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 43-62 are pending in this application. This communication is the first action on its merits. The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) filed on 9/5/2025 have been considered 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.
Claims 43-45, 49, and 52-61 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lambarth (US 20200155393 A1) in view of Shan (US 20140123392 A1).
Regarding Claim 43, Lambarth discloses a patient support coupler (See Fig. 4A, patient support housing 52) for a patient support (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20), the patient support including a deck (deck 26), a mattress supportable on the deck (mattress 38 on deck 26), the mattress including a head end, a foot end, and two opposed sides (See Fig. 2, mattress 38 having a head end, foot end, and opposing sides), the patient support coupler comprising: a mattress coupler operable to couple the patient support coupler to the mattress (See Fig. 4A-B and 5, mattress housing 54).
PNG
media_image1.png
538
690
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
768
559
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
368
550
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Lambarth fails to explicitly disclose the deck including an opening, and a latching mechanism configured to releasably engage the patient support to releasably couple the patient support coupler to the patient support, the latching mechanism including a spring biased catch that releasably engages the patient support, the latching mechanism including a release operable by a user to disengage the spring biased catch from the patient support to facilitate removal of the patient support coupler from the patient support.
However, Shan teaches the deck including an opening (See Fig. 1-2, bedplate 1 having latch 3 comprising chute 36), and a latching mechanism configured to releasably engage the patient support to releasably couple the patient support coupler to the patient support (See Fig. 1-3, hook 4 latches onto latch 3), the latching mechanism including a spring biased catch that releasably engages the patient support, the latching mechanism including a release operable by a user to disengage the spring biased catch from the patient support to facilitate removal of the patient support coupler from the patient support (“To adjust the mechanism, a user twists the handle so that the bolt located through and passing through the spring receives pressure. The end of the hook is lodged through the top surface of the through hole in one end of the buckle fixing block and shifts to overcome the spring force so the hook end is located entirely at the stationary block. The action and force of the spring sets the hook and latch together to combine them into one member”; [0014]).
PNG
media_image4.png
329
510
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
194
521
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
201
344
media_image6.png
Greyscale
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 Lambarth by adding the latching mechanism taught by Shan. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “prevents the mattress from slipping and improves the overall comfort of the electric bed”; (Shan, [Abstract]). 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.
Regarding Claim 44, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support coupler (See Fig. 4A, patient support housing 52) of claim 43 comprising an engagement body operable to engage the patient support to facilitate coupling the patient support coupler to the patient support (See Fig. 5-10, “Sloped interior surface 80 is dimensioned and sloped to matingly receive a similarly sloped projection surface 82”; [0081]).
PNG
media_image7.png
327
521
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
554
703
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
555
742
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 45, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support coupler (See Fig. 4A, patient support housing 52) of claim 44.
Lambarth fails to explicitly teach wherein the latching mechanism is configured to releasably engage the patient support to releasably couple the patient support coupler to the patient support in cooperation with the engagement body.
However, Shan teaches wherein the latching mechanism is configured to releasably engage the patient support to releasably couple the patient support coupler to the patient support in cooperation with the engagement body (See Fig. 1-3, hooks 4 of mattress 2 releasably coupled to latch 3 of bedplate 1).
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 Lambarth by adding the releasable latching mechanism taught by Shan. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “release the mattress”; (Shan, [0015]). 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.
Regarding Claim 49, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support coupler (See Fig. 4A, patient support housing 52) of claim 44 wherein the engagement body includes electrical contacts configured to electrically connect with support-side electrical contacts of the patient support for transmission of power and/or data to the engagement body (See Fig. 11-12 and 16-17, inductive coil 58 connecting to coil 56 creating an electrical current connection transmitting power and data between support 20 and mattress 38).
PNG
media_image10.png
728
571
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
683
475
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 52, Lambarth discloses a patient support for a patient (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20), said patient support comprising: a deck (deck 26); a mattress supportable on the deck (mattress 38 on deck 26), the mattress including a head end, a foot end, and two opposed sides (See Fig. 2, mattress 38 having a head end, foot end, and opposing sides), the mattress including an electrical system configured to at least one of 1) receive power from a power source (inductive coupler 50 and mattress controller 62 help power mattress 38) and 2) include a communication interface for communicating data between the mattress and another device (See Fig. 4A and 4B, control panel 92); a support side coupler operably to facilitate restraining the mattress from moving in at least one direction relative to the deck (See Fig. 4A-B and 5, patient support housing 52); and a mattress side coupler operatively connected to or part of the mattress (See Fig. 4A-B and 5, mattress housing 54), the mattress side coupler configured to mechanically couple to the support side coupler to couple the mattress to the support side coupler and facilitate restraining the mattress relative to the deck (See Fig. 7-10, housings 52 and 54 align and mate with each other, only when alignment is proper, preventing rotation of the mattress with respect to the deck).
Lambarth fails to explicitly disclose the mattress side coupler including a spring biased catch that releasably engages the support side coupler, the mattress side coupler including a release operable by a user to disengage the spring biased catch from the support side coupler to facilitate removal of the mattress side coupler from the support side coupler.
However, Shan teaches the mattress side coupler including a spring biased catch that releasably engages the support side coupler, the mattress side coupler including a release operable by a user to disengage the spring biased catch from the support side coupler to facilitate removal of the mattress side coupler from the support side coupler (“To adjust the mechanism, a user twists the handle so that the bolt located through and passing through the spring receives pressure. The end of the hook is lodged through the top surface of the through hole in one end of the buckle fixing block and shifts to overcome the spring force so the hook end is located entirely at the stationary block. The action and force of the spring sets the hook and latch together to combine them into one member”; [0014]).
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 Lambarth by adding the latching mechanism taught by Shan. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “prevents the mattress from slipping and improves the overall comfort of the electric bed”; (Shan, [Abstract]). 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.
Regarding Claim 53, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20) of claim 52 wherein the support side coupler includes a first support side electrical contact (See Fig. 11-12 and 16-17, inductive coil 56), and wherein the mattress side coupler including a first mattress side electrical contact configured to electrically connect to the first support side electrical contact of the support side coupler (See Fig. 11-12 and 16-17, inductive coil 58 connecting to coil 56 creating an electrical current connection).
Regarding Claim 54, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20) of claim 53 wherein the first support side electrical contact is electrically coupled to a power source and operable to supply power to the electrical system of the mattress via a connection with the first mattress side electrical contact (See Fig. 13A, “inductive transfer of electrical energy from patient support 20 to mattress 38 may be carried out by a controller 60 (FIGS. 13A-13C) positioned on patient support apparatus 20 that runs a changing electrical current through patient support coil 56”; [0080]).
PNG
media_image12.png
548
759
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 55, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20) of claim 53 wherein: the support side coupler includes a second support side electrical contact (See Fig. 16-17, coil 56 includes a pair of wires 98); and the mattress side coupler includes a second mattress side electrical contact configured to electrically connect to the second support side electrical contact (See Fig. 16-17, coil 58 includes a pair of wires 100 that electrically connect to the pair of wires 98).
Regarding Claim 56, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20) of claim 55 wherein the second support side electrical contact is coupled to the other device and operable to transfer communication between the other device and the electrical system via a connection with the second mattress side electrical contact (See Fig. 17, control panel 92 receives data from controllers 60, 62 which are connected to coils 56, 58, respectively.
Regarding Claim 57, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20) of claim 55 wherein the communication interface is configured to at least one of receive and transmit a discrete signal from the other device via the second support side electrical contact and the second mattress side electrical contact (See Fig. 11-12, electrical communication network 102 comprising node #4 to send messages between the support apparatus 20 and mattress 38).
Regarding Claim 58, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20) of claim 53.
Lambarth fails to explicitly teach wherein the support side coupler includes a recess operable to receive an engagement body of the mattress side coupler and to restrain the mattress side coupler from moving laterally and vertically with respect to the deck.
However, Shan teaches the support side coupler includes a recess operable to receive an engagement body of the mattress side coupler and to restrain the mattress side coupler from moving laterally and vertically with respect to the deck (See Fig. 1-3, chute 36 of latch 3 when engaged with hook 4 prevents laterally and vertical movement of mattress 2).
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 Lambarth by adding the recess taught by Shan. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “prevents the mattress from slipping and improves the overall comfort of the electric bed”; (Shan, [Abstract]). 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.
Regarding Claim 59, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patent support (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20) of claim 52 comprising: the mattress including a patient support surface formed by a plurality of inflatable bladders (“mattress 38 may be a mattress that includes one or more internal fluid bladders”; [0076]), the mattress having a recessed portion beneath the patient support surface; and an enclosure housed in the recessed portion and including the electrical system (“Mattress control box 94 is also shaped to be received within a similarly shaped recess (not shown) within mattress 38”; [0090]), the electrical system including a pump for directing air to the plurality of inflatable bladders and a controller for operating the pump (“mattress control box 94 that is designed to house the blower or pump of mattress 38, as well as mattress controller 62”; [0090]).
Regarding Claim 60, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20) of claim 52 wherein the mattress side coupler includes an engagement body operable to engage the patient support to facilitate coupling the mattress side coupler to the patient support (See Fig. 5-10, “Sloped interior surface 80 is dimensioned and sloped to matingly receive a similarly sloped projection surface 82”; [0081]).
Regarding Claim 61, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20) of claim 60.
Lambarth fails to explicitly teach wherein the mattress side coupler is configured to releasably engage the patient support to releasably couple the mattress side coupler to the patient support in cooperation with the engagement body.
However, Shan teaches wherein the mattress side coupler is configured to releasably engage the patient support to releasably couple the mattress side coupler to the patient support in cooperation with the engagement body (See Fig. 1-3, hooks 4 of mattress 2 releasably coupled to latch 3 of bedplate 1).
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 Lambarth by adding the releasable latching mechanism taught by Shan. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “release the mattress”; (Shan, [0015]). 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.
Claims 46-48, 50, and 62 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lambarth (US 20200155393 A1) in view of Shan (US 20140123392 A1), further in view of Switzer (CA 2747001 C).
Regarding Claim 46, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support coupler (See Fig. 4A, patient support housing 52) of claim 44.
Lambarth in view of Shan fails to explicitly teach wherein the engagement body is operable to engage an edge of the deck.
However, Switzer teaches wherein the engagement body is operable to engage an edge of the deck (See Fig. 9, flange 42 and bracket 30 engage edge of foundation 18).
PNG
media_image13.png
620
550
media_image13.png
Greyscale
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 Lambarth in view of Shan by engaging the edge of the deck as taught by Switzer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “prevent the body support from sliding off the adjustable base”; (Switzer, [0003]). 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.
Regarding Claim 47, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support coupler (See Fig. 4A, patient support housing 52) of claim 46.
Lambarth fails to explicitly teach wherein the engagement body is receivable by the opening of the deck, and wherein the edge defines at least a portion of the opening.
However, Shan teaches wherein the engagement body is receivable by the opening of the deck (See Fig. 1-3, hook 4 is received in chute 36), and wherein the edge defines at least a portion of the opening (See Fig. 1-3, hook 4 is latched onto an edge of chute 36).
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 Lambarth by adding the latching mechanism taught by Shan. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “prevents the mattress from slipping and improves the overall comfort of the electric bed”; (Shan, [Abstract]). 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.
Regarding Claim 48, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support coupler (See Fig. 4A, patient support housing 52) of claim 46.
Lambarth in view of Shan fails to explicitly teach wherein the edge corresponds to a perimeter edge of the deck.
However, Switzer teaches wherein the edge corresponds to a perimeter edge of the deck (See Fig. 9, slot 40 at perimeter edge of foundation 18).
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 Lambarth in view of Shan by engaging the perimeter edge of the deck as taught by Switzer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “prevent the body support from sliding off the adjustable base”; (Switzer, [0003]). 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.
Regarding Claim 50, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support coupler (See Fig. 4A, patient support housing 52) of claim 44.
Lambarth in view of Shan fails to explicitly teach wherein the spring biased catch is operable to engage an edge of the opening of the deck to facilitate engagement between the patient support coupler and the deck.
However, Switzer teaches wherein the spring biased catch is operable to engage an edge of the opening of the deck to facilitate engagement between the patient support coupler and the deck (See Fig. 9, spring 46 engages plate 48 at slot 40 to facilitate engagement).
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 Lambarth in view of Shan by adding the engaged spring as taught by Switzer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “prevent the body support from sliding off the adjustable base”; (Switzer, [0003]). 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.
Regarding Claim 62, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support (See Fig. 2, patient support apparatus 20) of claim 60.
Lambarth in view of Shan fails to explicitly teach wherein the spring biased catch is operable to engage an edge of an opening of the deck to facilitate engagement with the mattress side coupler.
However, Switzer teaches wherein the spring biased catch is operable to engage an edge of an opening of the deck to facilitate engagement with the mattress side coupler (See Fig. 9, spring 46 engages plate 48 at slot 40 to facilitate engagement).
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 Lambarth in view of Shan by adding the engaged spring as taught by Switzer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “prevent the body support from sliding off the adjustable base”; (Switzer, [0003]). 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 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lambarth (US 20200155393 A1) in view of Shan (US 20140123392 A1), further in view of Hensley (US 20120124743 A1).
Regarding Claim 51, Lambarth, as modified, teaches the patient support coupler (See Fig. 4A, patient support housing 52) of claim 44.
Lambarth in view of Shan fails to explicitly teach wherein the mattress coupler includes a strap.
However, Hensley teaches wherein the mattress coupler includes a strap (See Fig. 18, strap 152).
PNG
media_image14.png
422
518
media_image14.png
Greyscale
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 Lambarth in view of Shan by adding the straps as taught by Hensley. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to “secure the patient”; (Hensley, [0048]), the straps are further “extended around the mattress 18”; (Hensley, [0048]), securing the mattress 18 to the deck 16. 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 20140304914 A1: Schnake discloses a hidden mattress retention system comprise a spring biased latching mechanism between the mattress and frame.
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