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 Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant's arguments filed 04/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The inclusion of supplementary reference as taught by Torres (US 20190053751 A1 – hereinafter Torres) teaches a similar mattress system comprising actuators in the form of vibrational motors (Torres abstract) and further teaches a plurality of pressure sensors (Torres figure 2, pressure sensors 2) used to measure pressure distribution applied by the patient across different portions of the mattress, while a control unit is used to analyze the pressure distribution data measured by the plurality of pressure sensors to identify regions of concentrated pressure, and selectively drives at least some of the plurality of actuators based on the identified regions of concentrated pressure, as stated in the rejection below.
Regarding claim 5, it is reminded that "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original), see MPEP 2114. A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. In other words, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In the instant case, since the reference as taught by Hayes (US 20160022218 A1), which similarly teaches a mattress system, and teaches all of the structural limitations as claimed in claim 5 (including the weight, pressure, temperature, ECG, and heartbeat sensors), it is considered that the structural elements as taught by Hayes are inherently capable of performing their intended use limitations, including for example, sensing electrocardiogram information by the ECG sensor before and after the patient receives treatments on the smart mattress as claimed. Therefore, the claim 5 rejection is maintained.
Regarding claims 6-7, claim 6 requires setting a predetermined range of biometric signal data measured by the at least one sensor and pressure data measured by pressure sensor as normal range data, and generation of data out of the normal range data as event data. The newly incorporated reference Torres (US 20190053751 A1) teaches the control part setting data within a predetermined range of biometric signal data measured by the at least one sensor and pressure data measured by the pressure sensor as normal range data (Torres paragraph 0013 using temperature and pressure sensor thresholds as stated in the rejection below). The reference as taught by Nunome (US 20020196148 A1 – hereinafter Nunome) also uses biometric data in the form of blood pressure data, as well as pressure data from pressure sensors (as stated in the rejection below) to set threshold TH as normal range data, and classifies data outside of that range to detect patient presence and absence in the bed, which is interpretably considered event data that is triggered by an alarm when outside of the TH data range as required by claim 7, under the broadest reasonable interpretation. Therefore, Nunome sufficiently teaches, as an analogous art directed to mattresses which measures biometric (blood pressure) data and pressure data, setting predetermined range of biometric signal data measured by the at least one sensor and pressure data measured by pressure sensor is set as normal range data, and generation of data out of the normal range data as event data as claimed.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 04/28/2026, with respect to claim 8 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 8 has been withdrawn.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2020-0187577, filed on December 30, 2020.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) filed June 28, 2023, September 09, 2024 and April 28, 2026 has/have been considered by the Examiner.
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) 1 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lachenbruch (US 20120222214 A1 – hereinafter Lachenbruch, Applicant cited, previously cited) in view of Torres (US 20190053751 A1 – hereinafter Torres) [NEW].
Re. claim 1, Lachenbruch teaches a smart mattress (abstract – “An associated bed (20) includes a mattress (82)…”) comprising:
an elastic body which elastically supports the weight of a patient (figure 12, blanket 132);
PNG
media_image1.png
318
490
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a driving part frame, which supports the elastic body and at least a part of which is deformed to deform the elastic body (figure 12, unlabeled mattress cover, which supports the blanket 132 shown below);
PNG
media_image2.png
219
490
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a sensor frame disposed under the driving part frame and to support the driving part frame (figure 12, bladder layer 100);
PNG
media_image3.png
219
490
media_image3.png
Greyscale
a plurality of actuators disposed between the sensor frame and the driving part frame and driven to cause deformation of the driving part frame (figure 12, repositioning bladders 102, 104, 106, 108);
PNG
media_image4.png
219
490
media_image4.png
Greyscale
a plurality of pressure sensors disposed to have a predetermined pattern (figure 12, pressure sensors 134) to measure a pressure that is applied by the patient to the elastic body (paragraph 0025 - “The mattress assembly also includes a sensor array 130 comprising a blanket 132 and an array of pressure or force sensors 134 installed on the blanket”; paragraph 0026 - “The controller is capable of receiving information from the sensor array, specifically signals indicating the force or pressure applied to the sensors”, further shown in figure 12);
at least one sensor for measuring biometric information of the patient (figure 12, pressure sensors 134);
and a control part (figures 5A-5B, controller 140) which drives at least some of the plurality of actuators on the basis of pressure information measured by the plurality of pressure sensors (paragraph 0039 - “…the controller is designed or configured to use the information from the sensors to identify nothing more than the mere existence of a position discrepancy and to command a preordained, open loop sequence of bladder inflation and deflation (e.g. inflate and deflate the right outboard bladder, then the right inboard bladder, then the left outboard bladder, then the left inboard bladder)”).
Lachenbruch teaches the plurality of pressure sensors as stated above (figure 12, pressure sensors 134), the sensor frame (figure 12, bladder layer 100) and the driving part frame (figure 12, unlabeled mattress cover which supports the blanket 132) as stated above, but does not explicitly teach that the plurality of pressure sensors are disposed between the sensor frame and the driving part frame.
However, despite the recitation of the essential working elements as claimed, a difference is found with respect to the layout and arrangement of the elements within the mattress. The differences in the layout and arrangement of the essential working elements are not considered to comprise a critical advantage to the layout of elements disclosed by Lachenbruch, and thus is not considered to constitute a patentable difference. Since Lachenbruch demonstrates the capability of housing each of the working elements to fit within mattress, then the architecture in which the elements are arranged is not deemed critical. This difference, wherein the only difference being the arrangement and location of essential working elements, specifically to the plurality of pressure sensors disposed between the sensor frame and driving part frame, has been held by the reviewing courts as being obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art since it is motivated by choice in design and routine skill (In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70), see MPEP 2144.04. A skilled designer is considered to recognize the claimed arrangement of elements as one of many possibilities for the layout of elements within the limited space created by the mattress. The location of each element is then motivated by choice in design dictated by the limited available space.
Lachenbruch teaches the plurality of pressure sensors (figure 12, pressure sensors 134), the control part above (figures 5A-5B, controller 140), and the actuators used to change the posture of the patient (figure 12, repositioning bladders 102, 104, 106, 108) as stated above, but does not expressly teach the plurality of pressure sensors to measure pressure distribution applied by the patient across different portions of the elastic body, and control part to analyze the pressure distribution data measured by the plurality of pressure sensors to identify regions of concentrated pressure, and selectively drives at least some of the plurality of actuators based on the identified regions of concentrated pressure to change the posture of the patient.
Torres teaches a similar mattress system comprising actuators in the form of vibrational motors (Torres abstract – “The present disclosure provides a device for use with a bed, chair, or other furniture for seating, reclining, or lying down, which comprises one or more pressure sensors, a perforated air-flow manifold, a plurality of vibrational motors”).
Torres further teaches a plurality of pressure sensors (Torres figure 2, pressure sensors 2),
PNG
media_image5.png
428
490
media_image5.png
Greyscale
to measure pressure distribution applied by the patient across different portions of the elastic body (figure 2 shows the pressure sensors distributed all over the mattress; paragraph 0031 – “…the pressure sensors are positioned for detection of pressure in body regions prone to ulcer formation, e.g., one or more of the elbow, inner knees, rear of the head, back of the shoulders, lower back, hip, greater trochanter, and heel”; paragraph 0068 – “In preferred embodiments, the pressure sensors are positions at least 5 inches apart from each other, to reduce or prevent interference between them (for example, 5-15 inches, or 5-10 inches, or 6-8 inches, or about 7 inches apart)”),
PNG
media_image6.png
544
380
media_image6.png
Greyscale
And a control part (Torres paragraph 0013 – “The control unit serves to monitor the input from the one or more pressure sensors, and optionally the one or more temperature sensors”),
to analyze the pressure distribution data measured by the plurality of pressure sensors to identify regions of concentrated pressure, and selectively drives at least some of the plurality of actuators based on the identified regions of concentrated pressure to change the posture of the patient (Torres teaches pressure is measured across all distributed pressure sensors 2 in figure 2, and corrective action is taken at the nearest adjacent pressure sensor, Torres paragraph 0013 – “When a pre-determined threshold of pressure or temperature is exceeded, the control unit will automatically initiate a corrective action, e.g., the initiation of vibration, air flow, or both, within those zones of the device which exceeded the pressure or temperature threshold”; paragraph 0033 – “…activation of any particular vibrational motor is based on the detection of above-threshold pressure in closest adjacent pressure sensors”).
Lachenbruch and Torres both pertain to mattress systems, particularly with pressure sensors, control parts and actuators as stated above. 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 plurality of pressure sensor configuration, actuator and control part functions of Lachenbruch, to incorporate the plurality of pressure sensor sensors distributed to measure pressure distribution applied by the patient across different portions of the elastic body AND control part function of driving actuators based on the sensed pressure region as taught by Torres as stated above, since such modification would predictably result in providing increased patient comfort based on the sensed pressure of the mattress.
Re. claim 4, Lachenbruch of the combined invention further teaches wherein the at least one sensor measuring biometric information of the patient is at least one sensor selected from a temperature sensor, a pressure sensor, a weight sensor, an electrocardiogram sensor, a heartbeat sensor, and an SpO2 sensor (figure 12, pressure sensors 134).
Claim(s) 2-3, 5 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lachenbruch (US 20120222214 A1 – hereinafter Lachenbruch, Applicant cited, previously cited) in view of Torres (US 20190053751 A1 – hereinafter Torres) [NEW], and in further view of Hayes (US 20160022218 A1 – hereinafter Hayes, previously cited).
Re. claim 2, the combined invention of Lachenbruch and Torres (hereinafter the combined invention) teaches the mattress as stated above in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach the mattress further comprising at least one of: a memory which stores data that are processed in the smart mattress; a communication part including one or more communication modules for enabling the smart mattress to communicate with an external device in a wired or wireless type; and a user interface providing one or more items of information of the state of the smart mattress and the condition of the patient.
Hayes teaches a similar patient support system with patient monitoring sensors (Hayes abstract – “A person support apparatus includes sensors for monitoring aspects of a person positioned thereon”) comprising a mattress (Hayes paragraph 0102 – “Frame 26 provides a structure for supporting patient support surface 28, headboard 30, and footboard 32. Patient support surface 28 provides a surface on which a mattress…”; figure 1) and pressure sensors (Hayes paragraph 0226 – “…vital sign sensor 134 may include one or more air pressure sensors…”).
PNG
media_image7.png
334
608
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Hayes further teaches the patient support system 20 which comprises a measurement subsystem 54 (Hayes figure 3) further comprising:
a memory which stores data that are processed in the smart mattress (Hayes figure 3, memory 58);
PNG
media_image8.png
382
554
media_image8.png
Greyscale
a communication part including one or more communication modules for enabling the smart mattress to communicate with an external device in a wired or wireless type (Hayes similar embodiment figure 21, transceiver 132 to the mobile device 268; paragraph 0191 – “This information is made available for caregiver viewing on display 64 and/or it is transmitted to one or more servers or applications running on the healthcare computer network via transceiver 132”);
PNG
media_image9.png
268
452
media_image9.png
Greyscale
and a user interface providing one or more items of information of the state of the smart mattress and the condition of the patient (Hayes paragraph 0205 – “As shown more clearly in FIG. 21, controller 56 communicates with additional electronic components besides vital signs sensor 134, such as a memory 58, a wireless transceiver 132, and a user interface 60”).
PNG
media_image10.png
382
554
media_image10.png
Greyscale
The combined invention and Hayes both teach within the field of patient support apparatuses, specifically with pressure sensors as stated above. 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 patient support mattress of the combined invention, to incorporate the memory, communication part and user interface as taught by Hayes, since such modification would predictably result in, for example, adjusting diagnosis, and/or treatment so as to improve the quality of the care delivered to that patient (Hayes paragraph 0256).
Re. claim 3, the newly combined invention of Lachenbruch, Torres and Hayes (hereinafter the combined invention) further teaches wherein one OR more of data about an operation pattern of the driving part, an operation time of the driving part, the operation number of times of the driving part, a sleep pattern of the patient, and information obtained from the at least one sensor are stored in the memory (Hayes paragraph 0205 – “Memory 58 stores the instructions used by controller 56 to carry out its algorithms, as well as the data gathered from vital signs sensor 134”),
the external device includes a terminal that can connect with a wearable device that the patient wears or an EMR system (Hayes paragraph 0131 – “…the weight event log entries are forwarded to one or more healthcare network applications or servers running on a healthcare network. Such applications or servers may include, among others, an electronic medical record system”, which then connects to the external mobile devices 268 shown in figure 21),
PNG
media_image11.png
272
556
media_image11.png
Greyscale
and the user interface shows one or more of biometric information of the patient, the shape of the mattress, the posture of the patient, and notice information (Hayes paragraph 0118 – “…measurement subsystem 54 communicates with display 64 on user interface 60…”; figure 21 also shows the vital sign sensor 134 which sends signals to the controller 56, which in turn sends the signals to the user interface 60, paragraph 0205 – “…controller 56 communicates with additional electronic components besides vital signs sensor 134, such as a memory 58, a wireless transceiver 132, and a user interface 60”; see also paragraphs 0181-0182).
Re. claim 5, Lachenbruch of the combined invention further teaches the pressure sensors as stated above in claim 4 (figure 12, pressure sensors 134).
The combined invention does not explicitly teach wherein the temperature sensor further senses temperature around the smart mattress; posture variation of the patient is sensed on the basis of information measured by the weight sensor and information measured by the pressure sensor; the electrocardiogram sensor senses electrocardiogram information before the patient receives treatments on the smart mattress, electrocardiogram information that is changed while the patient receives treatments and electrocardiogram information after the patient receives treatments; and the heartbeat sensor senses heartbeat information before the patient receives treatments on the smart mattress, heartbeat information that is changed while the patient receives treatments, and heartbeat information after the patient receives treatments.
Hayes teaches a similar patient support system with patient monitoring sensors (Hayes abstract – “A person support apparatus includes sensors for monitoring aspects of a person positioned thereon”) comprising a mattress (Hayes paragraph 0102 – “Frame 26 provides a structure for supporting patient support surface 28, headboard 30, and footboard 32. Patient support surface 28 provides a surface on which a mattress…”; figure 1),
and pressure sensors (Hayes paragraph 0226 – “…vital sign sensor 134 may include one or more air pressure sensors…”).
PNG
media_image7.png
334
608
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Hayes further teaches the system comprises temperature sensors (Hayes paragraph 0175 – “…measurement subsystem 54 and/or 54a can also include communication between controller 56 and one or more temperature sensors”),
Weight sensors (Hayes paragraph 0018 – “…the controller determines a baseline weight sensed by the sensors”; paragraph 0039 – “The plurality of force sensors may be adapted to measure a weight of a patient positioned on the support surface…”),
electrocardiogram sensors (Hayes paragraph 0203 – “…vital sign sensor may be modified to include the ability to sense a patient's ECG…”),
and heartbeat sensors (Hayes paragraph 0204 – “…vital sign sensor 134 communicates its detected signals indicative of heart rate and/or breathing rate to controller 56 positioned on board patient support apparatus 20c…Controller 56 receives the outputs of vital sign sensor 134 and processes them to determine the heart rate…”).
Furthermore, it is reminded that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. See MPEP section 2114. II. MANNER OF OPERATING THE DEVICE DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE APPARATUS CLAIM FROM THE PRIOR ART. Therefore, it is interpreted by the Examiner that Hayes sufficiently teaches the structural limitations and thus satisfies the intended use limitations of the claim.
The combined invention and Hayes both teach within the field of patient support apparatuses, specifically with pressure sensors as stated above. 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 patient support mattress of the combined invention, to incorporate the temperature, weight, ECG and heart beat sensors as taught by Hayes, since such modification would predictably result in, for example, adjusting diagnosis, and/or treatment so as to improve the quality of the care delivered to that patient (Hayes paragraph 0256).
Re. claim 9, Lachenbruch of the combined invention teaches a medical management system comprising: the smart mattress of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above).
The combined invention does not further teach a server transmitting and receiving information to and from the smart mattress.
Hayes teaches a similar patient support system with patient monitoring sensors (Hayes abstract – “A person support apparatus includes sensors for monitoring aspects of a person positioned thereon”) comprising a mattress (Hayes paragraph 0102 – “Frame 26 provides a structure for supporting patient support surface 28, headboard 30, and footboard 32. Patient support surface 28 provides a surface on which a mattress…”; figure 1) and pressure sensors (Hayes paragraph 0226 – “…vital sign sensor 134 may include one or more air pressure sensors…”).
PNG
media_image7.png
334
608
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Hayes further teaches a server transmitting and receiving information to and from the smart mattress (Hayes paragraph 0191 – “The patient turn feature automatically detects which position 172, 174, or 176 the patient is in, automatically records the time at which a change in these positions occurs and the type of change…This information is made available for caregiver viewing on display 64 and/or it is transmitted to one or more servers or applications running on the healthcare computer network via transceiver 132”; figure 24, servers 266).
PNG
media_image12.png
179
620
media_image12.png
Greyscale
The combined invention and Hayes both teach within the field of patient support apparatuses, specifically with pressure sensors as stated above. 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 patient support mattress of the combined invention, to incorporate the server as taught by Hayes, since such modification would predictably result in, for example, adjusting diagnosis, and/or treatment so as to improve the quality of the care delivered to that patient (Hayes paragraph 0256).
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lachenbruch (US 20120222214 A1 – hereinafter Lachenbruch, Applicant cited, previously cited) in view of Torres (US 20190053751 A1 – hereinafter Torres) [NEW], and in further view of Nunome (US 20020196148 A1 – hereinafter Nunome, previously cited).
Re. claim 6, Lachenbruch of the combined invention teaches the pressure sensing as stated above in claims 1 and 4 (Lachenbruch figure 12, pressure sensors 134). Torres of the combined invention further teaches setting data within a predetermined range of biometric signal data measured by the at least one sensor and pressure data measured by the pressure sensor as normal range data (Thresholds for pressure and temperature sensor data are set, Torres paragraph 0013 – “The control unit serves to monitor the input from the one or more pressure sensors, and optionally the one or more temperature sensors. When a pre-determined threshold of pressure or temperature is exceeded, the control unit will automatically initiate a corrective action, e.g., the initiation of vibration, air flow, or both, within those zones of the device which exceeded the pressure or temperature threshold”).
The combined invention does not explicitly teach wherein the control part sets generation of data out of the normal range data as event data.
Nunome teaches a similar patient support apparatus (Nunome abstract – “An apparatus for detecting a patient, including a plurality of pressure detecting devices which are adapted to be placed on a bed such that the pressure detecting devices are arranged in a widthwise direction of the bed…”) with pressure sensors (Nunome paragraph 0026; figure 2, pressure sensors 20) and a control part (Nunome figure 1, control device 28).
PNG
media_image13.png
266
452
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Nunome further teaches wherein the control part sets data within a predetermined range of biometric signal data (blood pressure) measured by the at least one sensor and pressure data measured by the pressure sensor as normal range data and sets generation of data out of the normal range data as event data (Nunome teaches setting a signal data range with a pressure threshold TH to reach in order to determine if a patient is present in the bed based on pressure sensors, and classifies patient presence/absence from the bed as an event when outside that threshold, paragraph 0028 – “…if at least one of the respective air pressures of the bags 16 is higher than a prescribed threshold value TH that is higher than the initial pressure, that the patient is present on the bed 12. On the other hand, if all the respective air pressures of the bags 16 are not higher than the prescribed threshold value TH, the patient detecting means 52 judges that the patient is not present on the bed 12”, also elaborated in paragraph 0029 – “A position detecting means 54 identifies, in the state in which the respective amounts of air present in the pressure detecting bags 16 are kept to their initial-pressure states by the initial-pressure establishing means 50, one or more bags 16 whose air pressure or pressures is or are higher than the threshold value TH, based on the respective electric signals SP supplied from the five pressure sensors 20…”; blood-pressure can be sensed via the pressure sensors, paragraph 0049 – “In addition, in the latter case, one of the tubes 18 may be connected to an inflatable cuff and a pressure sensor for use in a blood-pressure measurement. In this case, the pump 22 also functions as a pump for use in the blood-pressure measurement”).
The combined invention of Lachenbruch in view of Torres (hereinafter the combined invention) and Nunome both teach within the field of patient support apparatuses, specifically with pressure sensors as stated above. 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 patient support mattress of the combined invention, specifically the control part and biometric sensors and pressure sensor data, to incorporate the prescribed blood pressure and pressure signal data thresholds and event data as taught by Nunome as stated above, since such modification would predictably result, for example, in allowing for determining if a patient is present on a bed (Nunome paragraph 0002).
Re. claim 7, the newly combined invention of Lachenbruch, Torres and Nunome further teaches wherein the control part sets the event data as falling event sign data, and provides an alarm signal when one or more of the biometric signal data measured by the at least one sensor and the pressure data measured by the pressure sensor correspond to the falling event sign data (Nunome paragraph 0028 – “…if all the respective air pressures of the bags 16 are not higher than the prescribed threshold value TH, the patient detecting means 52 judges that the patient is not present on the bed 12. In the latter case, the patient detecting means 52 operates the signal transmitter 36 to transmit a signal representing an alarm that the patient is not present on the bed 12”; paragraph 0029 – “In addition, if the thus detected current position of the patient is located in one of prescribed widthwise opposite end portions of the bed 12, the position detecting means 54 judges that the patient is present at a dangerous position where the patient is likely to fall off the bed 12, and operates the signal transmitter 36 to transmit an alarm signal representing the situation”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
No prior art could be found to anticipate and/or render obvious to claim 8, including at least to one mattress formed by coupling a plurality of smart mattress modules that are unit bodies including at least a portion of the configuration of the smart mattress, wherein each smart mattress module corresponds to a respective body part of the patient, and the control part is configured to independently control the actuators of each smart mattress module based on the pressure distribution data measured by the pressure sensors of the respective smart mattress module, in combination with the other limitations of the claim 8.
The combined invention of Lachenbruch (US 20120222214 A1 – hereinafter Lachenbruch) in view of Torres (US 20190053751 A1 – hereinafter Torres) teaches the obvious invention of the smart mattress module comprising an elastic body which elastically supports the weight of a patient; a driving part frame, which supports the elastic body and at least a part of which is deformed to deform the elastic body; a sensor frame disposed under the driving part frame to support the driving part frame; a plurality of actuators disposed between the sensor frame and the driving part frame and driven to cause deformation of the driving part frame; and a plurality of pressure sensors disposed to have a predetermined pattern between the sensor frame and the driving part frame to measure a pressure that is applied by the patient to the elastic body (see claim 1 rejection above), however Lachenbruch and Torres neither teach the mattress formed as a coupling of a plurality of smart mattress modules, but instead as one integrated unit.
Hwang (US 4956884 A – hereinafter Hwang) teaches a similar mattress (Hwang abstract – “A modular box spring mattress includes two flexible plate units each of which consists of a plurality of plate subunits”; figure 1).
PNG
media_image14.png
324
424
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Hwang further teaches the known elements of a mattress comprising a plurality of mattress unit bodies including at least a portion of the configuration of the mattress (Hwang figure 1, mattress includes plate units 1 further comprising a plurality of plate subunits 10; column 2, lines 6-11: “Referring to FIG. 1, a modular box spring mattress of this invention includes upper and lower generally rectangular plate units 1 and a plurality of coiled compression springs 2 interposed between the plate units 1. Either of the plate units 1 consists of a plurality of generally rectangular plate subunits 10”). However, Hwang does not possess the required electronic components, sensors, and controlled actuators in each subunit as an independent smart mattress module, but merely springs combined to make a single mattress comprised of sectional subunits. In turn, combination of Lachenbruch/Torres with Hwang would constitute impermissible hindsight.
Claims 1-7 and 9 remain rejected under 35 USC § 103.
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 Anh-Khoa N. Dinh whose telephone number is (571)272-7041. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00am-4:00pm EST.
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, CARL LAYNO can be reached at 571-272-4949. 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.
/ANH-KHOA N DINH/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights