Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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 21, 23, 25, 27, 29 and 31 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. It is unclear to Examiner what applicant is referring to as the “patient support includes a first second”. This appears to be a typo and should read the patient support includes a first section. Claim will be examined under the assumption a typo is present in the claim.
Claim 25 is 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. It is unclear to Examiner what applicant is referring to as “and wherein the patient positioning system comprises”. This limitation is generally unclear and appears to be a clerical error. It is unclear if this is a typo or if a portion of the claim is missing.
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 pre-AIA 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) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
Claim(s) 13-16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by US Patent 5,131,106 hereinafter referred to as Jackson. Jackson discloses:
As per claim 12 Jackson teaches a patient positioning system 1 fig.1 comprising: spaced apart first 10, 31 fig.3 and second columns 11, 32 fig.3; a first rotation assembly 75 fig.3 coupled to the first column; a first bracket 80 fig.1 coupled to the first column and the first rotation assembly and a second bracket 80 fig.1 coupled to the second column; a first patient support 2 fig.1 having a first end coupled to the first bracket and a second end coupled to the second bracket; a second patient support 2 fig.3 having a first end coupled to the first bracket and a second end coupled to the second bracket; and a roll mechanism 82, 90 fig.9 coupled to the first column and the first patient support, the roll mechanism being configured to rotate the first patient support about the first longitudinal axis.
As per claim 13 wherein the second patient support is movable relative to the first patient support along the brackets between a first orientation in which the patient supports are spaced a first distance apart and a second orientation in which the patient supports are spaced a reduced second distance apart [column 8 lines 43-54 “When it is desired to attach the patient support structure 2 to the rotatable mounts 75 and 76, the locking pins are retracted using the retraction arms 122, the patient support structure 2 is then positioned so that the engaging bars 119 extend between the elongate receiving arms 80 (see FIG. 9), the retracted locking pins 121 are aligned with the desired pair of linearly aligned apertures 84 (see FIG. 8) in the receiving arms 80, and the retraction arms 122 are then released so that the locking pins 121 are spring biased into the apertures 84 and into locking engagement with the rotatable mounts 75 and 76.”] (It is understood the patient support 2 can be secured to the bracket 80 at a variety of desired locations along the bracket 80 via apertures 84.)
As per claim 14 wherein the first patient support is stationary as the patient supports move from the first orientation to the second orientation [column 8 lines 43-54] (the patient support can be adjusted along the bracket 80 as desired via apertures 84).
As per claim 15 wherein the second patient support is movable relative to the first patient support vertically along the brackets relative to the first patient support between a first orientation in which the patient supports are spaced a first distance apart and a second orientation in which the patient supports are spaced a reduced second distance apart [column 8 lines 43-54] (the patient support can be adjusted along the bracket 80 as desired via apertures 84).
As per claim 16 wherein the first patient support is stationary as the patient supports move from the first orientation to the second orientation [column 8 lines 43-54] (the patient support can be adjusted along the bracket 80 as desired via apertures 84).
As per claim 18 further comprising a base support 17 fig.2 extending from a base 15 fig.2 of the first column to a base 16 fig.2 of the second column.
As per claim 19 further comprising first and second castors 18 fig.6 coupled to the base of the first column and third and fourth castors 18 fig.7 coupled to the base of the second column.
As per claim 20 further comprising a second rotation assembly coupled to the second column, the second bracket being coupled to the second rotation assembly (see fig.2 & 5 about 76).
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 17 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jackson in view of US Patent 6,260,220 hereinafter referred to as Lamb.
Re-Claim 17
Jackson disclose the claimed apparatus however does not discloses wherein the first rotation assembly is rotatable relative to the first column about a rotation axis, the first rotation assembly being configured to rotate the patient supports 360 degrees about the rotation axis.
Lamb teaches a patient positioning system fig.1A comprising: spaced apart first 12 fig.1A and second columns 14 fig.1A; a first rotation assembly 45, 46 fig.12 coupled to the first column; wherein the first rotation assembly is rotatable relative to the first column about a rotation axis A1 fig.12, the first rotation assembly being configured to rotate the patient supports 360 degrees about the rotation axis [column 7 lines 54-59 “Once the table is rotated to the desired orientation, the brake handles 50 are re-engaged to lock the table in the angled condition. The table may be rotated as far as desired by the surgeon, and may even be rotated by 90 degrees to position the patient in a prone or supine position.”].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined the patient positioning system of Jackson and the 360 degree rotatable patient positioning system of Lamb and with a reasonable expectation of success arrived at patient positioning system that can be rotated 360 degrees. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination for the purpose of allowing the positioning system to be rotated to any desired position by a surgeon during a surgical procedure as taught in Lamb [column 7 lines 45-59].
Claims 21 and 23 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jackson in view of US Patent 4,244,358 hereinafter referred to as Pyers.
Re-Claim 21
Jackson disclose the claimed apparatus however does not discloses wherein the first patient support includes a first section and a second section that is connected to the first section by a hinge such that the second section is rotatable relative to the first section about the hinge.
Pyers teaches a patient positioning system 1 fig.1 comprising: spaced apart first 7A fig.2 and second columns 9A fig.2; a first rotation assembly 10 fig.1 coupled to the first column; a first bracket 25 fig.8 coupled to the first column and the first rotation assembly and a second bracket 51 fig.1 coupled to the second column; a first patient support 11 fig.1 having a first end coupled to the first bracket and a second end coupled to the second bracket; wherein the first patient support includes a first section 11’ fig.1 and a second section 11’’ fig.1 that is connected to the first section by a hinge 111 fig.1 such that the second section is rotatable relative to the first section about the hinge (see fig.2).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined the patient positioning system of Jackson and hinged patient positioning system of Pyers and with a reasonable expectation of success arrived at patient positioning system having a hinge connecting first and second sections of the patient support. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination for the purpose of making the patient supported on the apparatus more comfortable during use as taught in Pyers [see abstract].
Re-Claim 23
Jackson as modified by Pyers above discloses,
Pyers teaches wherein the second patient support 67 fig.8 includes a first section 11’ and a second section 11’’ [ column 6 lines 36-37 “Pallet 67 can be similar in construction to pallet 11, except that the end attached to support rod 25 assembly 49 is "split", as shown in FIG. 3.”] that is connected to the first section of the second patient support by a hinge such 111 that the second section of the second patient support is rotatable relative to the first section of the second patient support about the hinge of the second patient support.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 25-31 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 22, 24 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art of record disclose the claimed patient positioning system. However does not discloses the combination of structures and “a cable drive system coupled to the column, the cable drive system comprising spaced apart winch cylinders and a rotary motor positioned between the winch cylinders, the cable drive system further comprising cables that are each attached to one of the winch cylinders and one of the first and second sections, the rotary engine being configured to wind and unwind the cables to move the first patient support from a first configuration in which the first section is planar with the second section and a second configuration in which the first section extends at an acute angle relative to the second section.”, For at least that reason the claim is believed to be allowable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (see notice of references cited).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IFEOLU A ADEBOYEJO whose telephone number is (571)270-3072. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10AM-5PM 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.
/IFEOLU A ADEBOYEJO/Examiner, Art Unit 3673
/JUSTIN C MIKOWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3673