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 .
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: “horizontal movement support portion” in claim 3.
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.
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 § 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.
Claim 3 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.
Claim limitation “horizontal movement support portion” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The only mentions of a “horizontal movement support portion” are in paragraphs [0013] and [0073]. Paragraph [0073] goes on to also name it a “linear motion guide” but does not explain what this is and paragraph [0074] only discloses that it is a commercially available product, not what it is. The linear motion guide is labeled as 102 in Fig. 7, but this is only shown as a rectangle and does not help to clarify what it is. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USP 4,914,682 (Blumenthal hereinafter) in view of USP 6,761,248 (Harbison hereinafter).
With regard to claim 1, Blumenthal discloses a bed apparatus comprising:
a base member (21);
an ascending and descending member (19);
an X-shaped pantograph arm including a first arm member (24) and a second arm member (23) that is connected to the first arm member (24) at an intersection part (where rod (33) connects the first and second arm members (24, 23)) so as to be rotationally movable with respect to the first arm member (24), the X-shaped pantograph arm connecting the ascending and descending member (19) to the base member (21) such that the ascending and descending member (19) is able to ascend and descend in an up-down direction; and
an actuator (34) that drives the pantograph arm,
wherein the actuator (34) includes
a driving source (36), and
a rod member (37) that moves in the up-down direction by power of the driving source (36).
Blumenthal does not disclose a first connecting member that connects the rod member and the first arm member in the up-down direction and that has an upper end part connected to an upper end part of the rod member and a lower end part rotationally movably connected to a position between the intersection part and an upper end part of the first arm member.
Harbison teaches a pantograph mechanism (Fig. 4) with a first connecting member (150) that connects a rod member (62) and a first arm member (40) in the up-down direction and that has an upper end part connected to an upper end part of the rod member (62) and a lower end part rotationally movably connected to a position between an intersection part and an upper end part of the first arm member (40) (Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the apparatus of Blumenthal by providing a first connecting member that connects the rod member and the first arm member in the up-down direction and that has an upper end part connected to an upper end part of the rod member and a lower end part rotationally movably connected to a position between the intersection part and an upper end part of the first arm member as taught in Harbison for the purposes of reducing vibration (col. 4 lines 27-37).
With regard to claim 2, the Blumenthal modification with regard to claim 1 discloses all of the limitations except for further comprising a second connecting member that connects the actuator and the second arm member in the up-down direction and that has an upper end part rotationally movably connected to a position between the intersection part and a lower end part of the second arm member and a lower end part connected to a lower end part of the actuator.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a second connecting member that connects the actuator and the second arm member in the up-down direction and that has an upper end part rotationally movably connected to a position between the intersection part and a lower end part of the second arm member and a lower end part connected to a lower end part of the actuator, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378.
With regard to claim 3, insofar as claim 3 is definite, the Blumenthal modification with regard to claim 1 discloses the bed apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising:
a horizontal movement support portion that supports the actuator to be movable in a horizontal direction.
With regard to claim 5, the Blumenthal modification with regard to claim 1 discloses a medical diagnostic system comprising:
the bed apparatus according to claim 1; and
a medical image capturing apparatus (12).
Claim(s) 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blumenthal in view of Harbison and in further view of USP 7,543,989 (Hoth et al. hereinafter).
With regard to claim 4, the Blumenthal modification with regard to claim 1 discloses all of the limitations except for wherein the ascending and descending member has an escape hole for allowing the upper end part of the rod member to escape upward from the ascending and descending member in a case in which the ascending and descending member is moved downward.
Hoth et al. teaches a bed apparatus using a X-shaped pantograph lifting member wherein the ascending and descending member (11) has an escape hole (Fig. 5) for allowing an upper end part of a rod member to escape upward from the ascending and descending member (11) in a case in which the ascending and descending member (11) is moved downward.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to further modify the apparatus of the Blumenthal modification with regard to claim 1 by providing that the ascending and descending member has an escape hole as taught in Hoth et al. for the purposes of allowing the upper end part of the rod member to pass through the ascending and descending member.
With regard to claim 6, the Blumenthal modification with regard to claim 4 discloses the medical diagnostic system according to claim 5, wherein the ascending and descending member (19) of the bed apparatus has an escape hole for allowing the upper end part of the rod member to escape upward from the ascending and descending member (19) in a case in which the ascending and descending member (19) is moved downward.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. USPAP’s 2008/0047068, 2013/0341984 and 2021/0229537 as well as USP’s 8,015,638, 8,469,152, 10,499,730, 3,623,617, 4,181,858, 4,567,894, 4,858,888, 5,111,546, 5,460,460 and 9,777,755 disclose pantograph lifting mechanisms similar to that claimed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON R EASTMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3132. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Justin C. 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.
/AARON R EASTMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673