DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the communication received on 06/04/2026 concerning application no. 18/881,769 filed on 01/07/2025.
Claims 1, 3-6, 8-11, and 15 are pending.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 112 rejection of claim 1, Applicant argues “The Office Action also asserts that claim 1 (it is assumed that the Examiner also meant to include claim 15 after the comments on claim 5) is unclear because "the controller is part of a trolley for transporting the patient bed." Claim 1 does not require the trolley to be part of the patient bed, nor does it require the patient bed to comprise a component that carries itself. Rather, claim 1 recites a patient bed having an interface module, with the controller being part of a trolley which is used for transporting the patient bed. The specification expressly describes this relationship: "The trolley 170 comprises a control unit 160. When the patient bed 100 is located 5 on the trolley, a connection from the second interface 42 of the interface module 140 to the control unit 160 of the trolley 170 can be established" (Detailed Description of Fig. 2). The specification further explains that, when the patient bed is transferred, "the communicational connection of the second interface 142 with the control unit 160 of the trolley 170 is disconnected, and a connection of the second interface 142 with a control unit 160 of the medical imaging system 120 is established" (Detailed Description of Fig. 2). These disclosures confirm that the controller is located on the trolley and is connected through the second interface while the trolley transports the patient bed.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The rejection is a 112b rejection and not a 112a rejection. The language of the claim is indefinite. The claim establishes a “patient bed comprising” and later states that the controller is part of a trolley. That trolley is being used to carry the patient bed. It would be unclear to one with ordinary skill in the art if the trolly is part of the patient bed or is a different component that is transporting the patient bed. It unclear how the patient bed is able to comprise a component that carries itself. Furthermore, assuming, arguendo, the language of the specification could be used, the cited section does not remedy the issue. Applicant alleges in their remarks that the trolly is not part of the bed. However, the claim states that the controller is part of a trolley and that the controller appears to be actively claimed as part of the patient bed. If is not actively claimed, it is further unclear what the limitation regarding the controller provides to the claim.
Examiner respectfully maintains the rejection.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the wherein the second interface is configured to disconnect from the trolley and to connect with the medical imaging system when the patient bed is moved from the trolley to the medical imaging system; wherein the interface module is configured to test a functionality of the at least one medical device (Claims 1 and 15) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1, 3-6, and 8-11 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 1 is indefinite for the following reasons:
Recites “wherein the controller is part of a trolley which is used for transporting the patient bed”. This claim element is indefinite. The claim establishes “the patient bed comprising:…” It would be unclear to one with ordinary skill in the art if the trolly is part of the patient bed or is a different component that is transporting the patient bed. It unclear how the patient bed is able to comprise a component that carries itself.
Applicant is encouraged to provide consistent and clear language.
Claims that are not discussed above but are cited to be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are also rejected because they inherit the indefiniteness of the claims they respectively depend upon.
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, 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 1, 3-4, 6, 9-10, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cumpson et al. (PGPUB No. US 2008/0194942) in view of Abenaim et al. (US Patent 8,692,213).
Regarding claim 1, Cumpson a patient bed for accommodating a patient in a medical imaging system, the patient bed comprising:
a table top configured for receiving the patient (Abstract teaches to position an imaging subject in an imaging or therapy system, the imaging subject is arranged on a linearly translatable tabletop disposed on a movable trolley. See Fig. 1); and
an interface module comprising a first interface and a second interface, wherein the first interface is configured to be connected to at least one medical device attached to the patient, and wherein the second interface is configured to be connected to a controller which is communicatively coupled with the at least one medical device (Paragraph 0034 teaches the selection of the region of interest using the elongated position selector can be done with the movable trolley positioned away from the MRI scanner. For example, it may be advantageous to prepare the patient, including positioning the patient with suitable comfort items such as pillows, installing local radio frequency coils, and selecting the region of interest, in another room or at a sufficient distance away from the MRI scanner to avoid exposure of the radiologist to magnetic fields produced by the MRI scanner. Paragraph 0037 teaches a coil coupling element couples local coils disposed on the tabletop with the MRI scanner. See Fig. 1);
wherein the controller is part of a trolley which is used for transporting the patient bed (Paragraph 0034 teaches the selection of the region of interest using the elongated position selector can be done with the movable trolley positioned away from the MRI scanner. See Fig. 1);
wherein the interface module is configured to test a functionality of the at least one medical device (Paragraph 0036 teaches as a consequence of the docking, the elongated position selector has a predetermined position respective to the isocenter of the MRI scanner when the trolley is docked. Paragraph 0037 teaches a coil coupling element couples local coils disposed on the tabletop with the MRI scanner. Paragraph 0035 teaches the movable trolley is docked with the MRI scanner. Docking is achieved using a suitable docking member on the MRI scanner that mates with a corresponding docking member on the movable trolley. The docking positions the trolley 30 at a fixed position respective to the MRI scanner. In some embodiments, the docking automatically provides electrical and communication connections. In other embodiments, one or more separate connectors are used to establish electrical and communication connection).
However, Cumpson is silent regarding a patient bed for accommodating a patient in a medical imaging system, wherein the second interface is configured to disconnect from the trolley and to connect with the medical imaging system when the patient bed is moved from the trolley to the medical imaging system.
In an analogous imaging field of endeavor, regarding patient bed design, Abenaim teaches a patient bed for accommodating a patient in a medical imaging system, wherein the second interface is configured to disconnect from the trolley and to connect with the medical imaging system when the patient bed is moved from the trolley to the medical imaging system (Col. 6, line 66 to Col. 8, line 17 teaches that the examination transport surface is transferred from the transport component and slid into the docking component of the radiographic scanner. Col. 14, line 45-59 teach that the examination surface can be moved automatically or manually and can be controlled. Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Cumpson with Abenaim’s teaching of a detachable and attachable interface. This modified apparatus would allow the user to have accurate motion of the table across long distances (Col. 2, lines 9-22 of Abenaim). Furthermore, the modification allows for accurate operational examination surface handling and imaging with easier targeting and allow for the subject to be prepped elsewhere (Col. 6, line 66 to Col. 8, line 17 of Abenaim).
Regarding claim 3, modified Cumpson teaches the patient bed in claim 1, as discussed above.
Cumpson further teaches a patient bed, wherein the at least one medical device is a physiological sensor for detecting a body function of the patient, a coil of the medical imaging system, or a device for treating the patient (Paragraph 0034 teaches the selection of the region of interest using the elongated position selector can be done with the movable trolley positioned away from the MRI scanner. For example, it may be advantageous to prepare the patient, including positioning the patient with suitable comfort items such as pillows, installing local radio frequency coils, and selecting the region of interest, in another room or at a sufficient distance away from the MRI scanner to avoid exposure of the radiologist to magnetic fields produced by the MRI scanner. See Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Cumpson teaches the patient bed in claim 1, as discussed above.
Cumpson further teaches a patient bed, wherein the second interface is configured to establish the connection to the controller automatically (Paragraph 0037 teaches a coil coupling element couples local coils disposed on the tabletop with the MRI scanner. Paragraph 0035 teaches the movable trolley is docked with the MRI scanner. Docking is achieved using a suitable docking member on the MRI scanner that mates with a corresponding docking member on the movable trolley. The docking positions the trolley 30 at a fixed position respective to the MRI scanner. In some embodiments, the docking automatically provides electrical and communication connections. In other embodiments, one or more separate connectors are used to establish electrical and communication connection).
Regarding claim 6, modified Cumpson teaches the patient bed in claim 1, as discussed above.
Cumpson further teaches a patient bed, wherein the connection of the first interface with the at least one medical device and/or the connection of the second interface with the controller is a galvanic, an optical, or a wireless connection (Paragraph 0037 teaches a coil coupling element couples local coils disposed on the tabletop with the MRI scanner. Paragraph 0035 teaches the movable trolley is docked with the MRI scanner. Docking is achieved using a suitable docking member on the MRI scanner that mates with a corresponding docking member on the movable trolley. The docking positions the trolley 30 at a fixed position respective to the MRI scanner. In some embodiments, the docking automatically provides electrical and communication connections. In other embodiments, one or more separate connectors are used to establish electrical and communication connection).
Regarding claim 9, modified Cumpson teaches the patient bed in claim 1, as discussed above.
Cumpson further teaches a patient bed, wherein the patient bed is configured to be used in a computed tomography apparatus, a magnetic resonance imaging system, positron emission tomography, X-ray imaging, ultrasound, and/or therapy systems like MR LINAC, MR hyperthermia, and combinations thereof (Paragraph 0045 teaches the device is readily used for patient positioning in conjunction with magnetic resonance spectroscopy, positron emission tomography (PET) imaging, single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging, computed tomography (CT) imaging, radiation therapy, and so forth).
Regarding claim 10, modified Cumpson teaches the patient bed in claim 1, as discussed above.
Cumpson further teaches a patient bed, wherein the patient bed comprises a power connector configured to receive electric power from the trolley and/or from the medical imaging system (Paragraph 0037 teaches a coil coupling element couples local coils disposed on the tabletop with the MRI scanner. Paragraph 0035 teaches the movable trolley is docked with the MRI scanner. Docking is achieved using a suitable docking member on the MRI scanner that mates with a corresponding docking member on the movable trolley. The docking positions the trolley 30 at a fixed position respective to the MRI scanner. In some embodiments, the docking automatically provides electrical and communication connections. In other embodiments, one or more separate connectors are used to establish electrical and communication connection).
Regarding claim 15, Cumpson teaches a method for accommodating a patient in a medical imaging system, the method comprising:
providing a table top configured for receiving the patient (Abstract teaches to position an imaging subject in an imaging or therapy system, the imaging subject is arranged on a linearly translatable tabletop disposed on a movable trolley. See Fig. 1); and
providing an interface module comprising a first interface and a second interface, wherein the first interface is configured to be connected to at least one medical device attached to the patient, and wherein the second interface is configured to be connected to a controller which is communicatively coupled with the at least one medical device, wherein the controller is part of a trolley which is used for transporting a patient bed, and wherein the interface module is configured to test a functionality of the at least one medical device (Paragraph 0034 teaches the selection of the region of interest using the elongated position selector can be done with the movable trolley positioned away from the MRI scanner. For example, it may be advantageous to prepare the patient, including positioning the patient with suitable comfort items such as pillows, installing local radio frequency coils, and selecting the region of interest, in another room or at a sufficient distance away from the MRI scanner to avoid exposure of the radiologist to magnetic fields produced by the MRI scanner. Paragraph 0037 teaches a coil coupling element couples local coils disposed on the tabletop with the MRI scanner. See Fig. 1. Paragraph 0036 teaches as a consequence of the docking, the elongated position selector has a predetermined position respective to the isocenter of the MRI scanner when the trolley is docked. Paragraph 0037 teaches a coil coupling element couples local coils disposed on the tabletop with the MRI scanner. Paragraph 0035 teaches the movable trolley is docked with the MRI scanner. Docking is achieved using a suitable docking member on the MRI scanner that mates with a corresponding docking member on the movable trolley. The docking positions the trolley 30 at a fixed position respective to the MRI scanner. In some embodiments, the docking automatically provides electrical and communication connections. In other embodiments, one or more separate connectors are used to establish electrical and communication connection).
However, Cumpson is silent regarding a method for accommodating a patient in a medical imaging system, wherein the second interface is configured to disconnect from the trolley and to connect with the medical imaging system when the patient bed is moved from the trolley to the medical imaging system.
In an analogous imaging field of endeavor, regarding patient bed design, Abenaim teaches a method for accommodating a patient in a medical imaging system, wherein the second interface is configured to disconnect from the trolley and to connect with the medical imaging system when the patient bed is moved from the trolley to the medical imaging system (Col. 6, line 66 to Col. 8, line 17 teaches that the examination transport surface is transferred from the transport component and slid into the docking component of the radiographic scanner. Col. 14, line 45-59 teach that the examination surface can be moved automatically or manually and can be controlled. Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Cumpson with Abenaim’s teaching of a detachable and attachable interface. This modified method would allow the user to have accurate motion of the table across long distances (Col. 2, lines 9-22 of Abenaim). Furthermore, the modification allows for accurate operational examination surface handling and imaging with easier targeting (Col. 3, line 54 to Col. 4, 23 of Abenaim).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cumpson et al. (PGPUB No. US 2008/0194942) in view of Abenaim et al. (US Patent 8,692,213) further in view of Dai et al. (PGPUB No. US 2021/0153767).
Regarding claim 5, modified Cumpson teaches the patient bed in claim 4, as discussed above.
While Abenaim teaches automated control of the interface, the combination of Cumpson and Abenaim is silent regarding a patient bed, wherein the connection to the controller is established using 3D sensing to detect a position and/or an orientation of the second interface of the patient bed with respect to the medical imaging system.
In an analogous imaging field of endeavor, regarding patient bed design, Dai teaches a patient bed, wherein the connection to the controller is established using 3D sensing to detect a position and/or an orientation of the second interface of the patient bed with respect to the medical imaging system (Paragraph 0004 teaches that a 3D camera captures 3D images of the scan subject located on a scanning table of an MRI. The control device is able to set the scanning parameters according to body position. Paragraph 0007 teaches that the 3D camera is configured to photograph a scanning table of the magnetic resonance imaging system and a scan subject located on the scanning table to obtain a three-dimensional image wherein the scan subject is coupled to an RF receive coil, and the RF receive coil comprises a plurality of coil units arranged in an array. Paragraph 0011 teaches when the first receive coil is selected, the processing device is configured to select a required coil unit from the first receive coil based on relative position information of the part of interest of the scan subject and the first receive coil; when the second receive coil is selected, the processing device is configured to select a required coil unit from the second receive coil based on relative position information of the part of interest of the scan subject and the second receive coil).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination of Cumpson and Abenaim with Dai’s teaching of 3D sensing to detect position and orientation of a second interface. This modified apparatus would allow the user to arrange a surface receive coil more rapidly and accurately (Paragraph 0182 of Dai). Furthermore, the modification addresses the need for optimization in both the pre-scanning process and the scanning process to meet increasing clinical diagnostic requirements (Paragraph 0003 of Dai).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cumpson et al. (PGPUB No. US 2008/0194942) in view of Abenaim et al. (US Patent 8,692,213) further in view of Wedeleit et al. (PGPUB No. US 2010/0235994).
Regarding claim 8, modified Cumpson teaches the patient bed in claim 1, as discussed above.
However, the combination of Cumpson and Abenaim is silent regarding a patient bed, wherein the table top is a modular table top and configured to adapt the patient bed to an individual positioning of the patient.
In an analogous imaging field of endeavor, regarding patient bed design, Wedeleit teaches a patient bed, wherein the table top is a modular table top and configured to adapt the patient bed to an individual positioning of the patient (Paragraph 0001 teaches an operating table top consisting of one or several basic sections and one or several additional modules with such modules and basic sections being adjustable relative to each other and the modules being designed so as to be separable from the operating table top. Paragraph 0002 teaches that the patient resting on the operating table top can be brought into a position most favorable for the envisaged operation. If necessary, additional modules which are also adjustable may be attached to such an operating table top. This enables operating tables to be suitably extended as and when required. See Fig. 3-5).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination of Cumpson and Abenaim with Wedeleit’s teaching of a modular table top. This modified apparatus would allow the user to have the patient in a position that is most favorable and the table is suitably extended as needed (Paragraph 0002 of Wedeleit). Furthermore, the modification makes it possible to examine a patient, for example by magnetic resonance or computer tomography, without the necessity of moving them off the operating table (Abstract of Wedeleit).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cumpson et al. (PGPUB No. US 2008/0194942) in view of Abenaim et al. (US Patent 8,692,213) further in view of Yang et al. (PGPUB No. US 2020/0081081).
Regarding claim 11, modified Cumpson teaches the patient bed in claim 10, as discussed above.
However, the combination of Cumpson and Abenaim is silent regarding a patient bed, wherein the power connector is an inductively coupled power transmission.
In an analogous imaging field of endeavor, regarding patient bed design, Yang teaches a patient bed, wherein the power connector is an inductively coupled power transmission (Paragraph 0027 teaches that the connectors can be electrically connected via inductive coupling to the RF units with the table).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the combination of Cumpson and Abenaim with Yang’s teaching of inductive coupling power transmission. This modified apparatus would allow the user to minimize the distance between the patient and the coil (Paragraph 0021 of Yang). Furthermore, the modification can cover the patient on the head side only and not the face side using the flexible coil, because covering the face of a claustrophobic patient may cause them distress (Paragraph 0030 of Yang).).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Luginbuhl et al. (PGPUB No. US 2007/0039101): Teaches the second interface.
Zink (PGPUB No. US 2019/0128978): Teaches the second interface.
Ludwig et al. (PGPUB No. US 2019/0350791): Teaches the second interface.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADIL PARTAP S VIRK whose telephone number is (571)272-8569. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, Pascal Bui-Pho can be reached on 571-272-2714. 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.
/ADIL PARTAP S VIRK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
