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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on (1/26/24) is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: It recites in line 2 “each retractable” but should recite “each of the pair of retractable wheels”, for example. Appropriate correction is required.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
1. Claims 1, 5-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brice (US 4,776,415) in view of Asfa (US PG PUB NO 2015/0108731).
[CLAIM 1] Regarding claim 1, Brice discloses an infant walker apparatus comprising: a housing; a seat (122) mounted to the housing (The entire walker has its components attached and secured at assembly), the seat being positioned and configured to hold an infant such that the infant's legs contact a floor surface upon which the apparatus is placed during normal use (Brice, FIG 1 shows a seat and can allow a child to selectively walk or sit therein); a drive system (Brice, motors 44-46 are exemplary and adaptable for any desired application) mounted to the housing and configured to drive the housing across the floor surface.
-However, it fails to disclose a processor mounted in the housing and operatively coupled to the drive system.
-Nevertheless, Asfa discloses in paragraph [0019] “a processor configured to analyze the reflected infrared radiations and estimate various parameters pertaining to the obstacle and the walker”. Asfa further discloses an embodiment for a motor housed in the walker body in paragraph [0060]).
- Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have modified Brice to include a discrete processor as taught by Asfa with a reasonable expectation of success in order to control the walker and prevent undesired placement and movement.
-Regarding the remaining limitations: a plurality of sensors (Asfa, paragraph [0014] discloses walker sensors) mounted to the housing (401), the processor being configured to cause the drive system to move the housing across the floor surface according to navigation data received from the plurality of sensors (Asfa, paragraphs [0018-0019] disclose walker sensors analyzing (navigating) to avoid obstacles when the motor operates and Brice discloses motors to drive the walker).
PNG
media_image1.png
785
645
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
669
584
media_image2.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 5] Regarding claim 5, Brice/Asfa disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein: the housing defines a central opening which extends vertically through the housing when the apparatus is during normal use (Brice, FIG 1 is exemplary and shows the walker and drive components which have any housing arrangement to protect the electrical components from a walking child); and the seat (122) is spaced upwardly with respect to the housing (Brice, FIG 2), the seat (122) having leg-receiving apertures extending therethrough (Brice, FIG 1), the seat (122) being configured to hold the infant such that the infant's legs extend through the leg-receiving apertures (See rejection of claim 1 regarding the operating position and Brice FIG 1).
PNG
media_image3.png
485
768
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
526
767
media_image4.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 6] Regarding claim 6, Brice/Asfa disclose the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the drive system comprises a pair of drive wheels and a pair of motors (44-46), each motor being operatively coupled to an associated drive wheel of the pair of drive wheels (Brice is exemplary and shows at least wheels/casters 62, 68, 118, 120, 138 and the associated motors 44 and 46), the pair of drive wheels extending downwardly from the housing (Brice FIG 1).
[CLAIM 7] Regarding claim 7, Brice/Asfa disclose the apparatus of claim 1 further comprising a foot rest mountable to the housing in the central opening (Asfa discloses a frame 101 with a central opening and feet can rest on the frame).
PNG
media_image5.png
669
584
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[CLAIM 8] Regarding claim 8, Brice/Asfa disclose the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a pair of support wheels mounted to a bottom side of the housing, the pair of support wheels being spaced from the pair of drive wheels (Brice is exemplary and shows at least wheels/casters 62, 68, 118, 120, 138 and see FIG 2 for adapting a walker to any desired application).
[CLAIM 9] Regarding claim 9, Brice/Asfa disclose the apparatus of claim 8, wherein each support wheel comprises a caster (Brice, FIG 1).
[CLAIM 10] Regarding claim 10, Brice/Asfa disclose the apparatus of claim 8, further comprising a pair of retractable wheels mounted to the bottom side of the housing (Brice, FIGS 1-2), each retractable (See claim objection above) being movable between a deployed position and a retracted position, the pair of retractable wheels extending downwardly from the housing when in their deployed positions (Brice, FIGS 1-2), the pair of retractable wheels being stored in the housing when in their retracted positions (Brice, FIGS 1-2), each retractable wheel being pivotable with respect to the housing (Brice is exemplary and shows at least wheels/casters 62, 68 which can pivot as desired in order to engage the floor) and the pair of retractable wheels being configured to disengage the drive system from the floor surface when in their deployed positions (Brice is exemplary and shows at least wheels/casters 62, 68, the control 2 of Brice can employ any desired orientation for a particular application and shows the wheels retracted when not in use).
[CLAIM 11] Regarding claim 11, Brice/Asfa disclose the apparatus of claim 10, wherein each retractable wheel comprises a caster (Brice, FIG 1 shows wheels/casters).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 are 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.
Claim 12 is allowable. Brice (US 4,776415) represents the most similar walker as claimed by Applicant fails to disclose each limitation of claim 12.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and can be found on the attached Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to whose telephone number is (571)270-3411. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-6PM PST.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached on (571)270-5985. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAMES J TRIGGS/Examiner, Art Unit 3614B
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614