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 .
Response to Supplemental Amendment
This Office Action is responding to applicant’s supplemental amendment filed on 8/6/2026. Claims 1-2, 4, 8-12, and 15-17 have been amended. Claims 18-19 have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
The objections to the drawings have been withdrawn in view of applicant’s remarks and amendment.
The 102 rejection has been withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendment and remarks.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lamont (U.S. Patent No. 5,762,622).
Regarding independent claim 1, Figures 1-16 in Lamont reference discloses applicant’s claimed cushioned support device (10) comprising:
a rectangular pad (central portion 48 of pad 14, column 3 lines 60-62 discloses central portion 48 of cushion 14 has a somewhat rectangular configuration shape) configured to support a portion of a patient's leg; and
a leg wrap (16) coupled to the rectangular pad (48) and configured to secure the portion of the patient's leg to the rectangular pad (48), the leg wrap (16) comprising:
a first flap (left wing of wrap 16) extending from a first side of the rectangular pad (48),
a second flap (right wing of wrap 16) extending from a second side of the rectangular pad (48) and configured to overlap (see Figure 1) the first flap (right wing of wrap 16), and
a fastener (26) positioned on the first flap and configured to removably couple
the first flap (left wing of wrap 16) to the second flap (right wing of wrap 16) to define a leg cavity (see Figure 1) between the first flap (left wing of wrap 16), the second flap (right wing of wrap 16), and the rectangular pad (48).
Regarding claim 2, Lamont reference, presented above, discloses applicant’s claimed cushioned support device, comprising all features as recited in these claims, wherein:
the fastener (26) is a first fastening strip (column 3 lines 33-44); and
the second flap (right wing of wrap 16) comprises a fastener material (column 3 lines 33-44) that is configured to couple to the first fastening strip (26).
Regarding claim 3, Lamont reference, presented above, discloses applicant’s claimed cushioned support device, comprising all features as recited in these claims, wherein:
the first fastening strip (26) comprises a fabric hook fastener material column 3 lines 33-44); and
the fastener material comprises a fabric loop fastener material (column 3 lines 33-44).
Regarding claim 4, Lamont reference, presented above, discloses applicant’s claimed cushioned support device, comprising all features as recited in these claims, wherein the
rectangular pad (48) comprises a first pad portion (central portion of rectangular pad 48) centered on the rectangular pad (48), the first pad portion comprising a molded foam (column 3 lines 54-60).
Regarding claim 5, Lamont reference, presented above, discloses applicant’s claimed cushioned support device, comprising all features as recited in these claims,
a second cushioned support device (Figure 13 illustrates a pair of splints 83 inserted in opening 46, such suggest that there is a second cushion support devices 10);
the cushioned support device of claim 1; and
a connecting member (bar 73) comprising a first connection portion (one end of bar 73) coupled to the cushioned support device (1st device 10) and a second connecting portion opposing end of bar 73) coupled to the second cushioned support device (2nd device 10), the connecting member (bar 73) configured to couple the cushioned support device (1st device 10) to the second cushioned support device (1st device 10).
Regarding independent claim 21, Figures 1-16 in Lamont reference discloses applicant’s claimed kit comprising:
a cushioned support device (10) comprising:
a pad (48) configured to support a portion of a patient's leg; and
a leg wrap (16) coupled to the pad (48) and configured to secure the portion of the patient's leg to the pad (48), the leg wrap (16) comprising:
a first flap (left flap of wrap 16) extending from a first side of the pad (48),
a second flap (right flap wrap 16) extending from a second side of the pad (48), and
a fastener (26) positioned on the first flap (left flap of wrap 16a) and configured to removably couple the first flap (left flap of wrap 16) to the second flap (right flap of wrap 16) to define a leg cavity (see Figure 1) between the leg wrap (16) and the pad (48);
a second cushioned support device (Figure 13 illustrates a pair of splints 83 inserted in opening 46, such suggest that there is a second cushion support devices 10); and
a connecting member (bar 73) comprising a first connection portion (one end of bar 73) coupled to the cushioned support device (1st device 10) and a second connecting portion opposing end of bar 73) coupled to the second cushioned support device (2nd device 10), the connecting member (bar 73) configured to couple the cushioned support device (1st device 10) to the second cushioned support device (1st device 10).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamont (U.S. Patent No. 5,762,622) in view of Gainey (U.S. Patent No. 8,834,396).
Regarding claim 8, Lamont reference, presented above, discloses applicant’s claimed cushioned support device of claim 1, further comprising a foot pad (18, 60) coupled to each of a first lateral side of a distal end of the rectangular pad (48) and a second lateral side of the distal end of the rectangular pad (48).
Lamont reference does not disclose an opening that is configured to receive a heel of the patient.
However, Gainey teaches an analogous cushioned support device comprising a foot pad () (6, 7) coupled to base (5) of leg portion (9, 10), Figure 9 illustrates the coupling of the foot pad (6, 7) to a distal end of base (5) such that an opening (29) is formed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lamont cushioned support device prior to applicant’s effective filing to date to have an opening between the foot pad (18, 60) and the rectangular pad (48), as such opening provides a passage to accommodate the wearer’s heel.
Claims 6, 9-10, 13-14, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamont (U.S. Patent No. 5,762,622) in view of Robinson (U.S. Patent No. 2,588,411).
Regarding claims 6 and 22, Lamont reference, presented above, discloses applicant’s claimed cushioned support device of independent claims 1 and 21 comprising all features as recited in respective independent claim, including the connecting member (73).
Lamont does not disclose the connecting is adjustable so as to facilitate varying of a maximum separation between the cushioned support device and the second cushioned support device at the connecting member.
However, Figures 6-7 in Robinson teaches a connecting member coupling two footwear (phantom), Figures 1-2 and 4 illustrates the connector being adjustable such that allows for the distance between the two footwear to vary the distance therebetween.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lamont cushioned support device prior to applicant’s effective filing to date to have the connector (bar 73) being length adjustable for purposes of providing stability to the wearer.
Regarding independent claim 9, Figures 1-16 in Lamont reference discloses applicant’s claimed kit comprising:
a first cushioned support device (10) comprising:
a first rectangular pad configured to support a portion of a patient's first leg, and
a first leg wrap coupled to the first rectangular pad and configured to
secure the portion of the patient's first leg to the first rectangular pad, the first leg wrap
comprising:
a first wrap first flap extending from a first pad first side of the first
rectangular pad,
a first wrap second flap extending from a first pad second side of the first rectangular pad opposite the first pad first side, and
a first fastener positioned on the first wrap first flap and configured to removably couple the first wrap first flap to the first wrap second flap to define a first leg cavity between the first leg wrap and the first rectangular pad;
a second cushioned support device comprising:
a second rectangular pad configured to support a portion of a patient's
second leg, and
a second leg wrap coupled to the second rectangular pad and configured to secure the portion of the patient's second leg to the second rectangular pad, the second leg wrap comprising:
a second wrap first flap extending from a second pad first side of the second rectangular pad,
a second wrap second flap extending from a second pad second side of the second rectangular pad opposite the second pad first side, and
a second fastener positioned on the second wrap second flap and configured to removably couple the second wrap first flap to the second wrap second flap to define a second leg cavity between the second leg wrap and the second rectangular pad; and
a connecting member comprising a first connecting portion coupled to the first cushioned support device, and
a second connecting portion coupled to the second cushioned support device.
Lamont does not disclose the second connecting portion configured to receive the first connecting portion.
However, Figures 6-7 in Robinson teaches a connecting member coupling two footwear (phantom), Figures 1-2 and 4 illustrates the connector including two connecting portions in telescoping arrangement with each other such that allows for the distance between the two footwear to vary the distance therebetween.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lamont cushioned support device prior to applicant’s effective filing to date to have the connector (bar 73) being length adjustable, taught by Robinson, for purposes of providing stability to the wearer.
Regarding claim 10, Lamont/Robinson combination, presented above, discloses applicant’s claimed cushioned support device, comprising all features as recited in these claims, wherein the first rectangular pad (1st pad 48, Lamont) comprises a first pad first portion centered on the first rectangular pad, and the second rectangular pad (2nd pad 48, Lamont) comprises a second pad first portion centered on the second rectangular pad.
Regarding claim 13, Lamont/Robinson combination, presented above, discloses applicant’s claimed cushioned support device, comprising all features as recited in these claims, wherein the first cushioned support device further comprises a third pad (wing 52, Lamont) positioned between the first wrap first flap and the portion of the patient's first leg.
Regarding claim 14, Lamont/Robinson, presented above, discloses applicant’s claimed cushioned support device, comprising all features as recited in these claims, wherein the second cushioned support device further comprises a fourth pad (wing 50, Lamont) positioned between the second wrap second flap and the portion of the patient's second leg.
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lamont (U.S. Patent No. 5,762,622)/Robinson (U.S. Patent No. 2,588,411), in view of Gainey (U.S. Patent No. 8,834,396).
Regarding claims 15-16, Lamont/Gainey combination, presented above, discloses applicant’s claimed cushioned support device of claims 9, further comprising a foot pad (18, 60, in Lamont) coupled to each of a first lateral side of a distal end of the rectangular pad (48) and a second lateral side of the distal end of the rectangular pad (48).
Lamont/Robinson combination, presented above, does not disclose an opening that is configured to receive a heel of the patient.
However, Gainey teaches an analogous cushioned support device comprising a foot pad () (6, 7) coupled to base (5) of leg portion (9, 10), Figure 9 illustrates the coupling of the foot pad (6, 7) to a distal end of base (5) such that an opening (29) is formed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lamont/Robinson cushioned support device prior to applicant’s effective filing to date to have an opening between the foot pad (18, 60) and the rectangular pad (48), as such opening provides a passage to accommodate the wearer’s heel.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 11-12, and 23 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 17 and 20 are allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMTU TRAN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4799. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm, Monday-Friday.
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, Rachael E Bredefeld can be reached at 571-270-5237. 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.
/CAMTU T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3786
Prosecution Insights