DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Application
Claims 1-20 have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on merits. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 10/1/2024 has been acknowledged by the Office.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6 currently depends on claim 1, however the claim references “the support layer” which has been introduced in claim 2. Suggest updating dependency of claim 6 to be from claim 2 for proper antecedent basis. For examination purposes, claim 6 will be assumed to depend from claim 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 7 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 7 and 15 both recite in their last two lines respectively: “to define a restrict a height of the bladder body.” The examiner suggests the following amendment for improved grammar: “to define and restrict a height of the bladder body.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1, 9, 10, 12-14, 17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0270611 to Nissen et al. (hereinafter Nissen).
Regarding claim 1, Nissen teaches: A person support apparatus (see Abstract: “inflatable device for patient positioning”), comprising:
a person support surface (see Fig. 1A, inflatable device 100) having a head section (see Fig. 1A, section beneath 97) and a foot section (see Fig. 1A, tail section 50) opposite the head section;
a bladder (see Fig. 1A, plurality of inflatable cylinders 11, 21, 22, 31, 32) positionable between a non-inflated state and an inflated state (see para [0088-0090]), the bladder positioned at the head section of the person support surface (see Fig. 1A and 3, bladders located at the head end of overall device 100);
a fluid supply device (see Fig. 2, medical air supply 350, canister 370, or pump 360, see para [0192-0194]) in fluid communication with the bladder (see para [0191]), the fluid supply device storing a fluid (see Fig. 2, at least a pressurized air canister 370 would store fluid); and
a controller (see Fig. 2, controller 200) communicatively coupled to the fluid supply device and configured to operate the fluid supply device to deliver the fluid to the bladder and position the bladder between the non-inflated state and the inflated state (see para [0088-0090] and Fig. 2, controller 200 controls inflation of the inflatable cylinders).
Regarding claim 9, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 1, and additionally teaches: wherein the bladder comprises a plurality of bladder portions arranged along a longitudinal axis of the person support surface (see Fig. 1A, plurality of inflatable cylinders 11, 21, 22, 31, 32 are arranged along a longitudinal axis of person support surface).
Regarding claim 10, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 9, and additionally teaches: wherein: the plurality of bladder portions comprises a first bladder portion having a first height (see Fig. 1A-C, 21) a second bladder portion having a second height adjacent the first bladder portion (see Fig. 1A, bladders 22/31), a third bladder portion having a third height adjacent the second bladder portion (see Fig. 1A, bladders 33-34), and a fourth bladder portion having a fourth height adjacent the third bladder portion (see Fig. 1A, bladders 11/32); and the second height is greater than the first height (see Fig. 1A, bladders 22+31 are taller than 21), the third height is greater than the second height (see Fig. 1A, bladders 33-34 reach a greater height than any other bladders of the system), and the fourth height is greater than the first height and less than the second height (see Fig. 1A, total height of bladders 11+32 is greater than bladder 21 but less than 31).
Examiner note: the different bladder “heights” described above in claim 10 are claimed without respect to a standard inflation state (e.g. internal pressure) of each of the bladders for a given height. Thus, the bladders may vary in height based on their independent level of inflation/pressure irrespective of their total possible height (i.e. in a maximumly inflated state).
Regarding claim 12, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 1, and additionally teaches: wherein the bladder comprises a plurality of bladder portions arranged in two or more rows (see Fig. 1A, plurality of inflatable cylinders 11, 21, 22, 31, 32 are arranged in several rows).
Regarding claim 13, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 12, and additionally teaches: wherein the plurality of bladder portions have a cylindrical shape defining a circular cross-section (see Fig. 1A, all bladders all have a cylindrical shape as shown, see also para [0028-0029]).
Regarding claim 14, Nissen teaches: A method, comprising:
positioning a bladder (see Fig. 1A, plurality of inflatable cylinders 11, 21, 22, 31, 32) within a support layer (see Fig. 1A, bladders are within layer 97) of a person support surface of a person support apparatus (see Fig. 1A, inflatable device for patient positioning 100) and at a head section of the person support surface (see Fig. 1A and 3, bladders located at the head end of overall device 100);
transmitting a signal from a controller (see Fig. 2, controller 200) to a fluid supply device (see Fig. 2, medical air supply 350, canister 370, or pump 360, see para [0192-0194]) in fluid communication with a bladder (see para [0191] and tubing 15,25,35); and
delivering, by the fluid supply device in response to receiving the signal from the controller, fluid stored within the fluid supply device to the bladder to position the bladder into an inflated state from a non-inflated state (see para [0088-0090] and Fig. 2, controller 200 controls inflation of the inflatable cylinders),
wherein, when the bladder is in the inflated state, the bladder has a varying height across a longitudinal axis of the person support surface (see Fig. 1A-1C, device as an overall arched-shape with a varying height across a longitudinal axis of 100).
Regarding claim 17, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 14, and additionally teaches: wherein the bladder comprises a plurality of bladder portions arranged along a longitudinal axis of the person support surface (see Fig. 1A, plurality of inflatable cylinders 11, 21, 22, 31, 32 are arranged along a longitudinal axis of person support surface); the plurality of bladder portions comprises a first bladder portion having a first height (see Fig. 1A-C, 21) a second bladder portion having a second height adjacent the first bladder portion (see Fig. 1A, bladders 22/31), a third bladder portion having a third height adjacent the second bladder portion (see Fig. 1A, bladders 33-34), and a fourth bladder portion having a fourth height adjacent the third bladder portion (see Fig. 1A, bladders 11/32); and the second height is greater than the first height (see Fig. 1A, bladders 22+31 are taller than 21), the third height is greater than the second height (see Fig. 1A, bladders 33-34 reach a greater height than any other bladders of the system), and the fourth height is greater than the first height and less than the second height (see Fig. 1A, total height of bladders 11+32 is greater than bladder 21 but less than 31).
Regarding claim 19, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 14, and additionally teaches: wherein the bladder comprises a plurality of bladder portions arranged in two or more rows (see Fig. 1A, plurality of inflatable cylinders 11, 21, 22, 31, 32 are arranged in several rows).
Regarding claim 20, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 19, and additionally teaches: wherein the plurality of bladder portions have a cylindrical shape defining a circular cross-section (see Fig. 1A, all bladders all have a cylindrical shape as shown, see also para [0028-0029]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 2-4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0270611 to Nissen in view of U.S. Patent 4,829,614 to Harper.
Regarding claim 2, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 1, however it does not explicitly teach: wherein the person support surface comprises: a support layer; and a cover surrounding the support layer.
Harper teaches: wherein the person support surface comprises: a support layer (see Fig. 1-2, main body 12, “formed of soft foam rubber”); and a cover (see Fig. 1, cover) surrounding the support layer.
Nissen and Harper are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are the same field of inflatable pillows/cushions/patient support devices used for adjustable head/neck support. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Nissen with these aforementioned teachings of Harper in order to provide a foam material between the inflatable members as well as a cover surrounding the support layer and inflatable members with a reasonable expectation of success to provide individualized support for the neck, head, shoulders of a user (see col. 3, lines [10-15) as well as the cover providing a removable feature to assist with sanitary effects and/or cleaning of the device/bladders (see Harper, col. 2, lines [21-25]).
Regarding claim 3, Nissen, as modified teaches all the limitations as described in claim 2, however does not explicitly teach the following: wherein the bladder is provided within the support layer.
Harper teaches: wherein the bladder is provided within the support layer (see Fig. 1-3, chambers 30-36 are within foam body 12, see also col. 3, lines [11-15]).
Regarding claim 4, Nissen, as modified teaches all the limitations as described in claim 2, however does not explicitly teach the following: wherein the bladder is provided between the support layer and the cover.
Harper teaches: wherein the bladder is provided between the support layer and the cover (see Fig. 1-3, chambers 30-36 are within foam body 12 and inside cover 18, see also col. 3, lines [11-15]).
Regarding claim 6, Nissen, as modified teaches all the limitations as described in claim 1 (note: dependency upon claim 2 is assumed), however does not explicitly teach the following: wherein the support layer is formed from a compressible medium such that a protrusion is formed in an upper surface of the head section of the person support surface when the bladder is in the inflated state.
Harper teaches: wherein the support layer is formed from a compressible medium (see Fig. 1-2, main body 12, “formed of soft foam rubber”) such that a protrusion is formed in an upper surface of the head section of the person support surface when the bladder is in the inflated state (see Fig. 1-3, bladder 30 and foam body 12 form a neck supporting and protruding portion as shown).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0270611 to Nissen in view of U.S. Patent 4,829,614 to Harper in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0313526 to Kaikenger et al. (hereinafter Kaikenger).
Regarding claim 5, Nissen, as modified teaches all the limitations as described in the rejections of claim 2, however does not explicitly teach the following: further comprising: a deck including an upper surface, wherein the person support surface is positioned on the upper surface of the deck, wherein the bladder is provided between the upper surface of the deck and an outer surface of the cover.
Harper teaches: wherein the bladder is provided between the upper surface of the deck and an outer surface of the cover (see Fig. 1-3, chambers 30-36 are within foam body 12 and inside cover 18, see also col. 3, lines [11-15]).
Keikenger teaches: further comprising: a deck including an upper surface (see Fig. 1-3, and abstract: “patient support apparatus includes a frame with head section…seat section”), wherein the person support surface is positioned on the upper surface of the deck (see Fig. 1-3, patient support surface/mattress is located on top surface of deck/frame).
Nissen, Harper, and Keikenger are all considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are the same field of inflatable pillows/cushions/patient support devices used for adjustable head/neck support. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Nissen/Harper with these aforementioned teachings of Keikenger to have placed the existing inflatable device of Nissen/Harper on the frame/deck of an adjustable patient support device as shown and taught by Keikenger with a reasonable expectation of success to provide additional means to place a patient at an optimal angle for intubation based on a caregiver’s height by adjusting the frame/deck angle of the patient support (see Keikenger, para [0005]).
Claim(s) 7-8 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0270611 to Nissen in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2011/0229875 to Davis.
Regarding claim 7, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 1, however it does not explicitly teach: wherein the bladder comprises: a bladder body having a front end, a rear end opposite the front end, an upper wall, and a lower wall opposite the upper wall; and a plurality of baffles spaced apart from one another along an axis extending between the front end and the rear end of the bladder body, the plurality of baffles each comprising: an exposed portion provided at an outer surface of the upper wall of the bladder body; and an extending portion extending from opposite ends of the exposed portion and through the bladder body to the lower wall of the bladder body to define a restrict a height of the bladder body when in the inflated state.
Davis teaches: wherein the bladder comprises: a bladder body (see Fig. 1, base cushion 5) having a front end (see Fig. 1, thinner end of wedge structure), a rear end opposite the front end (see Fig. 1, back wall end 26), an upper wall (see Fig. 1, top walls 20 and 60), and a lower wall opposite the upper wall (see Fig. 1-2, bottom wall 23/63); and a plurality of baffles spaced apart from one another along an axis extending between the front end and the rear end of the bladder body (see Fig. 1-2, stringers 30), the plurality of baffles each comprising: an exposed portion provided at an outer surface of the upper wall of the bladder body (see Fig. 1-2, location where stringer 30 interfaces with top walls 20/60); and an extending portion extending from opposite ends of the exposed portion and through the bladder body to the lower wall of the bladder body (see Fig. 1-3, each stringer 30 extends downward from top portion to bottom walls 23/63, see also para [0022]) to define a restrict a height of the bladder body when in the inflated state (see para [0022]: “to provide for reduced bulging of base cushion”).
Nissen and Davis are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are the same field of inflatable pillows/cushions/patient support devices used for adjustable head/neck support. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Nissen with these aforementioned teachings of Davis in order to provide internal baffles/stringers withing the existing support bladder of Nissen with a reasonable expectation of success to provide for reduced bulging of the base cushion (See Davis, para [0022]).
Regarding claim 8, Nissen, as modified teaches all the limitations as described in the rejections of claim 7, however does not explicitly teach the following: wherein the plurality of baffles comprises a first baffle having a first length and positioned proximate the rear end, a second baffle having a second length and positioned proximate the front end, and a third baffle having a third length and positioned between the first baffle and the second baffle, the first length and the second length each being less than the third length.
Davis teaches: wherein the plurality of baffles comprises a first baffle having a first length and positioned proximate the rear end, a second baffle having a second length and positioned proximate the front end, and a third baffle having a third length and positioned between the first baffle and the second baffle, the first length and the second length each being less than the third length (see annotated Fig. 3 of Davis below, wherein the third baffle has a greater length/height than each of the first and second baffles).
PNG
media_image1.png
632
802
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 14, however it does not explicitly teach: wherein the bladder comprises: a bladder body having a front end, a rear end opposite the front end, an upper wall, and a lower wall opposite the upper wall; and a plurality of baffles spaced apart from one another along an axis extending between the front end and the rear end of the bladder body, the plurality of baffles each comprising: an exposed portion provided at an outer surface of the upper wall of the bladder body; and an extending portion extending from opposite ends of the exposed portion and through the bladder body to the lower wall of the bladder body to define a restrict a height of the bladder body when in the inflated state.
Davis teaches: wherein the bladder comprises: a bladder body (see Fig. 1, base cushion 5) having a front end (see Fig. 1, thinner end of wedge structure), a rear end opposite the front end (see Fig. 1, back wall end 26), an upper wall (see Fig. 1, top walls 20 and 60), and a lower wall opposite the upper wall (see Fig. 1-2, bottom wall 23/63); and a plurality of baffles spaced apart from one another along an axis extending between the front end and the rear end of the bladder body (see Fig. 1-2, stringers 30), the plurality of baffles each comprising: an exposed portion provided at an outer surface of the upper wall of the bladder body (see Fig. 1-2, location where stringer 30 interfaces with top walls 20/60); and an extending portion extending from opposite ends of the exposed portion and through the bladder body to the lower wall of the bladder body (see Fig. 1-3, each stringer 30 extends downward from top portion to bottom walls 23/63, see also para [0022]) to define a restrict a height of the bladder body when in the inflated state (see para [0022]: “to provide for reduced bulging of base cushion”).
Nissen and Davis are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are the same field of inflatable pillows/cushions/patient support devices used for adjustable head/neck support. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Nissen with these aforementioned teachings of Davis in order to provide internal baffles/stringers withing the existing support bladder of Nissen with a reasonable expectation of success to provide for reduced bulging of the base cushion (See Davis, para [0022]).
Regarding claim 16, Nissen, as modified teaches all the limitations as described in the rejections of claim 15, however does not explicitly teach the following: wherein the plurality of baffles comprises a first baffle having a first length and positioned proximate the rear end, a second baffle having a second length and positioned proximate the front end, and a third baffle having a third length and positioned between the first baffle and the second baffle, the first length and the second length each being less than the third length.
Davis teaches: wherein the plurality of baffles comprises a first baffle having a first length and positioned proximate the rear end, a second baffle having a second length and positioned proximate the front end, and a third baffle having a third length and positioned between the first baffle and the second baffle, the first length and the second length each being less than the third length (see annotated Fig. 3 of Davis above, wherein the third baffle has a greater length/height than each of the first and second baffles).
Claim(s) 11 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0270611 to Nissen in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2007/0181122 to Mulier.
Regarding claim 11, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 10, however it does not explicitly teach: wherein: the plurality of bladder portions comprises a first bladder portion having a first width and a first height, and a second bladder portion having a second width and a second height adjacent the first bladder portion; and the first width is greater than the second width, and the first height is greater than the second height.
Mulier teaches: wherein: the plurality of bladder portions comprises a first bladder portion having a first width and a first height (see Fig. 4, first head supporting bladder portions 4,6,7), and a second bladder portion having a second width and a second height adjacent the first bladder portion (see Fig. 4, second neck supporting bladder portions 2/3); and the first width is greater than the second width, and the first height is greater than the second height (see Fig. 4, height of 4/6/7 is greater than 2/3 | width of 4/6/7 is greater than width of 2/3).
Nissen and Mulier are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are the same field of inflatable pillows/cushions/patient support devices used for adjustable head/neck support. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Nissen with these aforementioned teachings of Mulier in order to vary the height and widths of particular bladder support sections as shown and taught by Mulier with a reasonable expectation of success to provide multiple applications that can facilitate endotracheal intubation and spontaneous breathing of a patient (see Mulier, para [0001-0002]).
Regarding claim 18, Nissen teaches all the limitations as described in the rejection of claim 14, and additionally teaches the following: wherein the bladder comprises a plurality of bladder portions arranged along a longitudinal axis of the person support surface (see Fig. 1A, plurality of inflatable cylinders 11, 21, 22, 31, 32 are arranged along a longitudinal axis of person support surface)
However, Nissen does not explicitly teach: wherein: the plurality of bladder portions comprises a first bladder portion having a first width and a first height, and a second bladder portion having a second width and a second height adjacent the first bladder portion; and the first width is greater than the second width, and the first height is greater than the second height.
Mulier teaches: wherein: the plurality of bladder portions comprises a first bladder portion having a first width and a first height (see Fig. 4, first head supporting bladder portions 4,6,7), and a second bladder portion having a second width and a second height adjacent the first bladder portion (see Fig. 4, second neck supporting bladder portions 2/3); and the first width is greater than the second width, and the first height is greater than the second height (see Fig. 4, height of 4/6/7 is greater than 2/3 | width of 4/6/7 is greater than width of 2/3).
Nissen and Mulier are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are the same field of inflatable pillows/cushions/patient support devices used for adjustable head/neck support. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Nissen with these aforementioned teachings of Mulier in order to vary the height and widths of particular bladder support sections as shown and taught by Mulier with a reasonable expectation of success to provide multiple applications that can facilitate endotracheal intubation and spontaneous breathing of a patient (see Mulier, para [0001-0002]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited patents show inflatable positioning devices with similar properties to the claimed invention. They show the general state of the art and are of general relevance with respect to the claimed subject matter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID R HARE whose telephone number is (571)272-4420. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI 8:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Justin Mikowski can be reached at 571-272-8525. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Sincerely,
/DAVID R HARE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673
2/27/2026