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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-15 and 22-26 are pending.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, and 7-9 were amended.
Claims 22-26 are new.
This FINAL Office Action is in response to the “Amendments and Remarks” received on 03/23/2026.
Response to Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks
Amendments and Remarks filed on 03/23/2026 have been fully considered and are addressed as follow:
Regarding the Claim Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 103: Applicants “Amendment and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant has amended the independent claim and these amendments have changed the scope of the original application and the Office has supplied new grounds for rejection attached below in the FINAL office action and therefore the prior arguments are considered moot.
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.
Claims 1-9, 11, 13, 22-24, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patmore (US PGPub 2019/0298590) in view of Nakashima (US Patent 5544053).
Regarding claim 1, Patmore teaches A patient support apparatus comprising [Patmore, Figure 1]:
a support structure [Patmore ¶ 0040 "A support structure 22 provides support for the patient."];
a support wheel coupled to the support structure [Patmore ¶ 0044 " Support wheels 56 are coupled to the base 24 to support the base 24 on a floor surface 99 such as a hospital floor."];
a drive system including a drive member coupled to the support structure to influence motion of the patient support apparatus over a floor surface, a motor coupled to the drive member to operate the drive member at a speed, and a motor control circuit for transmitting power signals from a power source to the motor [Patmore ¶ 0048 " the powered drive system 90 comprises a motor 102 associated with each respective drive wheel 64. Each motor 102 is also coupled to a power source (not shown), such as one or more rechargeable batteries."];
a graphical user interface for receiving user commands from a user to operate the drive system [Patmore ¶ 0053 "The patient transport apparatus 20 also includes one or more user input controls 250" and ¶ 0076 " For example, the mode switch 252 may be embodied on a touch screen interface, as one or more buttons, one or more dials, one or more switches, one or more sensors, or any other suitable user input device in which selection among two or more modes is possible."];
and a control system coupled to the graphical user interface and the drive system for operating the drive system, the control system including a memory device configured to store a plurality of
receive a first user command to select a first drive profile [Patmore ¶ 0058 "The selection of the longitudinal transport mode on the mode switch 252 provides the first signal that is received by the controller 126,"],
select the first
generate an output signal based on the selected first
transmit the generated output signal to the motor control circuit to operate the motor to operate the drive member in a first
Patmore does not teach a plurality of longitudinal drive profiles.
However, in a related field of invention, Nakashima does teach a plurality of longitudinal drive profiles [Nakashima, Col 12 lines 26-39 “The shift control modes are divided, for example, into five modes. Provided ready for use are a normal mode (MODE 0) for flat roads such as streets in urban regions, an uphill cornering mode (MODE 1) for frequently bent uphill slopes in mountainous regions, a downhill weak engine brake mode (MODE 2) for gentle downhill slopes where a weak engine brake is needed, a downhill strong engine brake mode (MODE 3) for steep downhill slopes and downhill slopes of large meandering degrees where a strong engine brake is needed, and a straight uphill slope road (MODE 4) for long straight uphill slopes. The downhill weak engine brake mode (MODE 2) and the downhill strong engine brake mode (MODE 3) correspond to the downhill road downshift mode described above.” And Figure 4].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the patient support apparatus with a different a multidirectional mode and a longitudinal mode as taught by Patmore with using multiple longitudinal drive profiles as taught by Nakashima in order to improve the drive feeling and riding comfort [Nakashima, Col 7 lines 6-11].
Regarding claim 2, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 1. Patmore further teaches wherein the first longitudinal drive mode includes a first drive mode parameter [Patmore ¶ 0061 "when the mode switch 252 is in the longitudinal transport mode, the controller 126 permits rotation of the at least one drive wheel 64 about the rotational axis 69 at the maximum allowable power assisted speed, such as about 6 miles per hour (about 10 kilometers per hour)."].
Regarding claim 3, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 2. Patmore further teaches wherein the first drive mode parameter includes one of: a rotational speed of the drive member, an acceleration rate of the drive member, a deceleration rate of the drive member, and a power setting [Patmore ¶ 0061 "when the mode switch 252 is in the longitudinal transport mode, the controller 126 permits rotation of the at least one drive wheel 64 about the rotational axis 69 at the maximum allowable power assisted speed, such as about 6 miles per hour (about 10 kilometers per hour)."].
Regarding claim 4, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 1. Patmore further teaches wherein the controller is further configured to:
receive a second user command to select a second longitudinal drive profile different from the first longitudinal drive profile [Patmore ¶ 0059 "The selection of the multidirectional mode on the mode switch 252 provides the second signal that is received by the controller 126,"];
select the second longitudinal drive profile from the plurality of stored drive profiles [Patmore ¶ 0094 “Accordingly, each subsequent release and re-contact of the touch sensor 316 toggles from the longitudinal transport mode to the multidirectional mode, or from the multidirectional mode to the longitudinal transport mode.”]
generate an output signal based on the selected second longitudinal drive profile [Patmore ¶ 0059 "which in turn sends one or more second output signals (second commands) to the lift actuator 66, the swivel actuator 71, and/or the powered drive system 90 corresponding to the second signal to position the at least one drive wheel 64 to facilitate movement of the patient transport apparatus 20 in multiple directions,"]; and
transmit the generated output signal to the motor control circuit to operate the motor to operate the drive member in a second longitudinal drive mode based on the selected second longitudinal drive profile [Patmore ¶ 0059 "which in turn sends one or more second output signals (second commands) to the lift actuator 66, the swivel actuator 71, and/or the powered drive system 90 corresponding to the second signal to position the at least one drive wheel 64 to facilitate movement of the patient transport apparatus 20 in multiple directions,"].
Regarding claim 5, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 4. Patmore further teaches wherein: the first longitudinal drive mode includes a first drive mode parameter; the second longitudinal drive mode includes a second drive mode parameter; and the first drive mode parameter is different from the second drive mode parameter [Patmore ¶ 0061 "Then the mode switch 252 is in the multidirectional mode, the controller 126 permits rotation of the at least one drive wheel 64 about the rotational axis 69 at a rotational speed that is substantially less than the maximum allowable power assisted speed in the longitudinal transport mode."].
Regarding claim 6, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 5. Patmore further teaches wherein the first drive mode parameter and the second drive mode parameter include one of: a rotational speed of the drive member, an acceleration rate of the drive member, a deceleration rate of the drive member, and a power setting [Patmore ¶ 0061 "Then the mode switch 252 is in the multidirectional mode, the controller 126 permits rotation of the at least one drive wheel 64 about the rotational axis 69 at a rotational speed that is substantially less than the maximum allowable power assisted speed in the longitudinal transport mode."].
Regarding claim 7, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 1. Patmore further teaches wherein each of the plurality of stored longitudinal drive profiles is associated with a location [Patmore ¶ 0115 "by placing the patient transport apparatus 20 in either the longitudinal transport mode or in the multidirectional mode depending upon a sensed location"].
Regarding claim 8, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 7. Patmore further teaches wherein a location associated with one of the plurality of stored longitudinal drive profiles is a medical facility [Patmore ¶ 0119 "Such sensed locations, for example, might be in tight spaces such as elevators, or in hospital rooms, where it is desirable to limit the speed of the motor 102 of the powered drive system 90 to speeds associated with the multidirectional mode, as described above."].
Regarding claim 9, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 7. Patmore further teaches wherein each of the plurality of stored longitudinal drive profiles includes a plurality of drive mode parameters defined based on the location [Patmore ¶ 0119 "Such sensed locations, for example, might be in tight spaces such as elevators, or in hospital rooms, where it is desirable to limit the speed of the motor 102 of the powered drive system 90 to speeds associated with the multidirectional mode, as described above."].
Regarding claim 11, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 9. Patmore further teaches wherein at least one of the plurality of drive mode parameters is defined based on an architectural layout associated with the location [Patmore ¶ 0119 "For example, when the patient transport apparatus 20 is in or near an elevator or in a patient room, the controller 126 may lockout the user's ability to switch to the longitudinal transport mode to avoid moving at high speeds, but may allow movement in the multidirectional mode, which may have a lower maximum speed as described above."].
Regarding claim 13, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 1. Patmore further teaches wherein the first user command is based on user engagement with the graphical user interface [Patmore ¶ 0053 "The patient transport apparatus 20 also includes one or more user input controls 250" and ¶ 0076 " For example, the mode switch 252 may be embodied on a touch screen interface, as one or more buttons, one or more dials, one or more switches, one or more sensors, or any other suitable user input device in which selection among two or more modes is possible."].
Regarding claim 22, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 4. Patmore further teaches wherein the first longitudinal drive profile is associated with a first location and includes a first drive mode parameter; and wherein the second longitudinal drive profile is associated with a second location different from the first location and defines a second drive mode parameter different from the first drive mode parameter [Patmore ¶ 0115 "by placing the patient transport apparatus 20 in either the longitudinal transport mode or in the multidirectional mode depending upon a sensed location"].
Regarding claim 23, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 22. Patmore further teaches wherein the first drive mode parameter of the first longitudinal drive profile includes a first maximum speed associated with the first location; and wherein the second drive mode parameter of the second longitudinal drive profile includes a second maximum speed different from the first maximum speed and associated with the second location [Patmore ¶ 0119 "Such sensed locations, for example, might be in tight spaces such as elevators, or in hospital rooms, where it is desirable to limit the speed of the motor 102 of the powered drive system 90 to speeds associated with the multidirectional mode, as described above."].
Regarding claim 24, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 23. Patmore further teaches wherein the first drive mode parameter of the first longitudinal drive profile is defined based on a first architectural layout associated with the first location; and wherein the second drive mode parameter of the second longitudinal drive profile is defined based on a second architectural layout associated with the second location [Patmore ¶ 0119 "For example, when the patient transport apparatus 20 is in or near an elevator or in a patient room, the controller 126 may lockout the user's ability to switch to the longitudinal transport mode to avoid moving at high speeds, but may allow movement in the multidirectional mode, which may have a lower maximum speed as described above."].
Regarding claim 26, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 1. Patmore further teaches wherein the drive system includes an actuator supporting the drive member for movement relative to the support structure between [Patmore ¶ 0050 “the lift actuator 66 is operably coupled to each respective one of the least one drive wheel 64.”]:
a retracted position spaced out of contact with the floor surface [Patmore ¶ 0050 “The lift actuator 66 is operable to move the at least one drive wheel 64 between a deployed position engaging the floor surface 99 (such as shown in FIGS. 2A, 2B, 3A and 3B) and a retracted position spaced away from and out of contact with the floor surface 99 (represented in a single view as shown in FIG. 2C).”], and
a deployed position engaging the floor surface to operate the drive member with torque generate by the motor for facilitating longitudinal movement of the support structure along the floor surface [Patmore ¶ 0050 “The lift actuator 66 is operable to move the at least one drive wheel 64 between a deployed position engaging the floor surface 99 (such as shown in FIGS. 2A, 2B, 3A and 3B) and a retracted position spaced away from and out of contact with the floor surface 99 (represented in a single view as shown in FIG. 2C).”].
Claims 10, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patmore in view of Nakashima and in further view of Sikorski (US PGPub 2022/0004189).
Regarding claim 10, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 9. Patmore and Nakashima do not teach wherein one or more of the plurality of drive mode parameters is adjustable by the user.
However, in a related field of invention, Sikorski does teach wherein one or more of the plurality of drive mode parameters is adjustable by the user [Sikorski ¶ 0049 "FIG. 5 shows an illustrative example of mode configuration. This process allows a user to access a configuration state setup screen, which can present the user with a list of profiles, variables, variable settings and corresponding modes."].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the patient support apparatus with different stored modes as taught by Patmore and Nakashima with allowing the user to adjust parameters as taught by Sikorski in order to increase usability of the patient support apparatus by allowing customization of modes.
Regarding claim 14, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 1. Patmore and Nakashima do not teach wherein the first user command is based on a recognized physical security token.
However, in a related field of invention, Sikorski does teach wherein the first user command is based on a recognized physical security token [Sikorski ¶ 0038 "Driver identification can be done in a variety of manners, such as, but not limited to, device based identification where the system identifies a driver based on a known device relationship, biometric identification (fingerprint, weight, height, etc), visual identification or even input of a specified username/password combination."].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the patient support apparatus with different stored modes as taught by Patmore and Nakashima with using a physical security token as taught by Sikorski in order to increase usability of the patient support apparatus by selective unlocking based on approved circumstances [Sikorski ¶ 0061].
Regarding claim 15, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 1. Patmore and Nakashima do not teach wherein the first user command is based on a recognized electronic security token.
However, in a related field of invention, Sikorski does teach wherein the first user command is based on a recognized electronic security token [Sikorski ¶ 0038 "Driver identification can be done in a variety of manners, such as, but not limited to, device based identification where the system identifies a driver based on a known device relationship, biometric identification (fingerprint, weight, height, etc), visual identification or even input of a specified username/password combination."].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the patient support apparatus with different stored modes as taught by Patmore and Nakashima with using an electronic security token as taught by Sikorski in order to increase usability of the patient support apparatus by selective unlocking based on approved circumstances [Sikorski ¶ 0061].
Claims 12 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patmore in view of Nakashima and in further view of Chang (US PGPub 2021/0215375).
Regarding claim 12, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 9. Patmore and Nakashima do not teach wherein at least one of the plurality of drive mode parameters is defined based on a driver training level associated with the location.
However, in a related field of invention Chang does teach wherein at least one of the plurality of drive mode parameters is defined based on a driver training level associated with the location [Chang ¶ 0023 “The skill determination module 204 receives the driver's identification and determines the driver's initial skill level corresponding to the received identification. The skill determination module 204 transmits this initial skill level to the feature set determination module 206 that determines a feature set to be enable for the driver based on the received initial skill level. The skill determination module 204 then monitors the driver and determines a current skill level for the driver. The current skill level is used by the feature set determination module 206 to alter the feature set enabled by vehicle 102 for the driver.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the patient support apparatus with different stored modes as taught by Patmore and Nakashima with using defining drive parameters based on the driver’s skill level as taught by Chang in order to increase usability and safety of the patient support apparatus.
Regarding claim 25, Patmore as modified by Nakashima teaches the patient support apparatus of claim 23. Patmore and Nakashima do not teach wherein the first drive mode parameter of the first longitudinal drive profile is defined based on a first architectural layout associated with the first location; and wherein the second drive mode parameter of the second longitudinal drive profile is defined based on a driver training level associated with the second location.
However, in a related field of invention Chang does teach wherein the first drive mode parameter of the first longitudinal drive profile is defined based on a first architectural layout associated with the first location; and wherein the second drive mode parameter of the second longitudinal drive profile is defined based on a driver training level associated with the second location [Chang ¶ 0023 “The skill determination module 204 receives the driver's identification and determines the driver's initial skill level corresponding to the received identification. The skill determination module 204 transmits this initial skill level to the feature set determination module 206 that determines a feature set to be enable for the driver based on the received initial skill level. The skill determination module 204 then monitors the driver and determines a current skill level for the driver. The current skill level is used by the feature set determination module 206 to alter the feature set enabled by vehicle 102 for the driver.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the patient support apparatus with different stored modes as taught by Patmore and Nakashima with using defining drive parameters based on the driver’s skill level as taught by Chang in order to increase usability and safety of the patient support apparatus.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOSEPHINE RICH whose telephone number is (571)272-6384. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5pm.
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, Scott Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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.
/J.E.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/SCOTT A BROWNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights