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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/06/2023 & 10/04/2023. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 1-9, 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones et al. (US Pub 2022/0062780; hereinafter Jones) in view of Mayer et al. (US pub No. 2023/0111790; hereinafter Mayer).
As to claim 1, A wheelchair swing (fig. 1) that enables a wheelchair to swing above a support surface (ground ) , comprising: a frame assembly (frame 106) configured to extend upwardly from the support surface; and a platform assembly (user area 108) operatively coupled to the frame assembly and including: a deck (platform 112) configured to support a wheelchair disposed thereon (par. 42) ; a plurality of swing supports (swing supports 114) operatively coupled between the deck and the frame assembly and configured to suspend the deck from the frame assembly to enable the deck to swing above the support surface (par. 41);
Jones does not expressly teach a deck stabilizer operatively coupled to the deck and moveable between a stable operating position wherein the deck stabilizer is engaged with the support surface to substantially prevent the deck from swinging above the support surface, and a swing operating position wherein the deck stabilizer is disengaged from the support surface to enable the deck to swing above the support surface.
However, Mayer (fig. 1) teaches a swing assembly with a platform for wheelchair swing. Mayer teaches a deck stabilizer (lower rectangular surface 20) operatively coupled to the deck and moveable between a stable operating position wherein the deck stabilizer is engaged with the support surface (ground) to substantially prevent the deck from swinging above the support surface, and a swing operating position wherein the deck stabilizer is disengaged from the support surface to enable the deck to swing above the support surface (paragraph 69. A lower surface 20 of the platform 12 may support a weight 38 promoting stability of the platform 12 at rest during loading and unloading of the rider 16. The lower surface 20 of the platform 12 may also attach to one or more motion restraints, for example, at least one flexible belt that is attached to, for example, the left and right lateral sides 66, 68 of the platform 12, respectively. The opposed flexible belts are stretched and compressed as the platform 12 moves side to side, constraining movement and providing a travel stop when the flexible belt is fully stretched at one end).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to use teaching of Mayer, having mechanism to stabilize the platform to secure the entry of the wheelchair and prevent accident.
As to claim 2, Jones teaches The wheelchair swing of claim 1, wherein the platform assembly further includes a ramp (104) operatively coupled to the deck and configured to move between a deployed position that enables the wheelchair to roll on the ramp between the support surface and the deck (as in figure 2), and a stowed position that prevents the wheelchair from rolling on the ramp between the support surface and the deck (figure 1 above the ground).
As to claim 3, Jones teaches the wheelchair swing of claim 1, wherein the frame assembly includes a plurality of legs (footings 101) that engage with and extend upwardly from the support surface to an upper structure (107) disposed above the deck of the platform assembly, the plurality of swing supports being operatively coupled to the upper structure.
As to claim 4, Jones teaches the wheelchair swing of claim 3, wherein the upper structure includes a pair of side beams coupled to a pair of end beams to form a rectangular structure, and a cross beam extending between the end beams, the plurality of swing supports being operatively coupled to the cross beam (see the structure of 107 in fig. 1 and connected at the end with the curve part of 106 (cross beam) to for rectangular shape).
As to claim 5, Jones teaches the wheelchair swing of claim 1, wherein the plurality of swing supports (114) includes a pair of swing supports, each swing support including a side rail operatively coupled to and extending along a lateral side of the deck, and a vertical support coupled between the side rail and the frame assembly (see figs 1-2, where the swing supports to and bottom are connected to each other via top and bottom beams; not labeled).
As to claim 6. Jones does not expressly The wheelchair swing of claim 1, wherein each swing support includes a first portion coupled to a second portion (note the lines at the top of 114 indicating that 114 has two portions), but does not show each of the first and second portions including a series of adjustment holes to enable the first and second portions to be coupled together at a plurality of positions to adjust a height of the deck above the support surface.
However, examiner takes an official notice that having holes in the tube-like support like 114 of Jones are well known in the art and would be known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to realize the benefit of having hole in the swing support of Jones, so as to be able to easily adjust the height.
As to claim 7. Jones and Mayer do not teach the wheelchair swing of claim 1, wherein each swing support includes a turnbuckle that enables adjustment of a height of the deck above the support surface. However, the same rational of claim 6 above applies to claim 7 (official notice) and the same rational applies to claim 7.
As to claim 8 Jones teaches the wheelchair swing of claim 1, wherein the platform assembly further includes a securing system (a stop 113) that is engageable with the wheelchair to securely position the wheelchair on the deck (fig. 1 and par. 43).
As to claim 9, Mayer teaches the wheelchair swing of claim 1, wherein the platform assembly further includes a plurality of ratchet connectors, each ratchet connector having a first end coupled to the deck and a second end that is engageable with the wheelchair to securely position the wheelchair on the deck (paragraph 69 showing flexible belts). Motivation and rational same as in claim 1.
As to claim 17, the claim is similar to claim 1 and is rejected similarly as the rejection of claim 1 above.
As to claim 19, similar to claim 2 above.
Claim(s) 10 and 12-6, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones in view of Mayer as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Goosen (US patent No. 7455490).
As to claim 10, note the rejection of claim 1 above. The modified device of Jones does not expressly teach, the wheelchair swing of claim 1, wherein the platform assembly further includes a seatbelt retainer having a belt portion coupled to the deck and positioned on a first lateral side of the deck, and a hasp portion coupled to the deck and positioned on a second lateral side of the deck opposite from the first lateral side, the belt portion being removably couplable to the hasp portion to at least partially secure a person in a seated position within the wheelchair when the wheelchair is positioned on the deck.
However, Goosen (figs. 1-6) teaches a wheelchair holding device that includes a platform assembly (holding area14) that includes seatbelt retainer (arm 38) coupled to the deck 14 and positioned on a first lateral side of the deck and a hasp (attaching member 28a) coupled to the deck and positioned on a second lateral side of the deck opposite from the first lateral side, the belt portion being removably couplable to the hasp portion to at least partially secure a person in a seated position within the wheelchair when the wheelchair is positioned on the deck.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date to use Goosen’s teaching having seatbelt to secure the wheelchair so as to be able to secure the wheelchair (col. 1, lines 39-41)
As to claim 12, the claim is substantially similar to claim 1. In addition, the ratchet limitation is equivalent to the limitation of the hasp limitation which Goosen reference was used for.
As to claim 13, same as claim 1 (stabilizer limitation).
As to claim 14, same as claim 2.
As to claim 15, same as claim 5.
Claim 20, same as claim 10 (hasp limitation).
As to claim 16, same as claims 6-7
As to claim 18, same as claim 12.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones in view of Mayer as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view Babcock et al. (US pat. No. 5938283; hereinafter Babcock).
As to claim 11, the modified device of Jones does not teach a wheelchair swing of claim 1, further including a rope assembly having a rope beam operatively coupled to the frame assembly, and a rope coupled to the rope beam and extending downwardly to a desired operating position of the wheelchair positioned on the deck.
Babcock (figure 5) teaches a rope and rope assembly to secure the wheelchair from top and change the height (by changing the length of the rope) (chain 84) (col. 3, line 66 to col. 4, line 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the well-known idea of using a rope (chain) to support the swing (with the wheelchair) included so as to be able to secure the seat accordingly.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Devine (US Pat. 6,736,732) teaches a swing for handicapped person (title).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMR A AWAD whose telephone number is (571)272-7764. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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.
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.
/AMR A AWAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2621