DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 124.4 (see par 0099).
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the extendable arm interconnecting the first anteroom and first rear frame members and the second anteroom and second rear frame member must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The drawings show the first anteroom and second anteroom frame members connected only to first and second front frame members. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-9, 11-13, 17, 20, 22-26, and 29 are 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 1 recites the limitation "the rear frame members" in clause iii) (2). It is unclear whether “the rear frame members” refer to the first or the second rear frame members.
Claim 9 discloses “canopy mountings.” It is unclear whether the canopy mountings of claim 9 refer to previously defined canopy mountings in claim 1 or another/different canopy mountings.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the…anteroom" in clauses a) iv), v), vi), and vii) and clauses b) iv), v), vi), and vii). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the extendable arms" in clause b). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 29 recites the limitation "the rear anteroom frame members" in clause iii) (2). It is unclear whether “the rear anteroom frame members” refer to the first or the second rear anteroom frame members.
The remainder of the claims are rejected as a result of their dependency from claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-9, 13, 17, and 22-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2018165715 to Ballantyne et al. (“Ballantyne”).
Regarding claim 1, Ballantyne discloses an isolation room apparatus 600 configured to isolate a subject, the apparatus including: a) a frame 610 movable between collapsed (Fig. 7D) and erected (Fig. 7A) configurations, the frame including: i) first 704/705 and second 702 front frame members; ii) first 703 and second 701 rear frame members; iii) deployable arms 721, 722, 723 interconnecting: (1) the first front and first rear frame members (via arm 722); (2) the rear frame members (via arm 723); and, (3) the second front and second rear frame members (via arm 721); iv) a canopy mounting (701.6, 702.6, 703.6, 704.6) mounted to each frame member; and, v) a curtain rail 725 that in the erected configuration is mounted proximate upper ends of the first and second front frame members so that the curtain rail extends between the first and second front frame members above an opening defining a doorway (doorway openable or closeable by curtain 642); and, b) a canopy 803 configured to be supported by the frame in the erected configuration, the canopy 803 defining an internal volume for containing a subject to thereby substantially isolate the subject from a surrounding environment and the canopy including one or more curtains 642 supported by the rail to allow the curtains to be moved between open (Fig. 6A) and closed (Fig. 6B) positions to selectively provide access to the internal volume.
Regarding claim 2, Ballantyne discloses that the front frame members 704/705 and curtain rail 725 are configured so that the curtain rail 725 is supported without requiring elevation or extension of the front frame members. 725 is supported by upper portion of 705 and 702.
Regarding claim 3, Ballantyne discloses that the curtain rail 725 is pivotally mounted proximate to an upper end of the first front frame member and configured to be mounted to an upper end of the second front frame member at a height sufficient to support the rail in an operative position. See pivot joint in Fig. 7E and par 00148.
Regarding claim 5, Ballantyne discloses that the curtain rail 725 is configured to abut against the first front frame member 705 when the frame is in the collapsed configuration. See Fig. 7D.
Regarding claim 6, Ballantyne discloses that the curtain rail 725 is stored removably mounted to the first front frame member when the frame is in the collapsed configuration and when the frame is in the erected configuration, the curtain rail is removably attached proximate upper ends of the first and second frame members.
Regarding claim 7, Ballantyne discloses that the curtain rail 725 is extendible so that at least one of: a) a width of the frame in the erected configuration is adjustable; and, b) a width of the doorway is adjustable by virtue of the adjustable arms 721-723.
Regarding claim 8, Ballantyne discloses that the apparatus is configured to be used with different sized canopies to provide isolation rooms have different widths by virtue of the adjustable arms 721-723.
Regarding claim 9, Ballantyne discloses that the canopy mountings (701.6, 702.6, 703.6, 704.6) are at least one of: a) movably mounted to each frame member, the canopy mountings being movable between lowered (Fig. 7A) and elevated positions (Fig. 7D); b) slidably mounted to a surface of the frame members; c) supported by a shaft (703.1, 705.1, 702.1) that can be raised relative to a frame member; and, d) moved between lowered and elevated positions using linear actuators.
Regarding claim 13, Ballantyne discloses that the apparatus includes one or more canopy rails 701.6, 702.6, 703.6, 704.6 that in the erected configuration extend between frame members to engage the canopy and wherein at least one of: a) the one or more canopy rails support the canopy in an elevated position and extend between at least one of: i) upper ends of the rear frame members; ii) upper ends of the first front and first rear frame members; iii) upper ends of the second front and second rear frame members; iv) upper ends of the first front and first anteroom frame members; v) upper ends of the second front and second anteroom frame members; vi) upper ends of the first anteroom and first rear frame members; and, vii) upper ends of the second anteroom and second rear frame members.
Regarding claim 17, Ballantyne discloses that at least one of: a) the apparatus includes: i) a filter (par 0042); and, ii) a fan 545 configured to urge air into and/or out of the internal volume through the filter.
Regarding claim 22, Ballantyne discloses that the apparatus includes a controller (par 0190) that is configured to control at least one of: a) extension of the curtain rail; b) extension of the extendable arms; c) operation of a filter fan (par 0191); and, d) operation of an air pump.
Regarding claim 23, Ballantyne discloses that the apparatus includes a sensor (par 0072, 0162) configured to sense a canopy size, and wherein the controller is configured to control extension of the curtain rail and one or more extendable arms in accordance with a sensed canopy size.
Regarding claim 24, Ballantyne discloses that the canopy includes coded data (par 0025-0028, 0178) indicative of the canopy size and the sensor is configured to sense the coded data provided on the canopy.
Regarding claim 25, Ballantyne discloses that the apparatus includes an actuator 640 (par 0132) for at least one of opening and closing curtains supported by the curtain rail.
Regarding claim 26, Ballantyne discloses that the actuator 640 includes at least one of: i) a foot pedal; ii) a foot pedal physically connected to the curtains; and, iii) a controller (controller that is a button, par 0132) that is configured to control the actuator.
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO2014/019022 to Ballantyne et al. (“Ballantyne II”).
Regarding claim 4, Ballantyne does not disclose that the curtain rail is slidably mounted to the second front frame member, so that the curtain rail raises as the frame is moved from the collapsed to the erected configuration.
Ballantyne II discloses an isolation room apparatus wherein a curtain rail (Ballantyne II 1025.2) is slidably mounted to a second front frame member (1025.2 is slid into 1025.4 connected to a second front frame member; see Figs. 10G and 11B), so that the curtain rail raises as the frame is moved from the collapsed to the erected configuration.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Ballantyne to have the curtain rail is slidably mounted to the second front frame member, so that the curtain rail raises as the frame is moved from the collapsed to the erected configuration as taught in Ballantyne II with a reasonable expectation of success because it would predictably faciltiate deployment of the apparatus.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ballantyne.
Regarding claim 20, Ballantyne does not expressly disclose that at least one of: a) the collapsed configuration the frame has a maximum height that is at least one of: i. greater than 1400 mm; ii. greater than 1500 mm; iii. greater than 1600 mm; iv. greater than 1750 mm; v. less than 2100 mm; vi. less than 2000 mm; vii. less than a standard doorway opening; and, viii. about 1895 mm; and, b) without extension, the front frame members reach a height that is at least one of: i) greater than 1400 mm; ii) greater than 1500 mm; iii) greater than 1600 mm; iv) greater than 1750 mm; v) less than 2100 mm; vi) less than 2000 mm; vii) less than a standard doorway opening; and, viii) about 1895 mm. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the structure of Ballantyne to have at least one of: a) the collapsed configuration the frame has a maximum height that is at least one of: i. greater than 1400 mm; ii. greater than 1500 mm; iii. greater than 1600 mm; iv. greater than 1750 mm; v. less than 2100 mm; vi. less than 2000 mm; vii. less than a standard doorway opening; and, viii. about 1895 mm; and, b) without extension, the front frame members reach a height that is at least one of: i) greater than 1400 mm; ii) greater than 1500 mm; iii) greater than 1600 mm; iv) greater than 1750 mm; v) less than 2100 mm; vi) less than 2000 mm; vii) less than a standard doorway opening; and, viii) about 1895 mm since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of the components. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Claim(s) 11, 12, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ballantyne in view of U.S. Publication No. 2020/0165838 to Thomas et al. (“Thomas”).
Regarding claim 11, Ballantyne does not disclose that the frame includes: a) first and second anteroom frame members; and, b) an anteroom curtain rail that in the erected configuration is mounted proximate upper ends of the first and second anteroom frame members so that the curtain rail extends between the first and second anteroom frame members above an opening defining a anteroom doorway, and wherein the canopy is configured to define a first internal volume configured to contain the subject and a second internal volume configured to define an anteroom.
Thomas in Fig. 8 discloses an isolation structure comprising a frame (Thomas 1a, 1b) including an anteroom (Thomas 1b), the frame includes: a) first and second anteroom frame members (Thomas 9c, 9d); and, b) an anteroom curtain rail (Thomas 7f) that in the erected configuration is mounted proximate upper ends of the first and second anteroom frame members so that the curtain rail extends between the first and second anteroom frame members above an opening defining a anteroom doorway (Thomas 51), and wherein the canopy is configured to define a first internal volume configured to contain the subject and a second internal volume configured to define an anteroom.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the appartus of Ballantyne to have the frame include: a) first and second anteroom frame members; and, b) an anteroom curtain rail that in the erected configuration is mounted proximate upper ends of the first and second anteroom frame members so that the curtain rail extends between the first and second anteroom frame members above an opening defining a anteroom doorway, and wherein the canopy is configured to define a first internal volume configured to contain the subject and a second internal volume configured to define an anteroom as taught in Thomas with a reasonable expectation of success because it would predictably provide for an expanded isolation room to increase available isolation room space. Further, it has been held that a mere duplication of parts, such as the duplication of the frame to have an anteroom, has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. A duplication of parts is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 12, Ballantyne does not disclose that the frame includes: a) first and second anteroom frame members; and, b) extendable arms interconnecting: i) the first front and first anteroom frame members; ii) the second front and second anteroom frame members; iii) the first anteroom and first rear frame members; and, iv) the second anteroom and second rear frame members; and, c) an anteroom curtain rail that in the erected configuration is mounted proximate upper ends of the first and second anteroom frame members so that the curtain rail extends between the first and second anteroom frame members above an opening defining a anteroom doorway, and wherein the canopy is configured to define a first internal volume between the rear and anteroom frame members for containing the subject and a second internal volume between the anteroom and front frame members defining an anteroom.
Thomas in Fig. 8 discloses an isolation room apparatus wherein the frame (Thomas 1a, 1b) includes: a) first and second anteroom frame members (Thomas 9c, 9d); and, b) extendable arms (Thomas 74a/72a, 74c/72c) interconnecting: i) the first front and first anteroom frame members; ii) the second front and second anteroom frame members (Thomas 9c, 9d) ; iii) the first anteroom and first rear frame members; and, iv) the second anteroom and second rear frame members; and, c) an anteroom curtain rail (Thomas 72f, 74f) that in the erected configuration is mounted proximate upper ends of the first and second anteroom frame members so that the curtain rail extends between the first and second anteroom frame members above an opening defining a anteroom doorway, and wherein a canopy (not labeled; see canopy forming ceiling of 1b in Fig. 8) is configured to define a first internal volume between the rear and anteroom frame members for containing the subject and a second internal volume between the anteroom and front frame members defining an anteroom.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the appartus of Ballantyne to have the frame include: a) first and second anteroom frame members; and, b) extendable arms interconnecting: i) the first front and first anteroom frame members; ii) the second front and second anteroom frame members; iii) the first anteroom and first rear frame members; and, iv) the second anteroom and second rear frame members; and, c) an anteroom curtain rail that in the erected configuration is mounted proximate upper ends of the first and second anteroom frame members so that the curtain rail extends between the first and second anteroom frame members above an opening defining a anteroom doorway, and wherein the canopy is configured to define a first internal volume between the rear and anteroom frame members for containing the subject and a second internal volume between the anteroom and front frame members defining an anteroom as taught in Thomas with a reasonable expectation of success because it would predictably provide for an expanded isolation room to increase available isolation room space. Further, it has been held that a mere duplication of parts, such as the duplication of the frame to have an anteroom, has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. A duplication of parts is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 29, Ballantyne does not disclose that the frame may be detacheably coupled to an anteroom frame, wherein the anteroom frame includes: a) a frame movable between collapsed and erected configurations, the frame including: i) first and second front anteroom frame members; ii) first and second rear anteroom frame members; iii) deployable arms interconnecting: (1) the first front and first rear anteroom frame members; (2) the rear anteroom frame members; and, (3) the second front and second rear anteroom frame members; b) an anteroom canopy mounting mounted to each anteroom frame member; and, c) an anteroom curtain rail that in the erected configuration is mounted proximate upper ends of the first and second anteroom front frame members so that the curtain rail extends between the first and second front anteroom frame members above an opening defining a doorway; and, d) an anteroom canopy configured to be supported by the anteroom frame in the erected configuration, the anteroom canopy defining an internal volume.
Thomas in Fig. 8 discloses an isolation room apparatus wherein the frame (Thomas 1a) may be detacheably coupled to an anteroom frame (Thomas 1b), wherein the anteroom frame includes: a) a frame (Thomas 1b) movable between collapsed and erected configurations, the frame including: i) first and second front anteroom frame members (Thomas 72a, 72c); ii) first and second rear anteroom frame members (Thomas 9a, 9b); iii) deployable arms (Thomas 72c/74c, 72a/74a) interconnecting: (1) the first front and first rear anteroom frame members; (2) the rear anteroom frame members; and, (3) the second front and second rear anteroom frame members; b) an anteroom canopy mounting (Thomas 6e-g) mounted to each anteroom frame member; and, c) an anteroom curtain rail (Thomas 72,f, 74f) that in the erected configuration is mounted proximate upper ends of the first and second anteroom front frame members so that the curtain rail extends between the first and second front anteroom frame members above an opening defining a doorway; and, d) an anteroom canopy (not labeled; see canopy forming ceiling of 1b in Fig. 8) configured to be supported by the anteroom frame in the erected configuration, the anteroom canopy defining an internal volume.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the appartus of Ballantyne to have the frame may be detacheably coupled to an anteroom frame, wherein the anteroom frame includes: a) a frame movable between collapsed and erected configurations, the frame including: i) first and second front anteroom frame members; ii) first and second rear anteroom frame members; iii) deployable arms interconnecting: (1) the first front and first rear anteroom frame members; (2) the rear anteroom frame members; and, (3) the second front and second rear anteroom frame members; b) an anteroom canopy mounting mounted to each anteroom frame member; and, c) an anteroom curtain rail that in the erected configuration is mounted proximate upper ends of the first and second anteroom front frame members so that the curtain rail extends between the first and second front anteroom frame members above an opening defining a doorway; and, d) an anteroom canopy configured to be supported by the anteroom frame in the erected configuration, the anteroom canopy defining an internal volume as taught in Thomas with a reasonable expectation of success because it would predictably provide for an expanded isolation room to increase available isolation room space. Further, it has been held that a mere duplication of parts, such as the duplication of the frame to have an anteroom, has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. A duplication of parts is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE T CAJILIG whose telephone number is (571)272-8143. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Brian Glessner can be reached at 571-272-6754. 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.
/CHRISTINE T CAJILIG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633