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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species C in the reply filed on 07/15/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “Applicant respectfully submits that the Requirement for Election/Restrictions should be withdrawn because there would not be a serious burden on the Examiner if restriction is not required. For the pending Restriction/Election Requirement to have been proper, the Examiner was required to show that, absent the restriction, there would be a serious burden on the Examiner.”. The arguments are not found persuasive because there is a different field of search for each indicated species - it is necessary to search for one of the inventions in a manner that is not likely to result in finding art pertinent to the other invention(s). Example being Claims 7-9 claim a hood structure which the elected species C comprises, however, species A, B, and D-L does not have this hood feature and Species H discloses a spring feature 2200C that would not be present in any of the other species, and therefore there would be a different manner of searching and/or strategies that would result in a different art and therefore a search burden to examine all the different features of each species.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 “accordion pleats” of Claim 8 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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “adjustment mechanism” in claims 14 and 16-20.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Claim 15 recites “wherein the first adjustment mechanism comprises a plurality of first loops on the first elastic connector and a first clip that is configured to couple to a selected one of the plurality of first loops, wherein the second adjustment mechanism comprises a plurality of second loops on the second elastic connector and a second clip that is configured to couple to a selected one of the plurality of second loops, and wherein the first clip is closer to the foot pad than the plurality of first loops when the first clip is decoupled from all of the plurality of first loops and the second clip is closer to the foot pad than the plurality of second loops when the second clip is decoupled from all of the plurality of second loops.”.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 10, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Marti (US 20200086159 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Marti teaches a bed exercise system (Refer to Paragraph [0045]:” [0045] Moreover, because of the slider 110 can move on substantially any type of smooth surface, the lower limb therapy device 100 provides a means to support the weight of a user's lower limb and allow the limb to slide and glide even on uneven surfaces as a bed or therapy table.”), comprising: a foot pad 114,110 (Refer to Figs. 1&3) having a first lateral side, a second lateral side opposite the first lateral side, an upper side, and a lower side, wherein the foot pad further comprises a proximal surface and a distal surface opposite the proximal surface, wherein the proximal surface and the distal surface extend between the first lateral side, the second lateral side, the upper side, and the lower side, wherein the proximal surface is configured to engage one or more soles of one or more feet of an operator, wherein the foot pad comprises at least one foot retention structure 121,122 that is configured to couple the foot pad 114,110 to the one or more feet of the operator; a leg support member 111 extending proximally from the lower side of the foot pad 114, wherein the leg support member is configured to support one or more ankles and one or more legs of an operator when the one or more soles of the one or more feet of the operator engage the proximal surface of the foot pad (Refer to Fig. 3); a first elastic connector 120a having a first end coupled to a first lateral side of the foot pad 114,110 and a second end configured to couple to a patient support structure 123a,310 (Refer to Fig. 1…The Office considers the handles 123a a patient support since it supports a user’s hands while gripping); and a second elastic connector 120b,310 having a first end coupled to a second lateral side of the foot pad 114,110 and a second end configured to couple to the patient support structure 123b, wherein, when the second end of the first elastic connector 120a and the second end of the second elastic connector 120b are coupled to the patient support structure 123a,b/310: (i) the foot pad is movable between a first position and a second position relative to the patient support structure, and (ii) a tension on the first elastic connector and a tension on the second elastic connector increases as the foot pad moves from the first position to the second position (Refer to Figs. 9-12).
Regarding Claim 10, Marti continues to teach further comprising an anchor (straps) configured to couple to a patient support structure (Refer to Col 7 Lines 15-21:” The handles 123a, 123b may be constructed of or otherwise include foam. The handles 123a, 123b may be defined by a substantially cylindrical handle portion with a foam surface and a web type strap, with the web type strap connecting to the cord members 120a, 120b and to the handle portion to improve durability without sacrificing comfort.”).
Regarding Claim 13, Marti continues to teach wherein the first elastic connector 120a and the second elastic connector 120b are releasably coupled to the foot pad 114,110 (Refer to Fig. 2 to depict that the connection is a knot and therefore untying the knot would allow removal of the first and second elastic connector from the device).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-20 are allowed.
Claims 2-9, 11, and 12 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Marti is the closest prior art to the claimed invention but fails to teach the claimed invention as a whole further comprising wherein the at least one foot retention structure comprises a plurality of pockets, wherein each pocket has a closed end facing an upper side of the foot pad and an open end facing a lower side of the foot pad such that the foot retention structure is configured to receive at least a forefoot region of a respective foot; wherein the at least one foot retention structure comprises a flap of material having a hook and loop fastener on opposing lateral sides of the flap of material, wherein the foot pad comprises a corresponding hook and loop fastener, and wherein the hook and loop fastener of the flap of material is configured to couple to the hook and loop faster of the foot pad; wherein the at least one foot retention structure comprises a hood structure that is movable between a storage position on a back side of the foot pad and a retention position on a front side of the foot pad, and wherein, in the retention position, the hood structure is configured to retain at least a forefoot region of a pair of boots worn by a patient while soles of the pair of boots contact the front side of the foot pad; wherein the anchor comprises a band that is configured to extend around a width and a thickness of a mattress of a bed; wherein the first elastic connector comprises a first adjustment mechanism configured to adjust a length of the first elastic connector, and wherein the second elastic connector comprises a second adjustment mechanism configured to adjust a length of the second elastic connector as defined by 112(f) interpretation.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to attach list of references cited for prior arts pertinent to claimed and unclaimed subject matter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NYCA T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7168. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00.
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, Loan Jimenez can be reached at 571-272-4966. 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.
/NYCA T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
