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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/15/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments, filed 05/15/2026, has been entered, claims 63-83 remain pending.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, 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.
Claim(s) 63-67, 75-77 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Keefe et al. (US20110258780), hereafter O’keefe, in view of Heilner (US4905329), hereafter Heilner.
Regarding Claim 63, O’keefe discloses a person support system (Fig. 1, par. 0050, a hospital bed 10), comprising: a person support surface (par. 0050, mattress 14, “a mattress assembly 14 (see FIG. 16) coupled to the frame. Illustratively, mattress assembly 14 is a patient-support surface”), including: a surface foundation layer (See Fig. A) including a proximal end, and a distal end (See Fig. A below), wherein the surface foundation layer extends between the proximal end and the distal end along a longitudinal axis (See Fig. A); a foot bladder layer (See Fig. A, foot structure 96) positioned proximally adjacent to the surface foundation layer (See Fig. A), the foot bladder layer comprising a plurality of tube bladders (Fig. 12, 13, rotation structures 102 and 103; par. 0063) and arranged in the foot bladder layer between one or more raft layers (Fig. 11, 12, collapse bladders 274, retract bladders 276, heel bladders 278; the bladders form a raft layer above the tube bladders) and a substrate in a system vertical direction (See Fig. A below).
O’keefe is silent on the plurality of tube bladders are hingedly coupled to one another via articulating hinges to define one or more voids therebetween through the foot bladder layer between the one or more raft layers and the substrate.
However, Heilner teaches an inflatable bladder system (Fig. 1), comprising of a plurality of tube bladders (Fig. 1 tubes 20 and 22), wherein the plurality of tube bladders are hingedly coupled to one another via articulating hinges to define one or more voids (See Fig. 2, tube bladders 20 and 22 are coupled by restrictive means 25, allowing hinged connection between the bladders; the tube bladders defines a void 28 through the bladders). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known system of O’keefe, and modify the tube bladders with the tube bladders of Heilner, to define one or more voids therebetween in the space between the one or more raft layers and the substrate for elevating the patient at an angle as taught by Heilner (Heilner, col. 2 line 7-23).
PNG
media_image1.png
618
805
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. A, Adapted from O’keefe Fig. 11
Regarding Claim 64, the modified O’keefe discloses the system of claim 63, wherein the person support surface further includes: a top encasement portion (O’keefe, Fig. 1, coverlet 28) and a bottom encasement portion (O’keefe, par. 0057, lower mattress cover 282); a blower subassembly (O’keefe, Fig. 16, assembly within element 26); a turn assist bladder layer (O’keefe, Fig. 12, par. 0062, left and right torso rotation structure 98, 99); a support cushion layer (O’keefe, Fig. 12, par. 0060, torso structure 90, seat structure 93, and thigh structure 92), wherein the turn assist bladder layer and the support cushion layer are positioned between the first lateral side bolster and the second lateral side bolster of the surface foundation layer (O’keefe, See Fig. 12, the turn assist bladder and support cushion layer are between the lateral side bolsters); and a microclimate management (MCM) layer (O’keefe, Fig. 6, intermediate layer 40; see par. 0052-0053, the intermediate layer provides airflow to cool the patient) positioned over the surface foundation layer, the turn assist bladder layer, the support cushion layer, and the foot bladder layer (O’keefe, Fig. 6 shows layer 40 positioned over 30, wherein 30 is the upper portion of the coverlet 28, par. 0052; Fig. 10 further shows 28 positioned over element 70, which consists of all the layers as claimed, shown in Fig. 11), wherein the blower subassembly is fluidly coupled to the MCM layer such that air is supplied by the blower subassembly to the MCM layer (O’keefe, par. 0052-0053); wherein the top encasement portion is removably coupled to the bottom encasement portion (O’keefe, par. 0057, “Coverlet 28 is configured to be attached to a mattress cover through a zipper (not shown) which is positioned about the perimeter of the lower mattress cover 282”), to enclose the blower subassembly, the surface foundation layer, the turn assist bladder layer, the support cushion layer, the foot bladder layer, and the MCM layer within the person support surface (O’keefe, See Fig. 1, 10, the top and bottom encasement portion encloses all the layers; Fig. 10-13 shows the conduits portion of the blower subassembly is enclosed by the encasement portions, Fig. 17 further shows the conduits are enclosed by the mattress 24 which has outer coverlet 28).
Regarding Claim 65, the modified O’keefe discloses the system of claim 64, wherein the person support surface further includes: a working cushion layer positioned between the first lateral side bolster and the second lateral side bolster of the surface foundation layer (O’keefe, par. 0062, working cushions 94 and 95; See Fig. 12, the working cushion layer is between the lateral side bolsters), wherein the MCM layer is positioned over the working cushion layer, and wherein the top encasement portion is removably coupled to the bottom encasement portion (O’keefe, par. 0057, “Coverlet 28 is configured to be attached to a mattress cover through a zipper (not shown) which is positioned about the perimeter of the lower mattress cover 282”) to further enclose the working cushion layer within the person support surface (O’keefe, See Fig. 1, 6, 10).
Regarding Claim 66, the modified O’keefe discloses the system of claim 64, wherein the support cushion layer includes a plurality of air tubes oriented transverse to the longitudinal axis (O’keefe, par. 0060, “A torso structure 90 also illustratively includes a series of interconnected air cells forming an inflatable volume to support the torso of a patient on structure 70 of mattress 24. A seat structure 93 is positioned in the thigh area 76 and includes a series of interconnected cells to support the seat of a patient on the structure 70. A thigh structure 92 is positioned in the thigh area 76 and includes a series of interconnected air cells to support the thigh area of a patient on the structure 70”; Fig. 10 shows the air tubes transverse to the longitudinal axis), wherein a first portion of the plurality of air tubes are cylindrically shaped (O’keefe, See Fig. 10, section 90 is cylindrically shaped), and wherein a second portion of the plurality of air tubes are shaped to conform to a profile of the surface foundation layer (See Fig. A above, element 90, 92, 93 fits the shape of the surface foundation layer).
Regarding Claim 67, the modified O’keefe discloses the system of claim 66, wherein the top encasement portion includes an enclosure that retains the MCM layer in contact with a surface of the top encasement portion (O’keefe, par. 0052, “an upper portion 30 of the coverlet 28… Upper portion 30 includes an upper layer 36 and a lower layer 38”; See Fig. 4, enclosure made by element 36 and 38 retains the MCM layer, upper portion 30 is in contact with top encasement portion 28).
Regarding Claim 75, O’keefe discloses a person support surface (par. 0050, mattress 14, “a mattress assembly 14 (see FIG. 16) coupled to the frame. Illustratively, mattress assembly 14 is a patient-support surface”), including: a microclimate management (MCM) air source (Fig. 16, par. 0052, a source of pressurized air); a surface foundation layer (See Fig. A) including a proximal end, and a distal end (See Fig. A), wherein the surface foundation layer extends between the proximal end and the distal end along a longitudinal axis (See Fig. A); a plurality of person support surface layers disposed on the surface foundation layer (par. 0062, working cushions 94 and 95; Fig. 12, par. 0062, left and right torso rotation structure 98, 99); a foot bladder layer (See Fig. A, foot structure 96) positioned proximally adjacent to the surface foundation layer (See Fig. A), the foot bladder layer comprising a plurality of tube bladders (Fig. 12, 13, rotation structures 102 and 103) arranged in the foot bladder layer between one or more raft layers (Fig. 11, 12, collapse bladders 274, retract bladders 276, heel bladders 278; the bladders form a raft layer above the tube bladders) and a substrate in a system vertical direction (See Fig. A),
O’keefe is silent on the plurality of tube bladders are hingedly coupled to one another via articulating hinges.
O’keefe is silent on the plurality of tube bladders are hingedly coupled to one another via articulating hinges to define one or more voids therebetween through the foot bladder layer between the one or more raft layers and the substrate.
However, Heilner teaches an inflatable bladder system (Fig. 1), comprising of a plurality of tube bladders (Fig. 1 tubes 20 and 22), wherein the plurality of tube bladders are hingedly coupled to one another via articulating hinges to define one or more voids (See Fig. 2, tube bladders 20 and 22 are coupled by restrictive means 25, allowing hinged connection between the bladders; the tube bladders defines a void 28 through the bladders). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known system of O’keefe, and modify the tube bladders with the tube bladders of Heilner, to define one or more voids therebetween in the space between the one or more raft layers and the substrate for elevating the patient at an angle as taught by Heilner (Heilner, col. 2 line 7-23).
The modified O’keefe further discloses the plurality of tube bladders arranged via the articulating hinges to define one or more voids therebetween in the space between the one or more raft layers and the substrate (See Fig. A; par. 0064, foot support 108); a MCM layer (Fig. 6, intermediate layer 40; see par. 0052-0053, the intermediate layer provides airflow to cool the patient) positioned over the surface foundation layer, the turn assist bladder layer, the support cushion layer, and the foot bladder layer (Fig. 6 shows layer 40 positioned over 30, wherein 30 is the upper portion of the coverlet 28, par. 0052; Fig. 10 further shows 28 positioned over element 70, which consists of all the layers as claimed, shown in Fig. 11), wherein the MCM air source is fluidly coupled to the MCM layer such that air is supplied by the MCM air source to the MCM layer (par. 0052-0053).
Regarding Claim 76, the modified O’keefe discloses the person support surface of claim 75, wherein the plurality of person support surface layers includes one or more than one of a turn assist bladder layer, a support cushion layer, a working cushion layer, a percussion and vibration bladder layer, and an advanced articulation bladder layer (O’keefe, par. 0062, working cushions 94 and 95; See Fig. 12, the working cushion layer is between the lateral side bolsters; Fig. 12, par. 0062, left and right torso rotation structure 98, 99).
Regarding Claim 77, the modified O’keefe discloses the person support surface of claim 75, further comprising a top encasement portion (O’keefe, Fig. 1, coverlet 28), wherein the top encasement portion includes an enclosure retaining the MCM layer in contact with a surface of the top encasement portion (O’keefe, par. 0052, “an upper portion 30 of the coverlet 28… Upper portion 30 includes an upper layer 36 and a lower layer 38”; See Fig. 4, enclosure made by element 36 and 38 retains the MCM layer, upper portion 30 is in contact with top encasement portion 28).
Claim(s) 68, 78 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’keefe, in view of Heilner, in view of Cassidy (US6206654), hereafter Cassidy.
Regarding Claim 68, the modified O’keefe discloses the system of claim 64, wherein the blower subassembly comprises: a blower (O’keefe, Fig. 16, blower 400), but does not specifically disclose a blower enclosure housing the blower.
However, Cassidy teaches a blower assembly (Fig. 2, assembly 10), comprising of a blower (Fig. 2, blower 60), and a control module (Fig. 2, assembly 80), further comprising of a blower enclosure (Fig. 2, housing 32 and surround 100) housing the blower and the control module. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known system of O’keefe, with the enclosure of Cassidy, for structural support, damp vibration, and reduce noise as taught by Cassidy (Cassidy, col. 2, line 9-19).
The modified O’keefe further discloses the blower produces a continuous flow rate of air for the MCM layer (O’keefe, Fig. 7, 8, par. 0053, “Upper portion 30 further includes an intermediate layer 40 separating upper layer 36 and lower layer 38 to provide a flow path for the pressurized air”); one or more than one fluid inlet coupled to the blower enclosure (See Fig. B below), wherein the one or more than one fluid inlet is located on the person support surface to interface with one or more than one gap defined on one or more than one person support apparatus (O’keefe, par. 0065, “communicates with various bladders in mattress 24 through a series of interfaces which include one or more conduits communicating to the various bladders”; See Fig. B below, the interface communicates fluidly with the person support apparatus, therefore, one or more gaps or openings inherently exists between the interface and the apparatus); and one or more than one fluid supply tube (O’keefe, Fig. 17, conduits 318, 320), wherein a first end of each fluid supply tube is coupled to the blower enclosure and a second end of each fluid supply tube is coupled to the MCM layer (O’keefe, par. 0052, “The pressurized air is routed and controlled by the control system 26 and introduced into an upper portion 30 of the coverlet 28”; par. 0066, “Conduits 318 and 320 are connected to the two entry ports 32 of coverlet 28”; see Fig. 4, 5, 7, 8).
PNG
media_image2.png
436
649
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. B, Adapted from O’keefe Fig. 16
Regarding Claim 78, the modified O’keefe discloses the person support surface of claim 75, wherein the MCM air source includes a blower subassembly (O’keefe, Fig. 16, assembly within element 26) comprising a blower (O’keefe, Fig. 16, blower 400), but does not specifically disclose a blower enclosure housing the blower.
However, Cassidy teaches a blower assembly (Fig. 2, assembly 10), comprising of a blower (Fig. 2, blower 60), and a control module (Fig. 2, assembly 80), further comprising of a blower enclosure (Fig. 2, housing 32 and surround 100) housing the blower and the control module. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known system of O’keefe, with the enclosure of Cassidy, for structural support, damp vibration, and reduce noise as taught by Cassidy (Cassidy, col. 2, line 9-19).
The modified O’keefe further discloses the blower produces a continuous flow rate of air for the MCM layer (O’keefe, Fig. 7, 8, par. 0053, “Upper portion 30 further includes an intermediate layer 40 separating upper layer 36 and lower layer 38 to provide a flow path for the pressurized air”); one or more than one fluid inlet coupled to the blower enclosure (See Fig. B), wherein the one or more than one fluid inlet is located on the person support surface to interface with one or more than one gap defined on one or more than one person support apparatus (O’keefe, par. 0065, “communicates with various bladders in mattress 24 through a series of interfaces which include one or more conduits communicating to the various bladders”; See Fig. B, the interface communicates fluidly with the person support apparatus, therefore, one or more gaps or openings inherently exists between the interface and the apparatus); and one or more than one fluid supply tube (O’keefe, Fig. 17, conduits 318, 320), wherein a first end of each fluid supply tube is coupled to the blower enclosure and a second end of each fluid supply tube is coupled to the MCM layer (O’keefe, par. 0052, “The pressurized air is routed and controlled by the control system 26 and introduced into an upper portion 30 of the coverlet 28”; par. 0066, “Conduits 318 and 320 are connected to the two entry ports 32 of coverlet 28”; see Fig. 4, 5, 7, 8).
Claim(s) 70, 79 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’keefe, in view of Heilner, in view of Cassidy, further in view of Clayman et al. (US5613254).
Regarding Claim 70, the modified O’keefe discloses the system of claim 68, wherein the one or more than one fluid supply tube includes a first fluid supply tube and a second fluid supply tube (O’keefe, Fig. 17, conduits 318, 320), wherein the blower enclosure is positioned in a proximal portion of the person support surface (Examiner Notes: See Fig. 14, par. 0070, head deck section is located at the proximal end, see Fig. 15, control assembly 402 is coupled to section 270; see Fig. 16 and par. 0065, the blower is coupled to assembly 402, therefore, the blower enclosure is positioned in a proximal portion).
The modified O’keefe does not specifically disclose the first fluid supply tube and the second fluid supply tube is routed to define a radiolucent window in a distal portion of the person support surface for fluoroscopy procedures.
However, Clayman further teaches a person support surface for fluoroscopy (Fig. 1, Abstract), comprising of tubes routed along lateral sides of the surface (Fig. 1, tubes 46a, 46b), to define a radiolucent window of the person support surface for fluoroscopy procedures (col. 4, line 26-37; Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to have the tubes of O’keefe to be routed to define a radiolucent window in a distal portion (See O’keefe, Fig. 12, 14, the tubes are in a distal portion of the surface) of the person support surface for fluoroscopy procedures to avoid interference with fluoroscopy as taught by Clayman (Clayman, col. 1, line 55 – col. 2, line 16).
Regarding Claim 79, the modified O’keefe discloses the system of claim 68, wherein the one or more than one fluid supply tube includes a first fluid supply tube and a second fluid supply tube (O’keefe, Fig. 17, conduits 318, 320), wherein the blower enclosure is positioned in a proximal portion of the person support surface (Examiner Notes: See Fig. 14, par. 0070, head deck section is located at the proximal end, see Fig. 15, control assembly 402 is coupled to section 270; see Fig. 16 and par. 0065, the blower is coupled to assembly 402, therefore, the blower enclosure is positioned in a proximal portion).
The modified O’keefe does not specifically disclose the first fluid supply tube and the second fluid supply tube is routed to define a radiolucent window in a distal portion of the person support surface for fluoroscopy procedures.
However, Clayman further teaches a person support surface for fluoroscopy (Fig. 1, Abstract), comprising of tubes routed along lateral sides of the surface (Fig. 1, tubes 46a, 46b), to define a radiolucent window of the person support surface for fluoroscopy procedures (col. 4, line 26-37; Fig. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to have the tubes of O’keefe to be routed to define a radiolucent window in a distal portion (See O’keefe, Fig. 12, 14, the tubes are in a distal portion of the surface) of the person support surface for fluoroscopy procedures to avoid interference with fluoroscopy as taught by Clayman (Clayman, col. 1, line 55 – col. 2, line 16).
Claim(s) 71, 72 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’keefe, in view of Heilner, in view of Cassidy, further in view of Brykalski et al. (US20180140489), hereafter Brykalski.
Regarding Claim 71, the modified O’keefe discloses The system of claim 68, wherein the MCM layer comprises an internal MCM sheet (O’keefe, Fig. 6, sheet defined by 40) that defines a seat MCM portion (O’keefe, Fig. 1, 4, 6, par. 0052, the MCM layer extends along the entire length of the apparatus, therefore, it comprises a seat MCM portion), wherein the seat MCM portion corresponds to a seat section (O’keefe, Fig. 1, a seat section is shown) of one or more than one person support apparatus (O’keefe, See Fig. 1, 6, 10, 12, 13, the seat MCM portion corresponds to a seat section).
O’keefe is silent on wherein an array of holes is defined in the seat MCM portion to uniformly distribute the continuous flow rate of air across a surface of the seat MCM portion.
However, Brykalski teaches an MCM sheet for a person support system (Fig. 1, par. 0072, “a conditioner mat 20 or topper member adapted to be attached to or otherwise positioned on top of a medical bed 8”), that defines a seat MCM portion (Fig. 1, the middle section defines a seat portion), wherein an array of holes is defined in the seat MCM portion to uniformly distribute the continuous flow rate of air across a surface of the seat MCM portion (Fig. 1, par. 0078, openings 24). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known person support system of O’keefe, with the MCM sheet of Brykalski, to have an array of holes to direct airflow as desired or required as taught by Brykalski (Brykalski, par. 0078, 0083).
Regarding Claim 72, the modified O’keefe discloses the system of claim 71, wherein the internal MCM sheet further defines a head MCM portion corresponding to a head section of the one or more than one person support apparatus (O’keefe, Fig. 1, 4, 6, a head portion is shown and the MCM layer extends along the entire length, therefore defining a head portion), and wherein the seat MCM portion and the head MCM portion of the MCM layer are configured such that air continuously flows from the seat MCM portion across the head MCM portion toward a vent (O’keefe, Fig. 7, 8, par. 0052, exhaust 34) defined in a distal portion of the MCM layer (O’keefe, par. 0052, “Upper portion 30 is configured to distribute the pressurized air as it flows from entry fittings 32 to an exhaust 34”).
Claim(s) 80, 82 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’keefe, in view of Heilner, in view of Brykalski.
Regarding Claim 80, the modified O’keefe discloses the person support surface of claim 75, wherein the MCM layer comprises an internal MCM sheet (O’keefe, Fig. 6, sheet defined by 40) that defines a seat MCM portion (O’keefe, Fig. 1, 4, 6, par. 0052, the MCM layer extends along the entire length of the apparatus, therefore, it comprises a seat MCM portion), wherein the seat MCM portion corresponds to a seat section (O’keefe, Fig. 1, a seat section is shown) of one or more than one person support apparatus (O’keefe, See Fig. 1, 6, 10, 12, 13, the seat MCM portion corresponds to a seat section).
O’keefe is silent on wherein an array of holes is defined in the seat MCM portion to uniformly distribute the continuous flow rate of air across a surface of the seat MCM portion.
However, Brykalski teaches an MCM sheet for a person support system (Fig. 1, par. 0072, “a conditioner mat 20 or topper member adapted to be attached to or otherwise positioned on top of a medical bed 8”), that defines a seat MCM portion (Fig. 1, the middle section defines a seat portion), wherein an array of holes is defined in the seat MCM portion to uniformly distribute the continuous flow rate of air across a surface of the seat MCM portion (Fig. 1, par. 0078, openings 24). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known person support system of O’keefe, with the MCM sheet of Brykalski, to have an array of holes to direct airflow as desired or required as taught by Brykalski (Brykalski, par. 0078, 0083).
Regarding Claim 82, the modified O’keefe discloses the person support surface of claim 80, wherein the internal MCM sheet further defines a head MCM portion corresponding to a head section of the one or more than one person support apparatus (O’keefe, Fig. 1, 4, 6, a head portion is shown and the MCM layer extends along the entire length, therefore defining a head portion), and wherein the seat MCM portion and the head MCM portion of the MCM layer are configured such that air continuously flows from the seat MCM portion across the head MCM portion toward a vent (O’keefe, Fig. 7, 8, par. 0052, exhaust 34) defined in a distal portion of the MCM layer (O’keefe, par. 0052, “Upper portion 30 is configured to distribute the pressurized air as it flows from entry fittings 32 to an exhaust 34”).
Claim(s) 81 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’keefe, in view of Heilner, in view of Brykalski, further in view of Morgan et al. (US20140090178), hereafter Morgan.
Regarding Claim 81, the modified O’keefe discloses the person support surface of claim 80, wherein the internal MCM sheet further defines a foot MCM portion corresponding to a foot section of the one or more than one person support apparatus (O’keefe, Fig. 1, 4, 6, par. 0052, the MCM layer extends along the entire length of the apparatus, therefore, it comprises a foot MCM portion), but is silent on wherein the foot MCM portion includes a spacer that is relatively softer than a spacer associated with the seat MCM portion to reduce a subject's heel interface pressure.
However, Morgan teaches a person support surface (Fig. 1, mattress 14), comprising of a seating portion (See Fig. 1, Fig. 3, the middle portion of the mattress), and a foot portion (Fig. 1, Fig 3, the portion close to foot end 24), wherein the foot portion includes a spacer that is relatively softer than a spacer associated with the seat portion to reduce a subject's heel interface pressure (par. 0047, “Generally the layers 32 will each have a different firmness… Positioning the firm layer in the middle of mattress 14…”; par. 0048, “The layers 34 under the patient's heel will desirably each provide low IFD values so as to reduce point pressures on the patient's heel.”; the firm layer is position at the seat portion and a softer layer is positioned at the heel). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to further modify the known system of O’keefe, with the spacer of Morgan, to reduce heel pressure for medical uses such as preventing pressure ulcers as taught by Morgan (Morgan, par. 0005).
Claim(s) 73, 74, 83 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’keefe, in view of Heilner, in view of Caminade et al. (US20080095322), hereafter Caminade.
Regarding Claim 73, the modified O’keefe discloses the system of claim 64, but is silent on wherein a sleeve is defined on a surface of the top encasement portion, wherein the sleeve is positioned to correspond with at least one of a head section, a seat section, or a foot section of one or more than one person support apparatus, and wherein the sleeve is accessible to place a medical device under a subject positioned on the person support surface.
However, Caminade teaches a person support surface (surface shown in Fig. 1), comprising of a top encasement portion (Fig. 1, protective cover 1), wherein a sleeve is defined on a surface of the top encasement portion (Fig. 1, par. 0041, tubular sheath 3), wherein the sleeve is positioned to correspond with at least one of a head section, a seat section, or a foot section of one or more than one person support apparatus (Fig. 2 shows the sleeve positioned to correspond with a head and seat section), and wherein the sleeve is accessible to place a medical device under a subject positioned on the person support surface (par. 0046, “the pocket 3 forms a sheath via which radiography cassettes 5 can be translated, from one opening to the other, when the opening/closing slide devices 3b are open”). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known system of O’keefe, with the sleeve of Caminade, to allow convenient radiography treatment on the patient as taught by Caminade (Caminade, par. 0004).
Regarding Claim 74, O’keefe discloses the system of claim 64, wherein the top encasement portion is fluid resistant and fluid proof (par. 0012).
O’keefe is silent on wherein the top encasement portion includes one or more than one fluid flap extending over one or more than one interlocking device such that the person support surface is one of fluid-resistant or fluid- proof.
However, Caminade teaches a person support surface (surface shown in Fig. 1), comprising of a top encasement portion (Fig. 1, protective cover 1), wherein the top encasement portion includes one or more than one fluid flap (Fig. 3, a protective rebate 3c) extending over one or more than one interlocking device (Fig. 3, opening/closing slide devices 3b, opening/closing slide device 6) such that the person support surface is one of fluid-resistant or fluid- proof (par. 0042, 0044;). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known system of O’keefe, with the fluid flap of Caminade, to protect the interior of the top encasement portion from liquid or contamination as taught by Caminade (Caminade, par. 0030).
Regarding Claim 83, the modified O’keefe discloses The person support surface of claim 75, further comprising a top encasement portion (O’keefe, Fig. 1, coverlet 28), but is silent on wherein a sleeve is defined on a surface of the top encasement portion and is positioned to correspond with at least one of a head section, a seat section, or a foot section of one or more than one person support apparatus, and wherein the sleeve is accessible to place a medical device under a subject positioned on the person support surface.
However, Caminade teaches a person support surface (surface shown in Fig. 1), comprising of a top encasement portion (Fig. 1, protective cover 1), wherein a sleeve is defined on a surface of the top encasement portion (Fig. 1, par. 0041, tubular sheath 3), wherein the sleeve is positioned to correspond with at least one of a head section, a seat section, or a foot section of one or more than one person support apparatus (Fig. 2 shows the sleeve positioned to correspond with a head and seat section), and wherein the sleeve is accessible to place a medical device under a subject positioned on the person support surface (par. 0046, “the pocket 3 forms a sheath via which radiography cassettes 5 can be translated, from one opening to the other, when the opening/closing slide devices 3b are open”). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known system of O’keefe, with the sleeve of Caminade, to allow convenient radiography treatment on the patient as taught by Caminade (Caminade, par. 0004).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks, filed 05/15/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Heilner.
Specifically, Heilner teaches a plurality of tuber bladders coupled to one another via articulating hinges, the tube bladders defining a void through the bladder layer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US3795021 teaches a tube bladder layer defining a quadrilateral void;
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRIS HANYU GONG whose telephone number is (703)756-5898. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4:30.
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, Brandy Lee can be reached at 571-270-7410. 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.
/KRIS HANYU GONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/BRANDY S LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights