Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 19/030,450

PRACTICAL AND ECONOMICAL MEDICAL NURSING BED

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Jan 17, 2025
Priority
Oct 31, 2024 — CN 202422646708.6
Examiner
EASTMAN, AARON ROBERT
Art Unit
3673
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Anhui Langwei Medical Device Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 5m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
708 granted / 893 resolved
+27.3% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
914
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
44.1%
+4.1% vs TC avg
§102
25.1%
-14.9% vs TC avg
§112
27.1%
-12.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 893 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 discloses a gear box and gears in the gearbox that rotate to raise and lower the back bed frame assembly and the leg bed frame assembly. Neither the Specification nor the Drawings ever mention or show a gear box or gears meaning that this subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. 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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USP 3,932,903 (Adams et al. hereinafter) in view of USPAP 2023/0157912 (Thota et al. hereinafter). With regard to claim 1, insofar as claim 1 is definite, Adams et al. discloses a practical and economical medical nursing bed, comprising two head bed frame assemblies (4, 1) and two guardrail assemblies (112), wherein the two guardrail assemblies (112) are movably and oppositely mounted on sides of the two head bed frame assemblies (4, 1) respectively and each comprise a guardrail body (13) and two guardrail slots (30 and interior of frame 29), and the medical nursing bed further comprising a connecting rod (bars seen underneath and holding up the head portion in Fig. 1), a back bed frame assembly (6) and a leg bed frame assembly (8), the guardrail body (13) is movably mounted on a side of the respective head bed frame assembly (4, 1), the two guardrail slots (30 and interior of frame 29) are formed in the side of the respective head bed frame assembly (4, 1), the connecting rod (bars seen underneath and holding up the head portion in Fig. 1) is movably mounted between the two head bed frame assemblies (4, 1), the back bed frame assembly (6) is fixedly mounted on one side of the two head bed frame assemblies (4, 1), the back bed frame assembly (6) is arranged at a bottom of the medical nursing bed, and the leg bed frame assembly (8) is movably mounted between the two head bed frame assemblies (4, 1). Adams et al. does not disclose wherein one rotating motor is fixedly mounted on one side of the back bed frame assembly, a gear box is connected to the rotating motor via the connecting rod such that the rotating motor drives gears in the gear box to rotate, achieving raising and lowering of the back bed frame assembly and the leg bed frame assembly. Thota et al. teaches a medical bed using motors and gear trains for actuating (raising and lowering) individual sections of the bed (paragraphs [0025] and [0032]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the apparatus disclosed by Adams et al. by providing wherein one rotating motor is fixedly mounted on one side of the back bed frame assembly, a gear box is connected to the rotating motor via the connecting rod such that the rotating motor drives gears in the gear box to rotate, achieving raising and lowering of the back bed frame assembly and the leg bed frame assembly as taught by Thota et al. for the purposes of actuating (raising and lowering) individual sections of the bed (paragraphs [0025] and [0032] of Thota et al.). With regard to claim 2, insofar as claim 2 is definite, the Adams et al. modification with regard to claim 1 discloses the practical and economical medical nursing bed according to claim 1, wherein a foot bed frame assembly (8) is fixedly mounted on opposite sides of the head bed frame assemblies (4, 1), and the foot bed frame assembly (8) is arranged at a foot portion of the medical nursing bed. With regard to claim 3, insofar as claim 3 is definite, the Adams et al. modification with regard to claim 1 discloses the practical and economical medical nursing bed according to claim 1, wherein a spring (68) is movably mounted inside the guardrail slot (30 and interior of frame 29). With regard to claim 4, insofar as claim 4 is definite, the Adams et al. modification with regard to claim 1 discloses the practical and economical medical nursing bed according to claim 2, wherein the gear box is fixedly mounted on one side of the rotating motor (Abstract and claim 9), and the gear box is arranged on one side of the foot bed frame assembly (8). With regard to claim 5, insofar as claim 5 is definite, the Adams et al. modification with regard to claim 1 discloses the practical and economical medical nursing bed according to claim 1, wherein a handle (71, 62) is movably mounted on one side of each head bed frame assembly (4, 1), and the handle (71, 62) is arranged on one side of the guardrail slot (30 and interior of frame 29). With regard to claim 6, insofar as claim 6 is definite, the Adams et al. modification with regard to claim 1 discloses the practical and economical medical nursing bed according to claim 1, wherein mounting holes are formed in sides of the head bed frame assemblies (4, 1), and fixing pins are arranged inside the mounting holes (col. 5 lines 44-53). With regard to claim 7, insofar as claim 7 is definite, the Adams et al. modification with regard to claim 1 discloses the practical and economical medical nursing bed according to claim 1, wherein the back bed frame assembly comprises a plurality of back bed frame assemblies (6, 7), and each of the back bed frame assemblies (6, 7) has the same specification and function. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 17, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103, §112
Jun 24, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 21, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12692800
SLEEVE FOR SERIALLY-ARRANGED SEAL ELEMENTS
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12677962
FOLDING BED STRUCTURE
1y 6m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12680509
POWER TRANSFER SYSTEM FOR A GAS TURBINE ENGINE
1y 5m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12674436
A VORTEX GENERATOR FOR A WIND TURBINE ROTOR BLADE
1y 4m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12669134
FAN ANTI-FOREIGN MATTER STRUCTURE
1y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+18.9%)
3y 0m (~1y 5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 893 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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