The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to amended claims filed on 11/26/24, in which Claims 1-16 are presented for examination of which Claim 1 is in independent form.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-18 in the of US Patent No. 12190712, and Claims 1-20 of US 11410532, 11229564 and 11801181. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Claims 1-16 are generally broader than claims in US 12190712, 11410532, 11229564 and 11801181. Broader claims in a later application constitute obvious double patenting of narrow claims in an issued patent. See In re Van Ornum and Stang, 214, USPQ 761, 766, and 767 (CCPA) (the court sustained an obvious double patenting rejection of generic claims in a continuation application over narrower species claims in an issued patent); In re Vogel, 164 USPQ 619, 622, and 623 (CCPA 1970) (generic application claim specifying "meat" is obvious double patenting of narrow patent claim specifying "pork").
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-16 would allowable if a terminal disclaimer is filed.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Bhimavarapu et al. (Bhimavarapu US 20160038361 A1) discloses a patient support apparatus (Abstract) comprising: a litter frame (26 of Fig 1 base); a support deck (22 of Fig 1 support surface) supported by the litter frame, the support deck adapted to support a patient thereon; a communication sensor ([0054] including pins 10 and 11) adapted to detect when a communication channel is successfully established between the nurse call cable interface and the nurse call system ([0054] depending on electrical status), and to detect when the communication channel is not successfully established between the nurse call cable interface and the nurse call system will be changed such that the nurse call system will recognize that the cable has become disconnected, and will therefore issue an appropriate alert to the appropriate personnel ([0054] the cable is inadvertently disconnected, the electrical status of pins 10 and 11 (in a conventional 37 pin connection) will be changed such that the nurse call system will recognize that the cable has become disconnected); an indicator (76 of Fig 4); and a controller (66 of Fig 4) in communication with the communication sensor and the indicator, the controller adapted to activate the indicator ([0059] main controller 66 is in communication with one or more indicators 76, one or more sensors 78, and one or more motors 80. Indicators 76 may, for example, be any one or more lights, buzzers, displays, or the like that are able to provide an indication in aural or visual form to an occupant of person support apparatus 20, or to a caregiver associated with person support apparatus 20).
In another embodiment, Bhimavarapu teaches that there is a nurse call cable interface (44’of Fig 3 headwall connector) adapted to receive a first end (see Fig 3 top of 54) of a nurse call cable (54 of Fig 3 adapter cable), the nurse call cable including a second end (55 of Fig 3 receptacle) adapted to couple to an outlet (50 of Fig 2 (not shown in Fig 3)) of a nurse call system (18 of Fig 1 person support apparatus system), the outlet mounted to a headwall (40 of Figs 1-3) of a healthcare facility ([0049] healthcare facility).
Bhimavarapu also discloses a display (72 of Fig 4) in communication with the controller (66), and issuing an appropriate alert to the appropriate personnel when a cable is disconnected ([0054] recognize that the cable has become disconnected, and will therefore issue an appropriate alert).
While Bhimavarapu discloses nurse alert system for warning of disconnected cables, the prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious, alone or in combination, the unique system of wherein the controller is adapted to display a dismissible popup window on the display when the cable sensor detects that the nurse call cable is not physically coupled to the nurse call cable interface, and, in response to a user dismissing the popup window, to stop displaying the dismissible popup window but to continue to activate the indicator until the cable sensor detects the nurse call cable is physically coupled to the nurse call interface, as detailed in the independent claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a. Cox et al. (US 20170221344 A1) discloses a method a nurse call system includes: a host device; and a multifunctional nurse call cable, comprising a nurse call button. The host device includes an interface for the multifunctional nurse call cable. The multifunctional nurse call cable is configured to be connected to the host device and a patient's mobile device, and is further configured to provide power from the host device to the patient's mobile device. The host device to which the mobile device is connected via the multifunctional nurse call cable can also provide additional functionality, such as disconnection alerts for both the multifunctional nurse call cable and the mobile device (e.g., a first type of alert for the multifunctional nurse call cable becoming disconnected from the host device and a second type of alert for the mobile device becoming disconnected from the multifunctional nurse call cable.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK S RUSHING whose telephone number is (571)270-5876. The examiner can normally be reached on 10-6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MARK S RUSHING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689