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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/20/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
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 4 and 15-19 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 4 — “CENTRAL VERTICAL ROLLER”
Claim 4 recites “wherein the fixed rail further comprises a central vertical roller to assist the support beam in translating within the passageway of the fixed rail.”
The specification describes the support beam translating within the passageway of the fixed rail using several identified roller structures, including a foot-end roller 166, one or more foot-end vertical rollers 164, one or more foot-end lateral rollers 165, head-end vertical rollers 173, head-end lateral rollers 174, and rollers 315 on the first ramp block. See, e.g., Spec. ¶¶ [0105]-[0112] and FIGS. 7L-7P. However, the specification does not appear to describe or identify a “central vertical roller,” nor does it indicate which disclosed roller is “central” or otherwise correspond to the claimed “central vertical roller.”
Accordingly, the disclosure does not reasonably convey possession of a fixed rail comprising the claimed “central vertical roller” that assists the support beam in translating within the passageway of the fixed rail.
SUGGESTED RESPONSE
Applicant may overcome this rejection by amending claim 4 to recite a roller structure actually described in the application as filed, such as the foot-end vertical roller(s), head-end vertical roller(s), or ramp-block roller(s), if such amendment is consistent with applicant’s intended scope. Alternatively, applicant may point to specific support in the originally filed specification and drawings for the claimed “central vertical roller.” Any attempt to add a new description of an undisclosed “central vertical roller” should be reviewed for new matter.
CLAIM 15 — “CARRIAGE SLIDER ... OPERABLE TO CONTACT THE LATCH SLIDER”
Claim 15 recites, in part, “a carriage slider slidably disposed within the switch plate base, coupled to the intermediate slider, and operable to contact the latch slider.”
The specification describes a fastener slider 168, intermediate slider 167, carriage slider 169, and latch slider 199 slidably disposed within the switch plate assembly. The specification further describes the intermediate slider contacting or pushing the fastener slider, the latch slider contacting or pushing the fastener slider, the carriage slider being coupled to the carriage link arm, and the carriage slider being pulled by the intermediate slider. See Spec. ¶¶ [0157]-[0165] and FIGS. 13N-13R. However, the specification does not appear to describe the carriage slider contacting the latch slider or being operable to contact the latch slider.
Accordingly, the disclosure does not reasonably convey possession of the specific claimed relationship in which the carriage slider is operable to contact the latch slider. Claims 16-19 depend, directly or indirectly, from claim 15 and are rejected for the same reason.
SUGGESTED RESPONSE
Applicant may overcome this rejection by amending claim 15 to remove the unsupported “operable to contact the latch slider” relationship, by replacing it with a relationship supported by the originally filed disclosure, or by identifying specific support in the originally filed specification and drawings showing the carriage slider contacting or being operable to contact the latch slider.
35 U.S.C. §112(b) REJECTIONS — INDEFINITENESS
Claim(s) 11-19 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 the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
CLAIM 11 — LACK OF ANTECEDENT BASIS FOR “THE FIRST MODE” AND “THE SECOND MODE”
Claim 11 depends from claim 8 and recites “the first mode” and “the second mode.” Claim 8 does not introduce a first mode or a second mode. Claim 10 introduces “a first mode” and “a second mode,” but claim 11 does not depend from claim 10.
As presented, the definite phrases “the first mode” and “the second mode” in claim 11 lack antecedent basis in the claim from which claim 11 depends. Because claim 11 does not incorporate claim 10, it is unclear whether the “first mode” and “second mode” in claim 11 are intended to be the same modes recited in claim 10 or newly introduced modes having different scope.
SUGGESTED RESPONSE
Applicant may overcome this rejection by amending claim 11 to depend from claim 10, if claim 11 is intended to further define the modes introduced in claim 10. Alternatively, applicant may amend claim 11 to introduce “a first mode” and “a second mode” and clearly define those modes within claim 11.
CLAIM 12 — LACK OF ANTECEDENT BASIS FOR “THE END BLOCK,” “THE UNLOCK BUTTON,” AND “THE SUPPORT BEAM MEMBER”
Claim 12 depends from claim 11, which depends from claim 8. Claim 12 recites “the end block,” “the unlock button,” and “the support beam member.” However, claims 8 and 11 do not introduce an end block, an unlock button, or a support beam member. These structures appear to be introduced in claim 10, but claim 12 does not depend from claim 10.
Accordingly, it is unclear what “end block,” “unlock button,” and “support beam member” are being further limited in claim 12. The metes and bounds of claim 12 are therefore unclear.
SUGGESTED RESPONSE
Applicant may overcome this rejection by amending claim 12, directly or indirectly, to depend from claim 10, if the claimed end block, unlock button, and support beam member are intended to be the structures recited in claim 10. Alternatively, applicant may amend claim 12 to expressly introduce the support beam, support beam member, end block, and unlock button within the claim.
CLAIM 13 — LACK OF ANTECEDENT BASIS FOR “THE SUPPORT BEAM”
Claim 13 depends from claim 12 and recites “the support beam comprises.” However, due to the dependency chain from claim 13 to claim 12 to claim 11 to claim 8, there is no clear antecedent basis for “the support beam.” Claim 12 refers to “the support beam member,” but does not properly introduce “a support beam” in the dependency chain.
Because the claim does not clearly identify the support beam being further limited, the scope of claim 13 is indefinite. Claims 14-19 depend, directly or indirectly, from claim 13 and are indefinite at least for the same reason.
SUGGESTED RESPONSE
Applicant may overcome this rejection by amending claim 12 or claim 13 to expressly introduce a support beam, or by correcting the dependency chain so that claim 13 depends, directly or indirectly, from a claim that properly introduces the support beam.
CLAIM 19 — “THE SECOND INPUT ARM OF THE FIRST LINKAGE ASSEMBLY”
Claim 19 recites “the flip-flop tab is proximate the second input arm of the first linkage assembly.” However, claim 14 defines the first linkage assembly as comprising “a plurality of primary links, a first input arm and a first output arm,” and defines the second linkage assembly as comprising “a plurality of secondary links, a second input arm and a second output arm.”
Thus, the claim set introduces a “first input arm” of the first linkage assembly and a “second input arm” of the second linkage assembly. It does not introduce a “second input arm of the first linkage assembly.” The phrase in claim 19 is internally inconsistent with the antecedent structure recited in claim 14 and renders the scope of claim 19 unclear.
SUGGESTED RESPONSE
Applicant may overcome this rejection by amending claim 19 to recite “the second input arm of the second linkage assembly,” if that is the intended structure. This amendment would appear consistent with the disclosure describing the second input arm 157 as part of the second linkage assembly 156. See Spec. ¶¶ [0146], [0149], [0162]-[0163].
CLAIM OBJECTIONS / INFORMALITIES
Claim 3 is objected to because of informalities. In claim 3, the phrase “comprising safety hook” should be amended to “comprising a safety hook.”
Claim 18 is objected to because of an apparent typographical error. The phrase “toward, the head-end of the fixed rail” should be amended to “toward the head-end of the fixed rail.”
Appropriate correction is required.
LIST OF REFERENCES USED
Reference 1: U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0233386 A1, “Stretcher.”
Reference 2: U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0080016 A1, “Ambulance Cot and Loading and Unloading System.”
Reference 3: U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0117984 A1, “Guide Rail for a Stairlift.”
Reference 4: U.S. Patent No. 3,661,431, “Guide Wheels and Tracks.”
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 (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 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 –
REJECTION I
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Reference 1.
────────────
A cot loading and unloading system comprising: a fixed rail comprising a track, wherein the fixed rail is operable to be fixed to a floor; and a carriage directly coupled to the track and operable to travel along the fixed rail on the track, wherein the carriage is further operable to travel to an extended position such that at least a portion of the carriage extends beyond a length of the fixed rail.
Analysis
Reference 1 discloses a cot/stretcher loading and unloading system 10 including a loading/unloading apparatus 30 for loading and unloading a stretcher 20 relative to an ambulance V. The loading/unloading apparatus 30 includes a longitudinal guide 31 positioned on a loading surface L of the ambulance V.
Reference 1 discloses the claimed “fixed rail comprising a track” because longitudinal guide 31 includes fixed rail 310. Fixed rail 310 is fixed to, or bolted to, loading surface L of the ambulance V. The fixed rail 310 provides the track path along which the movable loading components travel.
Reference 1 discloses that the fixed rail is operable to be fixed to a floor because fixed rail 310 is secured to the ambulance loading surface L, which corresponds to the floor or floor-like loading surface of the vehicle.
Reference 1 discloses the claimed “carriage directly coupled to the track” because intermediate slide 312 is slidingly associated with fixed rail 310 and is carried directly by guide 31/fixed rail 310. The slide 312 is a movable carriage structure because it travels relative to the fixed rail 310 and supports the loading/unloading movement of the stretcher system.
Reference 1 discloses that the carriage is operable to travel along the fixed rail on the track because slide 312 moves along fixed rail 310 in a longitudinal sliding direction parallel to the fixed rail 310. The support coupling 32 also travels along guide 31 and slide 312 to support and guide the stretcher 20 during loading and unloading.
Reference 1 discloses that the carriage travels to an extended position such that at least a portion of the carriage extends beyond a length of the fixed rail because slide 312 is movable to a rear-end position in which the rear end of slide 312 projects axially beyond the rear end of fixed rail 310. Thus, the movable carriage/slide extends beyond the length of the fixed rail in the same manner required by the claim.
Accordingly, Reference 1 discloses each limitation of claim 1.
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.
REJECTION II
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 3.
Claims 3-4 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Claims 5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 3 and in further view of Reference 4.
────────────
The cot loading and unloading system of claim 1, wherein the track comprises a rack member operable to receive a drive pinion of the carriage.
Rejection
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 3.
Analysis
Reference 1 discloses the cot loading and unloading system of claim 1, including fixed rail 310, guide 31, slide 312, and support coupling 32.
Reference 1 does not expressly disclose that the track includes a rack member operable to receive a drive pinion of the carriage. Reference 3 teaches this feature. Reference 3 discloses guide rail 2, rack 20, and drive pinion 7. The rack 20 is positioned along the rail structure and is engaged by pinion 7 to move a carrier frame 4 along guide rail 2. The pinion 7 receives/engages rack 20 to provide controlled driven travel along the rail.
It would have been obvious to modify the fixed rail/track of Reference 1 so that fixed rail 310 includes a rack member corresponding to rack 20 of Reference 3, and to provide the movable carriage/slide/support coupling with a drive pinion corresponding to pinion 7 of Reference 3. The resulting system would include a track having a rack member operable to receive a drive pinion of the carriage, as claimed.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to provide positive, controlled, powered linear movement of the carriage along the fixed rail rather than relying only on free sliding or manual pulling. Reference 1 already uses a longitudinal rail and sliding carriage arrangement for moving a stretcher relative to a vehicle. Reference 3 teaches a known rack-and-pinion drive for moving a load-carrying frame along a guide rail. Applying the rack 20 and pinion 7 arrangement of Reference 3 to the fixed rail 310 and slide/carriage of Reference 1 would have predictably improved positional control, reduced manual effort, and provided reliable longitudinal drive of the carriage during loading and unloading.
────────────
The cot loading and unloading system of claim 1, wherein: the fixed rail further comprises an end roller support section comprising safety hook, a foot-end roller, and a foot-end vertical roller; and the foot-end roller and the foot-end vertical roller are operable to support a support beam disposed in a passageway of the fixed rail.
Rejection
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Analysis
Reference 1 discloses the cot loading and unloading system of claim 1, including fixed rail 310, guide 31, slide 312, and support coupling 32.
Reference 1 discloses a safety hook feature because fixed rail 310 includes safety couplings/hooks 311 configured to engage corresponding coupling portions 210 of stretcher 20. The safety hooks 311 retain the stretcher relative to the fixed rail/loading apparatus during loading, unloading, and transport.
Reference 1 does not expressly disclose the claimed end roller support section having both a foot-end roller and a foot-end vertical roller supporting a support beam in a passageway of the fixed rail. Reference 2 teaches this support architecture. Reference 2 discloses a vehicle-mounted base 20, transfer track 22, and trolley 24. The base 20 and transfer track 22 form a nested rail arrangement. Transfer track 22 functions as a movable support beam because it translates relative to base 20 and supports trolley 24 when the trolley is extended. Reference 2 further discloses bearings/rollers 32 supporting transfer track 22 relative to base 20, and bearings/rollers 104 supporting trolley 24 relative to transfer track 22. Reference 2 also discloses lock/support assemblies 122 and 123 with pawls, brackets, rollers, and cam/roller structures adjacent end portions of the rail arrangement.
It would have been obvious to provide the fixed rail 310 of Reference 1 with an end roller support section based on Reference 2, including a safety hook corresponding to safety hook 311 of Reference 1, a foot-end roller, and a foot-end vertical roller corresponding to the end-position roller/bearing supports of Reference 2. In the modified system, the movable support beam corresponding to slide 312 or transfer track 22 is disposed in and supported by the passageway/nested rail region of the fixed rail/base.
The foot-end roller and foot-end vertical roller support the support beam during translation and especially when the carriage extends outwardly from the vehicle. This corresponds to the claimed function of supporting a support beam disposed in a passageway of the fixed rail.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to improve support of the movable carriage/slide when it is extended beyond the fixed rail. Reference 1 already discloses an ambulance loading rail with an extendable slide 312 and safety hooks 311. Reference 2 teaches that a telescoping cot-loading rail benefits from roller/bearing supports 32 and 104 and end lock/support structures 122 and 123 to carry vertical and longitudinal loads. Incorporating the end roller support arrangement of Reference 2 into Reference 1 would predictably reduce friction, reduce binding, distribute vertical loads, and support the cantilevered carriage during loading and unloading.
────────────
The cot loading and unloading system of claim 3, wherein the fixed rail further comprises a central vertical roller to assist the support beam in translating within the passageway of the fixed rail.
Rejection
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Analysis
Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 discloses the cot loading and unloading system of claim 3 as set forth above.
Reference 2 discloses a nested rail arrangement in which transfer track 22 translates relative to base 20 and is supported by bearing/roller structures 32. Reference 2 further discloses trolley 24 translating relative to transfer track 22 and being supported by bearing/roller structures 104. These rollers/bearings assist translation of the movable support rail and trolley within the nested rail arrangement.
Reference 2 teaches the use of multiple roller or bearing support points along the rail assembly to support translating components. Providing an additional central vertical roller in the fixed rail passageway would have been an obvious implementation of the roller support concept of Reference 2. A central vertical roller positioned between end support rollers would support the movable support beam during travel, reduce sagging of the support beam, reduce friction between the support beam and fixed rail passageway, and maintain alignment while the carriage moves between retracted and extended positions.
Accordingly, the modified system includes the claimed central vertical roller assisting the support beam in translating within the passageway of the fixed rail.
Motivation
The motivation to provide a central vertical roller is to improve the load distribution and sliding performance of the support beam in the fixed rail. Because the cot-loading system supports a patient-bearing cot and because the carriage extends beyond the fixed rail, a skilled artisan would have recognized that the translating support beam benefits from vertical support at an intermediate/central location. Adding a central vertical roller based on the roller-supported rail arrangement of Reference 2 would predictably reduce bending, binding, and wear while maintaining smooth longitudinal travel.
────────────
The cot loading and unloading system of claim 1, wherein: the track comprises a first side, a second side, a rack member, a wheel guide member, and at least two guide members; the at least two guide members are disposed in opposing grooves in the second side of the track; the first side comprises a first groove and a second groove opposing the first groove; the rack member is positioned in the first groove and the wheel guide member is positioned in the second groove; and the rack member comprises a rack protrusion and the wheel guide member comprises a wheel guide protrusion.
Rejection
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 3 and further in view of Reference 4.
Analysis
Reference 1 discloses the cot loading and unloading system of claim 1, including fixed rail 310, guide 31, slide 312, and support coupling 32.
Reference 1 discloses a track/rail arrangement for supporting longitudinal carriage travel, but does not expressly disclose the specific claimed multi-sided track having a rack member, wheel guide member, opposing grooves, and opposing protrusions.
Reference 3 teaches a guide rail 2 having a rack 20 positioned along the guide rail for engagement by a drive pinion 7. Reference 3 further discloses a rail profile having a cavity, internal support surfaces, carrier members 8, guide members 10 and 11, and guiding means 12 and 13 arranged to guide a movable frame along the rail. Thus, Reference 3 teaches incorporating a rack member and guide members into a rail profile to guide and drive a moving carriage.
Reference 4 teaches guide wheel 1 having a V-shaped annular groove and guide tracks 12/14 having protruding V-shaped track portions that mate with the groove of the wheel. Reference 4 further teaches opposed guide track arrangements in which wheels are captured and guided by facing track portions. Thus, Reference 4 teaches the claimed concept of protruding guide/rack-side rail portions that mate with wheel grooves to control carriage travel and resist lateral displacement.
It would have been obvious to modify the fixed rail/track of Reference 1 using the rack-and-guide-rail teachings of Reference 3 and the grooved-wheel/protruding-track teachings of Reference 4. In the modified system, the track would include a first side and a second side formed by opposite portions of the rail profile. The first side would include first and second opposed grooves, with a rack member positioned in one groove and a wheel guide member positioned in the other groove. The rack member would include a protruding guide/rack surface, and the wheel guide member would include an opposing protruding guide surface. The second side would include opposing grooves receiving guide members corresponding to guide members 10 and 11 and/or carrier members 8 of Reference 3.
The rack protrusion and wheel guide protrusion would be provided according to the protruding V-track structures of Reference 4 so that the carriage wheels remain aligned and captured during motion along the rail. The combined track structure would therefore include each structural element required by claim 5.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to provide the ambulance cot-loading rail of Reference 1 with a compact, positively driven, self-guiding rail structure. Reference 1 already requires a fixed rail and movable carriage/slide. Reference 3 teaches adding a rack 20 and guide members to a rail profile to drive and guide a moving load. Reference 4 teaches using mating protrusions and grooved wheels to provide self-centering, low-friction, mechanically captured movement. A skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine these teachings to improve powered carriage travel, lateral stability, alignment, and load support in the extended cot-loading position.
────────────
The cot loading and unloading system of claim 1, further comprising a support beam disposed within a passageway of the fixed rail, wherein the support beam is operable to translate within the passageway and support the carriage when it is in the extended position.
Rejection
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Analysis
Reference 1 discloses the cot loading and unloading system of claim 1, including fixed rail 310, guide 31, slide 312, and support coupling 32. Reference 1 further discloses that slide 312 moves relative to fixed rail 310 and projects beyond fixed rail 310 in the extended position.
Reference 2 teaches the claimed support-beam relationship more expressly. Reference 2 discloses base 20, transfer track 22, and trolley 24. Transfer track 22 is a support beam because it translates relative to base 20, supports trolley 24, and allows trolley 24 to extend outwardly relative to base 20. The base 20 and transfer track 22 form a nested rail/passageway arrangement in which the transfer track 22 translates while supporting the trolley 24.
It would have been obvious to modify the fixed rail/slide arrangement of Reference 1 to include the translating support-beam arrangement of Reference 2. In the modified system, the support beam corresponding to transfer track 22 is disposed within the passageway of the fixed rail/base and translates within that passageway to support the carriage when the carriage is in the extended position.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to improve cantilevered support of the carriage during ambulance cot loading and unloading. Reference 1 already discloses a slide 312 that extends beyond fixed rail 310. Reference 2 teaches that a movable transfer track 22 can support trolley 24 during extension beyond base 20. Applying the translating support beam of Reference 2 to Reference 1 would predictably increase strength, reduce bending of the extended carriage, and improve safety when the carriage supports a patient-bearing cot.
────────────
The cot loading and unloading system of claim 1, wherein: the fixed rail further comprises: a fastener receiver for locking a fastener of the cot to the fixed rail; and a carriage lock for locking the carriage to the fixed rail; and the carriage further comprises a pair of latch mechanisms for locking a head-end of the cot to the carriage.
Rejection
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Analysis
Reference 1 discloses the cot loading and unloading system of claim 1, including fixed rail 310, guide 31, slide 312, support coupling 32, and stretcher 20.
Reference 1 discloses safety couplings/hooks 311 on fixed rail 310 that engage coupling portions 210 of stretcher 20. These structures generally teach securing the cot/stretcher relative to the fixed rail/loading apparatus.
Reference 2 more expressly teaches the claimed fastener receiver, carriage lock, and pair of latch mechanisms. Reference 2 discloses fastener 132 including guide 134, V-shaped recess 136, hook 138, springs 140, and release plate 138b. The fastener 132 receives and locks a corresponding cot fastener 130, thereby functioning as the claimed fastener receiver for locking a fastener of the cot to the fixed rail/loading apparatus.
Reference 2 discloses a carriage lock because latch mechanism 105, including pawl 106, actuator 110, manual release plate 112, and button 112a, locks trolley 24 and associated rail components relative to the loading apparatus. Reference 2 also discloses lock assemblies 122 and 123 for locking transfer track 22 relative to base 20 and controlling rail/carriage position.
Reference 2 discloses the claimed pair of latch mechanisms because trolley 24 includes two latches 70 that engage corresponding pins 90 associated with cot wheels 86a. The latches 70 lock the cot head-end region to trolley 24 during loading and unloading.
It would have been obvious to incorporate the fastener 132, carriage lock structures 105/122/123, and pair of latches 70 of Reference 2 into the cot loading and unloading system of Reference 1. The resulting system includes a fixed rail with a fastener receiver, a carriage lock for locking the carriage to the fixed rail, and a carriage with a pair of latch mechanisms for locking the head-end of the cot to the carriage.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to improve securement of the cot and carriage during loading, unloading, and vehicle transport. Reference 1 already discloses safety hooks 311 and a vehicle-mounted loading apparatus. Reference 2 teaches known cot-loading locks and latches that secure the cot at both head-end and foot-end locations and lock rail/trolley components during travel. Incorporating those locks into Reference 1 would predictably improve patient safety, prevent unintended cot movement, and maintain carriage position during ambulance operation.
────────────
The cot loading and unloading system of claim 8, wherein the fixed rail further comprises a release that is operable to unlock the carriage lock.
Rejection
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 2.
Analysis
Reference 1 in view of Reference 2 discloses the cot loading and unloading system of claim 8 as set forth above.
Reference 2 discloses a release operable to unlock the carriage lock. In particular, Reference 2 discloses manual release plate 112 and button 112a associated with latch mechanism 105. Actuation of button 112a/manual release plate 112 releases the locking engagement of pawl 106. Reference 2 also discloses release mechanisms associated with lock assemblies 122 and 123, including release arms, pawls, buttons, and cam/roller structures for releasing rail/trolley locking relationships.
It would have been obvious to provide the fixed rail/loading apparatus of Reference 1 with the release structures of Reference 2 so that an operator can unlock the carriage lock and move the carriage during loading or unloading.
Motivation
The motivation to provide the release is to permit controlled transition between locked transport/storage positions and movable loading/unloading positions. A carriage lock prevents unintended movement, but the lock must be releasable when an operator intentionally loads or unloads the cot. Reference 2 teaches releases for this purpose. Incorporating those releases into Reference 1 would predictably allow safe, deliberate unlocking of the carriage while preserving secure locking during transport.
────────────
A fixed rail of a cot loading and unloading system comprising a track further comprising a first side, a second side, a rack member, and a wheel guide member, wherein: the fixed rail is operable to be fixed to a floor; the rack member comprises a plurality of teeth and a rack protrusion; the wheel guide member comprises a wheel guide protrusion; the rack protrusion and the wheel guide protrusion oppose one another to receive at least one wheel of a carriage; and the rack protrusion and the wheel guide protrusion have a profile to mate with a groove of the at least one wheel.
Rejection
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reference 1 in view of Reference 3 and further in view of Reference 4.
Analysis
Reference 1 discloses a fixed rail of a cot loading and unloading system. Specifically, Reference 1 discloses loading/unloading apparatus 30 for stretcher 20 and fixed rail 310 of guide 31. Fixed rail 310 is fixed to loading surface L of ambulance V, which corresponds to the claimed floor.
Reference 1 discloses that the fixed rail includes a track because fixed rail 310 guides slide 312 and support coupling 32 along the longitudinal loading/unloading direction.
Reference 1 does not expressly disclose the claimed rack member, wheel guide member, rack protrusion, wheel guide protrusion, or protrusion profiles that mate with a groove of at least one carriage wheel. References 3 and 4 teach these features.
Reference 3 discloses guide rail 2 including rack 20 engaged by drive pinion 7. Rack 20 includes a plurality of rack openings/teeth configured to receive corresponding teeth of pinion 7. The rack 20 is positioned along the guide rail so that a movable carriage/frame can be driven along the rail. Thus, Reference 3 teaches the claimed rack member comprising a plurality of teeth.
Reference 4 discloses guide wheel 1 having a groove, including a V-shaped annular guide channel, and guide tracks 12/14 having protruding V-shaped rail profiles that mate with the groove of the wheel. Reference 4 further discloses opposed guide tracks that receive and guide wheel structures. Thus, Reference 4 teaches a protruding rail profile on one guide member and an opposing protruding rail profile on another guide member, with the protrusions shaped to mate with the groove of the wheel.
It would have been obvious to modify fixed rail 310 of Reference 1 to include a rack member according to rack 20 of Reference 3 and to include opposed rack/wheel-guide protrusions according to the V-shaped track structures 12/14 of Reference 4. In the modified rail, the track includes a first side and a second side defined by opposite portions of the rail profile. The rack member is located on one side of the track and includes teeth for engagement by a carriage drive pinion. The wheel guide member is located opposite the rack member. The rack member includes a rack protrusion, and the wheel guide member includes a wheel guide protrusion. These protrusions oppose one another to receive at least one wheel of the carriage, and their V-shaped or groove-mating profiles mate with the groove of the carriage wheel.
Accordingly, Reference 1 in view of Reference 3 and Reference 4 teaches or renders obvious each limitation of claim 20.
Motivation
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to provide the fixed rail of the cot loading/unloading system with a compact, positively driven, and mechanically captured wheel-guide structure. Reference 1 already discloses a vehicle-floor-mounted fixed rail 310 for guiding an extendable carriage/slide. Reference 3 teaches adding rack 20 to a guide rail 2 so that a pinion-driven carriage can be moved with controlled longitudinal force. Reference 4 teaches using opposed protruding guide tracks 12/14 and a grooved guide wheel 1 to maintain wheel alignment and resist lateral disengagement. A skilled artisan would have applied those known rail-drive and grooved-wheel guide features to Reference 1 to improve powered travel, alignment, load support, and safety of the extendable cot carriage.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 10-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 14-19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
CONCLUSION
EP 3791845 A1 was reviewed but not relied upon in the above rejections. That reference appears relevant to ambulance stretcher loading because it discloses a receiving/loading structure with a vehicle-mounted base and movable support components. However, it was not used because Reference 1 provides a closer primary disclosure of a fixed rail 310, slide 312, support coupling 32, and safety hooks 311 for a cot/stretcher loading system. EP 3791845 A1 also does not appear to provide the specific rack/pinion track, grooved wheel/protrusion, detent-switch, or two-mode release-linkage features needed for the dependent claims.
EP 2366369 B1 was reviewed but not relied upon in the above rejections. That reference appears relevant to telescoping patient support/loading structures, but it is less directly applicable than Reference 1 for the claimed fixed rail and carriage arrangement. It also does not appear to provide a stronger teaching of the detailed rack/protrusion/grooved-wheel structure of claims 5 and 20 or the specific detent-switch and two-mode release mechanisms of claims 6 and 10-19.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON C SMITH whose telephone number is (703)756-4641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 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, Joseph Morano can be reached at (571) 272-6684. 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.
/Jason C Smith/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights