Ex Parte Shaya

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

May 25, 2017

13165052 (P.T.A.B. May. 25, 2017)

United States Patent and Trademark Office
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O.Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
20092-131270 3053
EXAMINER
NGANGA, BONIFACE N
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3769
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
13/165,052 06/21/2011
42798 7590 05/25/2017
FITCH, EVEN, TAB IN & FLANNERY, LLP
120 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1600
Chicago, IL 60603-3406
Fawzi Shaya
05/25/2017 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte FAWZI SHAYA
Appeal 2015-007858
Application 13/165,052
Technology Center 3700
Before JAMES P. CALVE, GEORGE R. HOSKINS, and
SEAN P. O’HANLON, Administrative Patent Judges.
CALVE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant appeals under 35U.S.C. § 134 from the final rejection of
claims 1—19 and 21—32. Appeal Br. 5. Claim 20 is canceled. Id. at 32
(Claims Appendix). We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We AFFIRM.
Appeal 2015-007858
Application 13/165,052
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Claims 1, 10, 18, 19, and 21 are independent. Claim 1 is reproduced
below.
1. A method for permitting a real-time virtual medical
examination using a patient device and at least one diagnostic
device, comprising:
collecting diagnostic data from a patient using the at least
one diagnostic device and generating patient diagnostic
information by the at least one diagnostic device based on the
collecting the diagnostic data from the patient using the at least
one diagnostic device;
generating a signal including both the patient diagnostic
information and patient identification data by the at least one
diagnostic device based on the collecting the diagnostic data
from the patient using the at least one diagnostic device;
transmitting the signal including both the patient
diagnostic information and the patient identification data from
the at least one diagnostic device to the patient device;
transmitting from the patient device over a network to a
first remote server at least a portion of the patient diagnostic
information and at least a portion of the patient identification
data;
storing the at least a portion of the diagnostic information
and the at least a portion of the patient identification data on the
first remote server;
establishing a video conferencing session via a second
remote server, wherein the video conferencing session permits,
on an output display of a health care provider device,
simultaneous viewing of:
the at least a portion of the patient diagnostic information
stored on the first remote server; and
real-time video images of at least one participant
associated with the at least one diagnostic device used to
generate the patient diagnostic information and the patient
identification data.
2
Appeal 2015-007858
Application 13/165,052
REJECTIONS
Claims 1—3, 5—12, 14—19, and 21—32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Kumar (US 2007/0130287 Al, pub.
June 7, 2007), Sadler (US 2009/0240525 Al, pub. Sept. 24, 2009), and
Westerteicher (WO 01/47418 Al, pub. July 5, 2001).
Claims 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
patentable over Kumar, Sadler, Westerteicher, and Parthasarathy (US
2008/0113621 Al, pub. May 15, 2008).
ANALYSIS
Claims 1—3, 5—12, 14—19, and 21—32 as
unpatentable over Kumar, Sadler, and Westerteicher
Appellant argues claims 1—3, 5—12, 14—19, and 21—32 as a group.
Appeal Br. 15—25. We select claim 1 as representative, and claims 2, 3, 5—
12, 14—19, and 21—32 stand or fall with claim 1. 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(l)(iv).
The Examiner relied on Kumar to teach the method of claim 1, except
for simultaneously displaying video communication and patient diagnostic
information. Final Act. 3^4. The Examiner found that Sadler teaches this
feature. Id. at 4. The Examiner found that Westerteicher teaches a patient
identification signal can be combined with a physiological measurement
signal to associate specific measurements with a specific patient. Id. at 4—5.
The Examiner also found that Westerteicher teaches a measurement unit that
combines and outputs the patient identification signal with the measurement
signals, as claimed. Ans. 14—15. The Examiner found that Westerteicher
does this by integrating personal identification reader 110 with measurement
unit 102, so that the integrated unit collects, combines, and outputs patient
identification with patient measurement data, as claimed. Id. at 15.
3
Appeal 2015-007858
Application 13/165,052
Appellant argues that Westerteicher does not teach a diagnostic device
that generates a signal that includes both patient diagnostic information and
patient identification data, as recited in claim 1. Appeal Br. 15—16, 24—25.
Appellant argues that Westerteicher teaches a diagnostic device (physical
measurement unit 120) that collects diagnostic data from a patient and then
generates a signal with that data for transmission to signal packaging unit
130, which combines that patient diagnostic data with patient identification
data generated and transmitted by patient identification reader 110. Id. at 16
(quoting Westerteicher, 6:16—21). Appellant also argues that Westerteicher
illustrates signal packaging unit 130 as a separate device from physiological
measurement unit 120 in Figure 1, and signal packaging unit 130 receives
signals from two separate devices. It receives patient diagnostic data from
physiological measurement unit 120 and patient identification data from
patient identification reader 110. Id. at 16, 18.
Appellant is correct that Westerteicher teaches embodiments in which
signal packaging unit 130 receives patient identification data from patient
identification reader 110 and diagnostic data from measurement device 120
and then generates output signal 140 that includes both data signals, as in
Figure 1. Westerteicher, 6:11—7:27. However, Westerteicher teaches other
aspects of the invention in which diagnostic equipment comprises a patient
identification reader (PIR), which provides patient identification data to the
measurement equipment, which associates the patient identification signal
with the measurement signal. Id. at 3:19—28. Westerteicher also teaches
that the PIR can be an integral part of the measurement equipment, which
then links the patient identification information with the measured diagnostic
signal, as claimed. Id. at 4:8—27, 5:21—25; see Ans. 14—16; Final Act. 4—5.
4
Appeal 2015-007858
Application 13/165,052
Kumar teaches the step of transmitting a signal from diagnostic device
102 to patient device (computing device 110), as claimed. Kumar H 69, 73,
74, Fig. 1 A; see Final Act. 3^4. The Examiner proposes to modify Kumar’s
system and diagnostic device 102 to include a personal identification reader
of Westerteicher and to integrate the PIR into Kumar’s diagnostic device to
link a unique patient identification number to diagnostic data that is recorded
by diagnostic device 102 and sent to patient device 110. Final Act. 4—5.
The Examiner’s reason for modifying Kumar’s diagnostic device and
telemedical system to include Westerteicher’s PIR is supported by a rational
underpinning of ensuring that physiological data that is sensed by diagnostic
devices is clearly assigned or linked to a particular patient who is associated
with that information. Id. at 5. Westerteicher teaches that this arrangement
and step ensures that a recorded measurement is assigned unambiguously to
a specific individual to clearly identify the patient associated with a specific
measurement signal. Westerteicher, 2:8—28. Westerteicher teaches that this
process and capability is particularly important in the field of telemedicine.
Id. at 1:10—23. In order to combine, associate, or link a patient identification
signal with a measurement signal, “the measurement equipment comprises a
patient identification reader (PIR).” Id. at 2:19-21. These teachings would
improve the remote health telemedicine system of Kumar in the same way.
Kumar already identifies each patient’s session with a unique client loginid.
Kumar 1117. The Examiner proposes to improve Kumar further by tagging
measured patient data with a unique patient identification, such as a unique
loginid of Kumar, at the diagnostic device, as Westerteicher teaches, to link
the patient’s unique identification with the measured data. Final Act. 4—5.
5
Appeal 2015-007858
Application 13/165,052
Appellant’s argument that there is no motivation to modify Kumar
with this teaching of Westerteicher because Kumar already accomplishes
this task with a unique patient ID and servlets (Appeal Br. 21—22) is not
persuasive. Kumar’s use of a unique loginid with servlets relates to emails,
not transmitted diagnostic data. Kumar || 130-138. Even so, modification
of Kumar’s patient side medical devices 102 with Westerteicher’s teaching
to combine a unique patient identification with measured patient diagnostic
data at the diagnostic device would ensure that diagnostic data of a patient is
linked to that patient at the time that the diagnostic data is created to ensure
the proper identification of the data for a patient ab initio.
Thus, we sustain the rejection of claims 1—3, 5—12, 14—19, and 21—32.
Claims 4 and 13 as patentable
over Kumar, Sadler, Westerteicher, and Parthasarathy
Appellant argues that Parthasarathy does not cure the deficiencies of
Kumar, Sadler, and Westerteicher for claims 1 and 10, from which claims 4
and 13 depend, respectively. Appeal Br. 25. As we sustain the rejection of
claims 1 and 10, there are no deficiencies for Parthasarathy to cure. Thus,
we sustain the rejection of claims 4 and 13.
DECISION
We affirm the rejections of claims 1—19 and 21—32.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l)(iv).
AFFIRMED
6