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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 33-52 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12295756. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the limitations of the present claims are found in the claims of the subject patent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 48 and 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 48 there is no antecedent basis for the terms “the contact face of the release member” and “the planar contact face of the base member”. It appears that claim 48 should depend from claim 45 where these terms are introduced.
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) 33,35-37,44-49 and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by MCS Medical Concept Solutions GMBH(DE102017110001A1)(hereinafter MCS).
[claim 33] MCS teaches a support system(1) for supporting equipment(ABS), the support system being releasably connected to a patient transport system(paragraph [0003]), the support system comprising; a back support(5); at least one support face(upper face of 4) extending from the back support, the at least one support face arranged to support a given unit of equipment; and a release member(15) connected to one of an outer side of the back support, a lower end of the support system(fig 1), or an upper end of the support system, the release member being configured to releasably connect to the patient transport system for releasably connecting the support system to the patient transport system, as seen in figures 1 and 2.
[claim 35] further comprising: a bottom plate(4) connected to a lower end of the back support; and wherein the release member is connected to the bottom plate(fig 2).
[claim 36] wherein the release member has a first side(bottom side of 4) defining a planar contact face configured to contact a base member(3) connected to the patient transport system.
[claim 37] wherein the planar contact face defines an opening(10) configured to selectively receive a stop member(9) of the base member.
[claim 44] further comprising: a base member(3) releasably connected to the release member, the base member being configured to releasably connect to the patient transport system.
[claim 45] wherein the base member comprises a front face(top face with stop member 9) having a planar contact portion for contacting a contact face(lower face of 4) of the release member.
[claim 46] wherein the base member comprises a shoulder(11) extending around at least a portion of a periphery of the planar contact portion to define a pocket for receiving the release member(fig 2).
[claim 47] wherein the base member comprises an open access end(fig 2) through which the release member can be slidingly inserted and removed from the pocket(fig 1,2).
[claim 48] wherein: the contact face(bottom face of 4) of the release member defines an opening(10); the planar contact portion of the base member defines a recess(receiving 9 in fig 2); and the base member comprises a stop member(9) positioned in the recess, the stop member being moveable such that the stop member is received in the opening and retracted from the opening.
[claim 49] wherein the base member comprises an actuator(16) operatively connected to the stop member for moving the stop member.
[claim 52] wherein the patient transport system is one of a stretcher, a wheelchair, a portable bed(see paragraph[0003]), an ambulance, a plane, or a helicopter.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 34,41,42,50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCS as applied to claim 33 above.
[claim 34] MCS teaches a support system as detailed above, with a bottom plate(4) connected to a lower end of the back support and wherein the release member is connected to the bottom plate. However MCS may not teach a back plate connected to the outer side of the back support(5) and wherein the release member is connected to the back plate. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to use a back plate connected to the outer side of the back support to connect the release member, in place of the bottom plate, as a matter of simple design choice, as this would merely be changing the location of parts essential to the practice of the invention.
[claim 41,42] MCS teaches a support system as detailed above wherein the release member has a first side(bottom side of 4) defining a planar contact face configured to contact a base member(3) connected to the patient transport system. MCS however may not teach the use of an anti-friction layer disposed on the planar contact face. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to use any known anti-friction material to provide an anti-friction layer on the contact face, as this would have the predictable result of reducing friction between the sliding contacting parts and would merely be using known elements for their known functions.
[claim 50] MCS teaches a system as detailed above, wherein the given unit of equipment is a medical device, such as a defibrillator(see paragraph [0005]). MCS however may not specifically teach that the given unit of equipment is an infusion pump. Given that infusion pumps are known medical devices, and MCS specifically says the support system is for medical devices, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to use the support system with an infusion pump as the unit of equipment, as this would provide a means for supporting an infusion pump on a patient transport system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 38-40,43,51 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, as well as upon the filing of a Terminal Disclaimer as detailed above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With regards to claims 38-40, the prior art teaches a support system as defined by claim 36, as detailed above, however the prior art does not teach a support system of claim 36 with the release member having a collar extending from a second side as recited in claim 38.
With regards to claim 43 the prior art renders obvious a support system as defined by claim 41 as detailed above, however the prior art does not teach a disc connectable to the release member, with the anti-friction layer being an anti-friction coating applied to the disc as recited in claim 43.
With regards to claim 51 the prior art teaches a system as defined in claim 33, however the prior art does not teach the system wherein the release member is rotatable relative to the patient transport system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US12637880, US12310901, US12295756, US7884735.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY H DUCKWORTH whose telephone number is (571)272-2304. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 5712724979. 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.
/BRADLEY DUCKWORTH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights