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
Status of the Claims
This is in response to the amendment filed on 12/10/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 12/10/25 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of the full statutory term of US Patent Numbers US 10,231,649, 10,750,978, 11,350,852 and 11,957,456 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 1-4 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wilson et al. (US 20110208541 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Wilson discloses a patient support apparatus (Abstract) comprising:
a frame (122 of Fig 2A);
a support surface supported on the frame and adapted to support a patient thereon (134 of Fig 2A);
a user interface (including 34, 36, 150, 152 of Figs 1, 2A; 128, 130 or 132 of Fig 2A; 206 of Fig 5A; [0072] The patient stations 34, 36… graphical touchscreen user interface 82… a non-touchscreen display 84) adapted to allow a caregiver to enter new patient information regarding a new patient assigned to the patient support apparatus ([0155] a caregiver or other authorized staff person may manually enter the patient's status at a master station 26, a patient station 34, 36, a non-bed mounted user interface 150, 152 of Fig 2A; [0196] FIG. 7C, at step 314…patient admit information (which includes a patient identifier and an admit indicator) may be…manually input at a user interface);
a display (82, 84 of Fig 1; 154, 156 of Fig 2A; [0072]); and
a controller (192 of Fig 4, [0077]) adapted to receive data indicating that a service event exists for the patient support apparatus ([0198] At step 318, the system 10 determines whether the bed-integrated weigh scale has been zeroed before the patient has been admitted to the room by checking the date and time stamp of the last bed scale zeroing and comparing it to the date and time stamp of the patient admit), the service event indicating that a form of maintenance work should be performed on the patient support apparatus ([0160] room status identifiers include, but are not limited to "room not ready" or "room dirty," "room clean," "room ready," "room occupied," "bed scale zeroed," and "bed scale not zeroed." [0199] If the bed scale has not been zeroed…At step 324, the room status of "not ready" is displayed on the electronic status board 30 and/or one or more of the in-room user interfaces 34, 36, 206), wherein the controller further adapted to provide an indication on the display that the service event exists in response to the caregiver attempting to enter new patient information ([0196] patient admit information… may be manually input at a user interface, step 314 of Fig 7C) regarding the new patient ([0199] If the bed scale has not been zeroed…At step 324, the room status of "not ready" is displayed on the electronic status board 30 and/or one or more of the in-room user interfaces 34, 36, 206; [0200] user control for zeroing the scale may be made available at one of the non-bed mounted user interfaces; Fig 7C).
Regarding Claim 2, Wilson discloses the controller is further adapted to prevent the caregiver from entering new patient information until service for the service event has been completed ([0202] At step 354, the system 10 determines (e.g. by detecting signals issued by the bed controller 192 over the bed network 190) whether the zeroing of the bed scale has been successfully completed. If the bed scale zeroing fails, an error message is displayed at the bed-mounted user interface 198 and no date and time stamp for bed scale zeroing is issued).
Regarding Claim 3, Wilson discloses a transceiver adapted to communicate with a local area network ([0051], [0137]-[0138]), wherein the controller is adapted to receive the data indicating that the service event exists for the patient support apparatus from a server on the local area network via the transceiver ([0051] The room-based components of the system 10 are in bidirectional communication with the server 18 via the communications interface 20, which includes the network interface 22).
Regarding Claim 4, Wilson discloses the user interface includes a plurality of controls adapted to control a plurality of functions of the patient support apparatus ([0030] FIG. 2A patient room including patient beds with bed-mounted user controls; [0219] display allows the caregiver to…zero the bed scale; Figs 12-13), and the controller is adapted to display the indication in response to a user activating one or more of the controls ([0094]-[0095] 158, 162 displays of need to clean or zero the bed; [0064] displays that the bed is dirty; [0099] list of functions).
Regarding Claim 8, Wilson discloses a first control for carrying out a first function of the patient support apparatus ([0030] FIG. 2A patient room including patient beds with bed-mounted user controls); and wherein the controller (192) is further adapted to detect when the first control is activated by a user ([0088] include a display 154, 156 as well as one or more user controls 158, 160, 162, 164) and, in response to such activation, if the controller has received the data indicating that the service event exists (need for cleaning or zeroing) for the patient support apparatus, to respond to the activation of the first control in a first manner ([0094]-[0095],158, 162, 168 display indicates need to clean or zero the bed); and if the controller has not received the data indicating that the service event exists for the patient support apparatus, to respond to the activation of the first control in second manner, the second manner being different from the first manner ([0094]-[0095] display indicates no need to clean or zero bed).
8>Regarding Claim 9, Wilson discloses the first manner includes carrying out the first function of the patient support apparatus without a predetermined limit (indicates “not zeroed” on display until zeroed), and the second manner includes at least one of the following: carrying out the first function of the patient support apparatus with the predetermined limit (166 of Fig 2B shows time stamp, as a reminder that the bed will again need to be zeroed after appropriate time frame, [0199] If the bed scale has not been zeroed within the appropriate time frame…then the room status is set to "not ready"), or not carrying out the first function of the patient support apparatus.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson, further in view of Andrienko (US 2012/0137436).
Regarding Claim 5, Wilson doesn’t specify that the controller is further adapted to limit a function of the patient support apparatus based upon a comparison of a current date to a date on which the patient support apparatus has been scheduled for service.
However, Wilson teaches the system determines whether the bed-integrated weigh scale has been zeroed before the patient has been admitted to the room by checking the date and time stamp of the last bed scale zeroing and comparing it to the date and time stamp of the patient admit. If the bed scale has been zeroed within the appropriate time frame, the room status remains as "ready" (step 328) ([0198], Fig 7C) and if not (and not auto ready) the room is set to not ready ([0199] step 322). So Wilson limits usage of the room (not ready) based on the date comparison, but doesn't specify limiting a function.
In the same field of endeavor, Andrienko teaches a bed has one or more electronically-controllable features. Input-output devices are used by persons to control the electronically-controllable features. A biometric input-output device obtains biometric data from persons who desire to control one or more of the electronically-controllable features. The bed may restrict access or modify the electronically-controllable features based on the biometric data. Andrienko teaches if the routine obtains the patient's weight information (from the HIS 148, for example), based on the biometric data, then the routine may disable the bed's weigh scale ([0097]).
Therefore, 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 Wilson in order to eliminate redundancy and save energy.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson, further in view of Pathare (US 2004/0172182).
Regarding Claim 6, Wilson doesn’t specify the indication includes data regarding a date for which the patient support apparatus has been scheduled for service.
In the field of support apparatuses for occupants, Pathare teaches a user interface with a display configured to include a fixed area and a selectable area. The fixed area displays information, while the selectable area displays one of a plurality of pages that includes parameters for at least one of a plurality of optional subsystems.
Pathare discloses the indication includes data regarding the date for which a support apparatus has been scheduled for service ([0037]).
Therefore, 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 Wilson in order to provide helpful reminders and assurance that maintenance has been scheduled.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson, further in view of Reeder (US 2014/0320290).
Regarding Claim 7, Wilson discloses the controller is further adapted to receive a level associated with the scheduled service and change the indication based upon the conditions ([0064] dirty would have a different indication than clean), but doesn’t specify priority level.
In the same field of endeavor, Reeder teaches a hospital monitoring system for monitoring hospital personnel, a plurality of patient locations for patients, and associated devices is configured to control associated devices based on the presence of hospital personnel or alarms.
Reeder receives a priority level associated with the scheduled service and changes the indication based upon the priority level ([0063]-[0068]; Fig 9 no lockout, partial lockout or full lock out).
Therefore, 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 Wilson in order to prepare the working environment when an alarm is received, subject to environmental and patient control overrides depending on the nature and time of the alarm, as suggested by Reeder ([0005]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson, further in view of Andrienko.
8>Regarding Claim 10, Wilson discloses the first manner includes carrying out the first function of the patient support apparatus ([0094]-[0095],158, 162, 168 display indicates need to clean or zero the bed)and the second manner includes carrying out the first function of the patient support apparatus (Fig 2A indicating clean, Fig 2B scale zeroed), but doesn’t specify changing how the controller reacts to a subsequent activation of a second control for carrying out a second function of the patient support apparatus.
Andrienko teaches changing how the controller reacts to a subsequent activation of a second control for carrying out a second function of the patient support apparatus ([0097] for instance, the weighing mechanism works normally, but is disabled once biometrics of patient are taken).
Therefore, 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 Wilson in order to eliminate redundancy and save energy.
Claims 11-16 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson, further in view of Reeder.
Regarding Claim 11, Wilson discloses a patient support apparatus comprising:
a frame (122 of fig 2A);
a support surface supported on the frame and adapted to support a patient thereon (134 of Fig 2A);
a transceiver adapted to communicate with a local area network (([0051] room-based components of the system 10 are in bidirectional communication with the server 18 via the communications interface 20, which includes the network interface 22, [0132], [0137]-[0138]) [0137], Figs 4, 5);
a display (82, 84 of Fig 1; 154, 156 of Fig 2A; [0072] patient stations 34, 36… graphical touchscreen user interface 82… a non-touchscreen display 84); and
a controller (192 of Fig 4, [0077]) adapted to receive data via the transceiver indicating that a service event exists for the patient support apparatus ([0198] At step 318, the system 10 determines whether the bed-integrated weigh scale has been zeroed before the patient has been admitted to the room by checking the date and time stamp of the last bed scale zeroing and comparing it to the date and time stamp of the patient admit, Figs 4,5), the data being received from a server on the local area network ([0051] room-based components of the system 10 are in bidirectional communication with the server), the data including a dirty would have a different indication than clean), the service event indicating that a form of maintenance work should be performed on the patient support apparatus ([0160] room status identifiers include, but are not limited to "room not ready" or "room dirty," "room clean," "room ready," "room occupied," "bed scale zeroed," and "bed scale not zeroed." [0199] If the bed scale has not been zeroed…At step 324, the room status of "not ready" is displayed on the electronic status board 30 and/or one or more of the in-room user interfaces 34, 36, 206), wherein display indicates need or no need to clean or zero the bed), but doesn’t respond with a priority level.
Reeder receives a priority level associated with the scheduled service and change the indication based upon the priority level ([0063]-[0068]; Fig 9 no lockout, partial lockout or full lock out). Reeder also teaches alarms indicating a form of maintenance work should be performed on the patient support apparatus ([0037] Alarms 92 include bed malfunction alarms).
Therefore, 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 Wilson with Reeder in order to prepare the working environment when an alarm is received, subject to environmental and patient control overrides depending on the nature of the alarm and time of the alarm, as suggested by Reeder ([0005]).
Regarding Claim 12, Wilson doesn’t specify if the priority level exceeds a predetermined level, the controller is further adapted to change the patient support apparatus to an unusable configuration.
However, if the bed is not ready it would likely be limited to who can use it.
Reeder teaches an unusable configuration ([0047], [0063]-[0068], Fig 9).
Therefore, 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 Wilson in order to prepare the working environment when an alarm is received, subject to environmental and patient control overrides depending on the nature of the alarm and time of the alarm, Reeder ([0005]).
12>Regarding Claim 13, Reeder discloses the unusable configuration includes moving a section of a support deck of the patient support apparatus to an orientation adapted to deter a patient from resting on the support deck, and locking of the section of the support deck in the orientation until servicing of the patient support apparatus commences ([0072] lockout corresponds to the bed 90 siderail).
Regarding Claim 14, Wilson discloses a user interface (including 34, 36, 150, 152 of Figs 1, 2A; 128, 130 or 132 of Fig 2A; 206 of Fig 5A) adapted to allow a caregiver to enter new patient information regarding a new patient assigned to the patient support apparatus ([0155] a caregiver or other authorized staff person may manually enter the patient's status at a master station 26, a patient station 34, 36, a non-bed mounted user interface 150, 152 of Fig 2A; [0196] FIG. 7C, at step 314…patient admit information (which includes a patient identifier and an admit indicator) may be…manually input at a user interface); wherein the controller is further adapted to provide an indication on the display that the service event exists in response to the caregiver attempting to enter new patient information regarding the new patient ([0199] If the bed scale has not been zeroed…At step 324, the room status of "not ready" is displayed on the electronic status board 30 and/or one or more of the in-room user interfaces 34, 36, 206).
14>Regarding Claim 15, Wilson discloses the controller is further adapted to prevent the caregiver from entering new patient information until service for the service event has been completed ([0202] At step 354, the system 10 determines (e.g. by detecting signals issued by the bed controller 192 over the bed network 190) whether the zeroing of the bed scale has been successfully completed. If the bed scale zeroing fails, an error message is displayed at the bed-mounted user interface 198 and no date and time stamp for bed scale zeroing is issued).
14>Regarding Claim 16, Wilson discloses the user interface includes a plurality of controls adapted to control a plurality of functions of the patient support apparatus ([0030] FIG. 2A patient room including patient beds with bed-mounted user controls; [0219] display allows the caregiver to…zero the bed scale; Figs 12-13), and the controller is adapted to display the indication in response to a user activating one or more of the controls ([0094]-[0095] 158, 162 displays of need to clean or zero the bed; [0064] displays that the bed is dirty; [0099] list of functions).
14>Regarding Claim 19, Wilson discloses a first control for carrying out a first function of the patient support apparatus ([0030] FIG. 2A patient room including patient beds with bed-mounted user controls); and wherein the controller (192) is further adapted to detect when the first control is activated by a user ([0088] include a display 154, 156 as well as one or more user controls 158, 160, 162, 164) and, in response to such activation, if the controller has received the data indicating that the service event exists (need for cleaning or zeroing) for the patient support apparatus, to respond to the activation of the first control in a first manner ([0094]-[0095],158, 162, 168 display indicates need to clean or zero the bed); and if the controller has not received the data indicating that the service event exists for the patient support apparatus, to respond to the activation of the first control in second manner, the second manner being different from the first manner ([0094]-[0095] display indicates no need to clean or zero bed).
19>Regarding Claim 20, Wilson discloses the first manner includes carrying out the first function of the patient support apparatus without a predetermined limit (indicates “not zeroed” on display until zeroed), and the second manner includes at least one of the following: carrying out the first function of the patient support apparatus with the predetermined limit (166 of Fig 2B shows time stamp, as a reminder that the bed will again need to be zeroed after appropriate time frame, [0199] If the bed scale has not been zeroed within the appropriate time frame…then the room status is set to "not ready"), or not carrying out the first function of the patient support apparatus.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson and Reeder, further in view of Andrienko.
Regarding Claim 17, Wilson doesn’t specify that the controller is further adapted to limit a function of the patient support apparatus based upon a comparison of a current date to a date on which the patient support apparatus has been scheduled for service.
However, Wilson teaches the system determines whether the bed-integrated weigh scale has been zeroed before the patient has been admitted to the room by checking the date and time stamp of the last bed scale zeroing and comparing it to the date and time stamp of the patient admit. If the bed scale has been zeroed within the appropriate time frame, the room status remains as "ready" (step 328) ([0198], Fig 7C) and if not (and not auto ready) the room is set to not ready ([0199] step 322). So Wilson limits usage of the room (not ready) based on the date comparison, but doesn't specify limiting a function.
Andrienko teaches if the routine obtains the patient's weight information (from the HIS 148, for example), based on the biometric data, then the routine may disable the bed's weigh scale ([0097]).
Therefore, 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 Wilson in order to eliminate redundancy and save energy.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson and Reeder, further in view of Pathare.
Regarding Claim 18, Wilson doesn’t specify the indication includes data regarding a date for which the patient support apparatus has been scheduled for service.
Pathare discloses the indication includes data regarding the date for which a support apparatus has been scheduled for service ([0037]).
Therefore, 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 Wilson in order to provide helpful reminders and assurance that maintenance has been scheduled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/10/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the following reasons:
Arguments:
A. Applicant argues, claim 1 recites a display that is part of the patient support apparatus and that displays the indication that the service event exists. The display 150 of Wilson is positioned on a wall, and is not part of the patient support apparatus. The subject matter of claim 1 is therefore not disclosed in the Wilson publication.
It is respectfully submitted that the claimed patient support apparatus comprises a frame and a support surface, but is not defined as the frame and support surface. Wilson’s display on the wall is a part of the entire patient support apparatus for a patient bed. The display gives the status of the patient bed ([0088] each of the beds 14, 16 has a non-bed mounted user interface 150, 152 connected thereto via a bidirectional communication link 106, [0090] user interface 150, 152 displays information relating to the bed), and is a part of the patient support apparatus.
B. Applicant argues, claim 1 recites displaying the service event indicator in response to the caregiver attempting to enter new patient information. Not only is there is no disclosure in Wilson of a bed that allows a user to enter new patient information, there is no disclosure that the "room not ready" message displayed on the wall-display 150 is displayed "in response to the caregiver attempting to enter new patient information." Instead, it appears that this message is displayed in response to a new patient being admitted to the hospital (see steps 314 and 324 of FIG. 7C). For this additional reason, the subject matter of claim 1 is not disclosed in the Wilson publication.
It is respectfully submitted that Wilson teaches, patient admit information may be manually inputted at a user interface ([0196] patient admit information…may be manually input at a user interface, step 314 of Fig 7C), allowing a user to enter new patient information. And teaches that “a user control for zeroing the scale may be made available at one of the non-bed mounted user interfaces 34, 36, 206, and/or an indication that the bed scale has not been zeroed is displayed thereon (steps 332, 334) ([0200]). In Fig 7C Wilson teaches that the displays respond directly to the user input of the newly admitted patient based on the status of the assigned patient bed. Therefore Wilson reads on the claim language.
C. Applicant argues, claim 1 has been amended to specify that the service event indicates "that a form of maintenance work should be performed on the patient support apparatus." The scale zeroing of the Wilson reference is not maintenance work. Whether the scale is zeroed or not has nothing to do with maintaining the operation of the patient support apparatus. It is simply a procedure performed to discount non-patient weight from being included as patient weight. This is not maintenance work. For this additional reason, the rejection of claim 1 and its dependent claims should be withdrawn.
It is respectfully submitted that the examiner is responsible to provide the broadest reasonable interpretation to the claim language. “Maintenance” is defined as, the upkeep (the act of maintaining in good condition) of property or equipment, or the process of preserving a condition or situation or the state of being preserved. “Work” is defined as activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result. Wilson teaches a user control for zeroing the scale may be made available at one of the non-bed mounted user interfaces ([0200]). Zeroing out a bed to prepare it for a new patient reads on maintenance work.
D. Applicant argues, Claim 11 recites data that includes "a priority level for the service event," and that the service event indicates "that a form of maintenance work should be performed on the patient support apparatus." The Reeder publication was cited for disclosing in paragraphs [0063] through [0068] patient alarms that have different priority levels, such as code blue or cardiac arrest. Although these patient alarms lead to taking different actions on the patient support apparatus, these alarms have nothing to do with "maintenance work that should be performed on the patient support apparatus." Accordingly, even if the disclosure of the Reeder publication is combined with that of the Wilson publication, the result is not what is set forth in claim 11. For this reason, the rejection of claim 11 and its dependent claims should be withdrawn.
It is respectfully submitted that the Wilson reference teaches displaying a form of maintenance work should be done (needs cleaning, needs to be zeroed). And, Reeder also teaches alarms indicating a form of maintenance work should be performed on the patient support apparatus ([0037] Alarms 92 include bed malfunction alarms).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a. Iucha et al. (US 20160259906 A1) discloses a method a patient support apparatus includes a frame comprised of one or more components controlled by a controller to move portions of the frame between a plurality of positions and orientations. The controller monitors usage of the patient support apparatus components and dates when maintenance has been performed on one or more of the patient support apparatus components. The controller is operable to transmit the maintenance date and usage information to a remote computing device, wherein the remote computing device is configured to determine an availability status of the patient support apparatus that indicates whether the patient support apparatus is available to be scheduled for maintenance or assigned to a patient, based on the maintenance date and the usage information.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK S RUSHING whose telephone number is (571)270-5876. The examiner can normally be reached on 10-6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/MARK S RUSHING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689