DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 1/6/2026. Claims 21-40 are pending. Claims 21-40 are rejected.
Restriction/Election of Species
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II in the reply filed on 1/6/2026 is acknowledged. Election was made without traverse, and the election requirement is hereby made final. Applicant has cancelled claims 11-20 directed toward a non-elected species.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
CONCLUSION.--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 30 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which Applicant regards as the invention. The claims recite the relative terminology “about”, which causes the claim to be ambiguous and indefinite. Appropriate correction is required. See MPEP §
In view of the above rejections the respective claims are rejected as best understood on prior art as follows:
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention; or
(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.
Claims 21-28, 30-34, and 37-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2016/0000626 to Jackson et al. (“Jackson”).
Claim 21. A surgical table comprising: a table top (Jackson, Fig. 1) configured to support a patient during surgery, the table top having an elongated frame extending longitudinally between a first end and a second end, a table base comprising a first lift column and a second lift column (Jackson, Fig. 46 discloses two columns at # 100), the table top being supported by the table base for movement to a position situated between the first and second lift columns, the table base including a rotatable shaft (Jackson Fig. 17, #196) coupled to the first lift column and rotatable about a longitudinal axis (Jackson Fig. 47) to rotate the table top about the longitudinal axis relative to the first and second lift columns, a rotor (Jackson Fig. 15, #198) fixed to the rotatable shaft to rotate therewith about the longitudinal axis, and a support bracket (Jackson Fig. 10, #206) coupled to the rotor, the support bracket including a bar and a slide assembly (Jackson Fig. 28 discloses a bar at #332; also see Fig. 46 and paragraph [0189] which explain how the table it coupled to the support bracket in a manner that allows for it to slide up and down for different attachment holes on H-frame #206) coupled to the bar, the first end of the elongated frame of the table top being coupled to the slide assembly to move therewith along the bar, the bar including a series of pin- receiving depressions (Jackson Fig. 46, H-frame is provided with holes, unlabeled) provided along opposite sides of the bar, the slide assembly including a pair of handles, each handle of the pair of handles extending laterally outwardly with respect to a corresponding side of the bar (Jackson, Fig. 10, H-frame #206 comprises two side portions which are considered to be “handles” and which extend outwardly in the claimed configuration), and the slide assembly including a pair of pins that are each spring biased toward a locking position, each pin being coupled to a respective handle of the pair of handles and movable from the respective locking position in which the respective pin is received in a corresponding pin-receiving depression to a respective unlocking position retracted out of the corresponding pin-receiving depression to permit the slide assembly to be repositioned along the bar (Jackson discloses a lock pin 222 and a roll lock assembly, which reads on Applicant’s “pin” and “pin-receiving depression”; see paragraph [0107] and Figs. 15-21).
Claim 22. The surgical table of claim 21, wherein the series of depressions comprise a series of cylindrically shaped holes (Jackson, Fig. 16, lock pin #222 is cylindrically shaped).
Claim 23. The surgical table of claim 22, wherein the bar extends generally perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the rotatable shaft of the table base in a first direction and each hole of the series cylindrically shaped holes extends generally perpendicular to the rotatable shaft of the table base in a second direction (bar #332, seen in Fig. 28, attaches to bracket #206, seen in Fig. 16; the bar and bracket are perpendicular to the shaft #196)
Claim 24. The surgical table of claim 21, wherein the bar extends radially outwardly from the rotatable shaft beyond an outer periphery of the rotor (Jackson Fig. 16, bar #332, seen in Fig. 28, extends radially outward from axel #196).
Claim 25. The surgical table of claim 21, wherein the bar includes a first end region adjacent to the rotatable shaft and a second end region distal from the rotatable shaft and wherein the bar includes a stop extending from the second end region to prevent the slide assembly from being slidable off of the bar (Jackson Fig. 10; also see paragraph [0101] which discloses “a pair of spaced-apart hooked attachment mechanisms 202 that retain a horizontal bar 204 of an H-frame 206“).
Claim 26. The surgical table of claim 21, wherein the slide assembly includes a pair of flanges, each flange extending from a respective handle, and the first end of the elongated frame of the table top being coupled to the pair of flanges (see annotated Fig. 28, below).
PNG
media_image1.png
740
922
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 27. The surgical table of claim 26, wherein the first end of the elongated frame includes a laterally extending connection tube coupled to the pair of flanges (Jackson Fig. 28, #300).
Claim 28. The surgical table of claim 21, wherein the bar is lockable to the rotor to rotate about the longitudinal axis together with the rotor and the rotatable shaft and wherein the bar is unlockable from the rotor so as to be rotatable about the rotatable shaft relative to the rotor while the rotor and rotatable shaft are stationary (Jackson discloses a lock pin 222 and a roll lock assembly, which reads on Applicant’s “pin” and “pin-receiving depression”; see paragraph [0107] and Figs. 15-21).
Claim 30. The surgical table of claim 28, wherein the bar is lockable to the rotor at a first position and a second position and wherein the first and second positions of the bar are spaced circumferentially about the longitudinal axis by about 90 degrees (the apparatus of Jackson is capable of performing the claimed rotation; see at least Figs. 50-51)
Claim 31. The surgical table of claim 21, further comprising a bar mount rotatably coupled to the rotatable shaft to rotate relative to the rotatable shaft and relative to the rotor, and wherein the bar of the support bracket is detachably coupled to the bar mount (Jackson Fig. 10; also see paragraph [0101] which discloses “a pair of spaced-apart hooked attachment mechanisms 202 that retain a horizontal bar 204 of an H-frame 206“).
Claim 32. The surgical table of claim 31, wherein the bar mount is lockable to the rotor at a first position and a second position thereby to lock the bar to the rotor at the first and second positions of the bar mount (Jackson discloses a lock pin 222 and a roll lock assembly, which reads on Applicant’s “pin” and “pin-receiving depression”; see paragraph [0107] and Figs. 15-21).
Claim 33. The surgical table of claim 32, wherein the first and second positions of the bar are circumferentially spaced about the longitudinal axis by about 90 degrees (the apparatus of Jackson is capable of performing the claimed rotation; see at least Figs. 50-51).
Claim 34. The surgical table of claim 32, further comprising an engagement rod movably coupled to the bar mount and wherein the rotor includes first and second rod-receiving depressions that receive an end of the engagement rod to lock the bar mount at the first and second positions, respectively (Jackson Fig. 28 discloses a bar at #332; also see Fig. 46 and paragraph [0189] which explain how the table it coupled to the support bracket in a manner that allows for it to slide up and down for different attachment holes on H-frame #206).
Claim 37. The surgical table of claim 31, wherein the bar mount is formed to include a cradle and wherein the bar includes a cylindrical connection member that is received in the cradle when the bar is coupled to the bar mount (see Jackson Fig. 10, slot #200, and Fig. 28, bar #332).
Claim 38. The surgical table of claim 37, further comprising a slidable member attached to the bar, and wherein the slidable member includes a projection that is received in an opening formed in an end of the bar mount to lock the bar to the bar mount when the slidable member is in a locking position (Jackson Fig. 16 #202 is considered to be a “slidable member” in that it slides into a locking position over bar #332; #202 is seen in both locked and unlocked positions in Fig. 16).
Claim 39. The surgical table of claim 38, wherein the slidable member is movable from the locking position to an unlocking position to retract the projection out of the opening formed in the end of the bar mount to permit the bar to be detached from the bar mount (Jackson Fig. 16 #202 is seen in both locked and unlocked positions).
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 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 29, 35-36 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as US Patent Application Publication 2016/0000626 to Jackson et al. (“Jackson”).
Claim 29. The surgical table of claim 28, wherein the rotor comprises a flat, circular plate (see Jackson Fig. 16; plate #198 is disclosed to be rectangular, and not circular; however, the plate #198 of capable of rotating as is Applicant’s circular plate; therefore the choice of rectangular vs. circular is considered to be an obvious matter of design choice; since applicant has not disclosed that the shape solves any stated problems or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with the rectangular plate of Jackson).
Claim 35. The surgical table of claim 34, wherein the rotor comprises a circular plate having a circular periphery and wherein the rod-receiving depressions are provided in the circular periphery (see Jackson Fig. 16; plate #198 is disclosed to be rectangular, and not circular; however, the plate #198 of capable of rotating as is Applicant’s circular plate; therefore the choice of rectangular vs. circular is considered to be an obvious matter of design choice; since applicant has not disclosed that the shape solves any stated problems or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with the rectangular plate of Jackson).
Claim 36. The surgical table of claim 34, wherein the engagement rod is biased by a spring toward an engaged position in which the end of the engagement rod is received in one of the first and second rod-receiving depressions arid wherein the engagement rod is manually movable to a disengaged position in which the end of the engagement rod is retracted out of the respective first and second rod-receiving depression (Jackson Fig. 10 and paragraph [0101] discloses “a pair of spaced-apart hooked attachment mechanisms 202 that retain a horizontal bar 204 of an H-frame 206“; however, Jackson does not disclose that these attachment mechanisms are spring biased; Examiner takes Official Notice that it would be obvious for one of ordinary skill to provide the hooked attachment mechanisms of Jackson with springs in order to bias them to a closed position and to ensure that the table of Jackson is securely connected to the column to prevent separation and potential harm to a user).
Claim 40. The surgical table of claim 39, wherein the slidable member is biased by a spring toward the locking position (Jackson Fig. 10 and paragraph [0101] discloses “a pair of spaced-apart hooked attachment mechanisms 202 that retain a horizontal bar 204 of an H-frame 206“ and which read on Applicant’s “slidable member”, however, Jackson does not disclose that these attachment mechanisms are spring biased; Examiner takes Official Notice that it would be obvious for one of ordinary skill to provide the hooked attachment mechanisms of Jackson with springs in order to bias them to a closed position and to ensure that the table of Jackson is securely connected to the column to prevent separation and potential harm to a user).
Discussion of allowable subject matter
Applicant’s invention as claimed is not patentable over the prior art, as discussed in the above rejections. The invention as claimed is broad and the structures of the apparatus of Jackson read on the claimed terminology. For example, “support bracket” and “bar” are general terms, which are found in the structures of Jackson, as are “pins” that provide “a locking position”. However, the structures disclosed in Applicant’s invention are different than those of the prior art. For example, compare Applicant’s Fig. 5A to Jackson Figs. 9-10. The apparatus of Jackson provides functionality of rotating a patient about a longitudinal axis and locking the apparatus at a desired rotation angle, however, Applicant’s structures which enable this functionality are fundamentally different than those of the prior art. Therefore, inclusion of specific structural details in the claims (for example the shape, size, location, and configuration of each of the structures seen in the figures) could help to differentiate over the prior art. Additionally, those structural details combined with language that reasons as to the criticality and functionality of those specific recited structures and claimed structural configurations could help to more specifically claim the disclosed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MYLES A THROOP whose telephone number is (571)270-5006. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached at 571-270-3654. 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.
/MYLES A THROOP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673