DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Request for Continued Examination (RCE)
This Office Action is in response to an RCE filed on 2/10/2026. As directed by the RCE, claims 1-2, 5-31, and 33-36 were canceled, and no claims were amended or added. Thus, claims 3, 4, 32, and 37-45 are pending for this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 3-4, 41, 43 and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wegher-Thompson (US 2009/0177130) in view of Biondo (US 2002/0104535) and Calvelage (US 3,003,164).
Regarding claim 3, Wegher-Thompson discloses (Fig. 1-6) an overlay (cover 104) for use in applying compression to a patient positioned upon a supporting surface, the overlay comprising:
a flexible sheet material (“suitable materials for the inner members 114 and 116 include, but are not limited to, Lycra.RTM., spandex and other elastic fabrics, satin woven fabrics formed from silk or polyester, felt, and cotton fabrics. Suitable materials for the outer members 118 and 120 include, but are not limited to, canvas fabric, nylon fabric, and other durable heavy duty fabrics”, paragraph [0016]) that is arranged into at least two layers (outer members 118,120) to define an internal region (inner member 116) therebetween and having a superior peripheral edge (edge of cover 104 adjacent to patient face) and an inferior peripheral edge (edge of cover 104 distal from patient face), the layers including an inner layer (layer 118) and an outer layer (layer 120), the layers being repositionable with respect to each other such that the sheet material can assume a deflated state in which
an inlet orifice (aperture 132) that opens into the internal region, whereby gas introduced to the internal region via the inlet orifice serves to increase the volume of the internal region from the deflated state and/or to establish an elevated pressure within the internal region (paragraph [0023]); and
restraints (fastener 144, paragraph [0016], that connects edges 138 and 140, and second releasable fastener (i.e. zipper or hook and loop) to connect edges 134 and 136, paragraph [0017] (“Another alternative is to provide a releasable connection, through the use of a fastener mechanism such as a zipper or hook and loop fastener strips (commonly sold under the trade name Velcro), to connect the longitudinally extending side edges 134 and 136 to one another”), paragraph [0017]) that are attached to the outer layer (see Fig. 2-3),
wherein the flexible sheet material and restraints are configured:
such that with the flexible sheet material in the deflated state and draped over the patient, the inner layer (layer 118) provides a posterior layer of the overlay (positioned at posterior of patient, as shown in Fig. 4) that is in contact with the patient (via internal region 116) and the outer layer (layer 120) provides an anterior layer of the overlay that is spaced from the patient by the posterior layer (see spacing of layer 120 from patient in Fig. 4), such that with at least part of the patient's body between the flexible sheet material and the supporting surface (top surface of base 102), the restraints restrain lateral edge portions of the flexible sheet material relative to the support surface (see Fig. 2-3 and paragraph [0016]-[0018]), and such that a pressure differential between the internal region and the atmosphere surrounding the overlay, compresses the patient between the posterior layer of the overlay and the supporting surface (Fig. 3-4 and paragraph [0028]) with a portion of the posterior layer conforming to the patient (posterior layer conforms to patient due to conforming of anterior layer to patient).
Wegher-Thompson does not disclose the supporting surface is that of a theater bed.
However, Biondo teaches (Fig. 14-15) a pulmonary therapy system integrated into a theater bed (bed 175) and a supporting surface of said theater bed upon which a user and overlay are positioned (overlay 164,168 and patient positioned on supporting surface, bladder 162, of bed 175 as shown in Fig. 14-15).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the supporting surface of Wegher-Thompson to be that of a theater bed, as taught by Biondo, for the purpose of improving portability of the device and allow for the device to be used in a hospital setting.
Modified Wegher-Thompson discloses a plurality of restraints, but does not disclose each restraint being configured with a length that is greater than that required to encircle the supporting surface when the patient is resting on that surface, and having a releasable coupling, such that with at least part of the patient's body between the flexible sheet material and the supporting surface, with the restraints extending underneath the theatre bed, and with the releasable couplings interconnected, the restraints restrain lateral edge portions of the flexible sheet material relative to the support surface, and such that a pressure differential between the internal region and the atmosphere surrounding the overlay, together with tensile forces generated in the restraints, compresses the patient between the posterior layer of the overlay and the supporting surface of the theatre bed, with a portion of the posterior layer conforming to the patient.
However, Calvelage teaches (Fig. 1-4) cushioning device comprising restraints (securing straps 26,28), each restraint being configured with a length that is greater than that required to encircle the supporting surface (see length in Fig. 1-2) when the patient is resting on that surface (see Fig. 1), and having a releasable coupling (buckles 42), such that with at least part of the patient's body between the flexible sheet material (bed 25, made of flexible material, Col. 2 lines 64-68) and the supporting surface (top surface of cushion 10), with the restraints extending underneath the supporting surface (See Fig. 1), and with the releasable couplings interconnected (see Fig. 1), the restraints restrain lateral edge portions of the flexible sheet material relative to the support surface (see Fig. 1).
Regarding the limitation “such that a pressure differential between the internal region and the atmosphere surrounding the overlay, together with tensile forces generated in the restraints, compresses the patient between the posterior layer of the overlay and the supporting surface of the theatre bed, with a portion of the posterior layer conforming to the patient”, combining the teachings of Calvelage with the Wegher-Thompson and Biondi references comprehends this limitation, as Wegher-Thompson already discloses an overlay compressing a user with straps (not shown, but described in paragraph [0018]) for attaching to support surface, and Biondi discloses the supporting surface is a theater bed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the overlay f modified Wegher-Thompson such that each restraint being configured with a length that is greater than that required to encircle the supporting surface when the patient is resting on that surface, and having a releasable coupling, such that with at least part of the patient's body between the flexible sheet material and the supporting surface, with the restraints extending underneath the theatre bed, and with the releasable couplings interconnected, the restraints restrain lateral edge portions of the flexible sheet material relative to the support surface, and such that a pressure differential between the internal region and the atmosphere surrounding the overlay, together with tensile forces generated in the restraints, compresses the patient between the posterior layer of the overlay and the supporting surface of the theatre bed, with a portion of the posterior layer conforming to the patient, as taught by Calvelage, for the purpose of allowing for adjustable fastening to different support surfaces as well as for allowing adjustable fastening to users of different sizes.
Regarding claim 4, modified Wegher-Thompson discloses the flexible sheet material is configured such that the anterior layer is distended when an elevated pressure is established within the internal region (anterior layer 120 distends as shown when comparing deflated state in Fig. 2 to inflated stated in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 41, modified Wegher-Thompson discloses wherein each restraint has a free section (free sections of straps 26, 28 shown in Fig. 2 Calvelage that are free hanging) that extends outwardly from one of the lateral edge portions of the flexible sheet material (see Fig. 2 Calvelage).
Regarding claim 43, modified Wegher-Thompson discloses an inlet connector (portion of connector 124 that connects to conduit 206, see Fig. 1 and 4 Wegher-Thompson) within the outer layer, wherein the inlet connector is in communication with the inlet orifice (see Fig. 1 and 4 and paragraph [0016] Wegher-Thompson).
Regarding claim 45, modified Wegher-Thompson discloses markings (handles 160,162 of Wegher-Thompson) on the outer layer (120 of Wegher-Thompson) to facilitate positioning of the flexible sheet material with respect to the patient at a prescribed position (positioned on side of flexible sheet, indicating that the markings should be placed along longitudinal axis of patient).
Claim(s) 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wegher-Thompson (US 2009/0177130) in view of Biondo (US 2002/0104535), Hui (US 2002/0099409), Ramanan (US 2021/0386594), Receveur (US 20120022414), and Calvelage (US 3,003,164).
Regarding claim 32, Wegher-Thompson discloses (Fig. 1-6) a corporeal compression system for applying compression to a patient positioned upon a supporting surface of a theatre bed, the corporeal compression system comprising:
a gas supply system (inflation apparatus 200) comprising: a discharge port (connector 208) forming an outflow connector;
a pump (pump 202) that is in communication with the discharge port,
a controller (controller 210) that controls operation of the pump (paragraph [0027]), and: a self-contained source of electrical power (batteries, paragraph [0023]),
an overlay (cover 104) comprising:
flexible sheet material (“suitable materials for the inner members 114 and 116 include, but are not limited to, Lycra.RTM., spandex and other elastic fabrics, satin woven fabrics formed from silk or polyester, felt, and cotton fabrics. Suitable materials for the outer members 118 and 120 include, but are not limited to, canvas fabric, nylon fabric, and other durable heavy duty fabrics”, paragraph [0016]) that is arranged into at least two layers (118,120) to define an internal region therebetween, and having a superior peripheral edge (edge of cover 104 adjacent to patient face) and an inferior peripheral edge (edge of cover 104 distal from patient face), the layers including an inner layer (layer 118) and an outer layer (layer 120), the layers being repositionable with respect to each other such that the sheet material can assume a deflated state in which a volume of an internal region is a minimum (see Fig. 3-4),
an inlet orifice (132) that opens into the internal region, and
restraints (fastener 144, paragraph [0016], that connects edges 138 and 140, and second releasable fastener (i.e. zipper or hook and loop) to connect edges 134 and 136, paragraph [0017] (“Another alternative is to provide a releasable connection, through the use of a fastener mechanism such as a zipper or hook and loop fastener strips (commonly sold under the trade name Velcro)”), that are attached to the outer layer (see Fig. 2-3), and
a conduit (connector 124) that is interconnected at a first end to the flexible sheet material so as to open into the inlet orifice (paragraph [0016]), the second end of the conduit including an inlet connector (portion of connector 124 that connects to conduit 206) that is releasably couplable to the outflow connector (see Fig. 1 and 4 and paragraph [0023]),
such that with the flexible sheet material in the deflated state and draped over the patient, the inner layer (layer 118) provides a posterior layer of the overlay (positioned at posterior of patient, as shown in Fig. 4) that is in contact with the patient (via internal region 116) and the outer layer (layer 120) provides an anterior layer of the overlay that is spaced from the patient by the posterior layer (see spacing of layer 120 from patient in Fig. 4), such that with at least part of the patient's body between the flexible sheet material and the supporting surface (top surface of base 102), the restraints restrain lateral edge portions of the flexible sheet material relative to the support surface (see Fig. 2-3 and paragraph [0016]-[0018]), with the conduit interconnected at a first end of the flexible sheet material so as to open into the inlet orifice at a second end of the outflow connector (see Fig. 3-4) such that a pressure differential between the internal region and the atmosphere surrounding the overlay, compresses the patient between the posterior layer of the overlay and the supporting surface (Fig. 3-4 and paragraph [0028]) with a portion of the posterior layer conforming to the patient (posterior layer conforms to patient due to conforming of anterior layer to patient).
Wegher-Thompson does not disclose the supporting surface is that of a theater bed.
However, Biondo teaches (Fig. 14-15) a pulmonary therapy system integrated into a theater bed (bed 175) and a supporting surface of said theater bed upon which a user and overlay are positioned (overlay 164,168 and patient positioned on supporting surface, bladder 162, of bed 175 as shown in Fig. 14-15).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the supporting surface of Wegher-Thompson to be that of a theater bed, as taught by Biondo, for the purpose of improving portability of the device and allow for the device to be used in a hospital setting.
Wegher-Thompson does not disclose the pump including: an electric motor connected to a rotor that is rotatable to displace gas from an intake, through a chamber in which the rotor is housed, to the discharge port, at least one of a flow sensor and a pressure sensor located between the chamber and the discharge port, a controller that controls operation of the electric motor, the controller being configured to receive information from the flow sensor and/or the pressure sensor.
However, Hui teaches (Fig. 1-7 and 12-18) a pump including: an electric motor (289) connected to a rotor (290) that is rotatable to displace gas from an intake (244, paragraph [0051]), through a chamber (chamber of inflation/deflation valve 248, see Fig. 17) in which the rotor is housed, to the discharge port (260), a pressure sensor (pressure transducer 254) located between the chamber and the discharge port (see Fig. 6), a controller (10) that controls operation of the electric motor (paragraph [0038]), the controller being configured to receive information from the flow sensor and/or the pressure sensor (paragraph [0047]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pump of Wegher-Thompson of include an electric motor connected to a rotor that is rotatable to displace gas from an intake, through a chamber in which the rotor is housed, to the discharge port, at least one of a flow sensor and a pressure sensor located between the chamber and the discharge port, a controller that controls operation of the electric motor, the controller being configured to receive information from the flow sensor and/or the pressure sensor., as taught by Hui, for the purpose of regulating function of pump based on pressure of the inflatable apparatus.
Modified Wegher-Thompson does not disclose driving the electric motor to vary the flow rate of gas to the discharge port in response to the received sensor information.
However, Ramanan teaches driving an electric motor (“blower motor”, paragraph [0244]) to vary the flow rate of gas to the discharge port in response to the received sensor information (paragraphs [0312] and [0317]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of modified Wegher-Thompson to include driving the electric motor to vary the flow rate of gas to the discharge port in response to the received sensor information, as taught by Ramanan, for the purpose of providing optimal therapy to a user.
Modified Wegher-Thompson does not disclose the gas supply system being operable to deliver gas to the discharge port at a first flow rate and at a second flow rate, the first flow rate being higher than the second flow rate; thereby operating the gas supply system to introduce gas to the internal region via the inlet orifice at the first flow rate to increase the volume of the internal region from the deflated state and establish an elevated pressure within the internal region, thereby compressing the patient between the posterior layer of the overlay and the supporting surface, and wherein the gas supply system is configured to deliver gas at flow rates up to the second flow rate when the pressure within the internal region is above a pre-determined pressure.
However, Receveur teaches (Fig. 1) a compression device having a gas supply system (gas supply system 10, paragraph [0004]) being operable to deliver gas to the discharge port (inlet 22) at a first flow rate and at a second flow rate (paragraph [0060]), the first flow rate being higher than the second flow rate (paragraph [0060]); thereby operating the gas supply system to introduce gas to the internal region via the inlet orifice at the first flow rate to increase the volume of the internal region from the deflated state and establish an elevated pressure within the internal region (paragraph [0060]), thereby compressing the patient between the posterior layer of the overlay and the supporting surface (see Fig. 3), and wherein the gas supply system is configured to deliver gas at flow rates up to the second flow rate when the pressure within the internal region is above a pre-determined pressure (second flow rate is delivered following first flow rate and therefore above a predetermined pressure of 0 atm, paragraph [0060]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the gas supply system of modified Wegher-Thompson to be operable to deliver gas to the discharge port at a first flow rate and at a second flow rate, the first flow rate being higher than the second flow rate; thereby operating the gas supply system to introduce gas to the internal region via the inlet orifice at the first flow rate to increase the volume of the internal region from the deflated state and establish an elevated pressure within the internal region, thereby compressing the patient between the posterior layer of the overlay and the supporting surface, and wherein the gas supply system is configured to deliver gas at flow rates up to the second flow rate when the pressure within the internal region is above a pre-determined pressure.as taught by Receveur, for the purpose preventing overpressurizing of the device and/or injuring a user.
Modified Wegher-Thompson does not disclose each restraint being configured with a length that is greater than that required to encircle the supporting surface when the patient is resting on that surface, and having a releasable coupling, such that with at least part of the patient's body between the flexible sheet material and the supporting surface, with the restraints extending underneath the theatre bed, and with the releasable couplings interconnected, the restraints restrain lateral edge portions of the flexible sheet material relative to the support surface, and such that a pressure differential between the internal region and the atmosphere surrounding the overlay, together with tensile forces generated in the restraints, compresses the patient between the posterior layer of the overlay and the supporting surface of the theatre bed, with a portion of the posterior layer conforming to the patient.
However, Calvelage teaches (Fig. 1-4) cushioning device comprising restraints (securing straps 26,28), each restraint being configured with a length that is greater than that required to encircle the supporting surface (see length in Fig. 1-2) when the patient is resting on that surface (see Fig. 1), and having a releasable coupling (buckles 42), such that with at least part of the patient's body between the flexible sheet material (bed 25, made of flexible material, Col. 2 lines 64-68) and the supporting surface (top surface of cushion 10), with the restraints extending underneath the supporting surface (See Fig. 1), and with the releasable couplings interconnected (see Fig. 1), the restraints restrain lateral edge portions of the flexible sheet material relative to the support surface (see Fig. 1).
Regarding the limitation “such that a pressure differential between the internal region and the atmosphere surrounding the overlay, together with tensile forces generated in the restraints, compresses the patient between the posterior layer of the overlay and the supporting surface of the theatre bed, with a portion of the posterior layer conforming to the patient”, combining the teachings of Calvelage with the Wegher-Thompson and Biondi references comprehends this limitation, as Wegher-Thompson already discloses an overlay compressing a user with straps (not shown, but described in paragraph [0018]) for attaching to support surface, and Biondi discloses the supporting surface is a theater bed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the overlay of modified Wegher-Thompson such that each restraint being configured with a length that is greater than that required to encircle the supporting surface when the patient is resting on that surface, and having a releasable coupling, such that with at least part of the patient's body between the flexible sheet material and the supporting surface, with the restraints extending underneath the theatre bed, and with the releasable couplings interconnected, the restraints restrain lateral edge portions of the flexible sheet material relative to the support surface, and such that a pressure differential between the internal region and the atmosphere surrounding the overlay, together with tensile forces generated in the restraints, compresses the patient between the posterior layer of the overlay and the supporting surface of the theatre bed, with a portion of the posterior layer conforming to the patient, as taught by Calvelage, for the purpose of allowing for adjustable fastening to different support surfaces as well as for allowing adjustable fastening to users of different sizes.
Claim(s) 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wegher-Thompson (US 2009/0177130) in view of Biondo (US 2002/0104535) and Calvelage (US 3,003,164), and further in view of Anderson (US 5,773,275).
Regarding claim 37, modified Wegher-Thompson discloses releasable couplings in the form of buckles (buckles 42 of Calvelage), and therefore does not disclose each of the releasable couplings is in the form of hook and loop fastener materials.
However, Anderson teaches (Fig. 4-5) restraints (ties 500 and 503) having releasable couplings (connectors 506,507) in the form of either buckles or hook and loop fastener materials (see Fig. 4-5 and Col. 4 lines 58-60 and Col. 5 lines 1-2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the releasable couplings of modified Wegher-Thompson to be hook and loop fasteners, as taught by Anderson, for the purpose of allowing for adjustable and releasable coupling of the straps together. Furthermore, as it has been held that simple substitution of one well-known coupling structure (buckles of Calvelage) with another well known coupling structure (hook and loop fasteners of Anderson) would provide the expected result of providing removable and adjustable coupling of the retainers together (see rationale for obviousness of a simple substitution of a well-known structure in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). See also MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
Regarding claim 38, modified Wegher-Thompson discloses wherein each restraint has a free section (free section of straps 26,28 of Calvelage), and the hook fastener material is provided on a portion of the free section of the respective restraint (see Fig. 5 of Anderson).
Claim 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wegher-Thompson (US 2009/0177130) in view of Biondo (US 2002/0104535), Calvelage (US 3,003,164), Anderson (US 5,773,275), and further in view of LaCroix (US 10,368,594).
Regarding claim 39, modified Wegher-Thompson discloses restrains with hook and loop fasteners, but does not disclose wherein each restraint is configured with the loop fastener material extending across the width of the flexible sheet material and on the external surface of the outer layer.
However, LaCroix teaches (Fig. 5-6) restraints (straps 120) configured with the loop fastener material extending across the width of the flexible sheet material (width of flexible sheet 102 comprised of loop material because grip 130, which attaches to sheet 102, is comprised of hook material, see Col. 7 lines 26-54) and on the external surface of the outer layer (see Fig. 5-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the restraints of modified Wegher-Thompson such that each restraint is configured with the loop fastener material extending across the width of the flexible sheet material and on the external surface of the outer layer, as taught by LaCroix, for the purpose of allowing for the straps to be detachably connected as well as to allow for the compression to be increased on a user’s body.
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wegher-Thompson (US 2009/0177130) in view of Biondo (US 2002/0104535), and Calvelage (US 3,003,164), and further in view of Roth (US 7,044,924).
Regarding claim 40, modified Wegher-Thompson discloses restraints, but does not disclose wherein each restraint includes a looped handle at a terminal end of the respective restraint.
However, Roth teaches (Fig. 2A-2B) a restraint having a looped handle (handle 222) at a respective terminal end.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the restraints of modified Wegher-Thompson such that each restraint includes a looped handle at a terminal end of the respective restraint., as taught by Roth, for the purpose of allowing for restraints to be easily tightened so that compression can be optimally performed.
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wegher-Thompson (US 2009/0177130) in view of Biondo (US 2002/0104535) and Calvelage (US 3,003,164), and further in view of Fraser (US 2013/0184623).
Regarding claim.42, modified Wegher-Thompson discloses at least one of the inner and outer layers comprises a woven material (paragraph [0016] Wegher-Thompson), but does not disclose a coating that reduces the porosity of the woven material.
However, Fraser teaches (Fig. 1a) a compression device comprising an inner layer and outer layer made of woven material (“fabrics” forming bladder, paragraph [0036]), wherein at least one of the fabrics include a coating that reduces porosity of the woven material (paragraph [0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of modified Wegher-Thompson to include a coating that reduces the porosity of the woven material, as taught by Fraser, for the purpose of preventing environmental damage as well as provide for water/fluid sealing of the device.
Claim 44 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wegher-Thompson (US 2009/0177130) in view of Biondo (US 2002/0104535) and Calvelage (US 3,003,164), and further in view of McGregor (US 2019/0374377).
Regarding claim 44, modern Wegher-Thompson discloses an inner layer, but does not disclose the inner layer includes one or more pleats that extend in the length direction of the overlay.
However, McGregor teaches (Fig. 1) a compression device comprising an inner layer (bladder 23) having one or more pleats (pleats 54) extending in length direction of overlay (see Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inner layer of modified Wegher-Thompson such that the inner layer includes one or more pleats that extend in the length direction of the overlay, as taught by McGregor, for the purpose of aiding in expansion of the device and improve compression therapy provided.
Response to Arguments
The following arguments filed 2/10/2026 have been considered but are not found to be persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that the fastening mechanisms 150,152 of Wegher-Thompson are different from that of fastener 144 (page 3 paragraph 5 Remarks), examiner has decided to use a different component for the second fastener for the present rejection (releasable fastener that connects edges 136 and 134, see paragraph [0017] Wegher-Thompson), therefore applicant’s arguments regarding this feature are moot.
Regarding combination of Wegher-Thompson and Biondo, applicant argued (page 4 paragraph 10 and page 5 paragraph 1-2 Remarks) that examiner’s combination disregards the fact that the apparatus of Wegher-Thompson is constructed with a cover joined to the base along the side edges to form a hinge, and examiner’s modification treats the cover as a separate component of the base (due to the cover having a part integral to the base).
Examiner respectfully disagrees and directs applicant to paragraph [0017] of Wegher-Thompson, which discloses an alternative embodiment (which is used by examiner in the rejection above) in which the hinge connection is instead a releasable attachment similar to that of the fastener 144 (i.e. hook and loop, zipper, etc). Thus, examiner contends that because the cover and base are not integrally attached at any point in this embodiment that it would be reasonable to treat them as separate components.
Applicant further argued (page 5 paragraph 2 Remarks) that Wegher-Thompson in view of Biondo would not be able to fulfill the function that Wegher-Thompson was designed to provide, that being a full body squeeze that is achieved by cooperative inflation of both base and cover of person’s body.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant is first reminded that Biondo reference is used merely to teach the supporting surface of the invention to be that of a theater bed, for the purpose of improving portability and so device can be used in a hospital setting. Wegher-Thompson already discloses this “full body squeeze” and the structures required to achieve this function. In the new grounds of rejection, examiner has chosen to utilize embodiment in Figs. 14-15 of Biondo, where the apparatus is integrated into a theater bed (as opposed to just being placed atop). The supporting surface formed in the theater bed includes a bladder 162 that provides for pressure against a user while cover is placed atop patient. While Biondo discloses the bladder provides a different function than that Wegher-Thompson, and thus does not disclose a “full body squeeze”, applicant is reminded that the bladder and function of bladder of Biondo is not used as part of the teaching as applicant appears to allege. The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Applicant further argued (page 5 paragraph 4 Remarks) that securing the apparatus to a hospital bed would be contrary to the fundamental operating principle of Biondo (simplifying patient rotation between supine and prone positions), as anchoring the apparatus to a hospital bed would frustrate, rather than advance this objective.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant is reminded that the primary reference in this rejection is Wegher-Thompson, not Biondo. Biondo reference is used merely to teach the supporting surface of the invention to be that of a theater bed, for the purpose of improving portability and so device can be used in a hospital setting. Furthermore, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Applicant further argued (page 5 paragraph 5-6 Remarks) that the supporting rationale used by examiner (“improving portability of the device and allowing for the device to be used in a hospital setting”)is not supported by either reference, as Wegher-Thompson is expressly directed to addressing immobility of prior apparatus by providing a device that is readily movably when not in use, and a patient at risk of bed sores addressed by Biondo would not benefit from full body squeeze therapy that is central to the Wegher-Thompson reference.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Examiner contends that the fact that Wegher-Thompson aims to address immobility by allowing for a device that is readily movable when not in use actually makes the combination with Biondo more obvious, as making the supporting surface that of a theatre bed would further improve portability since patient would not be required to move off of the device when device is not in use so that both patient and device can be transported at same time, and the mobility of the device in general would be improved because theatre beds have wheels so a user would not need to fully deflate and carry the device, merely a user can move the device using the wheels of a theatre bed. Furthermore, incorporating device into a theater bed would allow for device to be used in a hospital setting which improves therapeutic outcome (i.e. to help calm patient before medical procedure or during panic episode).
Regarding the Calvelage reference, applicant argued (page 6 paragraph 2 Remarks) that Calvelage is non-analogous art, because it is not in the same field of endeavor as Wegher-Thompson and Biondo references due to being directed to an infant bed for a vehicle seat, and is not pertinent to the problems addressed in claimed invention, much less Wegher-Thompson and Biondo.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant is reminded that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). The examiner utilizes Calvelage as a teaching reference to modify the restraints of Wegher-Thompson for the purpose of allowing for adjustable fastening to different support surfaces as well as for allowing adjustable fastening to users of different sizes. The entirety of Calvelage is not incorporated into that of Wegher-Thompson.
In response to applicant's argument that Calvelage is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Calvelage is directed to the particular problem with which inventor was concerned, that being securing an overlay to a support surface so that a user is secured to the support surface during use of the apparatus.
Applicant argued (page 6 paragraph 3 Remarks) that Calvelage teaches away from the claimed invention because Calvelage expressly seeks to provide an infant occupant with a degree of freedom of movement, while preventing dislodgement through anchoring of bed to a car seat, whereas the claimed invention is expressly directed to the controlled restraint and compression of a patient’s body relative to a supporting surface, thus the reference promotes freedom of movement whereas the claimed invention discourages it.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to Applicant' s argument that Calvelage teaches away, it is noted that a teaching away requires a reference to actually criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage investigation into the claimed solution. See In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2004). It has been further instructed that the Examiner will not read into a reference a teaching away from a process where no such language exists. See DyStar Textilfarben GmbH & Co. Deutschland KG v. C.H. Patrick Co., 464 F.3d 1356, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2006). In this case, nothing in Wegher-Thompson criticizes or discourages changing the fasteners of Wegher-Thompson to be straps as taught by Calvelage, and thus there is no teaching away.
Applicant is reminded that the examiner utilizes Calvelage as a teaching reference to modify the restraints of Wegher-Thompson for the purpose of allowing for adjustable fastening to different support surfaces as well as for allowing adjustable fastening to users of different sizes. The entirety of Calvelage is not incorporated into that of Wegher-Thompson. Furthermore, there is no disclosure in Calvelage that the straps 26,28 provide an infant occupant with a degree of freedom of movement. The straps are used to prevent dislodgement through anchoring of bed to a car seat as alluded by applicant, which is compatible with the goals of Wegher-Thompson.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW R MOON whose telephone number is (571)272-2554. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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.
/MATTHEW R MOON/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785