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 .
Status of the Application
Claims 1—28 have been examined in this application. Claims 26—28 are newly added. This communication is a Final Rejection in response to Applicant’s “Amendments/Remarks” filed 10/02/2025. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 08/14/2025 has been acknowledged by the Office.
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—18 & 20—23 & 26—28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent 4,526,355 A to Moore (Moore hereafter) in view of U.S Patent Application 2022/0241128 A1 to Newkirk (Newkirk hereafter).
As per claim 1, Moore teaches:
A patient positioning apparatus (10—Fig.1; Col 2 lines 45—50 ) comprising:
an active positioning assembly comprising a first pad (40—Fig.2; Col 3 lines 6—25); a first positioner arm coupled to the first pad (26, 28—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25); and
a first adjustment hub coupled to the first positioner arm ( 30,56, 58, 60,61 &62—Fig.1; Col 2 lines 62—65)and
configured to dynamically receive, while loaded, an adjustment input during a surgery
(Col 2 lines 62—65), the first adjustment hub further comprising a first lock (46 & 48 & 74—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 20—25), the first lock configured to lockably maintain a position of the first pad (Col 3 lines 20—25) a passive positioning assembly comprising(36 & 38—Fig.1): a second pad (36—Fig.1)
Moore does not teach; a second positioner arm coupled to the second pad; and a second adjustment hub coupled to the second positioner arm, the adjustment hub further comprising a second lock, the second lock configured to lockably maintain a position of the second pad, wherein the active positioning assembly and the passive positioning assembly are configured to be adjusted independently of each other.
Newkirk teaches ; a second positioner arm coupled to the second pad (210—Fig.20); and a second adjustment hub coupled to the second positioner arm (208—Fig.20; para [0097]), the adjustment hub further comprising a second lock, the second lock configured to lockably maintain a position of the second pad (210—Fig.20; para [0100]), wherein the active positioning assembly and the passive positioning assembly are configured to be adjusted independently of each other (para [0100]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Moore (directed to a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities) and Newkirk (directed to a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities) and arrived at a patient support pad a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to adjust a height of a patient support as needed to suit the size of a patient as taught in Newkirk (para [0100]).
As per claim 2, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first adjustment hub further comprises a biasing element (71—Fig.3; Col 3 lines 6—25)
configured to bias the first lock towards engagement with the first positioner arm (71—Fig.3; Col 3 lines 46—51) and, without user action, engage the first lock with the first positioner arm (Col 3 lines 46—51 lock engages arm via spring element).
As per claim 3, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first lock comprises one of a pawl (70—Fig.3 Col 3 lines 39—51 lock including pawl and pin) and a pin (72—Fig.3 Col 3 lines 39—51 lock including pawl and pin) configured to engage with the first positioner arm and selectively lock the first positioner arm in place relative to the first adjustment hub (Col 3 lines 39—51 lock including pawl and pin).
As per claim 4, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a clamp (12—Fig.1 Col 2 lines 45—50)
configured to attach at least one of the passive positioning assembly (36 & 38—Fig.1) and the active positioning assembly of the patient positioning apparatus to a structure in fixed relation to a patient engaged by the patient positioning apparatus (12—Fig.1 Col 2 lines 45—50).
As per claim 5, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 4, wherein the clamp defines a slot configured to receive a rail of the structure (14—Fig.1 Col 2 lines 45—50).
As per claim 6, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 4, further comprising an upright connecting the clamp to the first adjustment hub (22 &18—Fig.1 Col 2 lines 51—60).
As per claim 7, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 6, wherein the upright defines an elongated opening configured to lengthen or shorten a connection between the clamp and the first adjustment hub (22 &18—Fig.1 Col 2 lines 51—60 elongated opening 22).
As per claim 8, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 1, where the first positioner arm defines a proximal end slideably received by the first adjustment hub (32—Fig.1;Col 2 lines 62—65:proximal end of the arm)
and a distal end coupled to the first pad (60—Fig.1 distal end coupled to positioning pad 40).
As per claim 9, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first adjustment hub further comprises a drive element (50—Fig.1 Col 3 Lines 17—25),
the drive element configured to adjust, while the first pad is loaded, a position of the first pad relative to the first adjustment hub to support one of an anterior side and a posterior side of a patient (50—Fig.1; Col 3 Lines 17—25: locks pad in desired position).
As per claim 10, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 9, wherein the drive element is configured to dynamically advance or retract the first positioner arm relative to the adjustment hub (50—Fig.1; Col 3 Lines 17—25: locks pad in desired position).
As per claim 11, Moore (as modified) teaches:
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 9, wherein the drive element is configured to selectively move between engagement and disengagement with the first positioner arm (50—Fig.1; Col 3 Lines 17—25: locks pad in desired position relative to positioner arm).
As per claim 12, Moore (as modified) teaches:
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a rack and pinion (70 & 75—Fig.3 Col 3 lines 39—51 rack and pinion).
As per claim 13, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a drive element(70 & 75—Fig.3 Col 3 lines 39—51 rack and pinion) comprising a gear configured to engage with a plurality of notches or teeth disposed on the positioner arm (70 & 75—Fig.3 Col 3 lines 39—51 rack and pinion).
As per claim 14, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 1, where the first adjustment hub is configured to receive the adjustment input outside of a pre-defined surgical area (30,56, 58, 60,61 &62—Fig.1; Col 2 lines 62—65: adjustment hub positioned above and outside of presurgical area).
As per claim 15, Moore (as modified) teaches:
A patient positioning system (10—Fig.1; Col 2 lines 45—50 ) comprising:
a table having a first side and a second side (14—Fig.1: first side and second side opposite first side), wherein the second side is opposite the first side (14—Fig.1: first side and second side opposite first side);
an active positioner assembly (26, 28 40 & 42, 44—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25) coupled to the first side of the table, the active positioner assembly (14—Fig.1: first side ) comprising:
a pad (40—Fig.2; Col 3 lines 6—25); a positioner arm coupled to the pad (26, 28—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25); and
an adjustment hub coupled to the positioner arm (30,56, 58, 60,61 &62—Fig.1; Col 2 lines 62—65) and comprising a lock (46 & 48 & 74—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 20—25),
the lock configured to lockably maintain a position of the positioner arm with respect to the adjustment hub (46 & 48 & 74—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 20—25); and
a passive positioner assembly (36 & 38—Fig.1) configured to abut the patient opposite the active positioner assembly to securely hold the patient between the passive positioner assembly and the active positioner assembly (36 & 38—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 5—25).
Moore does not teach a passive positioner assembly coupled to the second side of the table, the passive positioner assembly.
Newkirk teaches a passive positioner assembly coupled to the second side of the table, the passive positioner assembly (202—Fig.20; para [0100]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Moore (directed to a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities) and Newkirk (directed to a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities) and arrived at a patient support pad a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to adjust a height of a patient support as needed to suit the size of a patient as taught in Newkirk (para [0100]).
As per claim 16, Moore (as modified) teaches:
The patient positioning system of claim 15, wherein the adjustment hub further comprises a drive element (50—Fig.1; Col 3 Lines 17—25: locks pad in desired position), the drive element configured to adjust, while the pad is loaded, a position of the pad relative to the adjustment hub (50—Fig.1; Col 3 Lines 17—25: locks pad in desired position).
As per claim 17, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning system of claim 15, wherein the active positioner assembly is one of a sternal active positioner assembly, a sacral active positioner assembly, and a thigh active positioner assembly (40 & 42—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25: active positioner can be positioned at various locations along the patient support via rail 14).
As per claim 18, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning system of claim 15, wherein the passive positioner assembly is one of a sternal passive positioner assembly and a thigh active positioner assembly (36 & 38—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25: passive positioner can be positioned at various locations along the patient support via rail 14).
As per claim 20, Moore teaches
A method for preoperative and intraoperative positioning of a patient (10—Fig.1; Col 2 lines 45—50 ), the method comprising:
providing a table defining a surface, a first side, and an opposite second side(14—Fig.1: first side and second side opposite first side)
adjusting at least one passive positioner assembly coupled to the first side of the table to contact the patient (36 & 38—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25: passive positioner can be positioned at various locations along the patient support via rail 14), the patient lying on the surface of the table (16—Fig.1; Col 2 lines 45—50); and dynamically adjusting at least one active positioner assembly coupled to the opposite side of the table with respect to the at least one passive positioner assembly to securely stabilize the patient with respect to the table (40 & 42—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25: active positioner can be positioned at various locations along the patient support via rail 14).
Moore does not teach: at least one active positioner assembly coupled to the opposite side of the table with respect to the at least one passive positioner assembly.
Newkirk teaches at least one active positioner assembly coupled to the opposite side of the table with respect to the at least one passive positioner assembly (202—Fig.20; para [0100]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Moore (directed to a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities) and Newkirk (directed to a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities) and arrived at a patient support pad a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to adjust a height of a patient support as needed to suit the size of a patient as taught in Newkirk (para [0100]).
As per claim 21, Moore (as modified) teaches
The method of claim 20, wherein: the passive positioner assembly is one of a sternal passive positioner assembly, a sacral passive positioner assembly, and a thigh passive positioner assembly (36 & 38—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25: passive positioner can be positioned at various locations along the patient support via rail 14); and
the active positioner assembly is one of a sternal active positioner assembly, a sacral active positioner assembly, and a thigh active positioner assembly (40 & 42—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25: active positioner can be positioned at various locations along the patient support via rail 14).
As per claim 22, Moore (as modified) teaches
The method of claim 20, further comprising engaging a lock of the at least one active positioner assembly (26, 28 40 & 42, 44—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25), engaging the lock comprising lockably maintaining a position of a positioning pad of the at least one active positioner (46 & 48 & 74—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 20—25) assembly with respect to an adjustment hub of the at least one active positioner assembly (Col 3 lines 20—25).
As per claim 23, Moore (as modified) teaches:
The method of claim 20, wherein the at least one active positioner assembly (40 & 42—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25: active positioner can be positioned at various locations along the patient support via rail 14) comprises:
a pad (40—Fig.2; Col 3 lines 6—25); a positioner arm coupled to the pad (26, 28—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25); and an adjustment hub coupled to the positioner arm (30,56, 58, 60,61 &62—Fig.1; Col 2 lines 62—65) and comprising
a lock (46 & 48 & 74—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 20—25) and a drive element (50—Fig.1; Col 3 Lines 17—25: locks pad in desired position);
wherein dynamically adjusting the at least one active positioner assembly (50—Fig.1; Col 3 Lines 17—25: locks pad in desired position) comprises:
disengaging the drive element from the positioner arm; positioning the pad close to a patient engaged by the at least one active positioner assembly (50—Fig.1; Col 3 Lines 17—25: locks pad in desired position relative to positioner arm); engaging the drive element with the positioner arm; and dynamically adjusting, while loaded, a position of the pad by moving the drive element to move the positioner arm (50—Fig.1; Col 3 Lines 17—25: locks pad in desired position relative to positioner arm).
As per claim 23, Moore (as modified) teaches:
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 1, wherein the active positioning assembly is configured to apply a force in a first direction (40—Fig.2; Col 3 lines 6—25) and the passive positioning assembly is configured to apply a force in a second direction that is opposite the first direction to create forced lordosis of a patient positioned within the patient positioning apparatus (36 & 38—Fig.1; Col 3 lines 6—25: passive positioner can be positioned at various locations along the patient support via rail 14).
As per claim 27, Moore (as modified) teaches
The patient positioning apparatus of claim 13, wherein the drive element is configured to disengage from the positioner arm by being offset in a transverse direction from an axis of the first positioner arm (70 & 75—Fig.3 Col 3 lines 39—51 rack and pinion), the drive element being disengaged from the notches or teeth of the positioner arm while offset in the transverse direction (70 & 75—Fig.3 Col 3 lines 39—51 rack and pinion).
As per claim 28, Moore (as modified) teaches
The method of claim 20, wherein: the passive positioner assembly is coupled to the first side of the table and applies force in a first direction (40—Fig.2; Col 3 lines 6—25).
Moore does not teach; and the active positioner assembly is coupled to the second side of the table and applies force in a second direction that is opposite direction from the first direction.
Newkirk teaches; and the active positioner assembly is coupled to the second side of the table and applies force in a second direction that is opposite direction from the first direction (200—Fig.20; para [0100]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Moore (directed to a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities) and Newkirk (directed to a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities) and arrived at a patient support pad a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to adjust a height of a patient support as needed to suit the size of a patient as taught in Newkirk (para [0100]).
Claim(s) 19 & 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent 4,526,355 A to Moore in view of U.S Patent Application 2022/0241128 A1 to Newkirk in view of U.S Patent Application 2022/0280367 A1 to Diodato (Diodato hereafter).
As per claim 19, Moore (as modified) teaches The patient positioning system of claim 15.
Moore does not teach, further comprising an inflatable bladder.
Diodato teaches further comprising an inflatable bladder (claim 18).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Moore (directed to a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities) and Diodato (directed to support comprising an inflatable bladder) and
arrived at a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities comprising an inflatable bladder. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to adjust a height of a patient support as need as taught in Diodato (Claim 18).
As per claim 25, Moore (as modified) teaches The method of claim 20.
Moore does not teach, further comprising: placing an inflatable bladder under the patient's decubitus flank; and selectively inflating the bladder.
Diodato teaches further comprising: placing an inflatable bladder under the patient's decubitus flank (134—Fig.6; para [0055]: support may be positioned under patient); and selectively inflating the bladder (claim 18).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Moore (directed to a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities) and Diodato (directed to support comprising an inflatable bladder) and
arrived at a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities comprising an inflatable bladder. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to adjust a height of a patient support as need as taught in Diodato (Claim 18).
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent 4,526,355 A to Moore in view of U.S Patent Application 20130305456 A1 to Thompson (Thompson hereafter).
As per claim 24, Moore (as modified) teaches The method of claim 20.
Moore does not teach , further comprising placing an axillary roll under the patient's decubitus armpit.
Thompson teaches, further comprising placing an axillary roll under the patient's decubitus armpit (18—Fig.1; para [0013]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Moore (directed to a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities) and Diodato (directed to a support including an axillary roll) and
arrived at a patient support pad provided with adjustable capabilities including an axillary roll. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to accommodate an axillary region of the patient to support the patient's thoracic spine at a predetermined angle relative to the operating table as taught in Thompson (para [0013]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 1—4, filed 10/02/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1—18, 20—23 under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Claim(s) 1—18, 20—23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent 4,526,355 A to Moore in view of U.S Patent Application 2022/0241128 A1 to Newkirk .
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
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 Deborah T Gedeon whose telephone number is (571)272-8863. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30am to 4:30pm EST.
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.
/D.T.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3673 03/22/2026
/JUSTIN C MIKOWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3673