DETAILED ACTION
Continuation
This application is indicated to be a continuation application of U.S. Application No. 17/887,016 filed on 12 August 2022, now abandoned. See MPEP §201.07.
Status
This communication is in response to the application filed on 21 August 2025. Claims 1-20 are pending and presented for examination.
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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit, via the Parent Application, under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) to U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/236,104, filed on 23 August 2021, is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 15 October 2025 was filed after the mailing date of the application on 21 August 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the bedside display device" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 an abstract idea without significantly more.
Please see the following Subject Matter Eligibility (“SME”) analysis:
For analysis under SME Step 1, the claims herein are directed to a system, which would be classified under one of the listed statutory classifications (SME Step 1=Yes).
For analysis under revised SME Step 2A, Prong 1, independent claim 1 recites a patient care coordination system comprising: a cloud based data center configured to enable communication among caregivers at a healthcare facility and receive information from devices at the healthcare facility; an electronic medical records (EMR) system configured to obtain electronic medical record data pertaining to patients, store the electronic medical record data, and provide the electronic medical record data upon request; an admission, discharge, transfer (ADT) system configured to store data indicative of patients that have been admitted to the healthcare facility, including when the patients were admitted, unique identifiers associated with the patients, and references to the medical record data; a location tracking system configured to track the locations of caregivers throughout the healthcare facility based on detections of tracking devices moving with the caregivers; and a mobile compute device configured to be carried by or attached to a caregiver, the mobile compute device being configured to execute instructions which process audio signals originating as voice inputs spoken by the caregiver, filter the audio signals, and convert the audio signals into textual data; wherein at least one or more of the EMR system, ADT system, location tracking system, and mobile compute device are configured to execute further instructions to supplement the textual data with location data of the caregiver received from the location tracking system, determine that a patient is associated with the caregiver based on association data received from the location tracking system and the ADT system, obtain at least some of the electronic medical record data regarding the patient from the EMR system and provide the at least some of the medical record data to the caregiver, determine medical notes regarding the patient included in the textual data, and record the medical notes in the EMR system in a corresponding record for the patient.
The dependent claims (claims 2-20) appear to be encompassed by the abstract idea of the independent claims since they merely indicate a tracking device is combined with the mobile device (claim 2), the medical notes include rounding notes of a patient status while visiting a patient during a round (claim 3) and/or a medical procedure (claim 4) performed during surgery (claim 5), displaying unread rounding notes from caregivers of a previous shift (claim 6) in response to location tracking detecting a caregiver has entered a patient room (claim 7) and/or based on notification and manual input (claim 8), further comprising a patient room bedside display to display unread rounding notes from caregivers of a previous shift (claim 9) in response to caregiver room entry (claim 10), converting speech to text using a machine learning model (claim 11), the mobile device using voice recognition to identify people at the caregiver’s location (claim 12), further comprising a second caregiver compute device of a second caregiver to determine second caregiver room entry and receive notification of text data from the first caregiver (claim 13), the second device prompting the second caregiver to acknowledge text data review (claim 14), further comprising a patient room bedside display to display text data from the caregiver mobile device (claim 15) in response to location detection of the second caregiver entering the patient room (claim 16), displaying text data to the caregiver for review and editing (claim 17), supplementing the text data with data regarding a procedure performed when the voice inputs were spoken, or voice inputs previously spoken by the caregiver, or predefined words with commands of the voice inputs (claim 18), supplementing the text data with a listing of operating room equipment or equipment status, a type of procedure, data indicating the stage of the procedure performed or the patient when voice inputs are spoken, and/or data indicating signature and date associated with the caregiver (claim 19), supplementing the text data with data indicating incision site, type, location, or relative diagram of incision(s), laparoscopic port size, intra-operative finding, pathology, procedure stages, vessel ligation, implant or prosthesis used, excised tissue, notable anatomy, closure time and/or material, complications noted, specimens obtained, blood loss, and/or post-operative actions (claim 20).
The underlined portions of the claims are an indication of elements additional to the abstract idea (to be considered below).
The claim elements may be summarized as the idea of producing documentation relating to healthcare services from information spoken by caregivers in a healthcare facility; however, the Examiner notes that although this summary of the claims is provided, the analysis regarding subject matter eligibility considers the entirety of the claim elements, both individually and as a whole (or ordered combination). This idea is within the following grouping(s) of subject matter:
Certain methods of organizing human activity (e.g. … commercial or legal interactions such as … business relations; and/or managing personal behavior or relationships between people such as social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions); and
Therefore, the claims are found to be directed to an abstract idea.
For analysis under revised SME Step 2A, Prong 2, the above judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements do not impose a meaningful limit on the judicial exception when evaluated individually and as a combination. The additional elements are using a system comprising: a cloud based data center, devices (at the healthcare facility); that the EMR is an electronic medical records system, an admission, discharge, transfer (ADT) system, a location tracking system, tracking devices moving with the caregivers; a mobile compute device configured to be carried by or attached to a caregiver, the mobile compute device being configured to execute instructions which process audio signals originating as voice inputs, filtering the audio signals, and converting the audio signals into textual data; the system(s) and mobile compute device are configured to execute further instructions to (at claim 1), a tracking device is combined with the mobile device (at dependent claim 2), a bedside display to display data (at dependent claims 9 and 15). These additional elements do not reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to other technology or technical field, effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (there is no medical disease or condition, much less a treatment or prophylaxis for one), implement the judicial exception with, or by using in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (there is no transformation/reduction of a physical article), and/or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generically linking use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
The claims appear to merely apply the judicial exception, include instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. The additional elements appear to merely add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception and/or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
For analysis under SME Step 2B, the claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, as indicated above, are merely “[a]dding the words ‘apply it’ (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, e.g., a limitation indicating that a particular function such as creating and maintaining electronic records is performed by a computer, as discussed in Alice Corp.” that MPEP § 2106.05(I)(A) indicates to be insignificant activity
There is no indication the Examiner can find in the record regarding any specialized computer hardware or other “inventive” components, but rather, the claims merely indicate computer components which appear to be generic components and therefore do not satisfy an inventive concept that would constitute “significantly more” with respect to eligibility. Applicant ¶¶ 0044-0045 indicate “the illustrative mobile compute device 140 includes a compute engine 200” and “The compute engine 200 may be embodied as any type of device or collection of devices capable of performing various compute functions described below”.
The individual elements therefore do not appear to offer any significance beyond the application of the abstract idea itself, and there does not appear to be any additional benefit or significance indicated by the ordered combination, i.e., there does not appear to be any synergy or special import to the claim as a whole other than the application of the idea itself.
The dependent claims, as indicated above, appear encompassed by the abstract idea since they merely limit the idea itself; therefore the dependent claims do not add significantly more than the idea.
Therefore, SME Step 2B=No, any additional elements, whether taken individually or as an ordered whole in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea, including analysis of the dependent claims.
Please see the Subject Matter Eligibility (SME) guidance and instruction materials at https://www.uspto.gov/patent/laws-and-regulations/examination-policy/subject-matter-eligibility, which includes the latest guidance, memoranda, and update(s) for further information.
NOTICE
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.
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 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 1, 3, 9, 12, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Embree et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0075140, hereinafter Embree) in view of Riskin et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0019128, hereinafter Riskin).
Claim 1: Embree discloses a patient care coordination system comprising:
a cloud based data center configured to enable communication among caregivers at a healthcare facility and receive information from devices at the healthcare facility (see Embree at least at, e.g., ¶¶ 0014, 0019, remote computer; citation hereafter by number only);
an electronic medical records (EMR) system configured to obtain electronic medical record data pertaining to patients, store the electronic medical record data, and provide the electronic medical record data upon request (0006, 0015, 0020, EMR server and computer);
an admission, discharge, transfer (ADT) system configured to store data indicative of patients that have been admitted to the healthcare facility, including when the patients were admitted, unique identifiers associated with the patients, and references to the medical record data (Fig. 1 and 0068, “The other servers and computers 76 generically represents all other computers and servers of network 100 in a healthcare facility such as, for example, an admission/discharge/transfer (ADT) computer” – the Examiner noting that “admission/discharge/transfer (ADT)” is itself an indication of storing identification of each patient and when they are admitted, so that such data can be referenced in their respective medical record);
a location tracking system configured to track the locations of caregivers throughout the healthcare facility based on detections of tracking devices moving with the caregivers (0011, “The locating system further may include a locating server that may be communicatively coupled to the locating transceivers and that may be operable to determine a location of the caregiver locating tag in the healthcare facility within three feet or less of an actual location of the caregiver locating tag”); and
wherein at least one or more of the EMR system, ADT system, location tracking system, and mobile compute device are configured to execute further instructions to supplement the textual data with location data of the caregiver received from the location tracking system, determine that a patient is associated with the caregiver based on association data received from the location tracking system and the ADT system (0015, “The charting system may further have an electronic medical record (EMR) computer that may be communicatively coupled to the communication device…. The locating server may be configured to notify the processor that the caregiver may have entered the patient room. The voice-to-text algorithm may be activated in response to the caregiver entering the patient room and may be configured to receive dictation from the caregiver via the microphone after activation. The voice-to text algorithm may convert the dictation into text. The processor may initiate transmission of the text and the vital signs data from the vital sign monitor to the EMR computer”),
obtain at least some of the electronic medical record data regarding the patient from the EMR system and provide the at least some of the medical record data to the caregiver (0104, “the automatically obtained vitals information is also displayed on the display screen of the device in room 12 so that the caregiver can verify that the vitals information charted to the patient's EMR is accurate and to make any corrections to the vitals information as desired”),
determine medical notes regarding the patient included in the textual data (0122, “a notes field 162 in which any other miscellaneous notes that the caregiver 20 may wish to store in the patient's EMR can be entered by the caregiver. In other embodiments, additional or different clinical inputs fields are included in window 152 at the discretion of the system designer or programmer. The names of fields 154, 156, 158, 160 serves as a reminder to the caregiver 20 as to the types of other clinical inputs that can be entered into the patient's EMR, as desired”), and
record the medical notes in the EMR system in a corresponding record for the patient (0122, “a notes field 162 in which any other miscellaneous notes that the caregiver 20 may wish to store in the patient's EMR can be entered by the caregiver. In other embodiments, additional or different clinical inputs fields are included in window 152 at the discretion of the system designer or programmer. The names of fields 154, 156, 158, 160 serves as a reminder to the caregiver 20 as to the types of other clinical inputs that can be entered into the patient's EMR, as desired”).
Embree, however, does not appear to explicitly disclose a mobile compute device configured to be carried by or attached to a caregiver, the mobile compute device being configured to execute instructions which process audio signals originating as voice inputs spoken by the caregiver, filter the audio signals, and convert the audio signals into textual data. Riskin, though, teaches “a speech-driven encounter recording system that converts physician voice into fully structured encounter data, while simultaneously delivering a superior user experience and improving workflow throughput. In some embodiments, the system may be a "cloud-based" (e.g. internet or web-based) system…. By using speech input that is converted directly to fully coded and structured electronic health records (EHR) data (i.e. an EHR compliant encounter note), physicians can save time, improve the accuracy of their notes, increase usable information, avoid third-party transcription errors, and mitigate workflow delays” (Riskin at 0072), including speech and/or voice input to generate text for notes in a medical record (Riskin at 0094, 0098), where “the user interface device is the primary means by which a physician may interact with the system. The user interface may be developed for several form factors, including PC/laptop, tablet computer, and a smartphone” (Riskin at 0120), and “the speech preprocessor may be distributed between a user device and the server (computing cloud). In general, this component performs pre-recognition functions such as audio normalization, filtering, and distinguishing start and end of speech from background noise” (Riskin at 0140 – indicating background noise filtering). Therefore, the Examiner understands and finds that to use a mobile computing device to filter background noise and convert audio, such as speech, to text is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to save time, improve accuracy, and mitigate delays.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine or modify the patient care system of Embree with the speech recognition of Riskin in order to use a mobile computing device to filter background noise and convert audio, such as speech, to text so as to save time, improve accuracy, and mitigate delays.
The rationale for combining in this manner is that to use a mobile computing device to filter background noise and convert audio, such as speech, to text is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to save time, improve accuracy, and mitigate delays as explained above.
Claim 3: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, wherein the medical notes comprise rounding notes regarding a status of the patient observed by the caregiver during a visit to the patient's room during a round (Embree at 0060, 0143, 0147, “rounding” and “rounds”).
Claim 9: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, further comprising a bedside display device situated in a patient room assigned to the patient and wherein the bedside display device is configured to display unread rounding notes that were converted to rounding textual data from speech signals originating from one or more other caregivers during a previous shift (Embree at 0103, “a device such as computer 42, audio station 54, and/or patient support apparatus 14 that is located in the room 12 of the caregiver 20 using bed 14 to chart information to the respective patient's EMR, has a display screen on which the information being charted into the EMR is displayed as the caregiver speaks into microphone 44 after activation of the voice-to-text module”, 0104, “the EMR computer 50 at nurse's station 32, or anywhere else where computer 50 may be located, is operable to display the information charted to the patient's EMR in response to the caregiver using module 46” – the charted EMR information including, by definition, any unread rounding notes).
Claim 12: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, wherein the mobile compute device is further configured to use voice recognition to identify other people at the caregiver's location (Riskin at 0087, “the ASR engine (e.g. voice recognition component), may be a component of a "cloud-based" (e.g. internet or web-based) system”, 0128, “the systems and methods may further include a metaspeech processor configured to identify textual cues in the text and to modify the text based on the identified textual cues. In some embodiments, the textual cues may include keywords, patterns, etc. The modification based on the identified textual cues may include organizing the text into sections, replacing words in the text, etc. The modification based on the identified textual cues may improve the accuracy of the NLP engine and the structured data. In some embodiments, the modification based on the identified textual cues may include changing the lexicon and/or the word weighting used by the ASR engine to generate a text. Metaspeech may be defined as tags assigned to the text generated from a speech input. The metaspeech, or tags, may be used to improve accuracy in voice recognition and data structuring”; as combined above and using the rationale as at the combination above).
Claim 15: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, further comprising a bedside display device situated in a patient room assigned to the patient and wherein the bedside display device is configured to display at least some of the textual data entered by the caregiver using the mobile compute device (Embree at 0103, “a device such as computer 42, audio station 54, and/or patient support apparatus 14 that is located in the room 12 of the caregiver 20 using bed 14 to chart information to the respective patient's EMR, has a display screen on which the information being charted into the EMR is displayed as the caregiver speaks into microphone 44 after activation of the voice-to-text module”, 0104, “the EMR computer 50 at nurse's station 32, or anywhere else where computer 50 may be located, is operable to display the information charted to the patient's EMR in response to the caregiver using module 46” – the charted EMR information including, by definition, any unread rounding notes).
Claim 16: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 15, wherein the textual data is displayed on the bedside display device in response to the location system detecting that a second caregiver has entered the patient room (Embree at 0103, “a device such as computer 42, audio station 54, and/or patient support apparatus 14 that is located in the room 12 of the caregiver 20 using bed 14 to chart information to the respective patient's EMR, has a display screen on which the information being charted into the EMR is displayed as the caregiver speaks into microphone 44 after activation of the voice-to-text module”, 0104, “the EMR computer 50 at nurse's station 32, or anywhere else where computer 50 may be located, is operable to display the information charted to the patient's EMR in response to the caregiver using module 46” – the charted EMR information including, by definition, any unread rounding notes).
Claim 17: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, wherein the mobile compute device is configured to display the textual data to the caregiver for review and editing before the textual data is provided to another device for storage or presentation (Riskin at 0021, “displaying with a user interface device the live speech input and a corresponding portion of the structured data in a predetermined order with respect to the structured data such that it may be reviewed, edited, or maintained as a record by a user” – see also Riskin at 0039, 0074 et seq.; as combined above and using the rationale as at the combination above).
Claim 18: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, wherein the mobile compute device is further configured to supplement the textual data with data indicative of a medical procedure being performed when the one or more voice inputs were spoken, a status of the patient when the one or more voice inputs were spoken, voice inputs that were previously spoken by the caregiver, or one or more predefined words associated with predefined commands of the voice inputs (Riskin at 0116, “the ASR engine is further configured to receive a portion of the structured data and to thereby classify a current subject matter section of the speech input based on the structured data and to change at least one of a lexicon and a word weighting used to generate the text according to the current section”; as combined above and using the rationale as at the combination above).
Claim 19: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, wherein the mobile compute device is further configured to supplement the textual data with data indicative of one or more of the following: a listing of equipment located in an operating room in which a medical procedure is being performed on the patient, a type of medical procedure being performed on the patient, procedure stage data indicative of a present stage of the medical procedure performed on the patient when the voice inputs are being spoken, patient status data indicative of a status of the patient when the voice inputs are being spoken, equipment status data indicative of a status of equipment present in a room in which the medical procedure is being performed, and signature data indicative of a signature and date associated with the caregiver who spoke the voice inputs represented in the textual data (Riskin at 0016, 0024, 0031, et seq., “a past surgical history section”; as combined above and using the rationale as at the combination above).
Claims 2 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Embree in view of Riskin in further view of Mukherji et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0278999, hereinafter Mukherji).
Claim 2: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein a first tracking device of the tracking devices is combined with the mobile compute device. Mukherji, though, teaches “the provider computing entity 102 may include location determining aspects … [where] the provider computing entity 102 may include indoor positioning aspects, such as a location module adapted to acquire, for example, latitude, longitude, altitude, geocode, course, direction, heading, speed, time, date, and/or various other information/data. Some of the indoor systems may use various position or location technologies including RFID tags, indoor beacons or transmitters, Wi-Fi access points, cellular towers, nearby computing devices (e.g., smartphones, laptops) and/or the like. For instance, such technologies may include the iBeacons, Gimbal proximity beacons, Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) transmitters, NFC transmitters, and/or the like. These indoor positioning aspects can be used in a variety of settings to determine the location of someone or something to within inches or centimeters” (Mukherji at 0066) and “the provider computing entity 102 may be a computing entity that the provider 102 uses to provide data including medical notes (e.g., audio data including medical notes) as an input to the medical record processing system 105 … [and] The provider computing entity 102 may include a smartphone computing device, a tablet computing device, and/or a voice-assisted personal assistant computing device (such as an Amazon Echo, Amazon Echo Dot, Amazon Show, Google Home, etc.)” (Mukherji at 0040), where “the present invention relate to the technological problem of addressing deficiencies in medical service reports (e.g., bills) in order to increase efficient and timely processing of such reports” (Mukherji at 0021). Therefore, the Examiner understands and finds that to provide tracking via a mobile compute device is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to provide timely, efficient medical reporting.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine or modify the patient care system of Embree in view of Riskin with the location information of Mukherji in order to provide tracking via a mobile compute device so as to provide timely, efficient medical reporting.
The rationale for combining in this manner is that to provide tracking via a mobile compute device is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to provide timely, efficient medical reporting as explained above.
Claim 4: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the medical notes comprise notes regarding a medical procedure performed on the patient. Mukherji, though, teaches that “the provider computing entity 102 may be a computing entity that the provider 102 uses to provide data including medical notes (e.g., audio data including medical notes) as an input to the medical record processing system 105 … [and] The provider computing entity 102 may include a smartphone computing device, a tablet computing device, and/or a voice-assisted personal assistant computing device (such as an Amazon Echo, Amazon Echo Dot, Amazon Show, Google Home, etc.)” (Mukherji at 0040), including “a surgery-related primary provider input must include an indication of a type of the surgery…. For example, the medical record processing system 105 may use a value denoting that a surgery-related primary provider input relates to a tumor removal surgery” (Mukherji at 0089), where “the present invention relate to the technological problem of addressing deficiencies in medical service reports (e.g., bills) in order to increase efficient and timely processing of such reports” (Mukherji at 0021). Therefore, the Examiner understands and finds that to provide notes, including for surgery, is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to provide timely, efficient medical reporting.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine or modify the patient care system of Embree in view of Riskin with the notes information of Mukherji in order to provide notes, including for surgery, so as to provide timely, efficient medical reporting.
The rationale for combining in this manner is that to provide notes, including for surgery, is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to provide timely, efficient medical reporting as explained above.
Claim 5: Embree in view of Riskin in further view of Mukherji discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 4, wherein the medical procedure to which the procedure notes pertain includes a procedure performed during surgery (Mukherji at 0089, as combined above and using the rationale as at the combination above).
Claim 6-8, 10, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Embree in view of Riskin in further view of Durlach et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0203007, hereinafter Durlach).
Claim 6: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the mobile compute device is further configured to display unread rounding notes that were converted to rounding textual data from speech signals originating from one or more other caregivers during a previous shift. Durlach, though, teaches a “rounding server is configured to execute a caregiver assistance application that monitors caregiver rounding tasks” (Durlach at 0005), “The caregiver assistance application is 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 is further configured to cause the electronic device to perform the following after accessing the particular URL: (i) display rounding information on the display, the rounding information relating to a patient associated with the bed; (ii) display the status data on the display; (iii) receive rounding data via the user input from a caregiver associated with the electronic device and the bed; and (iv) capture verification data verifying that the caregiver is physically present adjacent the bed” (Durlach at 0016), and “the portable electronic device is a smart phone or a tablet computer” (Durlach at 0028), where “the tool may provide an alert to the caregiver of an undesirable bed configuration while the caregiver is using the rounding function of the tool, thereby allowing the caregiver to perform both rounding and bed compliance duties at the same time, as well as eliminating the need for the caregiver to access and/or utilize a separate tool for ensuring the beds are in a desired state” (Durlach at 0004). The Examiner notes that the display of rounding notes includes notes from all caregivers, such as a first and a second caregiver, and also includes notes from all shifts, such as previous shifts. Therefore, the Examiner understands and finds that to provide rounding notes via a mobile compute device is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to enable multiple tasks on the same device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine or modify the patient care system of Embree in view of Riskin with the notes information of Durlach in order to provide rounding notes via a mobile compute device so as to enable multiple tasks on the same device.
The rationale for combining in this manner is that to provide rounding notes via a mobile compute device is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to enable multiple tasks on the same device as explained above.
Claim 7: Embree in view of Riskin in further view of Durlach discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 6, wherein the unread rounding notes pertain to a particular patient and are displayed on the mobile compute device in response to the location system detecting that the caregiver has entered a corresponding room of the particular patient (Embree at 0103, as combined above, where caregiver activation indicates detection of room entry, and 0015, “The locating system further may include a locating server that may be communicatively coupled to the locating receivers. The locating server may be configured to notify the processor that the caregiver may have entered the patient room”).
Claim 8: Embree in view of Riskin in further view of Durlach discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 6, wherein the mobile compute device is configured to notify the caregiver of unread rounding notes and the unread rounding notes are displayed on the mobile compute device in response to a manual input by the caregiver on the mobile compute device after being notified (Embree at 0025, as at the combination above, notification based on tag in the room with an audible prompt and receiving voice input).
Claim 10: Embree in view of Riskin in further view of Durlach discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 7, wherein the unread rounding notes are displayed on the bedside display device in response to the location system detecting that the caregiver has entered a corresponding room of the respective patient (Embree at 0025, 0103, 0104, as above).
Claim 13: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly disclose further comprising a second mobile compute device of a second caregiver, wherein the location tracking system is further configured to determine that the second caregiver has entered a room associated with the patient, and wherein the second mobile compute device is configured to receive a notification of the textual data entered by the caregiver using the first mobile compute device. Durlach, though, teaches a “rounding server is configured to execute a caregiver assistance application that monitors caregiver rounding tasks” (Durlach at 0005), “The caregiver assistance application is 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 is further configured to cause the electronic device to perform the following after accessing the particular URL: (i) display rounding information on the display, the rounding information relating to a patient associated with the bed; (ii) display the status data on the display; (iii) receive rounding data via the user input from a caregiver associated with the electronic device and the bed; and (iv) capture verification data verifying that the caregiver is physically present adjacent the bed” (Durlach at 0016), and “the portable electronic device is a smart phone or a tablet computer” (Durlach at 0028), where “the tool may provide an alert to the caregiver of an undesirable bed configuration while the caregiver is using the rounding function of the tool, thereby allowing the caregiver to perform both rounding and bed compliance duties at the same time, as well as eliminating the need for the caregiver to access and/or utilize a separate tool for ensuring the beds are in a desired state” (Durlach at 0004). The Examiner notes that the display of rounding notes includes notes from all caregivers, such as a first and a second caregiver, and also includes notes from all shifts, such as previous shifts. Therefore, the Examiner understands and finds that to provide first caregiver notes to a second caregiver is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to enable multiple tasks on the same device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine or modify the patient care system of Embree in view of Riskin with the notes information of Durlach in order to provide first caregiver notes to a second caregiver so as to enable multiple tasks on the same device.
The rationale for combining in this manner is that to provide first caregiver notes to a second caregiver is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to enable multiple tasks on the same device as explained above.
Claim 14: Embree in view of Riskin in further view of Durlach discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 13, wherein the second mobile compute device is configured to prompt the second caregiver to acknowledge that the textual data has been reviewed (Riskin at 0120, “The interface device may also support final review and proof editing before finalizing a document”; as combined above and using the rationale as at the combination above).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Embree in view of Riskin in further view of Lovitt et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0134026, hereinafter Lovitt).
Claim 11: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the mobile compute device is further configured to produce the textual data using a machine learning model trained to convert speech to text. Lovitt, though, teaches that “The audio processing module 414 may process the audio input stream 409 to identify which words 410 were spoken by the speaking user 408. The audio processing module 414 may use speech-to-text (STT) algorithms, dictionaries, databases, machine learning techniques, or other programs or resources when identifying the words spoken by the speaking user” (Lovitt at 0073). Therefore, the Examiner understands and finds that to use a machine learning model to convert speech to text is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to more completely or exactly provide the textual data.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine or modify the patient care system of Embree in view of Riskin with the machine learning of Lovitt in order to use a machine learning model to convert speech to text so as to more completely or exactly provide the textual data.
The rationale for combining in this manner is that to use a machine learning model to convert speech to text is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to more completely or exactly provide the textual data as explained above.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Embree in view of Riskin in further view of Mikhail et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0273774, hereinafter Mikhail).
Claim 20: Embree in view of Riskin discloses the patient care coordination system of claim 19, but does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the mobile compute device is further configured to supplement the textual data with data indicative of one or more of the following: an incision site, an incision type, a location or diagram of incisions relative to each other, a size of a laparoscopic port used, an intra- operative finding, an identification of a pathology, stages of the medical procedure carried out from first incision to closure, ligation of one or more vessels, identification of an implant or prosthesis used in the medical procedure, excised tissue, anatomy notably identified, closure time, one or more materials used for closure, one or more intraoperative complications noted, one or more specimens obtained, blood loss, or one or more actions to be taken post-operatively. Mikhail, though, teaches that “Some recently developed EMRs have gone a step further by using standardized pictographs which are symbols representing a concept, object, activity, place or event by means of an illustration that do not allow or require any real free-hand drawing. Some EMRs have even gone so far as to "link" the pre-defined pictographs with pre-defined data text fields such that when a physician selects a pictograph to supplement the medical record, a string of text is added to the written part of the medical record's generated report. For example, a physician might choose a pictograph illustrating that there is a tumor that can be felt in the upper-outer quadrant of the patient's right breast, and both the pictograph and the corresponding text (" . . . there is a palpable tumor in the upper-outer quadrant of the right breast") would appear in a report generated by the EMR” (Mikhail at 0009), “MediDraw provides a electronic medical records (EMR) program (either as a complete EMR system or as a component of a complete EMR system) that permits an end user to draw (e.g., free-hand) a picture representation of the physical findings, imaging results and/or any procedures that were performed, or even some of the patient's symptoms and produces a text description of the drawing, then populate the associated database fields with data that correspond to the physical findings, imaging results, and/or any procedures that were drawn using the MediDraw drawing program. These drawings may be done on a tablet computer which typically includes a graphical representation of a white piece of paper with a stylized, "pen-and-line" drawing on it. The stylized, pen-and-line drawing is referred to as "the background" because it is usually constant and does not vary from patient to patient. The background drawing is meant to graphically represent the general anatomic area under consideration, which may be nearly any part of a patient's body. The drawings are done using "tools" that are tailored specific to the practice. For example, in a phlebology (vein care) practice, a commonly used tool draws a bluish colored line representing a "varicose vein measuring 2-6 mm in diameter;" Whereas, the same tool may not be useful in an ophthalmology practice, where a line of a similar size and color might be used to represent a "retinal detachment".” (Mikhail at 0070), “The analysis allows the MediDraw program to describe by annotation the anatomic region where the drawing tool has indicated a particular type of pathology, the resolution of pathology, or other physical findings, imaging results, or procedure(s) performed” (Mikhail at 0072), “When the MediDraw program is initiated, the chart number may be passed on as a command line parameter. The MediDraw program performs a database query to find the patient name in order to display it on the user display screen. In this way, patient information may be synchronized with any billing software being used by an enterprise (e.g., doctor's office) without duplicating the information between the two applications” (Mikhail at 0174, “An "Encounter list" may also be stored, typically in the Lytec database (or similar database). Each time an appointment is created for the patient, the date, time, provider, and reason for the visit may be stored. The program reads the appointment table to obtain the existing past and future appointments for the patient and to populate a timeline so that current encounter may be documented, or the user might alternatively switch to a previous (historical) visit to document” (Mikhail at 0175). Therefore, the Examiner understands and finds that to supplement the text data with at least location diagrams and time indications is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to more fully and explicitly represent the patient’s history.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine or modify the patient care system of Embree in view of Riskin with the diagrams and timing of Mikhail in order to supplement the text data with at least location diagrams and time indications so as to more fully and explicitly represent the patient’s history.
The rationale for combining in this manner is that to supplement the text data with at least location diagrams and time indications is applying a known technique to a known device, method, or product ready for improvement to yield predictable results so as to more fully and explicitly represent the patient’s history as explained above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lovitt et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0134026, hereinafter Lovitt) indicates
[0001] Modern smartphones and other electronic devices are capable of performing a wide variety of functions. Many of these functions are provided by the phone's core operating system, and many additional functions may be added through applications. One piece of functionality that now comes built in to most modern smartphones is a function referred to as “text-to-speech” or TTS.
[0002] US allows a user to type a word or phrase into an electronic device, and the electronic device will render a computerized voice saying the written words. US functionality may also be used to read documents or books back to the user. The converse of US is speech-to-text (SU), which is also typically provided by most modern smartphones.
(Per the listed Pre-Grant Publication)
The Examiner notes that the original filing of the Lovitt application above indicates that the term “US” at the Pre-Grant Publication should be (i.e., was at the original filing) “TTS”, and the term “SU” is/was “STT”.
USF Health, Federal Mandates for Healthcare: Digital Record-Keeping Requirements for Public and Private Healthcare Providers, Published 16 February 2017, Updated 2 May 2024, downloaded 17 July 2026 from https://www.usfhealthonline.com/resources/health-informatics/electronic-medical-records-mandate/, indicating that “As a part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, all public and private healthcare providers and other eligible professionals (EP) were required to adopt and demonstrate “meaningful use” of electronic medical records (EMR) by January 1, 2014 in order to maintain their existing Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement levels”. (at p. 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT D GARTLAND whose telephone number is (571)270-5501. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM - 5 PM.
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, Kambiz Abdi can be reached at 571-272-6702. 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.
/SCOTT D GARTLAND/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3685
