Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/764,366

PRESSURE ULCER PREVENTION BED USING BODY PRESSURE SENSORS AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jul 05, 2024
Examiner
HARE, DAVID R
Art Unit
3673
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Ninebell Healthcare Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
408 granted / 607 resolved
+15.2% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+32.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
625
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
49.7%
+9.7% vs TC avg
§102
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§112
17.5%
-22.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 607 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 the Application Claims 8-12 have been examined in this application. Claims 1-7 are withdrawn based on Applicant’s election of Invention II in the response dated 3/20/2026. This communication is the first action on merits. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 7/5/2024 has been acknowledged by the Office. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention II (Claims 8-12) in the reply filed on 3/20/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/20/2026. Claim Objections Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 8 recites “duration control” which should likely be amended to “a duration control” for better primary antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 9 recites various formulas (formulae) in which the variables and equations contain difficult to read text and/or inline images as reproduced below. The portions in boxes below are in particular of poor quality and difficult to read. Appropriate correction is required. PNG media_image1.png 782 774 media_image1.png Greyscale 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 8-12 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 8 raises the issue of indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) in that the claim appears to be a single claim which claims both an apparatus and method steps of using the apparatus. See MPEP 2173.05(p), Section II: A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. It appears that claim 8 has been drafted (statutorily) be a method claim, however, the body of the claim does not specifically outline steps (e.g. “-ing” verbs) that comprise the overall method being claimed. Further, claim 8, in several locations, is written in very narrative format. For example: “…that is a pressure ulcer critical pressure at which a pressure ulcer is likely to occur, just before the specific raising and lowering link module with a pressure having come close to the pressure ulcer critical pressure reaches the pressure ulcer critical pressure, not only movements are stopped for a preset certain residence time after lowering only the specific raising and lowering link module with the pressure having come close to the pressure ulcer critical pressure from an initial first vertical position…” The examiner respectfully requests clarification or amendments to place claim 8 in better format with respect to US practice. The term “having come close to the pressure ulcer critical pressure” in claim 8 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is subjective and unclear what value would be considered “close” to the pressure ulcer critical pressure (32 mmHg as defined by the claim itself). Claims 9-12 are additionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being dependent upon a rejected base claim (claim 8). Any determinations of Allowable Subject Matter outlined below are made with respect to a best understanding of Applicant’s claims notwithstanding the rejections presented above. Allowable Subject Matter Claim(s) 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and objected to as noted in detail above, but would otherwise be allowable in view of the closest art of record if amendments are provided which may obviate the rejections under 35 U.S.C 112(b) and claim objections as noted above. Regarding independent claim 8, the closest art of record, KR 102076161, teaches a patient bed including a rotatable mat unit 300 pivotally mounted above a lateral base frame support 100/130 via connecting members 220, which broadly forms a raising/lowering parallelogram link similar to the requirement of claim 8. The reference also teaches a driving unit 210 which may read on the claimed “servo motor.” KR 102076161, however, is silent to the further inclusion of body pressure sensors, a motion control unit connected to the servo motor via wired and wireless communication. KR 102076161 is further silent with respect to the specific method of raising/lowering its link modules to specific independent vertical positions based on sensed pressure and reaching a critical ulcer pressure as required by claim 8. European Patent Application 0374742 A1 to Di Blasi, considered to be the second closest reference to the claimed invention, teaches a keyboard-form resting surface having a series of transversely adjacent raising/lower elements controlled by motor operated parallelogram system 270 (see Fig. 5-6). However, De Blasi, does not teach the specific method of raising each link structure independently to specific heights based on sensed body pressure information as required by claim 8. U.S. Patent 2,790,440 and U.S. Patent 2906259, both to Adair, teach a variable pressure cushion system for a bed, however, neither teaches nor fairly suggests a parallelogram link structure nor the specific method of raising each link structure independently to specific heights as required by claim 8. GB Patent Application 2015872A (Girgis), teaches an anti-sore bed with a plurality of adjustable segments that are movable with respect one another and actuated by a crank handle. However, Girgis does not teach a parallelogram link structure nor the method of raising each link structure independently to specific heights as required by claim 8. JP Patent 2003-24407 to Makino teaches a stretcher including a waist stretching portion having a parallelogram link (see Figs. 12-14), however, it does not have a plurality of links in parallel along the longitudinal surface of the bed. Further Makino is silent to the method of raising each link structure independently to specific heights as required by claim 8. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited patents show beds and body support devices with similar properties to the claimed invention. They show the general state of the art and are of general relevance with respect to the claimed subject matter. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID R HARE whose telephone number is (571)272-4420. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI 8:00 AM-5:00 PM EST. 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. Sincerely, /DAVID R HARE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673 4/1/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 05, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599524
Inflatable Mat for Use in Lateral Positioning
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599525
SUPPORT APPARATUS, SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588767
FUNCTIONAL MATTRESS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12569202
TRANSPORT APPARATUS IN MEDICAL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569389
SURGICAL TABLE CLADDING PROTECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+32.7%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 607 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month