Ex Parte Kouchi et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Jun 20, 2012

10525749 (B.P.A.I. Jun. 20, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
__________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
__________

Ex parte KENJI KOUCHI, RYUJI NAGAI,
and SHINYA NAGATA
__________

Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749
Technology Center 1600
__________

Before TONI R. SCHEINER, LORA M. GREEN, and
MELANIE L. McCOLLUM, Administrative Patent Judges.

SCHEINER, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the final rejection of
claims 1-3, 5-15, and 17-20, directed to a biological information trend
display device. The claims have been rejected as obvious. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm-in-part.
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The Specification discloses a biological information trend display
device “capable of facilitating check of the biological information trend and
identification of [an] abnormal value” (Spec. 2: 6-8).
Figure 5 of the Specification is reproduced immediately below:

Figure 5 of the Specification is a schematic view illustrating an
embodiment of Appellants‟ biological information trend display device that
meets the limitations of claim 1, as well as several narrower dependent
claims. In the embodiment shown in Figure 5, the device displays ST level
trend curves from 12 ECG leads in an overlapping manner (i.e., all 12 curves
are plotted on the same graph, such that curves with similar values overlap
each other). The dotted lines at 0.1 mV and -0.1 mV represent
predetermined upper and lower limits of the normal range of values. The
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

3
area from left to right of the display screen represents a time period, in this
case, 30 minutes. Icons representing ECG leads I, II, III, aVL, aVR, aVF,
V1, V2, V3, V4, V5, and V6 are displayed in both the upper and lower parts
of the display screen 14. (Spec. 18: 13 – 19: 3.)
In Figure 5, “[t]he parts of the curves within the normal range are
displayed in the normal value color „a‟ (blue, for example)” (id. at 19: 9-11),
while “ST levels of the waveforms derived from the 12 leads [which] show
abnormal values” (id. at 19: 13-14) are displayed as follows:
A curve 70 showing the ST level of the lead waveform
derived from the lead III is above the upper limit and displayed
(plotted) in an abnormal value color X (graph display style).
To indicate that the ST level derived from the lead III is higher
than the upper limit, a lead icon 60 (for the lead III) in the upper
part of the display screen is displayed in the same abnormal
value color X as the curve 70 in the drawing (the type of data is
displayed in the same style as the curve of the data).
A curve 72 showing the ST level of the waveform
derived from the lead V5 has become lower than the lower
limit, and the part of the curve below the lower limit is
displayed in an abnormal value color Y. To indicate that the ST
level derived from the lead V5 has become lower than the lower
limit, a lead icon 62 (for the lead V5) in the lower part of the
display screen is displayed in the same abnormal value color Y
as the curve 72 in the drawing.
(Id. at 19: 17 - 20: 1.)
According to the Specification, “[t]he user . . . can easily understand
the trend of determined abnormal biological information and the source for
obtaining the biological information” (id. at 3: 19-21).
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

4
Claims 1-3, 5-15, and 17-20 are pending and on appeal. Claim 1 is
representative:
1. A biological information trend display device for displaying a time
series trend of biological information, comprising:
means for obtaining a plurality of biological information;
means for determining whether the obtained biological information is
abnormal biological information or not; and
means for displaying a time-series trend for each of the plurality of
biological information, wherein the displaying means changes trend display
style for biological information that is determined as the abnormal biological
information, and wherein the displaying means further displays biological
information determined as the abnormal biological information in
association with information relating to the source of the biological
information,
wherein a graph displaying area and a data type displaying area are
provided;
the time-series trends for the plurality of biological information are
overlapped and displayed on the same graph displaying area and the
biological information determined as the abnormal biological information is
displayed in association with information related to the source of the
biological information; and
text indicating the source of the biological information is displayed on
the data type displaying area in the same displaying style as the time-series
trend for biological information which is determined as the abnormal
biological information.
The Examiner relies on the following evidence:
Sakaguchi et al. US 5,807,246 Sep. 15, 1998
Schradi et al. US 5,860,918 Jan. 19, 1999
Manuel et al. US 6,806,891 B1 Oct. 19, 2004
Dia Medical Systems JP 51-787 Jan. 6, 1976
S. Nelwan, et al., Implementing a continuous 12 lead ST Monitoring system,
18
TH
ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE IEEE ENGINEERING IN
MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY SOCIETY 1355-1356 (1996).

Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

5
I. Claims 1, 3, 5-8, 10-14, and 17-20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Schradi, Sakaguchi, and Dia Medical Systems.
II. Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Schradi, Sakaguchi, Dia Medical Systems, and Manuel.
III. Claims 2 and 15 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Schradi, Sakaguchi, Dia Medical Systems, and Nelwan.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Schradi discloses a medical monitoring device comprising
means for: monitoring and recording physiological parameters of a patient;
comparing the monitored physiological parameters with predetermined
threshold values; determining whether a physiological parameter exceeds the
associated threshold; and producing a representation of the event in relation
to time (Schradi, col. 1, l. 62 - col. 2, l. 16).
2. Figure 2 of Schradi is reproduced below:

Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

6
Figure 2 depicts the display of Schradi‟s medical monitoring device
110. The review window graphically displays abnormal events associated
with multiple channels, “one for each physiological parameter monitored”
(Schradi, col. 6, ll. 63-64), in this case: bradycardia (channel 200);
desaturation (channel 202), and apnea (channel 204) (id. at col. 6, l. 64-67).
3. An event occurs when “one parameter or a plurality of
parameters exceed a threshold or an alarm limit associated therewith . . .
[and] the expression exceed can mean that the detected value is larger than
. . . [an upper] threshold” or “smaller than . . . [a lower] threshold” (id. at col.
5, l. 67 - col. 6, l. 6).
“[E]vents are shown in the respective channel by vertical bars, cf. e.g.,
210. The length of these bars depends on the extent to which the respective
parameter, which caused an event, exceeded the threshold associated
therewith” (id. at col. 7, ll. 4-8).
4. According to Schradi, “a user who looks at the review window
is able to see immediately to what extent a parameter related to a respective
event exceeded the threshold or alarm limit associated therewith” (Schradi,
col. 7, ll. 33-36). Moreover, “[e]vent string boxes 222, 224, and 226 in the
right margin of the review window . . . contain items of information . . .
indicating the active threshold or alarm limit of the parameter in question”
(id. at col. 8, ll. 3-10) and “the trigger event is always shown [in] „invers[e]
video‟” (id. at col. 8, ll. 14-15).
5. Sakaguchi discloses a medical “multicolor display unit” which
displays numbers, letters, symbols, and messages in two or more colors and
illumination modes to distinguish between normal and abnormal conditions
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

7
(Sakaguchi, col. 1, ll. 32-33; col. 3, l. 5 - col. 4, l. 18). According to
Sakaguchi,
[M]ultiple types of data can be displayed in accordance with the
type of color used in a continuous illumination mode, and by
adding flashing to this the amount of data which can be
displayed is doubled, so that various types of data can be
displayed in respectively differing modes. For example, when
the multicolor display unit consists of colors, by the
combination of display color and steady illumination or
flashing display can be performed in 4 modes, so that the 3
statuses of normal and abnormal diagnostic and therapeutic data
and setting adjustment values can be easily displayed in
differing display modes.
(Id. at 1, ll. 40-50.)
6. Dia Medical Systems discloses a “trend monitor” which shows
“several pieces of biological information [for a given patient] for a certain
period of time at once in different colors” (Dia Medical Systems 2-3).
“When any piece of the information exceeds its specific limit preset for each
patient, the system indicates the applicable part in another color such that it
stands out from the rest to focus attention” (id. at 3). That is,
When the information data . . . falls within the range between a
minimum and maximum limit, [a] color code decoder . . .
decodes color codes to indicate pieces of biological information
in different basic colors by type of information. For example, a
waveform representing pulse rate is indicated in blue while a
waveform representing body temperature [is indicated] in
yellow . . . . In contrast, when the information data fails to fall
within the range between a minimum and maximum limit, the
color code decoder . . . decodes color codes to indicate the
applicable part of the waveform in another color such that it
stands out from the rest of the waveform to focus attention. For
example, part of the waveform representing pulse rate, which
exceeds the maximum limit of 90 or drops below the minimum
limit of 50, is indicated in red . . . . Also, part of the waveform
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

8
representing body temperature, which exceeds the maximum
level of 38° C or drops below the minimum limit of 35° C, is
indicated in vermillion.
(Id. at 5-6.)
7. Figure 2 of Dia Medical Systems is reproduced below:

Figure 2 depicts the display section 12 of the Dia Medical Systems
trend monitor, in this case displaying a trend line for the patient‟s pulse rate,
and another trend line for the patient‟s body temperature.
8. According to Dia Medical Systems, “each waveform on the
graph representing a piece of information can be accurately identified by a
color even when the waveforms are too close to each other or cross each
other” (Dia Medical Systems 7). Thus, the reference discloses a trend
monitor which displays a plurality of biological information trend lines in an
overlapping manner on the same graph.

Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

9
PRINCIPLES OF LAW
“The combination of familiar elements according to known methods
is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results.”
KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416 (2007). The obviousness
“analysis need not seek out precise teachings directed to the specific subject
matter of the challenged claim, for a court can take account of the inferences
and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ.”
Id. at 418. See also id. at 421 (“A person of ordinary skill is also a person
of ordinary creativity, not an automaton.”). The “suggestion test is in
actuality quite flexible and not only permits, but requires, consideration of
common knowledge and common sense.” DyStar Textilfarben GmbH & Co.
Deutschland KG v. C.H. Patrick Co., 464 F.3d 1356, 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2006).
DISCUSSION
I.
Claims 1, 3, 5-8, 10-14, and 17-20 stand rejected as unpatentable over
the combined disclosures of Schradi, Sakaguchi, and Dia Medical Systems.
Claim 1:
Schradi discloses a system that displays time series trends for a
plurality of physiological parameters (i.e., a plurality of biological
information) in a graphical display area. Each physiological parameter is
visually aligned, i.e., associated, with a specific channel, (elements 200, 202,
204, comprising text identifying the physiological parameter, i.e., indicating
the source of the biological information) (FFs 2, 3). An abnormal event
associated with a given parameter is depicted as a vertical bar (210) on the
trend line associated with the channel for that particular parameter. In
addition, an event string box (222, 224, 226) displays specific information
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

10
associated with the event in the form of numbers and symbols, highlighted in
inverse video, to make it easy to identify which parameter has exceeded its
threshold (FF4).
Dia Medical Systems discloses another conventional strategy for easy
visualization of abnormal events associated with multiple physiological
parameters, using color to differentiate between normal and abnormal parts
of overlapping curves (FFs 7, 8). Similarly, Sakaguchi discloses a display
system which differentiates between normal and abnormal conditions using
different colors and/or different illumination modes (FF5).
We agree with the Examiner‟s conclusion that it would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill “to link the style of display of the data trend
line for a specific data source with text describing the data source . . . to
easily confirm the significance and contents of the display by simple
observation, and enhance the ease of use of the medical diagnosis and
treatment system” (Ans. 14), given the teachings of Schradi, Sakaguchi, and
Dia Medical systems.
The claimed display device relies on a combination of familiar,
predictable visualization strategies - i.e., using color or other visual
phenomena to highlight abnormal events and differentiate between different
sources of information, and to instantly identify the significance of the
information. While the claimed invention is esthetically and functionally
elegant, it is nevertheless the product of the inferences and creative steps that
would be employed by a person of ordinary skill in the art of organizing and
displaying data for easy visualization (see KSR, 550 U.S. at 421). We are
not persuaded otherwise by Appellants‟ arguments.
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

11
Specifically, Appellants contend that Schradi neither “teaches,
suggests nor discloses that the displaying means displays a source for
abnormal biological information as claimed” (App. Br. 15).
However, as discussed above, and as noted by the Examiner, “the
vertical bars in [Schradi‟s] figures show information determined to be
abnormal that is displayed with information related to the source of the
information, the terms BRADY[bpm], DESAT[%], and APNEA
DURAT‟N[sec]” (FFs 2, 3; Ans. 12).
In addition, Appellants contend that “the relied upon references
[neither] teach, suggest nor disclose that the time-series trends for the
plurality of biological information are overlapped and displayed on the same
graph displaying area as recited . . . in independent claim 1” (App. Br. 15).
Again, however, Dia Medical Systems explicitly states that “each
waveform on the graph representing a piece of information can be accurately
identified by a color even when the waveforms are too close to each other or
cross each other” (Dia Medical Systems 7; FF8), and Figure 2 plainly shows
overlapping curves for pulse rate and body temperature (FF7).
Finally, Appellants contend that “[t]he references are also absent any
teaching that correlates the style of the text indicating the source of the
biological information and the time series trend as claimed” (App. Br. 16),
and “simply changing the display for abnormal information does not
anticipate nor render obvious the claimed features” (id. at 17).
It is true that none of the references discloses using the same style,
e.g., color, for both the depiction of the abnormal event and the depiction of
the source of the biological information. However, Schradi uses inverse
video to highlight data associated with a graphically displayed abnormal
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

12
event, and Sakaguchi and Dia Medical Systems both show that color is
conventionally used to graphically organize and highlight important aspects
of a multicomponent display. Highlighting abnormal biological information
on a trend line with a distinctive color, and displaying information related to
the source of the biological information in the same color is merely the sort
of creative step that would be employed by one skilled in the art of visually
organizing and displaying complex data.
Claim 5:
Appellants contend that claim 5 requires that “the time-series trends
for biological information judged as normal are displayed in the same style
with each other” (App. Br. 20), but none of the cited references discloses
this feature.
This argument is not persuasive. First, Schradi‟s channels and trend
lines appear to be in the same format, except for abnormal events, which are
indicated by vertical bars associated with data highlighted in inverse video
style. Second, if the aim is to make abnormal information conspicuous and
easily identifiable, then it would have been an obvious creative step for one
of ordinary skill in this art to display normal, less important information in a
less conspicuous manner than abnormal information, e.g., all in the same
color.
Claim 6:
Appellants contend that claim 6 requires a feature not disclosed by
any of the cited references, specifically:
[T]he displaying means further displays a source for obtaining
biological information at an upper portion of the time-series
trend when the biological information exceeds certain level, and
displays a source for obtaining biological information at a lower
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

13
portion of the time-series trend when the biological information
falls below certain level.
(App. Br. 21.)
The Examiner essentially disregards this feature, reasoning that
Appellants are “arguing limitations of a method” (Ans. 15), rather than
limitations to the system (id.). The limitations, however, are limitations as
to how the system is programed and data is displayed, and not merely
method limitations. Thus, we agree with Appellants that the Examiner has
not established that this particular feature (illustrated, e.g., in Figure 5 of the
Specification) would have been obvious over the cited prior art, and are
compelled to reverse the rejection with respect to claim 6.
Claim 7:
Appellants contend that claim 7 requires “when subsequent biological
information is no longer determined to be abnormal biological information
the displaying means further displays the trend of the subsequent biological
information in the original style, and maintains the indication of the
information relating to the source of the biological information” (App. Br.
21), and none of the references “teaches, suggests or discloses the above
feature” (id.).
This argument is not persuasive. We note (as did the Examiner) that
Dia Medical Systems discloses a curve that reverts to the normal color when
the parameter returns to normal after an abnormal event (Ans. 16; FFs 6, 7).
Claim 8:
Appellants contend that none of the references “teaches, suggests or
discloses the ability to discriminate” between abnormal current information;
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

14
abnormal past and current information; past abnormal and current normal
information (App. Br. 22).
This argument is not persuasive. As noted by the Examiner, Schradi
allows this type of discrimination (Ans. 16; FF4), and we note that Dia
Medical Systems does as well (FFs 6, 7).
Claim 10:
Appellants contend that claim 10 requires that “the displaying means
further displays a time-series trend of biological information with
information relating to the source of the biological information” (App. Br.
22), and is therefore allowable.
This argument is not persuasive, as it is not clear how this claim
further limits claim 1, from which it depends, and we have already
determined that claim 1 would have been obvious over the cited art.
Claim 11:
Appellants contend that claim 11 requires that “the displaying means
displays different biological information in the same trend display style,
which are derived from different sources for the biological information that
is not determined as the abnormal biological information” (App. Br. 23), but
none of the cited references discloses this feature.
This argument is not persuasive. As discussed above in connection
with claim 5, Schradi‟s trend lines (which are derived from different
sources) appear to be in the same format, except for abnormal events, which
are indicated by vertical bars associated with data highlighted in inverse
video style (FF2).
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

15
Claim 12:
Appellants contend that claim 12 requires that “the change of trend
display style comprises changing the trend display color” (App. Br. 23),
which is neither taught nor suggested by the cited art.
Again, we are not persuaded that using color to highlight and organize
information in the manner claimed would have been unobvious for the
reasons discussed above in connection with claim 1.
Claim 13:
Appellants contend that claim 13 requires that “the displaying means
further conforms the trend display color of biological information that is
determined as the abnormal biological information to display color of
information relating to the source of the biological information” (App. Br.
24), which is neither taught nor suggested by the cited art.
Again, we are not persuaded that using color to highlight and organize
information in the manner claimed would have been unobvious for the
reasons discussed above in connection with claim 1.
Claim 14:
Appellants contend that claim 14 requires that “the biological
information comprises information that shows different behaviors depending
on the sources” (App. Br. 24), which is neither taught nor suggested by the
cited art.
This argument is not persuasive. As noted by the Examiner, Schradi
“shows that the different sources have distinct behaviors” (Ans. 17), for
example, Figure 2 of Schradi displays bradycardia as bpm; desaturation as a
percentage; and apnea by duration (FF2).
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

16
II.
Claim 9 stands rejected as unpatentable over the combined disclosures
of Schradi, Sakaguchi, Dia Medical Systems, and Manuel.
Claim 9 recites that “the device further comprises display area for
displaying the information related to the source of biological information
related to the source of biological information, wherein the display area
includes an inner indication area and an outer indication area” and
differentiates between current and past abnormal biological information.
The Examiner cites Manuel for its disclosure of “a graphical display
for conveying status information . . . [using] an indicator having an inner and
outer area” wherein “the inner area changes color when a request has been
processed . . . [and the] outer area changes color when a request is made”
(Ans. 9). The Examiner finds that Manuel‟s indicator temporally “indicates
a changed status in a past event” (id.).
Appellants contend that “Manuel has nothing to do with biological
information” (App. Br. 30).
This argument is not persuasive. Manuel is concerned with visual
organization and display of temporal data - the same concern addressed by
Schradi, Sakaguchi, and Dia Medical Systems. The mere fact that the types
of data to be displayed are different does not mean that Manuel is irrelevant
to displaying medical data.
III.
Claims 2 and 15 stand rejected as unpatentable over the combined
disclosures of Schradi, Sakaguchi, Dia Medical Systems, and Nelwan.
Appellants contend that claim 2 “is directed toward comparable
features of claim 1, [and] the above arguments are equally applicable” (App.
Appeal 2011-000476
Application 10/525,749

17
Br. 19). Similarly, with respect to claim 15, Appellants contend that the
Examiner “has failed to provide any reference that teaches, suggests or
discloses the time-series trends and text as recited in independent claim 1”
(id. at 25).
These arguments are not persuasive for the same reasons discussed
above in connection with the rejection of claim 1.
SUMMARY
I. The rejection of claims 1, 3, 5-8, 10-14, and 17-20 as unpatentable
over Schradi, Sakaguchi, and Dia Medical Systems is reversed with respect
to claim 6, and affirmed with respect to claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10-14, and 17-
20.
II. The rejection of claim 9 as unpatentable over Schradi, Sakaguchi,
Dia Medical Systems, and Manuel is affirmed.
III. The rejection of claims 2 and 15 as unpatentable over Schradi,
Sakaguchi, Dia Medical Systems, and Nelwan is affirmed.
TIME PERIOD FOR RESPONSE
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).

AFFIRMED-IN-PART

cdc