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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 9-11, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE29817076 to Vetter.
Regarding claim 1, Vetter teaches a device (Figure 1) for relieving pressure (para [0009]) exerted on a wheelchair user sitting in a wheelchair that has two driving wheels (large, rear wheelchair wheels shown in drawings), a seat and a back support (illustrated), the device comprising:- a motion prevention structure (para [0019]; wheelchair wheels are driven to a stop 6 and locked using two rods) arranged and configured to prevent at least one of the two driving wheels from moving forward while maintaining the two driving wheels in a fixed horizontal and vertical position (wheelchair is fixed to the device to move about a pivot point 8 that corresponds to the wheel axle so that the wheel remains fixed vertically and horizontally, even when the wheelchair is pivoted); and a moveably mounted support structure 1, 2, arranged to allow the wheelchair to be rotated about a wheel axis at 8 of the two driving wheels, thereby tilting the wheelchair backwards while supporting the back support and maintaining the two driving wheels in the fixed horizontal and vertical position (the figures show the wheelchair and user in upright and backwardly tilted positions).
Regarding claim 2, Vetter teaches a frame 4-7, wherein the support structure 1, 2, is connected to the frame, moveably arranged relative to the frame, and configured to support the back support (as illustrated).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, one or more moveably arranged locking structures arranged and configured to engage with at least one of the two driving wheels to prevent at least one of the two driving wheels from moving forward (para [0011] and [0019] recite drive wheel locking structure).
Regarding claim 7, Vetter teaches a control member (lifting mechanism 9 in the form of a motor M; para [0015]) that is arranged and configured to provide a force large enough to maintain the back support in a position.
Regarding claim 9, Vetter teaches the structure, as discussed above and preventing at least one of the two driving wheels from moving forward while maintaining the two driving wheels in a fixed horizontal and vertical position (wheel locks, para [0011]); rotating the support structure about the wheel axis 8 of the two driving wheels (pivot 8 coincides with drive wheel axle; para [0017]), thereby tilting the back support backwards while supporting the back support with the support structure; and maintaining the back support in the tilted orientation for a time period (motor M of lifting mechanism controls the position of the back support).
Regarding claim 10, Vetter teaches the support structure 1, 2, is moveably arranged (pivots about axis 8).
Regarding claim 11, Vetter teaches applying one or more moveably arranged locking structures to engage with at least one of the two driving wheels to prevent at least one of the two driving wheels from moving forward (locking wheels in para [0011] and [0019]).
Regarding claim 14, Vetter teaches applying a control member 9, M, to provide a force large enough to maintain the back support in a position (motor M of lifting mechanism 9 controls the position of the back support).
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 9-, 10, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zimmermann (USPN 4,725,188).
Regarding claim 1, Zimmermann teaches a device (Figure 1) for relieving pressure exerted on a wheelchair user sitting in a wheelchair that has two driving wheels, a seat, and a back support (Figure 1), the device comprising: a motion prevention structure ((track 4, 5, for receiving wheelchair drive wheels, Figures 1 and 2; col. 4, lines 22-30) arranged and configured to prevent at least one of the two driving wheels from moving forward while maintaining the two driving wheels in a fixed horizontal and vertical position; and-a moveably mounted support structure (tilt frame 21; Figures 1and 2) arranged to allow the wheelchair to be rotated about a wheel axis 26 of the two driving wheels, thereby tilting the wheelchair backwards while supporting the back support and maintaining the two driving wheels in the fixed horizontal and vertical position.
Regarding claim 2, the support structure 21 is connected to the frame 1, 2, moveably arranged relative to the frame, and configured to support the back support at 25.
Regarding claim 6, a resilient member (gas spring 27, 28; Figure 2; col. 4, lines 45-65) arranged in a manner in which its potential energy is increased when the back support is tilted backwards, wherein the resilient member is arranged and configured to assist the wheelchair user in tilting the back support forwards.
Regarding claim 9, Zimmermann teaches a method for rotating a wheelchair having two driving wheels, a seat and a back support by changing an orientation of the back support relative to vertical by rotating a support structure 21 of a device while the support structure supports the back support, the method comprising the following steps: preventing at least one of the two driving wheels from moving forward while maintaining the two driving wheels in a fixed horizontal and vertical position (wheels are held in tracks 4,5, that allow the wheelchair from to pivot about the drive wheel axis; rotating the support structure 21 about the wheel axis 26 of the two driving wheels, thereby tilting the back support backwards while supporting the back support with the support structure; and- maintaining the back support in the tilted orientation for a time period.
Regarding claim 10, Zimmermann teaches the support structure 21 is moveably arranged (pivotable about axis 26).
Regarding claim 13, Zimmermann teaches applying a resilient member (gas spring 27 28) arranged in a manner in which its potential energy is increased when the back support is tilted backwards; and applying the resilient member to assist the wheelchair user in tilting the back support forwards (col. 4, lines 45-65).
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(s) 5 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vetter in view of Petersen (USPN 5,421,693).
Regarding claims 5 and 12, Vetter lacks one or more arm rests in a position in which the wheelchair user can rest their arms on the one or more arm rests when sitting in the wheelchair.
Petersen teaches a device for relieving pressure exerted on a wheelchair user by pivoting the wheelchair. The device includes arm rests 62 in a position in which the wheelchair user can rest their arms on the one or more arm rests when sitting in the wheelchair.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the device of Vetter with arm rests in a position in which the wheelchair user can rest their arms on the one or more arm rests when sitting in the wheelchair, as taught by Petersen, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide support for the user’s arm and to position tilt controls at a location convenient to the wheelchair user.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vetter in view of Mesa et al. (USPN 6,015,256).
Vetter lacks an illustration and details regarding the wheel locking structure, in particular a moveably arranged locking structure arranged and configured to engage with a spoke of at least one of the two driving wheels of the wheelchair.
Mesa teaches a device (Figure 1) for relieving pressure exerted on a wheelchair user sitting in a wheelchair 50 (Figure 3) that has two driving wheels 52, a seat 56, and a back support 70 (Figure 3; col. 5, lines 37-42), the device comprising a moveably arranged locking structure 18 arranged and configured to engage with a spoke of at least one of the two driving wheels of the wheelchair to prevent the driving wheel(s) from moving forward (Figures 3, 4, 5A, 5B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the device of Vetter with a moveably arranged locking structure arranged and configured to engage with a spoke of at least one of the two driving wheels of the wheelchair, as taught by Mesa, with a reasonable expectation of success, to positively lock the wheels against unintended rotation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rachman teaches wheelchair lift and tilt device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anne Marie M. Boehler whose telephone number is (571)272-6641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8-5pm.
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, Valentin Neacsu can be reached at 571-272-6265. 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.
/ANNE MARIE M BOEHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/ab/
