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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1 – 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/12/2026.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 31 and 34 – 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Collica (US 3,984,696).
With respect to independent claim 21, Collica teaches in Figs. 1 – 2 a radiation shield system 10, comprising:
a first radiation shield comprised of a first vertically-oriented rectangular panel 59; see column 2, lines 58 – 60 and
a second radiation shield comprised of a second vertically-oriented rectangular
panel 40; see column 3, line 34 – 35;
wherein the first radiation shield is configured to be positioned transversely across
a width of a patient platform as shown in Fig. 1; and,
wherein the second radiation shield is oriented perpendicularly as shown in Fig. 1 with respect to the
first radiation shield.
With respect to independent claim 35, Collica teaches in Figs. 1 – 3 a radiation shield system, comprising:
a patient platform 20a;
a first radiation shield comprised of a first vertically-oriented rectangular panel; and
a second radiation shield comprised of a second vertically-oriented rectangular panel;
wherein the first radiation shield is positioned transversely across a width of the
patient platform;
wherein the second radiation shield is oriented perpendicularly with respect to the
first radiation shield as discussed in the rejection justification to claim 1 above; and,
wherein a longitudinal axis 41 of the second radiation shield is parallel to a longitudinal
axis 51 of the patient platform as shown in Fig. 1.
With respect to dependent claim 22, Collica teaches in Fig. 1 wherein an upper edge of the first radiation shield is at a higher elevation than an upper edge of the second radiation shield.
With respect to dependent claim 23, Collica teaches in Fig. 1 wherein a lower edge of the first radiation shield is at a lower elevation than a lower edge of the second radiation shield.
With respect to dependent claims 24 and 38, Collica teaches in Figs. 2 – 3 wherein the first radiation shield is adjustable with respect to the second radiation shield.
With respect to dependent claims 25 and 36, Collica teaches in Fig. 1 wherein at least a portion of a lower edge of the first radiation shield is configured to be elevated above an upper surface of the patient platform.
With respect to dependent claims 26 and 37, Collica teaches in Fig. 1 wherein at least a portion of a lower edge of the second radiation shield is configured to be elevated above an upper surface of the patient platform.
With respect to dependent claim 27, Collica teaches in Fig. 1 wherein the first radiation shield is configured to be positioned transversely over a body of a patient on the patient platform.
With respect to dependent claim 28, Collica teaches in Fig. 1 wherein the second radiation shield is configured to be positioned over an arm when a patient is position on the table 21a, at least one arm of the patient is positioned over the second radiation shield of the patient on the patient platform.
With respect to dependent claims 29 and 39, Collica teaches in Fig. 1 wherein a width of the first radiation shield is equal to or greater than a width of the patient platform.
With respect to dependent claim 30, Collica teaches in Fig. 1 wherein a side edge of the first radiation shield is positioned near a side edge of the second radiation shield.
With respect to dependent claim 31, Collica teaches wherein the first radiation shield is pivotable about a hinge hinge mount 45.
With respect to dependent claim 34, Collica teaches in Fig. 1 wherein the patient platform comprises a table 20a.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 32 – 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collica, and further in view of Goff (US 2011/0184278 A1).
The teaching of Collica has been discussed above.
With respect to dependent claim 32, Collica is silent with wherein the patient platform
comprises an arm board.
In Fig. 14 Goff teaches a patient platform 112 having an arm board 116. In view of this, it would be obvious at the time of the claimed invention was filed to modify the teaching of Collica in order to perform desired medical procedures (see paragraph [0040]). This is in consistency with the Supreme Court Decision of the KSR. V. International Co.: applying a known technique to a known device (method or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
With respect to dependent claim 33, Collica is silent with wherein the second radiation shield is parallel to the arm board. As discussed above Goff teaches an arm board. In view of this, it would be obvious at the time of the claimed invention was filed to modify the teaching of Collica modified by Goff in order to protect patient’s arm from radiation. This is in consistency with the Supreme Court Decision of the KSR. V. International Co.: Obvious to try – choosing form a finite number of predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIHO KIM, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-1628. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8-5 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, David Makiya can be reached at (571)272-2273. 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.
KIHO KIM, Ph.D.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/Kiho Kim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884