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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the argument for claim 1, “wherein the sleeve is adapted to be secured to the drive handle of the mobile x-ray device and the sleeve does not extend beyond the outer sides of the drive handle”. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The interior of the slot/sleeve does not extend beyond the outer sides of the drive handle as seen in Figure 1B as shown below. Area between black dots is the sleeve which does not extend beyond the outer sides of the drive handle. Therefore, this argument is not persuasive
Regarding the arguments for claim 10, “a storage bin disposed on the body and operably connected to a power source to charge the detector positioned therein and a detector support secured to the drive handle and spaced from the storage bin.” The examiner respectfully disagrees. Jang does indeed teach a storage bin (Figure 2A Element 110) disposed on the body and operably connected to a power source to charge the detector positioned therein (Paragraph 56 - The one or more x-ray detectors 30 may be charged, while being stored in the one or more slots 110 and 120, by the terminal 31 of each of the one or more x-ray detectors 30 docked to the connector 160.). The element 120 is being interpreted as the separate storage bin that is connected to power. Therefore, these arguments are not persuasive.
-Regarding the arguments for claim 18, “a storage bin disposed on the body and operably connected to a power source to charge the detector positioned therein, and a detector support comprising a sleeve defining an interior adapted to receive an edge of a detector therein and a pair of securing plates extending outwardly from the sleeve and secured to the drive handle.” The examiner respectfully disagrees. Jang teaches v. a storage bin (Figure 2A Element 110) disposed on the body and operably connected to a power source to charge the detector positioned therein (Paragraph 56 - The one or more x-ray detectors 30 may be charged, while being stored in the one or more slots 110 and 120, by the terminal 31 of each of the one or more x-ray detectors 30 docked to the connector 160.); and vi. a detector support (Figure 2A Element 120) comprising: I. a sleeve (Figure 1B Element 120 Interior) defining an interior adapted to receive an edge of a detector therein (Paragraph 129 - store the first-sized x-ray detector 400 and the second-sized x-ray detector 410 into the one or more slots 110 and 120 of the storage unit 100.); and II. a pair of securing plates (Seen in Figure 2A – vertical protrusions on edges of storage unit 6 that allow for connection to the main mobile x-ray device) extending outwardly from the sleeve and secured to the drive handle (Seen in Figure 1B Element 70). Therefore, this argument is not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the bottom wall". Parent claim 1 does not recite a bottom wall. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction/clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-4, 7, 10-12, 14, 17, 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jang (US 20190175124 A1; June 13, 2019).
Regarding claim 1, Jang teaches a detector support for a mobile x-ray device (Figure 1B Element 1), the detector support comprising:
a. a sleeve (Figure 1B Element 120) defining an interior adapted to receive an edge of a detector therein (Paragraph 129 - store the first-sized x-ray detector 400 and the second-sized x-ray detector 410 into the one or more slots 110 and 120 of the storage unit 100.); and
b. a pair of securing plates (Seen in Figure 2A – vertical protrusions on edges of storage unit 100 that allow for connection to the main mobile x-ray device and drive handle) extending outwardly from the sleeve and adapted to be secured to a drive handle (Element 70) the mobile x-ray device;
PNG
media_image1.png
595
512
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the sleeve does not extend beyond out sides of the drive handle (The interior of the slot/sleeve does not extend beyond the outer sides of the drive handle; Seen in Figure 1B as shown below. Area between black dots is the sleeve.).
Regarding claim 2, Jang teaches the detector support of claim 1. Jang further teaches wherein the sleeve comprises:
a. a bottom wall (Figure 2A- Bottom of element 100);
b. a rear side wall extending upwardly from the bottom wall (Figure 2A- rear wall of element 100);
c. a front side wall extending upwardly from the bottom wall opposite the rear
side wall (Figure 2A- front wall of element 100);
d. a pair of end walls extending upwardly from the bottom wall and joining
opposed ends of the rear side wall and the front side wall (Figure 2A- side walls of element 100), and
e. an open upper end disposed opposite the bottom wall (Figure 2A- top opening of element 100).
Regarding claim 3, Jang teaches the detector support of claim 2. Jang further teaches wherein the rear side wall and front side wall are
disposed at an angle with regard to the bottom wall (Seen in Figure 1B)
Regarding claim 4, Jang teaches the detector support of claim 3. Jang further teaches wherein the front side wall is shorter than the rear side wall (Seen in Figure 2A).
Regarding claim 7, Jang teaches the detector support of claim 6. Jang further teaches further comprising a support surface (As seen in Figure 1B- The little horizontal pocket/bin area extends outwardly from the rear sidewall of the sleeve/slot between the pair of interior securing plate/notches shown in Figure 2A) extending outwardly from the rear side wall between and the pair of securing plates (As seen in Figure 1B- The little horizontal pocket/bin area extends outwardly from the rear sidewall of the sleeve/slot between the pair of interior securing plate/notches shown in Figure 2A).
Regarding claim 10, Jang teaches a mobile x-ray device (Figure 1A Element 1) comprising:
a. a body including a number of wheels (Figure 1B Element 50; Paragraph 33) rotatably attached thereto and housing operative systems for the obtaining and processing of x-ray data to provide x-ray images (Paragraph 10 – main body 10 with x-ray source 20, detectors 30 to generate x-ray image);
b. a moveable vertical column (Figure 1 B Element 90 – vertical Support frame; Paragraph 36) and horizontal arm (Figure 1B Element 80 – horizontal support arm; Paragraph 36) operably connected to the
body (Figure 1 Element 10 – moveable main body; Paragraph 36) and including an x-ray emitter (Figure 1B Element 20; Paragraph 36) opposite the body (Seen in Figure 1A(;
c. a detector (Figure 1A Element 30) configured to receive x-rays from the x-ray emitter and operably connected to the operative systems to transmit x-ray data from the detector to the operative systems (Paragraph 38-39 The mobile x-ray imaging apparatus 1 may further include the one or more x-ray detectors 30 provided to detect x-rays radiated from the x-ray source 20. The one or more x-ray detectors 30 may have various sizes depending on an object for x-ray image capturing.);
d. a drive handle (Figure 1 A Element 70; Paragraph 35) disposed on the body (Figure 1B Element 10); and
e. a storage bin (Figure 2A Element 110) disposed on the body and operably connected to a power source to charge the detector positioned therein (Paragraph 56 - The one or more x-ray detectors 30 may be charged, while being stored in the one or more slots 110 and 120, by the terminal 31 of each of the one or more x-ray detectors 30 docked to the connector 160.);
f) a detector support (Figure 2A Element 120) secured to the drive handle (Figure 1B Element 70) and spaced from the storage bin (Seen in Figure 2A), the detector support comprising:
f .a detector support comprising:
I. a sleeve (Figure 1B Element 120 Interior) defining an interior adapted to receive an edge of a detector therein (Paragraph 129 - store the first-sized x-ray detector 400 and the second-sized x-ray detector 410 into the one or more slots 110 and 120 of the storage unit 100.); and
II. a pair of securing plates (Seen in Figure 2A – vertical protrusions on edges of storage unit 100 that allow for connection to the main mobile x-ray device and drive handle) extending outwardly from the sleeve and secured to the drive handle (Seen in Fig. 1B Element 70).
Regarding claim 11, Jang teaches the mobile x-ray device of claim 10. Jang further teaches wherein the sleeve comprises:
a. a bottom wall (Figure 2A- Bottom of element 100);
b. a rear side wall extending upwardly from the bottom wall (Figure 2A- rear wall of element 100);
c. a front side wall extending upwardly from the bottom wall opposite the rear
side wall (Figure 2A- front wall of element 100);
d. a pair of end walls extending upwardly from the bottom wall and joining
opposed ends of the rear side wall and the front side wall (Figure 2A- side walls of element 100), and
e. an open upper end disposed opposite the bottom wall (Figure 2A- top opening of element 100).
Regarding claim 12, Jang teaches the mobile x-ray device of claim 11. Jang further teaches wherein the front side wall is shorter than the rear side wall (Seen in Figure 1B).
Regarding claim 14, Jang teaches the mobile x-ray device of claim 10. Jang further teaches further comprising a support surface (Partitions/top horizontal spaces of elements 130 131 132) disposed between the sleeve (Figure 2a Element 130) and the pair of securing plates.
Regarding claim 17, Jang teaches the mobile x-ray device of claim 10. Jang further teaches wherein the sleeve (Figure 1B Element 100) does not extend beyond outer sides of the drive handle (Figure 1B Element 70).
Regarding claim 21, Jang teaches the detector support of claim 1. Jang further teaches wherein the bottom wall (Figure 5 Element 140) includes an aperture (Figure 5 Element 141/142) extending through the bottom wall. (Seen in Figure 5; Paragraph 86 -A damping unit installation portion 141 may be formed at the base plate 140 of the one or more slots 110 and 120. The damping unit installation portion 141 may have a shape of a hole.)
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.
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.
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.
Claims 5-6, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang (US 20190175124 A1; June 13, 2019).
Regarding claim 5, Jang teaches the detector support of claim 4. Jang does not explicitly teach wherein the front side wall has a height between about 2" and about 5".
However, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to specify the abovementioned limitation since it has been held that the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Regarding claim 6, Jang teaches the detector support of claim 1. Jang does not explicitly teach wherein the securing plates extend at a downward angle relative to the rear side wall.
However, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to specify the abovementioned limitation since its merely a change in shape which is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed securing plated angle was significant. In reDailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)
Regarding claim 13, Jang teaches the mobile x-ray device of claim 12. Jang does not explicitly teach wherein the front side wall has a height between about 2" and about 5".
However, it would have been obvious at the time of filing to specify the abovementioned limitation since it has been held that the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. In Gardnerv.TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984).
Claims 8 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang (US 20190175124 A1; June 13, 2019) in view of Santos (US 20220031267A1; February 3, 2022).
Regarding claim 8, Jang teaches the detector support of claim 1. However, Jang does not teach further comprising a cord management system disposed on the front side wall opposite the interior.
Santos teaches further comprising a cord management system. (Paragraph 26).
Jang in view of Santos does not teach that the cord management system is disposed on the front side wall opposite the interior.
However, it would have been obvious at the time to filing to specify the abovementioned limitation since it has been held that a simple rearrangement of part is was held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device. In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)
Regarding claim 15, Jang teaches the mobile x-ray device of claim 10. However, Jang does not teach further comprising a cord management system disposed on the front side wall opposite the interior.
Santos teaches further comprising a cord management system. (Paragraph 26).
Jang in view of Santos does not teach that the cord management system is disposed on the front side wall opposite the interior.
However, it would have been obvious at the time to filing to specify the abovementioned limitation since it has been held that a simple rearrangement of part is was held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device. In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)
Claims 9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang (US 20190175124 A1; June 13, 2019) in view of Santos (US 20220031267A1; February 3, 2022) in view of Wu (US 20090202038 A1; August 13, 2009).
Regarding claim 9, Jang in view of Santos teaches the detector support of claim 8. Santos teaches further comprising a cord wrap. (Paragraph 26 – cord wrap).
Jang in view of Santos does not teach that the cord management system is disposed on the front side wall opposite the interior.
However, it would have been obvious at the time to filing to specify the abovementioned limitation since it has been held that a simple rearrangement of part is was held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device. In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)
Jang in view of Santos do not teach b. a switch holder disposed on the front side wall.
Wu teaches b. a switch holder disposed on the front side wall. (Figure 3 – Switch holder seen on the front side wall of Element 100).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the switch holder of Wu with the detector support of Jang in view of Santos. A person having ordinary skill in the art at would have been motivated to do this since it is a known element in a mobile imaging cart.
Regarding claim 16, Jang in view of Santos teaches the detector support of claim 15. Santos teaches further comprising a cord wrap. (Paragraph 26 – cord wrap).
Jang in view of Santos does not teach that the cord management system is disposed on the front side wall opposite the interior.
However, it would have been obvious at the time to filing to specify the abovementioned limitation since it has been held that a simple rearrangement of part is was held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device. In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)
Jang in view of Santos do not teach b. a switch holder disposed on the front side wall.
Wu teaches b. a switch holder disposed on the front side wall. (Figure 3 – Switch holder seen on the front side wall of Element 100).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the switch holder of Wu with the detector support of Jang in view of Santos. A person having ordinary skill in the art at would have been motivated to do this since it is a known element in a mobile imaging cart.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang (US 20190175124 A1; June 13, 2019) in view Elen (US 20190343592A1; November 14, 2019).
Regarding claim 18, Jang teaches a method of supporting a detector on a mobile x-ray device, the method
comprising the steps of:
a. providing a mobile x-ray device comprising:
1. a body (Figure 1B Element 100) including a number of wheels (Figure 1B Element 50) rotatably attached thereto and housing operative systems for the obtaining and processing of x-ray data to provide x-ray images (Paragraph 38-39 The mobile x-ray imaging apparatus 1 may further include the one or more x-ray detectors 30 provided to detect x-rays radiated from the x-ray source 20. The one or more x-ray detectors 30 may have various sizes depending on an object for x-ray image capturing);
ii. a moveable vertical column (Figure 1B Element 90) and horizontal arm (Figure 1B Element 80) operably connected to the body (Figure 1B Element 10) and including an x-ray emitter (Figure 1B Element 20) opposite the body;
iii. a detector (Figure 1A Element 30) configured to receive x-rays from the x-ray emitter and operably connected to the operative systems to transmit x-ray
data from the detector to the operative systems (Paragraph 38-39 The mobile x-ray imaging apparatus 1 may further include the one or more x-ray detectors 30 provided to detect x-rays radiated from the x-ray source 20. The one or more x-ray detectors 30 may have various sizes depending on an object for x-ray image capturing.);
iv. a drive handle disposed on the body (Figure 1A Element 70);
v. a storage bin (Figure 2A Element 110) disposed on the body and operably connected to a power source to charge the detector positioned therein (Paragraph 56 - The one or more x-ray detectors 30 may be charged, while being stored in the one or more slots 110 and 120, by the terminal 31 of each of the one or more x-ray detectors 30 docked to the connector 160.); and
vi. a detector support (Figure 2A Element 120) comprising:
I. a sleeve (Figure 1B Element 120 Interior) defining an interior adapted to receive an edge of a detector therein (Paragraph 129 - store the first-sized x-ray detector 400 and the second-sized x-ray detector 410 into the one or more slots 110 and 120 of the storage unit 100.); and
II. a pair of securing plates (Seen in Figure 2A – vertical protrusions on edges of storage unit 6 that allow for connection to the main mobile x-ray device) extending outwardly from the sleeve and secured to the drive handle (Seen in Figure 1B Element 70)
b. placing an edge of the detector within the sleeve to support the detector
within the sleeve in a hands-free manner (Paragraph 38 - The one or more x-ray detectors 30 may be stored in a storage unit 100 after capturing an x-ray image.).
Jang does not teach placing a protective bag around the detector.
Elen teaches placing a protective bag around the detector (Paragraph 28 - The mobile x-ray detector [20] has been transferred from the cart storage position into the protective bag dispensing system [10] which is depicted in an open position.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the detector of Jang with the protective bag of Elen. A person having ordinary skill in the art at would have been motivated to do this in order to add a protective layer to keep the detector panel sterile (Elen - Paragraph 10)
Regarding claim 19, Jang in view of Elen teaches the method of claim 18.
Jang teaches placing the detector with the sleeve (Paragraph 129 - store the first-sized x-ray detector 400 and the second-sized x-ray detector 410 into the one or more slots 110 and 120 of the storage unit 100.).
Jang does not teach a. performing an imaging procedure with the detector within the protective bag;
b. placing the detector and protective bag within the sleeve; and
c. removing the protective bag from the detector.
Elen further teaches further comprising the steps of: a. performing an imaging procedure with the detector within the protective bag (Paragraph 5 - the x-ray detector is optionally covered before an x-ray image is made and is positioned under the patient with a disposable hygiene protection means, e.g. a sterile plastic bag of form and size corresponding with the detector.);
b. placing the detector and protective bag within the sleeve (Paragraph 7 - Alternative solutions provide for similar approaches by complementing the existing detector storage location with an additional slot-like disposition which has then the capability of supporting the detector and at the same time storing the protective bags.).
Jan in view of Elen does not disclose “c. removing the protective bag from the detector.”
However, at the time of filing it would have been obvious to specify” “c. removing the protective bag from the detector.” Since it is a known and necessary step in order to use the detector the next time on a patient in order to ensure sanitary imaging conditions.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 GISSELLE GUTIERREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4672. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5:00PM.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/GISSELLE GUTIERREZ/
Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights