Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/862,419

SAFETY SYSTEM FOR DETECTING ERRORS IN MEDICAL TABLES

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Nov 01, 2024
Examiner
EASTMAN, AARON ROBERT
Art Unit
3673
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Maquet GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
697 granted / 878 resolved
+27.4% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+18.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
905
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
40.9%
+0.9% vs TC avg
§102
29.2%
-10.8% vs TC avg
§112
26.4%
-13.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 878 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph: Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claims 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 31 depends form claim 1, which is a canceled claim. With regard to claims 32 and 33, in that claims 32 and 33 depend from claim 31, claims 32 and 33 are similarly rejected. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. 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 – (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) 28 and 37-48 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by USPAP 2007/0164871 (Dionne et al. hereinafter). With regard to claim 28, Dionne et al. discloses a system for detecting an error of a sensor in an operating table (10) or detecting an error when determining a load or a load center of the operating table (10), the system comprising: the operating table (10) having an adjustable patient bearing surface (mattress) for bearing a patient; a load sensor arrangement comprising a plurality of load sensors (600) configured to issue sensor values; a load determination unit configured to determine at least one first parameter using the sensor values after adjusting the patient bearing surface (mattress), the at least one first parameter being selected from: a load center, a speed of the load center, or an acceleration of the load center (paragraphs [0014], [0037], [0064], [0065]), the load center being a center of a load, the load being a load acting on the load sensor arrangement, a load acting on the operating table (10), or a total load of the operating table (10); a calculation unit configured to predict or calculate at least one expected second parameter when the patient bearing surface (mattress) is adjusted, the at least one expected second parameter being selected from (paragraph [0070]): the load center changed by the adjustment, or the speed of the load center, or the acceleration of the load center; and an error recognition unit configured to compare the at least one expected second parameter predicted or calculated by the calculation unit with the at least one first parameter determined by the load determination unit to determine a deviation, and if the deviation exceeds a predetermined value the error recognition unit detects an error or possible error (paragraph [0070], wherein the predetermined value is the set of standard operational characteristics). With regard to claim 37, Dionne et al. discloses a system for detecting an error of a sensor in an operating table (10) or detecting an error when determining a load or a load center of the operating table (10), the system comprising: the operating table (10) having an adjustable patient bearing surface (mattress) for bearing a patient; a load sensor arrangement comprising a plurality of load sensors (600) configured to issue sensor values; a load determination unit configured to determine at least one first parameter using the sensor values, the at least one first parameter being selected from: a load, or a load center (paragraphs [0014], [0037], [0064], [0065]), the load being a load acting on the load sensor arrangement, a load acting on the operating table (10), or a total load of the operating table (10); a calculation unit configured to predict or calculate an expected second parameter, the expected second parameter being theoretical sensor values, the theoretical sensor values comprising expected sensor values that the plurality of load sensors (600) are predicted or calculated to issue based on the load or load center as the first parameter determined by the load determination unit (paragraph [0070]); and an error recognition unit configured to compare the sensor values issued by the plurality of load sensors (600) with the theoretical sensor values as the expected second parameter calculated or predicted by the calculation unit to determine a deviation, and if the deviation exceeds a predetermined value the error recognition unit detects an error or possible error (paragraph [0070], wherein the theoretical value is the set of standard operational characteristics). With regard to claim 38, Dionne et al. discloses the system according to claim 37, wherein the error recognition unit is configured to detect an error or a possible error if the patient bearing surface (mattress) is not adjusted (paragraph [0119] discloses that the measurements are taken every 50 ms, whether or not the bed is adjusted). With regard to claim 39, Dionne et al. discloses the system according to claim 28, wherein the load sensor arrangement has at least three load sensors (600) (Fig. 10). With regard to claim 40, Dionne et al. discloses the system according to claim 28, wherein the plurality of load sensors (600) is arranged in a single common plane (Fig. 10). With regard to claim 41, Dionne et al. discloses the system according to claim 28, wherein some of the plurality of load sensors (600) are arranged mirror-symmetrically with regard to a first axis and mirror-symmetrically with regard to a second axis, and wherein the first axis and the second axis are aligned orthogonally to one another (Fig. 10). With regard to claim 42, Dionne et al. discloses the system according to claim 28, wherein the error recognition unit is configured to detect an error or a possible error of at least one of the load sensors (600) if the load determined by the load determination unit as the at least one first parameter exceeds a predetermined value or if the load center determined by the load determination unit as the first parameter lies outside a predetermined space (paragraph [0070]). With regard to claim 43, Dionne et al. discloses a system for detecting an error of a sensor in an operating table (10) or detecting an error when determining a load or a load center of the operating table (10), the system comprising: the operating table (10) having an adjustable patient bearing surface (mattress) for bearing a patient; a load sensor arrangement comprising a plurality of load sensors (600) configured to issue sensor values; a load determination unit configured to determine at least one first parameter using the sensor values, the at least one first parameter being selected from: a load, a load center, a speed of the load center, or an acceleration of the load center, the load center being a center of a load, the load being a load acting on the load sensor arrangement, a load acting on the operating table (10), or a total load of the operating table (10); a calculation unit configured to predict or calculate at least one expected second parameter, the at least one expected second parameter being selected from: the load, the load center, the speed of the load center, the acceleration of the load center, or theoretical sensor values, the theoretical sensor values comprising expected sensor values that the plurality of load sensors (600) is predicted or calculated to issue based on the load or load center as the first parameter determined by the load determination unit; and an error recognition unit configured to compare the at least one expected second parameter predicted or calculated by the calculation unit with the at least one first parameter determined by the load determination unit, the error recognition unit configured to detect an error or possible error of one or more of the load sensors (600) if: the load determined by the load determination unit is negative, or the load sensor does not change its sensor value while the other load sensors (600) change their sensor values (paragraph [0070]), or the load sensor changes its sensor value while the other load sensors (600) do not change their sensor values, or the load Fmeasured determined by the load determination unit does not follow the following equation in case of a trend and/or tilt of the patient bearing surface (mattress): F m e a s u r e d = F l o a d . c o s α - 1 - c o s α . F d t wherein F l o a d is the load acting on the patient bearing surface (mattress), a is the trend and/or tilt angle of the patient bearing surface (mattress), and F d t , is a tared load which comprises all loads which are part of the operating table (10) and are above the load sensors (600). With regard to claim 44, Dionne et al. discloses the system according to claim 28, wherein the adjusting of the patient bearing surface (mattress) comprises one or more of: trending the patient bearing surface (mattress), tilting the patient bearing surface (mattress) (paragraph [0057]), longitudinally displacing the patient bearing surface (mattress), or laterally displacing the patient bearing surface (mattress). With regard to claim 45, Dionne et al. discloses the system according to claim 28, wherein the error or possible error comprises a sensor error of one or more of the following sensors: the plurality of load sensors (600), sensors for detecting a trend of the patient bearing surface (mattress), sensors (1000) for detecting a tilt of the patient bearing surface (mattress), sensors for detecting a longitudinal displacement of the patient bearing surface (mattress), sensors for detecting a lateral displacement of the patient bearing surface (mattress), or column lift sensors. With regard to claim 46, Dionne et al. discloses the system according to claim 28, wherein the error recognition unit upon detection of an error or a possible error creates an error signal that indicates a safety-critical condition of the operating table (10), an acoustic or optical warning signal or a warning signal in text form are created or a movement of the operating table (10) is slowed down or stopped or at least one function of the operating table (10) is blocked (paragraph [0077]). With regard to claim 47, Dionne et al. discloses the system according to claim 28, wherein the calculation unit predicts the at least one expected second parameter (paragraph [0070] discloses standard operational characteristics, which are predicted values). With regard to claim 48, Dionne et al. discloses a method for detecting an error of a sensor in an operating table (10) or an error when determining a load or a load center using the system of claim 28, the method comprising: after adjusting the patient bearing surface (mattress), determining the at least one first parameter using the load determination unit; calculating or predicting the at least one expected second parameter using the calculation unit; and using the error recognition unit to compare the sensor values or the at least one first parameter with the at least one expected second parameter to determine a deviation, the error recognition unit detecting an error or possible error if the deviation exceeds a predetermined value (paragraph [0070], wherein the predetermined value is the set of standard operational characteristics). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 29, 30 and 34-36 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. With regard to claims 31-33, although no art rejection is being put forth at this time, patentability is reserved pending Applicant’s response to the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejections above. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USPAP 2019/0298229 discloses a patient bed similar to that claimed. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON R EASTMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3132. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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 C. 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. /AARON R EASTMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 01, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595767
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR ENGINE WEAR REDUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584423
TURBINE AND TURBOCHARGER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577881
TURBINE SHROUD ASSEMBLIES WITH ANTI-MIGRATION SEALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571410
BRACE FOR CEILING DROP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571329
ALTERING STRUCTURAL RESPONSE OF TWO-PIECE HOLLOW-VANE ASSEMBLY
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
79%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+18.5%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 878 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