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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informality: “linear actuator assembly 50” on line 12 of page 12 should read “linear actuator assembly 56”. Numeral 50 is associated with the vertical lift assembly throughout the specifications while linear actuator assembly has designation 56 in ¶[0036].
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Beard et al. (US 5,601,302 A), hereinafter "Beard".
Regarding claim 1, Beard discloses a wheelchair (Full Access wheelchair, col. 1, lines 1 and 7-11, figs. 1-7) comprising:
a base assembly including a body portion having a frame and a plurality of wheel assemblies secured to the body portion (wheelchair base assembly as shown in figs. 2 and 5, comprising a body portion supporting batteries 8, motors 10 and 12, and wheels 14 and 16 secured to the frame, col. 4, lines 22-25);
a seat assembly including a frame with a seating portion supported thereon (seat 2 supported on a frame proximate slider rod 29 and best shown in figs. 5 and 6, col. 3, lines 43-46); and
a vertical lift assembly (the assembly comprising double-scissor mechanism 4 and linear actuator 6, figs. 5-7, col. 2, lines 26-28) that is secured to the base assembly and extends vertically upward therefrom (double-scissor mechanism 4 and linear actuator 6 shown secured to the base assembly and extending vertically upward in schematic of fig. 1 and illustrations of figs. 5-7), wherein the vertical lift assembly is configured to move the seat assembly about (“preferred lifting means is a linear actuator 6”, col. 4, line 3) and between a lowered vertical position (fig. 7) and a raised vertical position (fig. 6), and wherein the lowered vertical position and the raised vertical position are separated by at least 24.0 inches (lowest position of 10 inches and highest elevation of 40 inches, as described in cols. 2-3, lines 57-13, are separated by 30 inches).
Claims 2-5 and 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wilder (US 2007/0067905 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Wilder discloses the wheelchair of claim 1, more specifically: A wheelchair (alternate embodiment of the patient transport apparatus 600, figs. 6, 9, and 10, ¶[0050]) comprising:
a base assembly including a body portion having a frame and a plurality of wheel assemblies secured to the body portion (base 104 comprising frame 102 and attached wheels 120a, 120b, and center-mounted wheels 700, figs. 7-9, ¶[0051]);
a seat assembly including a frame with a seating portion supported thereon (chair 108 including chair frame 300 supporting seat 110, figs. 3 and 9, ¶[0045]); and
a vertical lift assembly (chair support 606, figs. 6 and 9, ¶[0053]) that is secured to the base assembly (chair support 606 shown connected to one or more of the cross-members 122 of the base 104, fig. 9) and extends vertically upward therefrom (chair support 606 shown substantially orthogonal to the base 104 and extending vertically upward, fig. 9), wherein the vertical lift assembly is configured to move the seat assembly about (“pivot axle 412 connects the chair frame 300 to a carriage that moves vertically in response to the lift system”, ¶[0048]) and between a lowered vertical position (fig. 13) and a raised vertical position (fig. 12), and wherein the lowered vertical position and the raised vertical position are separated by at least 24.0 inches (“vertical movement of the chair allows the seat height be varied between a minimum of approximately 1.5 inches above the ground and a maximum height of approximately 46 inches” thereby yielding a separation of approximately 44.5 inches, ¶[0064]),
and with respect to claim 2:
wherein the lowered vertical position and the raised vertical position are separated by at least 36.0 inches (separation of approximately 44.5 inches as described above based on ¶[0064]).
Regarding claim 3, Wilder discloses the wheelchair of claim 1, as described above relevant to claim 2,
wherein the vertical lift assembly (chair support 606) comprises a linear actuator (“electronically controlled lift system” of chair support 606, ¶[0053]), the linear actuator comprising: a lead screw (“drive shaft 914 is a threaded rod or lead screw”, ¶[0058], fig. 9) that is operably secured to the base assembly and extends vertically upwardly therefrom (drive shaft 914 is secured to the base by way of end support 916 and extends vertically upward to the control box 906, fig. 9, ¶[0054]); and
a cam assembly (“threaded receptor on the carriage 918”, ¶[0055]) that is secured to the seat assembly (carriage 918 connected to chair frame 300 by way of pivot axle 412, ¶[0048]), wherein the cam assembly is configured to travel linearly along the lead screw as the lead screw is rotated (“carriage 918 engages the drive shaft 914, which imparts movement to the carriage 918 … carriage 918 is raised or lowered depending upon the direction of rotation of the drive shaft 914”, ¶[0055]).
Regarding claim 4, Wilder discloses the wheelchair of claim 3, wherein the vertical lift assembly further comprises a pair of linear slide rail bearings (“vertical tram rails 900, 902, which serve as a guide for the carriage 918” in the embodiment where “the low friction liner [of carriage 918] is replaced with bearings”, ¶[0055], fig. 9) extending upwardly from the base assembly on opposing sides of the lead screw (“vertical tram rails 900, 902 are connected to the base 104” and as shown in fig. 9, extend upwardly on opposing side of drive shaft 914, ¶[0053]), each linear slide rail bearing including an elongated rail (vertical tram rails 900 and 902, fig. 9) and at least one bearing block that is secured to the frame of the seat assembly and is slidably secured to the elongated rail (blocks of bearings of carriage 918 secured to chair frame 300 and slidably secured to vertical tram rails 900 and 902, ¶[0048] and ¶[0055]).
Regarding claim 5, Wilder discloses the wheelchair of claim 3, wherein the cam assembly of the linear actuator comprises one of a ball screw nut, a nut (lead nut 1004, fig. 10, ¶[0058]), or a toothed gear that is operably secured to both the seat assembly (“lead nut 1004 is connected to the chair frame 300”, ¶[0058]) and the lead screw, and is configured to move linearly along the lead screw in a first direction when the lead screw is rotated in a clockwise direction and in an opposite second direction when the lead screw is rotated in a counter-clockwise direction (“lead screw 914 is received by a linear drive or lead nut 1004 that converts the rotary motion into linear motion”, ¶[0058]).
Regarding claim 10, Wilder discloses the wheelchair of claim 1, as described above relevant to claim 2,
wherein the wheelchair is configured to move horizontally from a first horizontal position to a second horizontal position when the seating portion is in either the lowered vertical position (“set of casters allows omni-directional travel of the patient transport apparatus”, ¶[0010]) and the raised vertical position (described process of extracting a patient from a vehicle by adjusting apparatus seat height to match the vehicle seat, then moving the apparatus close to the vehicle so that the base may slide under the body of the vehicle requires changing the apparatus position horizontally while the seat is raised and before it can be lowered when no longer obstructed by the vehicle, ¶[0066]).
Regarding claim 11, Wilder discloses a wheelchair (alternate embodiment of the patient transport apparatus 600, figs. 6, 9, and 10, ¶[0050]) comprising:
a base assembly including a body portion having a frame and a plurality of wheel assemblies secured to the body portion (base 104 comprising frame 102 and attached wheels 120a, 120b, and center-mounted wheels 700, figs. 7-9, ¶[0051]);
a seat assembly including a frame with a seating portion supported thereon (chair 108 including chair frame 300 supporting seat 110, figs. 3 and 9, ¶[0045]); and
a vertical lift assembly (chair support 606, figs. 6 and 9, ¶[0053]) including a linear actuator (“electronically controlled lift system” of chair support 606, ¶[0053]) having a lead screw (“drive shaft 914 is a threaded rod or lead screw”, ¶[0058], fig. 9) operably secured to the base assembly and extending vertically upwardly therefrom (drive shaft 914 is secured to the base by way of end support 916 and extends vertically upward to the control box 906, fig. 9, ¶[0054]), and a cam assembly (“threaded receptor on the carriage 918”, ¶[0055]) that is secured to the seat assembly (carriage 918 connected to chair frame 300 by way of pivot axle 412, ¶[0048]) and travels linearly along the lead screw as the lead screw is rotated (“carriage 918 engages the drive shaft 914, which imparts movement to the carriage 918 … carriage 918 is raised or lowered depending upon the direction of rotation of the drive shaft 914”, ¶[0055]), wherein the seat assembly is movable about and between a lowered vertical position (fig. 13) and a raised vertical position (fig. 12).
Regarding claim 12, Wilder discloses the wheelchair of claim 11, wherein the lowered vertical position and the raised vertical position are separated by at least 24.0 inches (“vertical movement of the chair allows the seat height be varied between a minimum of approximately 1.5 inches above the ground and a maximum height of approximately 46 inches” thereby yielding a separation of approximately 44.5 inches, ¶[0064]).
Regarding claim 13, Wilder discloses the wheelchair of claim 12, wherein the lowered vertical position and the raised vertical position are separated by at least 36.0 inches (separation of approximately 44.5 inches as described above relevant to claim 12 and based on ¶[0064]).
Regarding claim 14, Wilder discloses the wheelchair of claim 12, wherein the vertical lift assembly further comprises a pair of linear slide rail bearings (“vertical tram rails 900, 902, which serve as a guide for the carriage 918” in the embodiment where “the low friction liner [of carriage 918] is replaced with bearings”, ¶[0055], fig. 9) extending upwardly from the base assembly on opposing sides of the lead screw (“vertical tram rails 900, 902 are connected to the base 104” and as shown in fig. 9, extend upwardly on opposing side of drive shaft 914, ¶[0053]), each linear slide rail bearing including an elongated rail (vertical tram rails 900 and 902, fig. 9) and at least one bearing block that is secured to the frame portion of the seat assembly and is slidably secured to the elongated rail (blocks of bearings of carriage 918 secured to chair frame 300 and slidably secured to vertical tram rails 900 and 902, ¶[0048] and ¶[0055]).
Regarding claim 15, Wilder discloses the wheelchair of claim 12, wherein the cam assembly of the linear actuator comprises one of a ball screw nut, a nut (lead nut 1004, fig. 10, ¶[0058]), or a toothed gear that is operably secured to both the seat assembly (“lead nut 1004 is connected to the chair frame 300”, ¶[0058]) and the lead screw, and is configured to move linearly along the lead screw in a first direction when the lead screw is rotated in a clockwise direction and in an opposite second direction when the lead screw is rotated in a counter-clockwise direction opposite the clockwise direction (“lead screw 914 is received by a linear drive or lead nut 1004 that converts the rotary motion into linear motion”, ¶[0058]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilder as applied to claims 5 and 15 above respectively, and further in view of Beard (US 5,601,302 A).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Wilder discloses the wheelchair of claims 5 and 15 respectively, further comprising a motor assembly (“electric motor located in the control box 906”, ¶[0054], fig. 9) configured to selectively rotate the lead screw (“first end of the drive shaft 914 is operatively connected to electric motor”, ¶[0055]). Wilder does not recite the electric motor secured to the base assembly. Beard teaches a wheelchair (Full Access wheelchair, col. 1, lines 1 and 7-11, figs. 1-7) further comprising a motor assembly (actuator motor 10, fig. 2, col. 4, lines 22-25) secured to the base assembly and configured to selectively rotate the lead screw (actuator motor 10 illustrated as part of wheelchair base in fig. 2 and engaged with actuator 6).
Before the effective date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to substitute, with a reasonable expectation of success, the location of the motor as suggested by Beard for the motor location of Wilder. Beard recites the motivation for such substitution as the preference to have “the attachments of the lift mechanism be integrated into the base … because an integrated design provides a secure, stable base, has continuity of appearance, and should cost less to manufacture”, (col. 4, lines 17-21). The substitution would predictably achieve the desired results.
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beard as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Macedo Ribeiro et al. (US 2008/0202837 A1), hereinafter “Ribeiro”.
Regarding claim 7, Beard discloses the wheelchair of claim 1 comprising a plurality of wheels (wheels 14 and 16, fig. 5), but the axes of rotation of wheels do not form an angle of less than 180°. Ribeiro teaches a wheelchair control system (¶[0002], fig. 1) wherein each wheel assembly of the plurality of wheel assemblies (wheels 2, figs. 1 and 4A) has a respective axis of rotation, wherein the plurality of wheel assemblies includes a pair of front wheel assemblies (wheels 1 and 2 in annotated fig. 4A below) and a rear wheel assembly (wheel 3 in annotated fig. 4A below), wherein the axis of rotation of a first front wheel assembly (x1 in annotated fig. 4A below) of the pair of front wheel assemblies forms an angle with the axis of rotation of a second front wheel assembly (x2 in annotated fig. 4A below) of the pair of front wheel assemblies, and wherein said angle is less than 180° (“bases/platforms can use 3 omnidirectional wheels, meaning they will have an offset of 120 degrees between them”, ¶[0056]; see angle of less than 180° formed between x1 and x2 in annotated fig. 4A below).
Before the effective date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the wheelchair control system disclosed by Ribeiro with the wheelchair of Beard, thereby replacing wheels of Beard’s wheelchair with wheel assemblies of Ribeiro. The motivation would have been to provide a wheelchair that allows “moving on any direction without maneuvers, as translation and/or rotation without demanding a great physical effort from the user” (Ribeiro, ¶[0001]). The combination would predictably achieve the desired result.
PNG
media_image1.png
446
622
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, the combination discloses the wheelchair of claim 7, wherein each front wheel assembly of the pair of front wheel assemblies (wheels 1 and 2 in annotated fig. 4A above) further comprises a wheel having a hub assembly and a plurality of rollers (omnidirectional wheel shown in Ribeiro fig. 2 comprising a hub around central axis 2a and a plurality of rollers 2c), wherein each roller is disposed about an outer perimeter of the wheel and includes an axis of rotation that is transverse to the axis of rotation of the front wheel assembly (fig. 2 of Ribeiro shows rollers about outer perimeter of wheel and roller axis of rotation transverse to wheel axis of rotation).
Regarding claim 9, the combination discloses the wheelchair of claim 7, wherein the rear wheel assembly has an axis of rotation (x3 in annotated fig. 4A above) that lies in a plane that is a plane of symmetry of the seating portion (with wheels 1 and 2 in annotated fig. 4A above designated as front wheels, x3 lies in plane of symmetry of seating portion).
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilder as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Ribeiro (US 2008/0202837 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Wilder discloses the wheelchair of claim 12, comprising a plurality of wheels (wheels 120a, 120b, and center-mounted wheels 700, figs. 7-9, ¶[0051]), but the axes of rotation of wheels do not form an angle of less than 180°. Ribeiro teaches a wheelchair control system (¶[0002], fig. 1) wherein the plurality of wheel assemblies (wheels 2, figs. 1 and 4A) includes a pair of front wheel assemblies (wheels 1 and 2 in annotated fig. 4A above) and a rear wheel assembly (wheel 3 in annotated fig. 4A above), wherein the axis of rotation of a first front wheel assembly (x1 in annotated fig. 4A above) of the pair of front wheel assemblies forms an angle with the axis of rotation of a second front wheel assembly (x2 in annotated fig. 4A above) of the pair of front wheel assemblies, and wherein said angle is less than 180° (“bases/platforms can use 3 omnidirectional wheels, meaning they will have an offset of 120 degrees between them”, ¶[0056]; see angle of less than 180° formed between x1 and x2 in annotated fig. 4A above).
Before the effective date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to those having ordinary skill in the art to combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the wheelchair control system disclosed by Ribeiro with the patient transport apparatus of Wilder, thereby replacing wheels of Wilder’s wheelchair with wheel assemblies of Ribeiro. The motivation would have been to provide a wheelchair that allows “moving on any direction without maneuvers, as translation and/or rotation without demanding a great physical effort from the user” (Ribeiro, ¶[0001]). The combination would predictably achieve the desired result.
Regarding claim 18, the combination discloses the wheelchair of claim 17, wherein each front wheel assembly of the pair of front wheel assemblies (wheels 1 and 2 in annotated fig. 4A above) further comprises a wheel having a hub assembly and a plurality of rollers (omnidirectional wheel shown in Ribeiro fig. 2 comprising a hub around central axis 2a and a plurality of rollers 2c), wherein each roller of the plurality of rollers is disposed about an outer perimeter of the wheel and includes an axis of rotation that is transverse to the axis of rotation of the front wheel assembly (fig. 2 of Ribeiro shows rollers about outer perimeter of wheel and roller axis of rotation transverse to wheel axis of rotation).
Regarding claim 19, the combination discloses the wheelchair of claim 18, wherein each wheel assembly of the plurality of wheel assemblies further comprises an electric motor (Ribeiro: “control system in such wheelchair actuates each motor independently to each wheel”, ¶[0001]).
Regarding claim 20, the combination discloses the wheelchair of claim 19, further comprising at least one battery removably secured to the base assembly (any one of batteries 3 shown secured to base 1 in fig. 1 of Ribeiro), wherein the at least one battery is operably connected to the electric motors of the plurality of wheel assemblies and the motor assembly (“part of this wheelchair control system is a set of rechargeable batteries or fuel cells to feed the electrical motors”, ¶[0052]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional art of record relates to height-adjustable wheelchairs having features relevant to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD OMID NEYZARI whose telephone number is (571)272-9530. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8 AM-5 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, Allen Shriver can be reached at (303) 297-4337. 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.
/MOHAMMAD OMID NEYZARI/Examiner, Art Unit 3613
/JAMES A SHRIVER II/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights