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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 28, and 32 have been amended and claim 10 has been amended. Thus, claims 1-7, 11, 12, and 28-37 are presented for examination.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 28, and 30 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 in view of Bodurka et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0150737], and in further view of Paul et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2017/0176240] and Cram et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2007/0268119]
With regard to claim 1, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 meets all of the limitations of the claim except a third transceiver coupled to a third location on the patient support apparatus, an exit detection sensor to determine a position of the exit detection sensor relative to the patient support apparatus, the controller further adapted to receive an exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor, and to determine if the exit detection sensor is positioned inside or outside of a volume of space. In the field of patient support apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
a third transceiver coupled to a third location on the patient support apparatus [a patient support apparatus having a third transceiver (paragraph 0062 and figure 5, item 102)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support apparatus having multiple transceivers to communicate patient information. However, the combination of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. fails to disclose of an exit detection sensor to determine a position of the exit detection sensor relative to the patient support apparatus, the controller further adapted to receive an exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Paul et al. teaches:
an exit detection sensor to determine a position of the exit detection sensor relative to the patient support apparatus, the controller further adapted to receive an exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor [a patient exit detection algorithm automatically measuring the weight of a person present in a seat denoting the detection sensors, i.e. weight sensors, are placed under the patient and appropriately placed so they can measure the weight of the person (paragraph 0055)]]
to determine if the exit detection sensor is positioned inside or outside of a volume of space [a patient exit detection algorithm automatically measuring the weight of a person present in a seat denoting the detection sensors, i.e. weight sensors, are placed under the patient and appropriately placed so they can measure the weight of the person (paragraph 0055)]
if the exit detection sensor is positioned inside the volume of space, to transmit an exit detection alert to an off-board recipient in response to receiving the exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor [a controller issuing an exit alert using an alarm if a total weight detected by the plurality of load cells falls by more than a predetermined amount relative to a previously stored total weight or if a total weight detected by the plurality of load cells falls below a predetermined minimum threshold (paragraphs 0012 and 0051)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474, Bodurka et al., and Paul et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using weight sensors below the patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device. However, the combination of Bodurka et al. and Paul et al. fails to disclose of if the exit detection sensor is positioned outside of the volume of space, to not transmit the exit detection alert to the off-board recipient in response to receiving the exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Cram et al. teaches:
if the exit detection sensor is positioned outside of the volume of space, to not transmit the exit detection alert to the off-board recipient in response to receiving the exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor [a weight-sensor pad being placed underneath a child’s car seat (paragraphs 0024 and 0025) where it is connected via cable to a signal broadcasting antenna that sends signals to a receiver alarm (paragraph 0023) when a child is detected (paragraph 0026) thereby denoting the pad only functions as intended when the pad is installed underneath seat and connected to the antenna and does not function when it is not underneath the seat and disconnected from the antenna]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Bodurka et al., Paul et al., and Cram et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using weight sensors below the patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device only when the weight sensors are present on the support device and are in communication with a receiver in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device. However, the combination of U.S. Patent 10,716,47, Bodurka et al., and Paul et al. fails to disclose of not transmitting the exit detection alert to the off-board recipient in response to receiving the exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor if the exit detection sensor is positioned outside the volume of space. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Cram et al. teaches:
the controller is further adapted, if the exit detection sensor is positioned outside the volume of space, to not transmit the exit detection alert to the off-board recipient in response to receiving the exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor [a weight-sensor pad being placed underneath a child’s car seat (paragraphs 0024 and 0025) where it is connected via cable to a signal broadcasting antenna that sends signals to a receiver alarm (paragraph 0023) when a child is detected (paragraph 0026) thereby denoting the pad only functions as intended when the pad is installed underneath seat and connected to the antenna and does not function when it is not underneath the seat and disconnected from the antenna]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Bodurka et al., Paul et al., and Cram et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using weight sensors below the patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device only when the weight sensors are present on the support device and are in communication with a receiver in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 2, the limitations are met by claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474.
With regard to claim 3, the limitations are met by claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474.
With regard to claim 28, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 meets all of the limitations except a third transceiver coupled to a third location on the patient support apparatus, the controller is further adapted to determine if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside or outside of a volume of space, and forward the data to an off-board recipient or to display the data on the display if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside the volume of space. In the field of patient support apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
a third transceiver coupled to a third location on the patient support apparatus [a patient support apparatus having a third transceiver (paragraph 0062 and figure 5, item 102)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support apparatus having multiple transceivers to communicate patient information. However, the combination of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. fails to disclose of the controller is further adapted to determine if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside or outside of a volume of space and forward the data to an off-board recipient or to display the data on the display if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside the volume of space. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Paul et al. teaches:
the controller is further adapted to determine if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside or outside of a volume of space [a patient exit detection algorithm automatically measuring the weight of a person present in a seat denoting the detection sensors, i.e. weight sensors, are placed under the patient and appropriately placed so they can measure the weight of the person (paragraph 0055)]
if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside the volume of space, to perform at least one of the following: to forward the data to an off-board recipient, or to display the data on the display [a controller issuing an exit alert using an alarm if a total weight detected by the plurality of load cells falls by more than a predetermined amount relative to a previously stored total weight or if a total weight detected by the plurality of load cells falls below a predetermined minimum threshold (paragraphs 0012 and 0051)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474, Bodurka et al., and Paul et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using weight sensors below the patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device. However, the combination of However, the combination of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474, Bodurka et al. and Paul et al. fails to disclose of if the second patient support apparatus is positioned outside the volume of space, not to forward the data to an off-board recipient. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Cram et al. teaches:
if the exit detection sensor is positioned outside of the volume of space, to forward the data to an off-board recipient [a weight-sensor pad being placed underneath a child’s car seat (paragraphs 0024 and 0025) where it is connected via cable to a signal broadcasting antenna that sends signals to a receiver alarm (paragraph 0023) when a child is detected (paragraph 0026) thereby denoting the pad only functions as intended when the pad is installed underneath seat and connected to the antenna and does not function when it is not underneath the seat and disconnected from the antenna]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474, Bodurka et al., Paul et al., and Cram et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using weight sensors below the patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device only when the weight sensors are present on the support device and are in communication with a receiver in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 30, claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 meets the limitation of the present claim.
Claims 4-7, 11, 12, and 31-37 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 in view of Bodurka et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0150737]
With regard to claim 4, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the controller is further adapted to use radio frequency (RF) communication between the first, second, and third transceivers and a second patient support apparatus to determine if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside or outside of a second volume of space. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the controller is further adapted to use radio frequency (RF) communication between the first, second, and third transceivers and a second patient support apparatus to determine if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside or outside of a second volume of space [a controller in communication with first, second, and third transceivers where the transceivers are wireless devices (paragraph 0060 as well as paragraph 0062 and figure 5, items 90, 92, 96, and 102)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 5, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the exit detection sensor includes a pressure sensing pad adapted to be positioned underneath the patient. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the exit detection sensor includes a pressure sensing pad adapted to be positioned underneath the patient [the patient support apparatus includes a patient presence detector to detect whether or not the patient is currently using the pressure sensor mat (paragraph 0064 and 0066)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 6, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the pressure sensing pad is adapted to be removable from the patient support apparatus and positioned on a support surface of second patient support apparatus. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the pressure sensing pad is adapted to be removable from the patient support apparatus and positioned on a support surface of second patient support apparatus [the pressure sensor mat placed atop a mattress or support deck which can be moved to another patient support apparatus as needed (paragraph 0066)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 7, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the first transceiver, the second transceiver, and the third transceiver are all ultra-wideband transceivers. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the first transceiver, the second transceiver, and the third transceiver are all ultra-wideband transceivers [the first, second, and third transceivers being infrared, Bluetooth, or any RF type of communications devices (paragraph 0060)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three ultra-wideband transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 11, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the controller is further adapted to use RF communication between the first, second, and third transceivers and a fixed locator to determine a position of the patient support apparatus relative to the fixed locator. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the controller is further adapted to use RF communication between the first, second, and third transceivers and a fixed locator to determine a position of the patient support apparatus relative to the fixed locator [a controller in communication with first, second, and third transceivers where the transceivers are wireless devices (paragraph 0060 as well as paragraph 0062 and figure 5, items 90, 92, 96, and 102) where a location server. in communication with the controller of the patient support apparatus, is used to monitor and record the location of the patient support apparatus within the healthcare facility (paragraph 0071)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 12, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the controller is further adapted to use RF communication between the first, second, and third transceivers and a fixed locator to determine a position of the patient support apparatus relative to the fixed locator. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the controller is further adapted to receive an identifier from the fixed locator, to determine if the patient support apparatus is positioned within a threshold distance to the fixed locator, and to forward the fixed locator identifier to a server if the patient support apparatus is positioned within the threshold distance [a controller successfully communicating with a first wall unit which then indicates the patient support apparatus is in a position adjacent to the headwall interface and discloses the information to the location server when the patient support apparatus is positioned within a bay (paragraphs 0071 and 0078)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 31, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the patient support apparatus is a bed and the second patient support apparatus is a recliner. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the patient support apparatus is a bed and the second patient support apparatus is a recliner [a patient support apparatus in the form of a bed for use in a hospital or medical setting (paragraph 0035 and figure 1) where the head section of a support deck can be set at an angle meaning the support deck has a reclining feature (paragraph 0055)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 32, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of a nurse call system interface adapted to communicate with a nurse call system outlet integrated into a wall of a healthcare facility, wherein the nurse call outlet includes a plurality of electrical pins and wherein the controller is adapted to respond to the exit detection alert signal by changing an electrical state of a pin of the nurse call system outlet. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
a nurse call system interface adapted to communicate with a nurse call system outlet integrated into a wall of a healthcare facility, wherein the nurse call outlet includes a plurality of electrical pins and wherein the controller is adapted to respond to the exit detection alert signal by changing an electrical state of a pin of the nurse call system outlet [a nurse call system connected to a wall unit that is in communication with a patient support apparatus (paragraphs 0043, 0044, and 0045) where electrical pins change their state based upon a message received from a patient support apparatus relating to the exiting of a patient as detected by a patience presence sensor (paragraph 0053)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 33, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the nurse call system interface is adapted to communicate with the nurse call system outlet by wireless or wired communication. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the nurse call system interface is adapted to communicate with the nurse call system outlet by wireless or wired communication [a nurse call system connected to a wall unit that is in communication with a patient support apparatus (paragraphs 0043, 0044, and 0045)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 34, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the data includes at least one of the following: a brake status of the second patient support apparatus, a lock status of a lock of the second patient support apparatus, an angle of a component of the second patient support apparatus, an error message, or an occupancy detection signal. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the data includes at least one of the following: a brake status of the second patient support apparatus, a lock status of a lock of the second patient support apparatus, an angle of a component of the second patient support apparatus, an error message, or an occupancy detection signal [a patient presence detector in communication with a controller where the patient presence sensor detects a patient’s' presence/absence (paragraph 0062 and figure 5, items 96 and 98)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 35, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the second patient support apparatus includes an exit detection sensor that includes a pressure sensing pad adapted to be positioned underneath the patient. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the second patient support apparatus includes an exit detection sensor that includes a pressure sensing pad adapted to be positioned underneath the patient [the patient support apparatus includes a patient presence detector to detect whether or not the patient is currently using the pressure sensor mat (paragraph 0064 and 0066)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 36, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the pressure sensing pad is adapted to be removable from the second patient support apparatus and positioned on a support surface of another patient support apparatus. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the pressure sensing pad is adapted to be removable from the second patient support apparatus and positioned on a support surface of another patient support apparatus [the pressure sensor mat placed atop a mattress or support deck which can be moved to another patient support apparatus as needed (paragraph 0066)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 37, U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 fails to disclose of the first transceiver, the second transceiver, and the third transceiver are all ultra-wideband transceivers. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Bodurka et al. teaches:
the first transceiver, the second transceiver, and the third transceiver are all ultra-wideband transceivers [the first, second, and third transceivers being infrared, Bluetooth, or any RF type of communications devices (paragraph 0060)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,474 and Bodurka et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using one or more of the three ultra-wideband transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
Claim 29 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47 in view of Bodurka et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0150737], and in further view of Paul et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2017/0176240], Boston et al. [U.S. Patent 10,064,012] and Shah [U.S. Patent Publication 2020/0186518]
With regard to claim 29, the combination of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47, Bodurka et al., and Paul et al. fails to disclose of the controller is further adapted to receive an ID from the second patient support apparatus, to check to see if the ID matches a criterion, to forward the data to the off-board recipient if the ID matches the criterion and the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside the volume of space, and to not forward the data to the off-board recipient if the ID does not match the criterion. In the field of communications systems, Boston et al. teaches:
the controller is further adapted to receive an ID from the second patient support apparatus, to check to see if the ID matches a criterion, to forward the data to the off-board recipient if the ID matches the criterion and the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside the volume of space [a processing system determining if a location device’s ID matches the space in which an anchor transmitter has been determined to be located (column 8, lines 11-30)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47, Bodurka et al., Paul et al., and Boston et al. to create a patient support apparatus where the management system for the apparatus is able to determine if the patient support apparatus is located in the correct area based upon the detection of the support apparatus’ identifier. However, the combination of Bodurka et al., Paul et al., and Boston et al. fails to disclose of to not forward the data to the off-board recipient if the ID does not match the criterion. In the field of patient management systems, Shah teaches:
to not forward the data to the off-board recipient if the ID does not match the criterion [the exchange of data only occurring if the ID has been verified (paragraph 0052) meaning the data will not be exchanged if the ID is not valid]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of U.S. Patent No. 10,716,47, Bodurka et al., Paul et al., Boston et al., and Shah to create a patient support apparatus where the management system for the apparatus is able to determine if the patient support apparatus is located in the correct area based upon the detection of the support apparatus’ identifier and only exchange data when the identifier matches in order to prevent an mismatch patient support apparatus from exchanging information wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 11, 12, 28, and 30-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bodurka et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0150737] in view of Paul et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2017/0176240], and in further view of Cram et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2007/0268119]
With regard to claim 1, Bodurka et al. meets the limitations of:
a patient support apparatus comprising a support surface adapted to support a patient [a patient support apparatus in the form of a bed for use in a hospital or medical setting (paragraph 0035 and figure 1)]
a first transceiver coupled to a first location on the patient support apparatus [a patient support apparatus having a first wireless transceiver in the form of an infrared transceiver (paragraph 0060 and figure 4, item 90)]
a second transceiver coupled to a second location on the patient support apparatus [a patient support apparatus having a second wireless transceiver in the form of a Bluetooth transceiver (paragraph 0060 and figure 4, item 92)]
a third transceiver coupled to a third location on the patient support apparatus [a patient support apparatus having a third transceiver (paragraph 0062 and figure 5, item 102)]
a controller adapted to use radio frequency (RF) communication between the first, second, and third transceivers [a controller in communication with first, second, and third transceivers (paragraph 0062 and figure 5, items 90, 92, 96, and 102)]
However, Bodurka et al. fails to disclose of an exit detection sensor to determine a position of the exit detection sensor relative to the patient support apparatus where the controller further adapted to receive an exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor, to determine if the exit detection sensor is positioned inside or outside of a volume of space, and transmit an exit detection alert to an off-board recipient in response to receiving the exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor if the exit detection sensor is positioned inside the volume of space. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Paul et al. teaches:
an exit detection sensor to determine a position of the exit detection sensor relative to the patient support apparatus, the controller further adapted to receive an exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor [a patient exit detection algorithm automatically measuring the weight of a person present in a seat denoting the detection sensors, i.e. weight sensors, are placed under the patient and appropriately placed so they can measure the weight of the person (paragraph 0055)]]
to determine if the exit detection sensor is positioned inside or outside of a volume of space [a patient exit detection algorithm automatically measuring the weight of a person present in a seat denoting the detection sensors, i.e. weight sensors, are placed under the patient and appropriately placed so they can measure the weight of the person (paragraph 0055)]
if the exit detection sensor is positioned inside the volume of space, to transmit an exit detection alert to an off-board recipient in response to receiving the exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor [a controller issuing an exit alert using an alarm if a total weight detected by the plurality of load cells falls by more than a predetermined amount relative to a previously stored total weight or if a total weight detected by the plurality of load cells falls below a predetermined minimum threshold (paragraphs 0012 and 0051)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Bodurka et al. and Paul et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using weight sensors below the patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device. However, the combination of Bodurka et al. and Paul et al. fails to disclose of if the exit detection sensor is positioned outside of the volume of space, to not transmit the exit detection alert to the off-board recipient in response to receiving the exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Cram et al. teaches:
if the exit detection sensor is positioned outside of the volume of space, to not transmit the exit detection alert to the off-board recipient in response to receiving the exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor [a weight-sensor pad being placed underneath a child’s car seat (paragraphs 0024 and 0025) where it is connected via cable to a signal broadcasting antenna that sends signals to a receiver alarm (paragraph 0023) when a child is detected (paragraph 0026) thereby denoting the pad only functions as intended when the pad is installed underneath seat and connected to the antenna and does not function when it is not underneath the seat and disconnected from the antenna]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Bodurka et al., Paul et al., and Cram et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using weight sensors below the patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device only when the weight sensors are present on the support device and are in communication with a receiver in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device However, the combination of U.S. Patent 10,716,47, Bodurka et al., and Paul et al. fails to disclose of not transmitting the exit detection alert to the off-board recipient in response to receiving the exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor if the exit detection sensor is positioned outside the volume of space. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Cram et al. teaches:
the controller is further adapted, if the exit detection sensor is positioned outside the volume of space, to not transmit the exit detection alert to the off-board recipient in response to receiving the exit detection alert signal from the exit detection sensor [a weight-sensor pad being placed underneath a child’s car seat (paragraphs 0024 and 0025) where it is connected via cable to a signal broadcasting antenna that sends signals to a receiver alarm (paragraph 0023) when a child is detected (paragraph 0026) thereby denoting the pad only functions as intended when the pad is installed underneath seat and connected to the antenna and does not function when it is not underneath the seat and disconnected from the antenna]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Bodurka et al., Paul et al., and Cram et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using weight sensors below the patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device only when the weight sensors are present on the support device and are in communication with a receiver in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 2, Bodurka et al. meets the limitations of:
a nurse call system interface adapted to communicate with a nurse call system outlet integrated into a wall of a healthcare facility [a nurse call system may be a conventional nurse call system having one or more nurses' stations positioned throughout the healthcare facility having the ability to communicate with a patient support apparatus (paragraph 0044) via a connection provided by wireless wall units (paragraph 0045)]
wherein the nurse call system outlet includes a plurality of electrical pins and wherein the controller is adapted to transmit the exit detection alert to the off-board recipient by changing an electrical state of a pin of the nurse call system outlet [electrical pins changing their state based upon a message received from a patient support apparatus relating to the exiting of a patient as detected by a patience presence sensor (paragraph 0053)]
With regard to claim 3, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the nurse call system interface is adapted to communicate with the nurse call system outlet by wireless or wired communication [a nurse call system may be a conventional nurse call system having one or more nurses' stations positioned throughout the healthcare facility having the ability to communicate with a patient support apparatus (paragraph 0044) via a connection provided by wireless wall units (paragraph 0045)]
With regard to claim 4, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the controller is further adapted to use radio frequency (RF) communication between the first, second, and third transceivers and a second patient support apparatus to determine if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside or outside of a second volume of space [a controller in communication with first, second, and third transceivers where the transceivers are wireless devices (paragraph 0060 as well as paragraph 0062 and figure 5, items 90, 92, 96, and 102)]
With regard to claim 5, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the exit detection sensor includes a pressure sensing pad adapted to be positioned underneath the patient [the patient support apparatus includes a patient presence detector to detect whether or not the patient is currently using the pressure sensor mat (paragraph 0064 and 0066)]
With regard to claim 6, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the pressure sensing pad is adapted to be removable from the patient support apparatus and positioned on a support surface of second patient support apparatus [the pressure sensor mat placed atop a mattress or support deck which can be moved to another patient support apparatus as needed (paragraph 0066)]
With regard to claim 7, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the first transceiver, the second transceiver, and the third transceiver are all ultra-wideband transceivers [the first, second, and third transceivers being infrared, Bluetooth, or any RF type of communications devices (paragraph 0060)]
With regard to claim 11, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the controller is further adapted to use RF communication between the first, second, and third transceivers and a fixed locator to determine a position of the patient support apparatus relative to the fixed locator [a controller in communication with first, second, and third transceivers where the transceivers are wireless devices (paragraph 0060 as well as paragraph 0062 and figure 5, items 90, 92, 96, and 102) where a location server. in communication with the controller of the patient support apparatus, is used to monitor and record the location of the patient support apparatus within the healthcare facility (paragraph 0071)]
With regard to claim 12, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the controller is further adapted to receive an identifier from the fixed locator, to determine if the patient support apparatus is positioned within a threshold distance to the fixed locator, and to forward the fixed locator identifier to a server if the patient support apparatus is positioned within the threshold distance [a controller successfully communicating with a first wall unit which then indicates the patient support apparatus is in a position adjacent to the headwall interface and discloses the information to the location server when the patient support apparatus is positioned within a bay (paragraphs 0071 and 0078)]
With regard to claim 28, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
a patient support apparatus comprising a support surface adapted to support a patient [a patient support apparatus in the form of a bed for use in a hospital or medical setting (paragraph 0035 and figure 1)]
a display [a nurse call system having a display (paragraph 0100)]
a first transceiver coupled to a first location on the patient support apparatus [a patient support apparatus having a first wireless transceiver in the form of an infrared transceiver (paragraph 0060 and figure 4, item 90)]
a second transceiver coupled to a second location on the patient support apparatus [a patient support apparatus having a second wireless transceiver in the form of a Bluetooth transceiver (paragraph 0060 and figure 4, item 92)]
a third transceiver coupled to a third location on the patient support apparatus [a patient support apparatus having a third transceiver (paragraph 0062 and figure 5, item 102)]
a controller adapted to use radio frequency (RF) communication between the first, second, and third transceivers [a controller in communication with first, second, and third transceivers (paragraph 0062 and figure 5, items 90, 92, 96, and 102)]
to receive data from the second patient support apparatus [a patient presence detector on a patient support apparatus that is in communication with a controller where the patient presence sensor detects a patient’s' presence/absence (paragraph 0062 and figure 5, items 96 and 98)]
However, Bodurka et al. fails to disclose of the controller is further adapted to determine if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside or outside of a volume of space and forward the data to an off-board recipient or to display the data on the display if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside the volume of space. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Paul et al. teaches:
the controller is further adapted to determine if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside or outside of a volume of space [a patient exit detection algorithm automatically measuring the weight of a person present in a seat denoting the detection sensors, i.e. weight sensors, are placed under the patient and appropriately placed so they can measure the weight of the person (paragraph 0055)]
if the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside the volume of space, to perform at least one of the following: to forward the data to an off-board recipient, or to display the data on the display [a controller issuing an exit alert using an alarm if a total weight detected by the plurality of load cells falls by more than a predetermined amount relative to a previously stored total weight or if a total weight detected by the plurality of load cells falls below a predetermined minimum threshold (paragraphs 0012 and 0051)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Bodurka et al. and Paul et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using weight sensors below the patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device. However, the combination of Bodurka et al. and Paul et al. fails to disclose of if the second patient support apparatus is positioned outside
the volume of space, not to forward the data to an off-board recipient. In the field of patient monitoring apparatuses, Cram et al. teaches:
if the exit detection sensor is positioned outside of the volume of space, to forward the data to an off-board recipient [a weight-sensor pad being placed underneath a child’s car seat (paragraphs 0024 and 0025) where it is connected via cable to a signal broadcasting antenna that sends signals to a receiver alarm (paragraph 0023) when a child is detected (paragraph 0026) thereby denoting the pad only functions as intended when the pad is installed underneath seat and connected to the antenna and does not function when it is not underneath the seat and disconnected from the antenna]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Bodurka et al., Paul et al., and Cram et al. to create a patient support system where the device is able to monitor the presence of a patient using weight sensors below the patient using one or more of the three transceivers on the support device only when the weight sensors are present on the support device and are in communication with a receiver in order to determine the presence of a patient on the support device wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
With regard to claim 30, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the data includes an exit detection alert signal [a patient presence detector in communication with a controller where the patient presence sensor detects a patient’s' presence/absence (paragraph 0062 and figure 5, items 96 and 98)]
With regard to claim 31, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the patient support apparatus is a bed and the second patient support apparatus is a recliner [a patient support apparatus in the form of a bed for use in a hospital or medical setting (paragraph 0035 and figure 1) where the head section of a support deck can be set at an angle meaning the support deck has a reclining feature (paragraph 0055)]
With regard to claim 32, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
a nurse call system interface adapted to communicate with a nurse call system outlet integrated into a wall of a healthcare facility, wherein the nurse call system outlet includes a plurality of electrical pins and wherein the controller is adapted to respond to the exit detection alert signal by changing an electrical state of a pin of the nurse call system outlet [a nurse call system connected to a wall unit that is in communication with a patient support apparatus (paragraphs 0043, 0044, and 0045) where electrical pins change their state based upon a message received from a patient support apparatus relating to the exiting of a patient as detected by a patience presence sensor (paragraph 0053)]
With regard to claim 33, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the nurse call system interface is adapted to communicate with the nurse call system outlet by wireless or wired communication [a nurse call system connected to a wall unit that is in communication with a patient support apparatus (paragraphs 0043, 0044, and 0045)]
With regard to claim 34, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the data includes at least one of the following: a brake status of the second patient support apparatus, a lock status of a lock of the second patient support apparatus, an angle of a component of the second patient support apparatus, an error message, or an occupancy detection signal [a patient presence detector in communication with a controller where the patient presence sensor detects a patient’s' presence/absence (paragraph 0062 and figure 5, items 96 and 98)]
With regard to claim 35, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the second patient support apparatus includes an exit detection sensor that includes a pressure sensing pad adapted to be positioned underneath the patient [the patient support apparatus includes a patient presence detector to detect whether or not the patient is currently using the pressure sensor mat (paragraph 0064 and 0066)]
With regard to claim 36, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the pressure sensing pad is adapted to be removable from the second patient support apparatus and positioned on a support surface of another patient support apparatus [the pressure sensor mat placed atop a mattress or support deck which can be moved to another patient support apparatus as needed (paragraph 0066)]
With regard to claim 37, Bodurka et al. meets the limitation of:
the first transceiver, the second transceiver, and the third transceiver are all ultra-wideband transceivers [the first, second, and third transceivers being infrared, Bluetooth, or any RF type of communications devices (paragraph 0060)]
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bodurka et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0150737] in view of Paul et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2017/0176240], and in further view of Cram et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2007/0268119], Boston et al. [U.S. Patent 10,064,012], and Shah [U.S. Patent Publication 2020/0186518]
With regard to claim 29, the combination of Bodurka et al. and Paul et al. fails to disclose of the controller is further adapted to receive an ID from the second patient support apparatus, to check to see if the ID matches a criterion, to forward the data to the off-board recipient if the ID matches the criterion and the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside the volume of space, and to not forward the data to the off-board recipient if the ID does not match the criterion. In the field of communications systems, Boston et al. teaches:
the controller is further adapted to receive an ID from the second patient support apparatus, to check to see if the ID matches a criterion, to forward the data to the off-board recipient if the ID matches the criterion and the second patient support apparatus is positioned inside the volume of space [a processing system determining if a location device’s ID matches the space in which an anchor transmitter has been determined to be located (column 8, lines 11-30)]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Bodurka et al., Paul et al., and Boston et al. to create a patient support apparatus where the management system for the apparatus is able to determine if the patient support apparatus is located in the correct area based upon the detection of the support apparatus’ identifier. However, the combination of Bodurka et al., Paul et al., and Boston et al. fails to disclose of to not forward the data to the off-board recipient if the ID does not match the criterion. In the field of patient management systems, Shah teaches:
to not forward the data to the off-board recipient if the ID does not match the criterion [the exchange of data only occurring if the ID has been verified (paragraph 0052) meaning the data will not be exchanged if the ID is not valid]
It would be obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the elements of Bodurka et al., Paul et al., Boston et al., and Shah to create a patient support apparatus where the management system for the apparatus is able to determine if the patient support apparatus is located in the correct area based upon the detection of the support apparatus’ identifier and only exchange data when the identifier matches in order to prevent an mismatch patient support apparatus from exchanging information wherein the motivation to combine is to create a communications system between a patient support apparatus and a headwall communications interface (Bodurka et al., paragraph 0002).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the previous rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-7, 11, 12, and 28-37 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Cram et al. [U.S. Patent Publication 2007/0268119].
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 PAMESHANAND MAHASE whose telephone number is (571) 270-7223. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday- Friday 8:00AM - 5:00PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davetta Goins can be reached on 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.
/PAMESHANAND MAHASE/Examiner, Art Unit 2689
/DAVETTA W GOINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2689