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 .
Application Status
Claims 1-6, 10-11, and 13-15 are pending in this application. Claims 7-9 and 12 have been withdrawn. This communication is a Non-Final Rejection in response to the Election Reply filed on 7/6/2026. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 1/21/2025 has been considered by the office.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 7-9 and 12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 7/6/2026. Applicant’s election of Species 1 and Sub-Species 1A is detailed in the reply, however the examiner asserts that claims 7-8 are not readable on the elected Species and Sub-Species. Species 1 is directed to the cover comprising an opening/closing portion on a short side relative to a rectangular shape, not a limitation of claims 7-8 or claims 1-2, which claim 7 and ultimately 8 depend on. Claims 7-8 are only readable on Species 4, directed to the cover comprising a bending portion to assist in the opening and closing of the cover. Thus, claims 7-8 are withdrawn, along with claims 9 and 12.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 5 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities: these claims recite the limitations, “wherein one end and the other end”. It is unclear to the examiner what is bounded by “the other end”. The examiner suggests amending this to recite, “wherein a first a second . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-6 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Allen (US 20190083344 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Allen discloses a couch of a medical image capturing apparatus, comprising: a top plate on which a subject lies (See Fig. 2, table surface 12); a pedestal part that is provided on a floor surface side (See Fig. 2, table base surface 36); an elevating mechanism that is provided between the top plate and the pedestal part and is used to adjust a height of the top plate (See Fig. 2, “height adjustment mechanism is used to adjust the height of the patient table surface 12 relative to the table base surface 36 and the ground surface”; [0031]); and a cover that is tubular to cover a periphery of the elevating mechanism (See Fig. 1-2, cladding protection device 20 surrounds cladding assembly 30 of the height adjustment mechanism), is capable of expanding and contracting vertically according to driving of the elevating mechanism (See Fig. 1-2, regarding device 20, “the term cladding is used, it is contemplated that this includes telescoping cladding members or a flexible accordion shroud”; [0034]), and has an opening and closing portion that is openable and closable portion and is configured by a cutout longitudinally extending from an upper end on a top plate side to a lower end on a pedestal part side (See Fig. 4A, 6A-6B, bodies 20a and 20b side walls opened and closed using couplers 24).
Regarding Claim 2, Allen discloses the couch of a medical image capturing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the cover has a bellows structure configured by a flexible sheet and a plurality of frame members extending in a direction intersecting the opening and closing portion (See Fig. 1-2, regarding device 20, “the term cladding is used, it is contemplated that this includes telescoping cladding members or a flexible accordion shroud”; [0034], device 20 having a plurality of bodies).
Regarding Claim 3, Allen discloses the couch of a medical image capturing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein one end and the other end of the sheet facing each other in the opening and closing portion are attachably and detachably connected to each other by an attachment/detachment member (See Fig. 4A, 6A-6B, bodies 20a and 20b side walls opened and closed using couplers 24).
Regarding Claim 4, Allen discloses the couch of a medical image capturing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the attachment/detachment member is a hook-and-loop fastener or a slide fastener (See Fig. 13, key 42 and slot 44).
Regarding Claim 5, Allen discloses the couch of a medical image capturing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein regarding one end and the other end of the sheet facing each other in the opening and closing portion, the one end is disposed on an outer side, and the other end is disposed on an inner side, and the one end overlaps the other end to cover and conceal the other end (See Fig. 14, L-shaped element 48 covering and concealing L-shaped element 46).
Regarding Claim 6, Allen discloses the couch of a medical image capturing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the frame members are attachably and detachably connected to each other by fitting one end and the other end of the frame members facing each other in the opening and closing portion (See Fig. 13, key 42 and slot 44 fit together).
Regarding Claim 13, Allen discloses the couch of a medical image capturing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of the opening and closing portions are provided (See Fig. 4A, an opening and closing portion on either side of device 20).
Regarding Claim 14, Allen discloses the couch of a medical image capturing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the pedestal part is a caster portion to which casters are attached (See Fig. 2, table base surface 36 having casters).
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allen (US 20190083344 A1) in view of Dalbert (US 20180311101 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Allen discloses the couch of a medical image capturing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the cover has a rectangular shape having a short side and a long side in a top view (See Fig. 4A, device 20 being rectangular).
Allen fails to explicitly disclose the opening and closing portion is provided on the short side.
However, Dalbert teaches the opening and closing portion is provided on the short side (See Fig. 6, cladding protection unit 150 having openings on short sides of a rectangle).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to have modified the invention of Allen by locating the removable portions on the short side of a rectangle as taught by Dalbert. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “facilitate, for example, cleaning and sanitizing the cladding protection unit 150 and/or the telescoping column 110”; (Dalbert, [0033]). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have made this modification with a reasonable expectation of success and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the modification were predictable.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allen (US 20190083344 A1) in view of Dalbert (US 20180311101 A1), further in view of Cumpson (US 20080194942 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Allen, as modified, teaches the couch of a medical image capturing apparatus according to claim 10.
Allen in view of Dalbert fails to explicitly teach wherein the opening and closing portion is provided on the short side on a gantry side out of two short sides.
However, Cumpson teaches wherein the opening and closing portion is provided on the short side on a gantry side out of two short sides (See Fig. 2, when the movable trolley 30 is docked to the scanner 10 of Cumpson, an opening of unit 150 of Dalbert would be on the gantry side).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to have combined Allen in view of Dalbert (directed to a cladding protection unit with openings on the short sides of the unit) and Cumpson (directed to a moveable tabletop of an imaging system) and arrived at a moveable tabletop of an imaging system with a removable cladding protection unit. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination because all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (adding a cladding unit to a tabletop) with a reasonable expectation of success (tabletop would still support a patient) and with no change in their respective functions and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable (the cladding unit could be used in combination with the existing tabletop to achieve the predictable result of protecting the tabletop).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allen (US 20190083344 A1) in view of Cumpson (US 20080194942 A1).
Regarding Claim 15, Allen discloses the couch of a medical image capturing apparatus according to claim 1.
Allen fails to explicitly teach wherein the couch is attachably and detachably connected to a gantry.
However, Cumpson teaches wherein the couch is attachably and detachably connected to a gantry (See Fig. 1-2, trolley 30 is docked with scanner 10 using members 44 and 46).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to have modified the invention of Allen by adding a gantry and the ability to connect a trolley as taught by Cumpson. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “position the trolley 30 at a fixed position respective to the MRI scanner 10”; (Cumpson, [0035]). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have made this modification with a reasonable expectation of success and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the modification were predictable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20090321604 A1: Revenus discloses a telescoping height adjustable support column with an opening and closing portion attachable by a fastening mechanism.
US 6505364 B2: Simmons discloses a telescoping cover enclosing a table supporting mechanism.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE SAMUEL GINES whose telephone number is (571)270-0968. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am - 5:00pm.
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 SAMUEL GINES/Examiner, Art Unit 3673
/David E Sosnowski/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3673
Prosecution Insights