation of the device.
In response, Examiner submits that this feature corresponds to additional elements, that these elements are merely invoked as a tool to apply instructions of the abstract idea in a particular technological environment, and mere instructions to apply/implement/automate an abstract idea in a particular technological environment. Also, the current specification recites “As data is received by the Command Center 500 from external sources, the Command Center 5000 dynamically determines if the data is applicable to the flowsheet, processes it and stores it in a simple database table structure described below that can be easily retrieved when requested.” in [0317] and “Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the software instructions for implementing the algorithms and XML functionality described herein may be stored in conventional computer-readable storage media. Computer-readable storage media, as used herein, refers to physical or tangible storage (as opposed to signals) and includes without limitation volatile and non-volatile, removable and non-removable storage media implemented in any method or technology for the tangible storage of information such as computer-readable instructions, data structures, program modules or other data.” in [0348]. Therefore, this feature corresponds to mere instructions to apply/implement/automate an abstract idea in a particular technological environment.
Applicant argues that the conventional electronic medical record interfaces require user to navigate through multiple layers, folders and/or windows to access even basic patient information, and the claimed arrangement allows the data to be accessible without leaving the display screen.
In response, Examiner submits that this feature is a well-understood, routine and conventional activity in the field as evidenced by Henderson, as described above.
Argument 2: Claim 1 recites an inventive concept under Step 2B:
Applicant argues that the ordered combination recited by claim 1 supplies an inventive concept, and Henderson is directed only to a mini screen dashboard that remains in the foreground. Applicant argues that Henderson does not teach the recited data table and configuration structure architecture.
In response, Examiner submits that the feature of data tables and configuration data structures (specific data structures) corresponds to additional elements that are merely invoked as a tool to apply instructions of the abstract idea in a particular technological environment, as discussed above and in the rejection.
In response to Henderson teaches only a mini screen that remains in the foreground, Examiner submits that Henderson teaches “…a mini-screen dashboard that can be used with the larger known dashboard methods and systems. The mini-screen dashboard does not replace the monitoring of all status on larger dashboards, such as the physiological conditions and statuses of individual patients. Instead, it uses the same information that are used for the patients being monitored on these larger dashboards and collects the information together in a new and different way so that there can be a very small mini-screen dashboard that stays in the foreground of the computer screens that caregivers and other healthcare clinicians may use for a variety of tasks that may take them away from monitoring one of the larger standard dashboards.” in col. 3, lines 36-51, and “…allowing the mini-screen dashboard to always be shown on the foreground of the monitor screen without being obtrusive. This foreground display causes the mini screen dashboard to remain visible on the screen or screens where the system users perform the majority of their job requirements…” in col. 4, lines 46-55. These sections provide support for displaying a separate screen on the dashboard, which the user can still work on the dashboard.
Argument 3: Claim 32 recites a specific rules based transformation:
Applicant argues that claim 32 incorporates the architecture of claim 1 and adds a specific guideline harmonization pipeline, requires “accessing a plurality of guidelines from disparate sources or guideline jurisdictions” and “using natural language processing and rules-based parsing to contextually parse language of the plurality of guidelines and generate a unified summary…”, and evaluates the order information “against at least one of the patient-related data and the unified summary”, which corresponds applying specific rules to transform input data into a new form.
In response, Examiner submits that accessing data form disparate sources and evaluating the order information against the patient-related data or the unified summary corresponds to an abstract idea of managing interactions between people, such as user following rules and instructions (certain methods of organizing human activity) with a nominal recitation of generic computing components (at least one processor, at least one interface and a memory). The feature of natural language processing and rules-based parsing of the plurality of guidelines corresponds to an abstract idea of mathematical relationships (mathematical concepts). Examiner submits that transforming input data into a new form is not one of the “Particular Transformation” described in the MPEP or in the USPTO Patent Eligibility Guidelines. The MPEP recites “The particular transformation is applicable when the claim effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing…An "article" includes a physical object or substance….( see § 2106.05(c)).
Therefore, the arguments are not persuasive and claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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 DILEK B COBANOGLU whose telephone number is (571)272-8295. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 ET.
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, Obeid Mamon can be reached at (571) 270-1813. 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.
/DILEK B COBANOGLU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3687
Prosecution Insights