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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the indication” should be “an indication”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20110301516 A1 to Lafleche.
Re Claim 1, Lafleche teaches:
A bed (at least [Abstract] “mattress”), comprising: a sleep surface (at least Figs. 1-2 and [0114] “support surface 10”.);
an array of pumps for providing a pneumatic effect for the sleep surface (at least Figs. 5-8 elements 72 and [0151] “one or more air delivery devices, namely compressors or pumps 72 (FIG. 3A), such as 120 volt pumps. Optionally, two (such as shown in FIGS. 7 and 8) or three (such as shown in FIGS. 5 and 11) or more pumps 72a, 72b, and 72c may be provided”.), with outputs of the array of pumps coupled together (at least Figs. 5-8 and [0151] “pumps 72b and 72c, which are connected in series with each but in parallel with pump 72a, providing airflow”.).
Re Claim 2, Lafleche teaches:
The bed of claim 1, wherein each of the pumps of the array of pumps are independently operable (at least [0151] “Valves 60c are in fluid communication with conduits 56b and 56c and are controlled by control boards 65a, 65b, and 65c mounted in enclosure 56, which are in two-way communication with controller 70” and [0151] “To supply air to conduits 50b, 54b, and 56b, as noted pneumatic system 45 includes one or more air delivery devices, namely compressors or pumps 72 (FIG. 3A), such as 120 volt pumps. Optionally, two (such as shown in FIGS. 7 and 8) or three (such as shown in FIGS. 5 and 11) or more pumps 72a, 72b, and 72c may be provided”.).
Re Claim 3, Lafleche teaches:
The bed of claim 2, wherein less than all of the pumps may be operated to provide at least one predetermined pneumatic effect (at least [0151] “In this manner, one, two, or three of the pumps may be used”.).
Re Claim 4, Lafleche teaches:
The bed of claim 3, further comprising a controller configured to determine which pumps of the array of pumps are to be operated to provide the at least one predetermined pneumatic effect (at least element 70 and [0154] “to control the flow of airflow from pumps 72a, 72b, and 72c to the low air loss system (LAL), pneumatic system 45 includes valves 74a, such as solenoid valves, which are controlled by main controller 70”.).
Re Claim 5, Lafleche teaches:
The bed of claim 4, wherein the controller is configured to determine that different pumps should be operated to provide the at least one pneumatic effect at different times (at least Fig. 6, which shows different pneumatic forces over time and [0151] “In this manner, one, two, or three of the pumps may be used, which allows for smaller pumps to be employed,” which shows the pumps may be adjusted for different effects).
Re Claim 8, Lafleche teaches:
The bed of claim 1, wherein outputs of the array of pumps are selectively couplable to at least one chamber supporting the sleep surface (at least Figs. 5-8, showing the pump and conduits to the chambers).
Re Claim 9, Lafleche teaches:
The bed of claim 1, wherein the outputs of the array of pumps are selectively coupled to any of a plurality of chambers supporting a sleep surface of the bed (at least Figs. 5-8, showing the pump and conduits to the chambers).
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) 6-7 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lafleche in view of US 20180220971 A1 to Benson.
Re Claim 6, Lafleche teaches:
The bed of claim 5 (detailed with respect to claim 5).
Lafleche does not explicitly teach:
wherein the controller is configured to maintain information as to a level of wear for each of the pumps.
However, Benson teaches:
wherein the controller is configured to maintain information as to a level of wear for each of the pumps (at least [0344] “the processor may determine new usage-since-maintenance information by adding the amount of time elapsed between when the mattress was detected to be in use and when the mattress was detected to be no longer in use to the usage-since-maintenance information stored in memory”.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bed taught by Lafleche with the monitoring of the level of wear taught by Benson with a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at a bed that monitors the wear of its pumps. A person having ordinary skill would have been motivated to do so because “an alert may be triggered based on the mattress health information” (Benson [0346]), which allows the user to conduct maintenance on the bed.
Re Claim 7, the combination of Lafleche and Benson teaches:
The bed of claim 6 (detailed with respect to claim 6).
Lafleche further teaches:
wherein the controller is configured to determine which pumps to operate (at least [0151] “In this manner, one, two, or three of the pumps may be used”.) based on the information as to the level of wear for each pump (at least [0156] “the volume of the bladders may still maintained below their full volume to thereby reduce fatigue”.).
Re Claim 10, the combination of Lafleche and Benson teaches:
The bed of claim 7 (detailed with respect to claim 7).
Lafleche further teaches:
wherein the controller is configured to determine an activation time for operation of the pumps to provide the predetermined pneumatic effect (at least Fig. 6, which shows different pneumatic forces over time and [0151] “In this manner, one, two, or three of the pumps may be used, which allows for smaller pumps to be employed,” which shows the pumps may be adjusted for different effects).
Re Claim 11, the combination of Lafleche and Benson teaches:
The bed of claim 10 (detailed with respect to claim 10).
Lafleche further teaches:
wherein the controller (at least [0154] “main controller 70”.) is configured to determine a voltage to be supplied to the pumps to provide the predetermined pneumatic effect (at least [0151] “To supply air to conduits 50b, 54b, and 56b, as noted pneumatic system 45 includes one or more air delivery devices, namely compressors or pumps 72 (FIG. 3A), such as 120 volt pumps”.).
Re Claim 12, the combination of Lafleche and Benson teaches:
The bed of claim 11 (detailed with respect to claim 11).
Benson further teaches:
wherein the controller is configured to determine the indication of wear of the pumps (at least [0344] “the processor may determine new usage-since-maintenance information by adding the amount of time elapsed between when the mattress was detected to be in use and when the mattress was detected to be no longer in use to the usage-since-maintenance information stored in memory”.)
Lafleche further teaches:
based on operating times and operating voltages of the pumps (at least Fig. 6 and [0151] 120 volt pumps”.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE SUN whose telephone number is (571)270-7221. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-4:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Justin Mikowski can be reached at (571) 272-8525. 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.
/GEORGE SUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673