Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/941,824

ADJUSTABLE BED SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 08, 2024
Examiner
SUN, GEORGE
Art Unit
3673
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Ergomotion Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
219 granted / 313 resolved
+18.0% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+33.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
335
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
52.3%
+12.3% vs TC avg
§102
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§112
12.0%
-28.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 313 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 17 December 2025. 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) 1-13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 114847712 A to Keeson. Re Claim 1, Keeson teaches: An adjustable bed system (at least [translated title] “adjustable bed”) comprising: a mattress (at least Figs. 1-4 element 2 and [p. 4 of translation] “2-mattress”) having a head portion (at least Figs. 1-4 element 3 and [p. 4 of translation] “3-head”)and a foot portion rearward of the head portion (at least Figs. 1-4 element 4 and [p. 4 of translation] “4-tail”), wherein the head portion defines a cavity that is downwardly open (at least Figs. 1-4 element 21 and [p. 4 of translation] “21-groove”); and an adjustment mechanism (at least Figs. 1-4 element 1 and [p. 4 of translation] “1-adjusting bracket”) having a lower base formed of a planar substrate (at least Figs. 1-4 element 11 and [p. 4 of translation] “11-base”), an upper support formed of either a frame or another planar substrate that is movably coupled to the lower base (at least Figs. 1-4 element 12 and [p. 4 of translation] “12-support base”), and an actuator operable to move the upper support relative to the lower base (at least Figs. 1-4 element 13 and [p. 4 of translation] “13-driver”); wherein the adjustment mechanism is positioned in the cavity and coupled to the mattress, and when the actuator is operated, the adjustment mechanism moves the adjustable bed system between a flat configuration in which the head portion is substantially coplanar with the foot portion and an inclined configuration in which the head portion is inclined relative to the foot portion (at least Figs. 1-4 and [pp. 4-5 of translation] “the adjusting bracket 1 is independently arranged and can be set in the groove 21 at the bottom of the bed board or the mattress 2 to drive the bed board or the mattress 2 to turn over; the adjusting bracket 1 includes: The base 11, the support base 12 and the driver 13, one end of the base 11 is rotatably connected to one end of the support base 12, and the driver 13 drives the support base 12 to turn relative to the support base 12.”); and wherein the mattress and the adjustment mechanism are configured to be positioned on a support surface (at least Figs. 1-4 and [p. 5 of the translation] “the bottom of the base 11 is provided with a non-slip pad”), the adjustment mechanism having a higher coefficient of friction with the support surface than the mattress (at least Figs. 1-4 and [p. 5 of the translation] “the anti-skid pad helps to enhance the friction between the base 11 and the ground, prevents the base 11 from being displaced, and can better fix the adjusting bracket 1 and the mattress 2.”). Re Claim 2, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 1, wherein the lower base of the adjustment mechanism includes an elastomeric material that engages the support surface with the higher coefficient of friction (at least Figs. 1-4 and [p. 5 of the translation] “the bottom of the base 11 is provided with a non-slip pad. The anti-skid pad helps to enhance the friction between the base 11 and the ground, prevents the base 11 from being displaced, and can better fix the adjusting bracket 1 and the mattress 2.”); wherein the lower base is coextensive with a head portion of the mattress (at least Figs. 1-4); wherein the lower base includes one or more stanchions that are configured to be engaged by and support the upper support in the flat configuration (at least Fig. 2 element 111 and [p. 5 of the translation] “111-Support rod”); wherein the lower base includes a bottom material that has the higher coefficient of friction and that is configured to couple to the mattress with a coupler (at least Figs. 1-4 and [p. 5 of the translation] “the bottom of the base 11 is provided with a non-slip pad. The anti-skid pad helps to enhance the friction between the base 11 and the ground, prevents the base 11 from being displaced, and can better fix the adjusting bracket 1 and the mattress 2.”). Re Claim 3, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 1, wherein the lower base of the adjustment mechanism includes an elastomeric material that engages the support surface with the higher coefficient of friction (at least Figs. 1-4 and [p. 5 of the translation] “the bottom of the base 11 is provided with a non-slip pad. The anti-skid pad helps to enhance the friction between the base 11 and the ground, prevents the base 11 from being displaced, and can better fix the adjusting bracket 1 and the mattress 2.”). Re Claim 4, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 3, wherein the elastomeric material forms less than 20% of the area of the surface to which it is applied (at least Fig. 9 element 28). Re Claim 5, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 3, wherein the lower base includes a bottom material that is a woven or non-woven sheet material to which the elastomeric material applied on a lower surface thereof, and the bottom material of the lower base is the same material forming a lower covering of the mattress (at least Fig. 9 and [p. 8 of the translation] “an anti-slip device 28 and the anti-slip device 28 is provided on the mattress 2 and/or the bottom surface of the adjustable bracket 1, the anti-skid device 28 is used to limit the displacement along the direction of the head part 3 and the tall part 4.”). Re Claim 6, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 1, wherein the lower base is coextensive with a head portion of the mattress (at least Figs. 1-4 and 9). Re Claim 7, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 6, wherein the lower base has a base length that is greater than a cavity length of the cavity (at least Figs. 1-4 and 9). Re Claim 8, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 7, wherein the lower base is configured to engage a vertical surface of a wall to prevent headward movement of the adjustable bed assembly (at least Figs. 1-4). Re Claim 9, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 1, wherein the lower base includes one or more stanchions that are configured to be engaged by and support the upper support in the flat configuration (at least Fig. 2 element 111 and [p. 4 of the translation] “111-Support rod”). Re Claim 10, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 9, wherein in the flat configuration, the upper support is parallel with the lower base (at least Figs. 1-5). Re Claim 11, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 10, wherein the upper support is pivotably coupled to the lower base with one or more hinges that form an axis of rotation at an approximate mid-height between the upper support and the lower base (at least Fig. 2 element 111 and [p. 4 of the translation] “113-Hinged base”). Re Claim 12, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 1, wherein the lower base includes a bottom material that has the higher coefficient of friction and that is configured to couple to the mattress with a coupler (at least Figs. 1-4 and [p. 5 of the translation] “the bottom of the base 11 is provided with a non-slip pad. The anti-skid pad helps to enhance the friction between the base 11 and the ground, prevents the base 11 from being displaced, and can better fix the adjusting bracket 1 and the mattress 2.”). Re Claim 13, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 12, wherein the coupler is configured to releasably couple one or more of a head end, a left side, and a right side of the lower base to the mattress (at least Fig. 9 and [p. 8 of the translation] “The anti-skid cloth can be detachably connected to the adjustment bracket 1 through zippers, Velcro, etc., so that the adjustment bracket 1 and the mattress can be detachably connected. 2 are connected together to avoid displacement.”). Re Claim 15, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed of claim 12, further comprising another coupler that couples a foot end of the lower base to the mattress in the flat configuration and the inclined configuration (at least Fig. 9 and [p. 8 of the translation] “The anti-skid cloth can be detachably connected to the adjustment bracket 1 through zippers, Velcro, etc., so that the adjustment bracket 1 and the mattress can be detachably connected. 2 are connected together to avoid displacement.”). 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) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keeson in view of US 20110247144 A1 to Oh. Re Claim 14, Keeson teaches: The adjustable bed system of claim 13 (detailed with respect to claim 13). Keeson does not explicitly teach: further comprising a power cord having a plug, wherein the coupler is a zipper that releasably couples the head end, the left side, and the right side of the lower base to the mattress, and in a shipping configuration, the lower base is coupled to the mattress with the coupler and the plug is positioned on an opposite side of the cavity relative to a zipper pull of the coupler. However, Oh teaches: further comprising a power cord having a plug (at least Fig. 7 element 75 and [0052] “a power cord 75”), wherein the coupler is a zipper that releasably couples the head end, the left side, and the right side of the lower base to the mattress (at least Fig. 11 and [0060] “Bottom portion 82 that is apparent in FIG. 10 is attached to the perimeter of top portion 83 with a zipper 84”), and in a shipping configuration, the lower base is coupled to the mattress with the coupler and the plug is positioned on an opposite side of the cavity relative to a zipper pull of the coupler (at least Fig. 9). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the adjustable bed system taught by Keeson with the power cord and zipper taught by Oh with a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results. A person having ordinary skill would have been motivated to do so because “When adjustable mattress 20 is in the flat configuration, mattress 20 looks like a conventional mattress resting on a box spring, with the exception of a power cord 75 that protrudes out from under the upper section of adjustable mattress 20. Power cord 75 is plugged into a standard wall socket 76 and provides electrical power to the electric motors 63 and 67 of the movement mechanism 33” (Oh [0052]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE SUN whose telephone number is (571)270-7221. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-4:00pm. 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. /GEORGE SUN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 08, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599234
ELECTRIC RECLINING CHAIR WITH ANTI-PINCH PROTECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593920
HEIGHT ADJUSTABLE TRAVEL PILLOW
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594204
Cell Bladder, Expandable Bladder, Port System and Attachment System
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582240
MATTRESS PROTECTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569074
INFANT SLEEP DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.2%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 313 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month