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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 9-10 and 12 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because the claims depend upon cancelled claim 8. Accordingly, the claims 9-10 and 12 have not been further treated on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 13-14, 16, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. No. 7,836,890 to Walterman
Claim 1 Walterman discloses a table defined by a patient couch and breast board system comprising a base structure; a top surface (10,110) located atop the base structure (fig. 5); and removable stable stops defined by a handle and stand (30,44), wherein the top surface comprises a body portion and a plurality of receiving holes (23,33), wherein a first receiving hole of the plurality of receiving holes is located on a first side of the body portion, wherein a second receiving hole of the plurality of receiving holes is located on a second side of the body portion opposite the first side of the body portion, wherein the first receiving hole and the second receiving hole are at least approximately symmetrical across a center line of the body portion between the first side of the body portion and the second side of the body portion (fig. 1 & 6), wherein removable stable stops are capable of being inserted into any of the plurality receiving holes, wherein the one or more removable stable stops each comprise a peg portion (32,58) that fits into any of the plurality of receiving holes and a handle portion (36,38,42) that extends above the top surface of the tempering table when the peg portion is inserted into any of the plurality of receiving holes, and wherein the one or more stable stops each further comprise an attachment receiver defined by retention members (34,57) attached to the peg portion such that the attachment receiver extends below the top surface of the tempering table when the peg portion is inserted into any of the plurality of receiving holes.
Claim 2 Walterman discloses the table, wherein the first receiving hole is included in a first subgroup of receiving holes of the plurality of receiving holes, wherein the second receiving hole is included in a second subgroup of receiving holes of the plurality of receiving holes distinct from the first subgroup of receiving holes, and wherein each receiving hole in the first subgroup of receiving holes is at least approximately symmetrical with a corresponding receiving hole in the second subgroup of receiving holes across the center line of the body portion between the side of the body portion and the second side of the body portion (fig. 1 & 6).
Claim 3, Walterman discloses the table wherein each receiving hole in the first subgroup of receiving holes is symmetrical with the corresponding receiving hole in the second subgroup of receiving holes across the center line of the body portion between the side of the body portion and the second side of the body portion (fig. 1 & 6).
Claim 4, Walterman the table wherein a third receiving hole of the plurality of receiving holes is located approximately along the center line of the body portion between the first side of the body portion and the second side of the body portion (fig. 1 & 6).
Claim 5, Walterman discloses the table further comprising receivers located in the body portion of the top surface (fig. 1 & 6).
9-10Claim 13, Walterman discloses the table further comprising an attachment receiver defined by a support portion (14,102) attached to an underside of the top surface of the tempering table.
Claim 14, Walterman discloses the table further comprising a removable block that comprises one or more pegs (26,28) that fit into any of the plurality of receiving holes.
Claim 16, Walterman discloses the table further comprising an arm rests 30.
Claim 19, Walterman discloses all of the structural limitations as stated above, and further comprising a handle portion 30 that extends above the top surface when a peg portion 32 is inserted into any of the plurality of receiving holes, and
wherein the handle portion is a split handle (fig. 2A).
Claim 20, Walterman discloses the table wherein the split handle is capable of receiving a tool that sits inside the split handle.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set 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) 6 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. No. 7,836,890 to Walterman in view of U.S. Pat. No. 8,819,897 to Day et al.
Claim 6, Walterman discloses the table (fig. 5), but is silent to a cranial receiver. Day discloses a cranial receiver defined by a head section 40 comprising an indent defined by a cutout 48 along the center line of the body portion between the first side of the body portion and the second side of the body portion and near a third side of the body portion. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the cranial receiver disclosed in Day with the top surface of Walterman with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have allowed placing a patient in a prone position.
Claim 15, Walterman discloses the top surface system, but is silent to an adjustable base. Day discloses an adjustable base 3A capable of comprising a mechanical screw drive, fluid actuators (col. 4 lines 16-56). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the adjustable base in Day with the top surface system of Walterman with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have allowed adjusting the table between raised and lowered positions.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,360,392 to McCoy discloses a support device.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,216,383 to Heinl discloses a support device.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FREDRICK C CONLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-7040. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:30pm.
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, Justin C. Mikowski can be reached on (571) 272-8525. 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.
/FREDRICK C CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673