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 .
Status of the Application
Claims 1—20 have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on merits. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on May 30, 2025 has been acknowledged by the Office.
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.
Claim 10 and 20 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.
Claims 10 and 20 recite “each of the platform length and the platform width being greater than a stance distance of the user stance.” as such it is unclear the dimensions of the user stance as claimed. The examiner interprets the users stance distance as a distance of which patient capable of standing on the platform.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 10, 11 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S Patent 2,941,215 A to Johnson (Johnson hereafter).
As per claim 1, Johnson teaches:
A bed step apparatus (B-Fig.1; Col 2 lines 3—13) for providing an elevated support surface intermediate a reference support surface (12-Fig.1; Col 2 lines 3—13: intermediate surface coplanar with element 12) and
an upper bed surface (annotated Fig.1 upper bed surface), the bed step apparatus comprising:
a bed-facing side (15-Fig.4; Col 2 lines 14—25), a back side opposite the bed-facing side (annotated 30-Fig.1; Col 2 lines 51—60), and opposed platform access sides extending intermediate the bed-facing side and the back side (annotated 30-Fig.1; Col 2 lines 51—60), the bed-facing side being positionable next to a bedside (annotated 15-Fig.4: generally shown bed-facing side next to bed);
a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane (annotated B-Fig.1; Col 2 lines 3—13); and a platform support mechanism (14-Fig.4; Col 3 lines 15—20), the platform support mechanism supporting the platform in spaced relation relative to the reference surface and the upper bed surface (14-Fig.4; Col 2 lines 15—30) ;
at least one of the platform access sides being configured to provide access to the platform in a first direction so as to enable the user to stand thereupon in a user stance facing the first direction (annotated B-Fig.1; Col 2 lines 3—13); the bed-facing side being configured to provide access to the upper bed surface in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (annotated Fig.1), the platform being configured to enable the user to turn the user stance to face the second direction from the first direction (annotated Fig.1).
PNG
media_image1.png
705
906
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per claim 10, Johnson teaches:
The bed step apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the platform comprises a platform length and a platform width (B-Fig.1; Col 2 lines 3—13: platform length and width generally shown), each of the platform length and the platform width being greater than a stance distance of the user stance(Col 2 lines 51—59: patient is able to place their weight on platform).
As per claim 11, Johnson teaches:
A step apparatus (B-Fig.1; Col 2 lines 3—13) for providing an elevated support surface intermediate a reference support surface (12-Fig.1; Col 2 lines 3—13: intermediate surface coplanar with element 12) and
a target support surface (annotated Fig.1 above upper bed surface), the step apparatus comprising: a front side (15-Fig.4; Col 2 lines 14—25), a back side (annotated 30-Fig.1 above; Col 2 lines 51—60), and laterally opposed platform access sides (annotated 30-Fig.1 above; Col 2 lines 51—60), the front side being positionable adjacent the target support surface (annotated 15-Fig.4 above: generally shown front side adjacent to bed); a platform extending intermediate the front side, the back side, and the laterally opposed platform access sides (annotated B-Fig.1 above; Col 2 lines 3—13); and
a platform support mechanism (14-Fig.4; Col 3 lines 15—20), the platform support mechanism supporting the platform in spaced relation relative to the reference surface and the target support surface (14-Fig.4; Col 2 lines 15—30);
at least one of the platform access sides being configured to provide access to the platform in a first direction so as to enable the user to stand thereupon in a user stance facing the first direction (annotated B-Fig.1 above; Col 2 lines 3—13); and the front side being configured to provide access to the target support surface in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (annotated Fig.1 above), the platform being configured to enable the user to turn the user stance to face the second direction from the first direction (annotated Fig.1 above).
As per claim 20, Johnson teaches:
The step apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the platform comprises a platform length and a platform width (B-Fig.1; Col 2 lines 3—13: platform length and width generally shown), each of the platform length and the platform width being greater than a stance distance of the user stance (Col 2 lines 51—59: patient is able to place their weight on platform).
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) 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 12, 13, 16, 18 & 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent 2,941,215 A to Johnson in view of U.S Patent Application 2022/0241126 A1 to Baiera (Baiera hereafter) .
As per claim 2, Johnson teaches: The bed step apparatus according to claim 1.
Johnson does not teach, wherein the bed-facing side comprises a first hand support rail and a second hand support rail spaced from the first hand support rail, the first and second hand support rails being configured to provide access to the upper bed surface by way of at least one open configuration.
Baiera teaches, wherein the bed-facing side comprises a first hand support rail and a second hand support rail spaced from the first hand support rail (1930-Fig.24; para [0100]), the first and second hand support rails being configured to provide access to the upper bed surface by way of at least one open configuration (1930-Fig.30; para [0100]: open configuration may be considered when hand supports are positioned away from the seat assembly).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Johnson (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane) and Baiera (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface) and arrived at a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination for additional assistance/security when stepping onto and/or off of the step assembly as taught in Baiera (para [0101]).
As per claim 3, Johnson teaches: The bed step apparatus according to claim 2.
Johnson does not teach, wherein the first and second hand support rails are alignable in a first hand rail support plane.
PNG
media_image2.png
468
647
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Baiera teaches, wherein the first and second hand support rails are alignable in a first hand rail support plane (annotated 1930-Fig.30; 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 Johnson (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane) and Baiera (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface) and arrived at a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination for additional assistance/security when stepping onto and/or off of the step assembly as taught in Baiera (para [0101]).
As per claim 5, Johnson teaches: The bed step apparatus according to claim 2.
Johnson does not teach, wherein at least one of the first and second hand support rails are pivotal about a support axis of rotation.
Baiera teaches, wherein at least one of the first and second hand support rails are pivotal about a support axis of rotation (annotated 1930-Fig.30; para [0100]: hand support rails pivot between first and second direction).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Johnson (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane) and Baiera (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface) and arrived at a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination for additional assistance/security when stepping onto and/or off of the step assembly as taught in Baiera (para [0101]).
As per claim 8, Johnson teaches: The bed step apparatus according to claim 1.
Johnson does not explicitly teach, wherein the platform support mechanism is vertically adjustable for adjusting a distance of the platform relative to at least the reference surface.
Baiera teaches, wherein the platform support mechanism is vertically adjustable for adjusting a distance of the platform relative to at least the reference surface (1970-Fig.24; para; [0095] & [0100]: height adjustment mechanisms).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Johnson (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane) and Baiera (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform support mechanism is vertically adjustable) and arrived at a bed step apparatus provided with a platform support mechanism that is vertically adjustable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to provide a step assembly with adjustable heights to help a user enter a shower or bed as taught in Baiera (para [0095]).
As per claim 9, Johnson (as modified) teaches: The bed step apparatus according to claim 2.
Johnson does not teach, wherein at least one of the first hand support rail and a second hand support rail comprises an apparatus anchor assembly, the apparatus anchor assembly being positionable intermediate an upper bed structure and a lower bed structure, a weight of the upper bed structure for securing the apparatus anchor assembly intermediate the upper and lower bed structures.
Baiera teaches, wherein at least one of the first hand support rail and a second hand support rail comprises an apparatus anchor assembly (880-Fig.8D; para; [0082] anchor assembly positioned between upper bed structure and lower bed structure), the apparatus anchor assembly being positionable intermediate an upper bed structure and a lower bed structure (para [0082]), a weight of the upper bed structure for securing the apparatus anchor assembly intermediate the upper and lower bed structures (para [0082]: to help stabilize the bed step stool when being used).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Johnson (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane) and Baiera (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with an apparatus anchor assembly) and arrived at a bed step apparatus provided with an apparatus anchor assembly. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to help stabilize the bed step stool when being used as taught in Baiera (para [0082]).
As per claim 12, Johnson teaches: The step apparatus according to claim 11.
Johnson does not teach, wherein the front side comprises a first support rail and a second support rail spaced from the first support rail configured to provide access to the target support surface when in an open configuration.
Baiera teaches, wherein the front side comprises a first support rail and a second support rail spaced from the first support rail (1930-Fig.24; para [0100]), configured to provide access to the target support surface when in an open configuration (1930-Fig.30; para [0100]: open configuration may be considered when hand supports are positioned away from the seat assembly).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Johnson (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane) and Baiera (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface) and arrived at a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination for additional assistance/security when stepping onto and/or off of the step assembly as taught in Baiera (para [0101]).
As per claim 13, Johnson teaches: The step apparatus according to claim 12.
Johnson does not teach, wherein the first and second support rails are pivotal about a support axis of rotation and alignable in a first support plane to effect either the open configuration or a closed configuration.
Baiera teaches, wherein the first and second support rails are pivotal about a support axis of rotation (annotated 1930-Fig.30 above; para [0100]: hand support rails pivot between first and second direction) and alignable in a first support plane to effect either the open configuration or a closed configuration (annotated 1930-Fig.30 above; 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 Johnson (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane) and Baiera (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface) and arrived at a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination for additional assistance/security when stepping onto and/or off of the step assembly as taught in Baiera (para [0101]).
As per claim 16, Johnson teaches: The step apparatus according to claim 12.
Johnson does not teach , wherein at least one of the first and second support rails comprises an upper support portion and a lower support portion.
Baiera teaches, wherein at least one of the first and second support rails comprises an upper support portion and a lower support portion (annotated 1930-Fig.30; 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 Johnson (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane) and Baiera (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface wherein at least one of the first and second support rails comprises an upper support portion and a lower support portion) and arrived at a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane with a first and second handles configured to provide access to an upper bed surface wherein at least one of the first and second support rails comprises an upper support portion and a lower support portion. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination for additional assistance/security when stepping onto and/or off of the step assembly as taught in Baiera (para [0101]).
As per claim 18, Johnson teaches: The step apparatus according to claim 11.
Johnson does not teach, wherein the platform support mechanism is adjustable for adjusting a distance of the platform relative to at least the reference support surface.
Baiera teaches, wherein the platform support mechanism is adjustable for adjusting a distance of the platform relative to at least the reference support surface (1970-Fig.24; para; [0095] & [0100]: height adjustment mechanisms).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Johnson (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane) and Baiera (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform support mechanism is vertically adjustable) and arrived at a bed step apparatus provided with a platform support mechanism that is vertically adjustable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to provide a step assembly with adjustable heights to help a user enter a shower or bed as taught in Baiera (para [0095]).
As per claim 19, Johnson teaches: The step apparatus according to claim 12.
Johnson does not teach wherein at least one of the first and second support rails comprises an apparatus anchor assembly, the apparatus anchor assembly being positionable intermediate an upper structure and a lower structure, a weight of the upper structure for securing the apparatus anchor assembly intermediate the upper and lower structures.
Baiera teaches, wherein at least one of the first and second support rails comprises an apparatus anchor assembly (880-Fig.8D; para; [0082] anchor assembly positioned between upper bed structure and lower bed structure), the apparatus anchor assembly being positionable intermediate an upper structure and a lower structure (para [0082]), a weight of the upper structure for securing the apparatus anchor assembly intermediate the upper and lower structures (para [0082]: to help stabilize the bed step stool when being used).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Johnson (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane) and Baiera (directed to a bed step apparatus provided with an apparatus anchor assembly) and arrived at a bed step apparatus provided with an apparatus anchor assembly. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to help stabilize the bed step stool when being used as taught in Baiera (para [0082]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4, 6, 7, 14, 15 & 17 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.
Regarding dependent claims 4 & 14, the closest prior art of record U.S Patent Application 2022/0241126 A1 to Baiera teaches a bed step apparatus provided with a platform extending intermediate the bed-facing side, the back side, and the opposed platform access sides, the platform extending in a platform plane. The combination structure present in claim 4 & 14 was not found in U.S. Patent Application 2022/0241126 A1. Specifically, the limitation with respect to:
Claim 4: the back side comprises a third hand support rail, the third hand support rail extending in a second hand support plane parallel to the first hand support plane, the first and second hand support planes defining an apparatus access pathway extending at least along the first direction
Claim 14: wherein the back side comprises a third support rail, the third support rail extending in a second support plane parallel to the first support plane, the first and second support planes defining an apparatus access pathway extending at least along the first direction.
The examiner notes that bed stools configure to assist a person onto an upper surfacer of a bed are common in the art. The examiner further submits that the prior art teaches first and second hand support rails alignable in a first hand rail support plane. The prior art fails to teach the following features in combination with a third rail positioned parallel to a first rail support plane further providing access along a first direction.
The teachings of U.S. Patent 6,860,281 B1 to Clift teaches a sitting and standing apparatus provided with a first and second hand rail support aligned in a first rail support plane. However, teachings were silent with respect to a first and second hand rail support aligned in a first rail support plane in combination with a third rail positioned parallel to a first rail support plane further providing access along a first direction.
The teachings of U.S. Patent Application 2012/0061181 A1 to Onobrakpeya teaches a step for an examination table. While Onobrakpeya may suggest a bed step provided with a first and second hand rail support, the teachings are silent with respect to the combination of the first and second hand rails in combination with third rail positioned parallel to a first rail support plane further providing access along a first direction. Claims 6, & 15 depend on claims 4 and 14 respectively. Therefor upon exhausting the art, it is concluded by the examiner for those reasons stated above that inconsideration with deficiencies of the prior art, that applicant’s invention would be considered non-obvious in light of the prior art.
Regarding dependent claim 7 & 17, the prior art fails to teach where in the upper and lower supports of the first and second hand rails form a bifurcated gate when aligned in a closed configuration thereby preventing a user for entering the space. While bifurcated gates may be common in the art, further modifying U.S Patent 2,941,215 A to Johnson as modified by U.S Patent Application 2022/0241126 A1 to Baiera first and second hand rails to teach hand rails configured to provide a bifuricated gate may be considered hindsight reasoning. Therefor upon exhausting the art, it is concluded by the examiner for those reasons stated above that inconsideration with deficiencies of the prior art, that applicant’s invention would be considered non-obvious in light of the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent 6,860,281 B1 to Clift teaches a sitting and standing apparatus provided with a first and second hand rail support aligned in a first rail support plane.
U.S. Patent Application 2012/0061181 A1 to Onobrakpeya teaches a step for an examination table.
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.
/DEBORAH TALITHA GEDEON/Examiner, Art Unit 3673
07/21/2026
Prosecution Insights