www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`17/436,797
`
`09/07/2021
`
`Brian E. Brooks
`
`82437US006
`
`2833
`
`Solventum Intellectual Properties Company
`2510 Conway Ave E
`3M Center, 275-6E-21
`St Paul, MN 5514
`
`WILLIAMS, TERESA S
`
`3686
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`06/21/2024
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`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.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`IPDocketing @ Solventum.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`171436, 797
`Brooksetal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF)StatusExaminer
`TERESA S WILLIAMS
`3686
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORYPERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensionsof time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 03/08/2024.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`2a)[¥) This action is FINAL.
`2b) (J This action is non-final.
`3) An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4)(2) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-20 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C} Claim(s)__ is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected.
`(] Claim(s)__ is/are objectedto.
`C] Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`Application Papers
`10) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)0) The drawing(s) filedon__ is/are: a)(J accepted or b)( objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)7) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`c)Z None ofthe:
`b)() Some**
`a)C All
`1.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.1.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`*“ See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date 04/05/2024.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3)
`
`4)
`
`(LJ Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20240613
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Status of Claims
`
`1.
`
`This actionis in reply to the amendmentfiled on 03/08/2024.
`
`2.
`
`Claims 1-10 and 20 have been amended.
`
`3.
`
`Claims 21-27 have been cancelled.
`
`4.
`
`Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA orAIA Status
`
`The presentapplication,filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first
`
`inventorto file provisions of the AIA.
`
`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 requirementsofthis 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.
`
`Step 1:
`
`Claims 1-20 are directed to a method(i.e., a process). Accordingly, claims 1-20 are all within at
`
`least one of the four statutory categories.
`
`Step 2A - Prong One:
`
`Regarding Prong Oneof Step 2A, the claim limitations are to be analyzed to determine whether
`
`they “recite” a judicial exception or in other words whether a judicial exception is “set forth” or
`
`“described” in the claims. An “abstract idea” judicial exception is subject matter that falls within at least
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 3
`
`one of the following groupings: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human
`
`activity, and/or c) mental processes.
`
`Representative independent claim 1 includes limitations that recite an abstract idea.
`
`Specifically, independent claim 1 recites:
`
`automatically updating a casual model,
`
`generating, .....and based on the one or more externalinputs, one or more baseline values toa
`
`plurality of internal parameters, wherein the plurality of internal parameters define how the control
`
`system updatesa causal model using received environment responses and how the control system
`
`determines which control settings toselect givena current causal model;
`
`accessing...... a current causal model that measures one or more causal relationships between
`
`one or more control settings anda measure of success of one or more healthcare facilities;
`
`selecting, ....and based on the accessed current causal model and the plurality of internal
`
`parameters, one or more control settings that specify one or more controllable aspects of the one or
`
`more healthcarefacilities;
`
`repeatedly performing,
`
`selecting a configuration of control settings for controlling operations of the one or more
`
`healthcarefacilities based, atleastin part, on the current causal model and the plurality of internal
`
`parameters;
`
`automatically adjusting, based on the measure of success of the operation of the one or more
`
`healthcarefacilities and the plurality of internal parameters, the current causal model.
`
`The Examiner submits that the foregoing underlined limitations constitute: (a) “certain
`
`methods of organizing human activity” because adjusting input settings based ona measure of success
`
`of operations at healthcarefacilities and selecting more controllable aspects of healthcare facilities
`
`relate to managing human behavior/interactions between people, which is medical workflow activities.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 4
`
`Furthermore, the foregoing underlined limitations constitute (b) “a mental process” because selecting
`
`input settings and observing relationships to measure the success of operations at the healthcare
`
`facilities are observations/evaluations/analysis that can be performed in the human mind or witha pen
`
`and paper.
`
`Accordingly, the claim describes at least one abstract idea.
`
`Furthermore, dependent claims 2-20 further define the at least one abstract idea (and thusfail
`
`to make the abstract idea any less abstract) as set forth below.
`
`In relation toclaims 3-19, these claims merely recite specific kinds of input settings,
`
`related to outpatient management, measuresof success of operations, measures of operational
`
`efficiency, measures relatedto reprocessed instruments, measures related toinventory supply,
`
`measures related to medical coding, measures related to document accuracy, the measure of
`
`patient treatment effectiveness, measuresrelated to hospital-acquired infections, set of
`
`external variables and various personnel variables. Claims 2 and 20 (similarly to claim 1) recite
`
`determining steps suchas adjusting internal control parameters.
`
`2019 PEG: Step 2A - Prong Two:
`
`Regarding Prong Twoof Step 2A, it must be determined whether the claim as a whole integrates
`
`the abstract idea into a practical application. As noted, it must be determined whether any additional
`
`elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application ina
`
`manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that
`
`additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra
`
`solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment
`
`or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
`
`In the present case, for representative independentclaim 1, the additional limitations beyond
`
`the above-noted at least one abstract idea. For the following reasons, the Examiner submits that the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page5S
`
`above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted at least one abstract idea intoa
`
`practical application.
`
`Regarding the additional limitations of the control system that includes one or more computers
`
`and one or morestorage devices storing instructions and one or more computer-readable storage
`
`media storing instructions, the Examiner submits that these limitations amount to merely using a
`
`computer to perform the at least one abstract idea (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)) and are mere instructions to
`
`apply the above-noted at least one abstractidea (/d.).
`
`Regarding the additional limitation “receiving a measure of success of the operation of the
`
`healthcarefacilities,” the Examiner submits that this additional limitation merely addsinsignificant pre-
`
`solution activity (data gathering; selecting data to be manipulated) to the at least one abstract idea (see
`
`MPEP § 2106.05(g)).
`
`Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the at least one abstract idea intoa
`
`practical application.
`
`Looking at the additional limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already
`
`present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the
`
`additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a
`
`computer or an improvementto another technology or technical field, apply or use the above -noted
`
`judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition,
`
`implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacturethat is
`
`integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or
`
`thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the
`
`use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is
`
`not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. Thus, claims 1-20 as a whole do
`
`not integrate the above-noted at least one abstract idea into a practical application.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 6
`
`For these reasons, representative independent claim 1 with its dependent claims 2-20, do not
`
`recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
`
`Step 2B:
`
`Regarding Step 2B, in representative independentclaim 1, regarding the additional limitations of
`
`the control system, one or more computers and one or more storage devices storing instructions and
`
`one or more computer-readable storage media storing instructions, the Examiner submits that these
`
`limitations amount to merely using a computer to perform the at least one abstract idea (see MPEP §
`
`2106.05(f)).
`
`In dependentclaims 2-20, there is no additional elements.
`
`Therefore, claims 1-20 are ineligible under 35 USC §101.
`
`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 forthin section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention
`and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the
`effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the
`claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention
`was made.
`
`The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C.
`
`103 are summarized as follows:
`
`1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
`
`2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
`
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 7
`
`4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-12 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Solilov (US 2013/0132108 A1) in view of Glidewell (US 2017/0004263 A1) furtherin view of Rajasenan
`
`(US 8,407,081 B1).
`
`Claim 1:
`
`Solilov discloses a computer-implemented method for automatically updating a casual model,
`
`(See [Abstract] the contextual performanceindicators based on a modeland monitor measurements
`
`associated with the contextual performanceindicators, the workflow decision engine to process
`
`feedback to update the context performance indicators.)the method comprising:
`
`receiving, by a controlsystem configured to automatically optimize operations at one or more
`
`healthcarefacilities, one or more external inputs (See Fig. 5 system 500. See P0125, key performance
`
`indicators(kpi’s) of a hospital. See POO87 and [P0017] automatically adjusts KP! parametervalues or
`
`other definition 414 based on variation in the workflow parameters(e.g., interquartile range, either
`
`tighten or loosen the thresholds) basedon inflight data.);
`
`generating, by the controlsystem and based onthe one or more externalinputs, one or more
`
`baseline values to a plurality of internal parameters, wherein the plurality ofinternal parameters
`
`define how the controlsystem updates a causal modelusing received environment responses and
`
`howthe controlsystem determines which controlsettingsto select given a current causal model ((See
`
`P0026-P0028, POO69 where customizing kpi’s using workflow definitions serve as setting baseline values
`
`toa plurality of internal parameters. See P0115, where kpi parameters are updated based onstatical
`
`data and threshold data.);
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 8
`
`accessing, by the controlsystem, a current causal modelthat measures one or more causal
`
`relationships between one or more control settings and a measure of success of one or more
`
`healthcarefacilities (See exemplary analyzed data representing kpi’s construe measuring a causal
`
`relationships between control settings in PO041-43 such as long patient wait times, a modality that is
`
`underutilized and a performance metric that is not meeting hospital guidelines established measuring
`
`success and see kpi’s in [P0052] KPIs are used to assess the present state of the organization,
`
`departmentor the individual and to provide actionable information with a clear course of action. They
`
`assist a healthcare organization to measure progress towards the goals and objectives establishedfor
`
`success.);
`
`selecting, by the controlsystem and based onthe accessed current causalmodeland the
`
`lurality of internal parameters, one or more control settings that specify one or more controllable
`
`aspects ofthe one or more healthcarefacilities (See control limits that can be specified for a
`
`new/updated kpi with combined parameters as mentioned in P0118.);
`
`Although Solilov discloses automatically updating a casual model using the controlsystem as
`
`mentioned above. Solilov does not explicitly teach repeatedly selecting a configuration when receiving a
`
`measure of success of the operation of the healthcare facilities for automatically adjusting the measure
`
`of success of the operation of healthcare facilities and internal parameters.
`
`Glidewell teaches:
`
`repeatedly performing (See trend tracking, benchmark quality measures, exemplary refresh
`
`date/time data feed for payroll purposes in POO29-P0030 and key performanceindicators (KPIs) within
`
`acceptable thresholds in P0064. See established as useful for hospital facilities (P0003, POOO8, POO61).)
`
`the following:
`
`selecting a configuration of control settings for controlling operations of the one or more
`
`healthcarefacilities based, at least in part, on the current causal model and the plurality ofinternal
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 9
`
`parameters (See PO026-P0027, P0034, where monitored, analyzed and reported KPIs suchas labor,
`
`accounts receivable (AR) and clinical measures functions. Besides thresholds, warranting alerts (POO28)
`
`serve as input settings selected. Real time data analysis (POOO8) and trend tracking reported analysis
`
`serves as acausal model. Besides trend tracker template (P0029), see exemplary trend report(Fig. 3,
`
`154) as regulated labor hours selected and monitored by a client according to a nursing homefacility
`
`mentioned in P0036, POOSO-P0051, where labor costs comparison versus budget construe measures
`
`current causal relationships between input settings. );
`
`receiving a measure of success of the operation of the healthcarefacilities while controlled
`
`using the configuration of control settings (Besides trend tracker tool in P0029 to allows users to
`
`benchmark quality measures against their peers, see a set of quality measures (QM’s) as indicatorsin
`
`nursing homes mentioned in POO64 serve as a measure of success of the operation of a healthcare
`
`facility.); and
`
`Rajasenan teaches automatically adjusting, based on the measureof success of the operation
`
`of the one or more healthcarefacilities and the plurality of internal parameters, the current causal
`
`model (See Fig. 3 and column 15,line 65 to column 16,line 15, where the daily action plan is changed
`
`and improved dueto the impact of the monitored benchmark sensoractivities. The Role-Action for
`
`Repair process is applied to overall TIMSA- DAP (Time, Information, Motivation, Skill, Authority-Daily
`
`Action Plan), labor methodology (column 2, line 57 to column 3, line 12), ina hospital environment
`
`(column 6, lines 14-27). Also, see knowledge base model in column 7,lines 11-24, column 13, lines 46-
`
`59.).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method of Solilov to include repeatedly selecting a configuration when receiving a measure of success of
`
`the operation of the healthcarefacilities for automatically adjusting the measure of success of the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 10
`
`operation of healthcarefacilities and internal parameters as taught by Glidewell and Rajasenan in order
`
`to report key indicators impacting patient care and/or the efficiency of the services provided by the
`
`facilities mentioned in Glidewell’s POO04 and to improve efficiency in an organization as mentionedin
`
`Rajasenan.
`
`Regarding claim 3, Glidewell discloses wherein the control settings comprise one or moreof:
`
`a concentration of patients (See P0037, PO062, report financial forecasting for the Medicare
`
`population. ); a concentration of medical devices; a concentration of health care clinicians; one or more
`
`input settings related to instrument reprocessing; one or more control settings related to personnel
`
`staffing (See Fig. 4, P0040 setting up which personnel get notified.); one or more control settings
`
`related to inventory management; one or more control settings related to environmental control; one
`
`ormore control settings related to staff protocol; one or more control settings related to document
`
`management; or one or more control settings related to outpatient management(See P0028, P0039
`
`recording surveying teams activities.).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method ofSolilov to include control settings as taught by Glidewell in order to report key indicators
`
`impacting patient care and/or theefficiency of the services provided by thefacilities mentioned in
`
`Glidewell’s POO04.
`
`Regarding claim 7, Glidewell discloses wherein the control settings related to environmental
`
`controlcomprise one or moreof: a choice of temperature of one or more regions of the healthcare
`
`facilities; a choice of humidity of one or more regions of the healthcarefacilities; choice of a sanitation
`
`level of one or more regions of the healthcarefacilities; or a location of trip hazards (See POO028-P0029
`
`regional staffing and Trend Tracker for regional and national reporting analysis. ).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 11
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method of Solilov and Glidewell to include control settings related to environmental control as taught by
`
`Rajasenan to quickly determine when to order and restock medical supplies.
`
`Regarding claim 9, Glidewell discloses wherein the control settings related to document
`
`management comprise one or more of: a protocol for pre-processing documents;atraining regimen
`
`for medical coding of documents; a protocol for doctor engagement with a medical coding process; a
`
`time of day that medical coding is done (See labor hours in P0036, format for job codes.); a choice of
`
`medical document format: a configuration of document templates; a configuration of prompts
`
`provided duringdocument drafting; or a configuration of pre-defined queries of documents.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method of Solilov to include control settings related to document managementas taught by Rajasenan
`
`to quickly determine when to order and restock medical supplies.
`
`Regarding claim 11, Glidewell teaches wherein the measureof success of operations at the
`
`healthcarefacilities comprises a measure of operational efficiency of the healthcarefacilities (See
`
`trend tracking, benchmark quality measures and key performanceindicators (KPIs) within acceptable
`
`thresholds in PO064.).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method ofSolilov to include measuring the success of operations at the healthcarefacilities comprises a
`
`measure of operational efficiency of the healthcare facilities as taught by Glidewell in order to report
`
`key indicators impacting patient care and/or the efficiency of the services provided by thefacilities
`
`mentioned in Glidewell’s POO04.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 12
`
`Regarding claim 12, Glidewell discloses wherein the measureof operational efficiency of the
`
`healthcarefacilities comprises one or moreof: one or more measuresrelated to a reprocessed
`
`instrument; a turnover time; one or more measuresrelated to inventory supply; one or more
`
`measuresrelated to medical coding (See labor hours in P0036, format for job codes.); orone or more
`
`measuresrelated to document accuracy.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method of Solilov to include measuring the operational efficiency of the healthcarefacilities as taught by
`
`Glidewell in order to report key indicators impacting patient care and/orthe efficiency of the services
`
`provided by the facilities mentioned in Glidewell’s POOO4.
`
`Regarding claim14, Rajasenan teaches wherein the measuresrelated to inventory supply
`
`comprise one or more of: an amount of inventory available; or an amount of inventory on backorder
`
`(See hi/low matrix of supplies budget as inventory in column 19, lines 41 to column 20,line 18.).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method of Solilov and Glidewell to include an amountof inventory available as taught by Rajasenanto
`
`quickly determine when to order and restock medical supplies.
`
`Regarding claim 15, Glidewell discloses wherein the measures related to medical coding
`
`comprise one or more of: a measure of human agreement with medical codes; a precision rate of the
`
`medical codes;a recall rate of the medical codes: or a denial rate of the medical codes (See labor
`
`hours in P0036, format for job codes.).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinaryskill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method of Solilov to include measures related to medical coding as taught by Glidewell in order to
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 13
`
`report key indicators impacting patient care and/orthe efficiency of the services provided by the
`
`facilities mentioned in Glidewell’s POOO4.
`
`Regarding claim 16, Glidewell discloses wherein the measuresrelated to document accuracy
`
`comprise one or more of: a proportion of documents containing identified instances of missing
`
`information; or a proportion of documents containing identified instances of incorrect information
`
`(See correcting deficiencies resulting from an inspection/survey in P0039.).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method of Solilov to include measures relatedtodocument accuracy as taught by Glidewell in order to
`
`report key indicators impacting patient care and/or the efficiency of the services provided by the
`
`facilities mentioned in Glidewell’s POOO4.
`
`Regarding claim 17, Glidewell discloses wherein the measureof success of operations at the
`
`healthcarefacilities comprises a measure of patient treatment effectiveness (See efficiency of patient
`
`care evaluated accordingto length of inpatient stay and discharges in POO46. ).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method of Solilov to include measures related to patient treatment effectiveness as taught by Glidewell
`
`in order toreport key indicators impacting patient care and/orthe efficiency of the services provided by
`
`the facilities mentioned in Glidewell’s POOO4.
`
`Regarding claim 18, Glidewell discloses wherein the measureof patient treatment
`
`effectiveness comprises one or more of: a readmission rate; one or more measuresrelated to
`
`hospital-acquired infections; a length of stay for a given condition; a mortality rate; a compliance rate
`
`with outpatient treatment plans; ora number of patient falls (See admissions trending in PO044-P0045
`
`and readmissions rates in PO061.).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 14
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method of Solilov to include measures related to patient treatment effectiveness as taught by Glidewell
`
`in order toreport key indicators impacting patient care and/or the efficiency of the services provided by
`
`the facilities mentioned in Glidewell’s POOO4.
`
`Regarding claim 19, Glidewell discloses wherein the measuresrelated to hospital-acquired
`
`infections comprise one or moreof: a hospital-acquired infection rate; or a hospital-acquired infection
`
`type (See P0064, urinary trackinfections detectedin nursing homes.).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method ofSolilov to include measures related to hospital-acquired infections as taught by Glidewell in
`
`order to report key indicators impacting patient care and/or the efficiency of the services provided by
`
`the facilities mentioned in Glidewell’s POO04.
`
`Regarding claim 2, Rajasenanteaches wherein:
`
`the method further comprises adjusting the internal control parameters basedon the
`
`measure of success of the operation of the one or more healthcarefacilities (See Fig. 3 and column 15,
`
`line 65 tocolumn 16,line 15, where the daily action plan is changed and improved due to the impact of
`
`the monitored benchmark sensoractivities. The Role-Action for Repair process is applied to overall
`
`TIMSA-DAP (Time, Information, Motivation,Skill, Authority-Daily Action Plan), labor methodology
`
`(column 2, line 57 to column 3,line 12), in a hospital environment (column 6,lines 14-27). Also, see
`
`knowledge base model in column 7, lines 11-24, column 13,lines 46-59.).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/436, 797
`Art Unit: 3686
`
`Page 15
`
`method of Solilov and Glidewell to include adjusting the causal model based on the input settings based
`
`on the causal model and a setof internal control parameters of the healthcarefacilities as taught by
`
`Rajasenan in order to quickly improve healthcare organizations that suffer from budget overruns, quality
`
`deficits or other workflow process breakdowns.
`
`Regarding claim5, Rajasenan teaches wherein the control settings related to personnel staffing
`
`comprise one or more of: a staffing protocol; a scheduling protocol; anumber of room visitations per
`
`room per day; ora location of nurse stations (See roles of personnel staff in column 35,lines 44-64,
`
`wherebest actions, practices and protocols impacting the hospital's own order sheets and PFP (Pay for
`
`Performance) order sheets.).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method of Solilov and Glidewell to include a staffing protocol control setting as taught by Rajasenan in
`
`order to quickly improve healthcare organizations that suffer from budget overruns, quality deficits or
`
`other workflow process breakdowns.
`
`
`Regarding claim 6, Rajasenan teaches wherein the controlsettings related to inventory
`
`management comprise one or moreof: a choice of inventory locations; or an inventory stocking
`
`schedule (See hi/low matrix of supplies budget in column 19, lines 41 to column 20, line 18 toimprove a
`
`facility.).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of healthcare
`
`organization managementbefore the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the
`
`method of Sol