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 .
The indicated allowability of claims 5 and 15 is withdrawn in view of the newly discovered reference(s) to U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0125260 to Peterson et al . Rejections based on the newly cited reference(s) follow.
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) 1-4, 11, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0125260 to Peterson et al.
Claims 1 and 14, Peterson discloses an adjustable bed assembly, comprising a mattress 112 having a lower surface; an adjustable base 204 having an upper surface; and a magnetic attachment system, each magnetic attachment system including a magnetic member (220) for securing to the lower surface of the mattress; and a magnet configured to be secured to the upper surface of the adjustable base [0006]-[0008], and a plastic shell 537 positioned around the at least one magnet, a metal ring defined by a shunt 435 positioned around the at least one magnet [0065](fig. 6C).
Claim 2, Peterson discloses the adjustable bed assembly wherein the magnetic attachment systems include a first magnetic attachment system positioned adjacent to an upper portion of the mattress and the adjustable base, and a second magnetic attachment system positioned adjacent to a foot portion of the mattress and the adjustable base [0005].
Claim 3, Peterson discloses the adjustable bed assembly wherein the magnetic attachment systems comprise two sets of magnets [0005].
Claim 4, Peterson discloses the adjustable bed assembly wherein the magnetic member defines a central opening, and wherein the magnet is mounted to the adjustable base, and a fastener 492 positioned through the central opening (fig. 5A-5E,6A-6C).
Claim 11, Peterson discloses the adjustable bed assembly further comprising at least one magnet housing configured to be secured to the upper surface of the adjustable base, each magnet housing including a central channel configured to receive the magnetic member, and one or more magnets positioned in the central channel of the at least one magnet housing (fig. 5A-5E,6A-6C).
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) 6-7, 10, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0125260 to Peterson et al. in view of U.S. Pat. No. 5,195,197 to Gutierrez et al.
Claims 6-7, Peterson discloses the adjustable bed assembly, but is silent to a cover including a pocket. Gutierrez discloses a cover including a pocket for receiving a magnetic member adjacent to a lower surface of a mattress [Abstract]. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the pocket and cover of Guitierrez with the mattress of Peterson with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have provided an equivalent and alternative means to secure the magnet to the mattress of Peterson.
Claims 10 and 18, Peterson, as modified, discloses the adjustable bed assembly wherein the pocket defines one or more windows which each correspond to the predetermined location of the magnetic member is received in the pocket (fig. 2-3). Selecting from a plethora of magnets is considered an obvious modification and it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to select the magnetic members as stated above with the mattress of Peterson with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have provided an equivalent and alternative magnetic means for the mattress of Peterson.
Claim(s) 8-9, 12-13, and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0125260 to Peterson et al.
Claims 8-9 and 16-17, Peterson discloses the adjustable bed assembly, but is silent to the magnetic member comprising a magnetic bar or a flexible bar including metal plates positioned at predetermined locations. Selecting from a plethora of magnets is considered an obvious modification and it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to select the magnetic members as stated above with the mattress of Peterson with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have provided an equivalent and alternative magnetic means for the mattress of Peterson.
Claim 12-13, Peterson discloses the adjustable bed assembly, but is silent to the mattress being formed from a flexible foam mattress such as visco-elastic foam. Selecting from a plethora of known foam materials such as visco-elastic is considered an obvious modification and it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to select a visco-elastic foam as stated above with the mattress of Peterson with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have provided an equivalent and alternative material to construct the mattress of Peterson.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0302085 to King discloses a magnetic support for a bed.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,995,762 to Albinson discloses a magnetic support for a bed.
Conclusion
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