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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 52-60 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 08/25/2026.
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 40, 41, 43, 47 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.
Regarding claims 40, 41, and 47, the limitation “substantially” renders the claims indefinite. It is not clear what qualifies to meet the associated limitations, or what approximation (of the limitations) qualifies.
Regarding claims 43 and 49, the limitation “and/or” renders the claims indefinite. It is not clear if the associated limitations in the claims are inclusively required or merely recited in the alternative. For the sake of claim interpretation, it is assumed that the list is inclusive and has the same interpretation as “or”. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 38-51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jackson et al. (US 2017/0181908 A1).
Regarding claim 38, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach a patient support comprising: a seat member (see [0401]); and a shin rest (see [0563]), wherein the inclination of the seat member is adjustable about a pivotable mount (see [0402]).
Regarding claim 39, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 38, wherein a horizontal location of the shin rest is adjustable (see [0563]).
Regarding claim 40, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 38, wherein the inclination of the seat member is adjustable from a first position that is horizontal or substantially horizontal to a second position that is positioned downward about the pivotable mount (see [0502]).
Regarding claim 41, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 40, wherein the second position is inclined downward at an angle of approximately 60° from horizontal (see [0502]).
Regarding claim 42, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 38, wherein the patient support is rotatable about a vertical axis (see [0502]).
Regarding claim 43, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 38, wherein the patient support is horizontally and/or vertically translatable (see [0502]).
Regarding claim 44, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 38, wherein the patient support is tiltable (see [0502]).
Regarding claim 45, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 38, wherein the patient support is adjustable between a first configuration comprising the seat member in a horizontal position for supporting a patient's buttocks to a second configuration comprising the seat member at an inclined position for supporting a patient's thighs (see [0560]).
Regarding claim 46, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 38, wherein the patient support is adjustable between a first configuration comprising the shin rest in a first horizontal location for contacting a patient's shins to a second configuration comprising the shin rest in a second horizontal location for contacting a patient's shins (see [0560]-[0563]).
Regarding claim 47, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 38, wherein the patient support is adjustable between a first configuration for supporting a seated or substantially seated patient to a second configuration for supporting a standing or substantially standing patient (see [0560]-[0563]).
Regarding claim 48, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 38, further comprising a back rest (see [0401]-[0402]).
Regarding claim 49, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 48, wherein the back rest is translatable and/or tiltable (see [0401]-[0402]).
Regarding claim 50, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 38, further comprising a head rest (see [0401]-[0402]).
Regarding claim 51, Jackson et al. (‘908) teach the patient support of claim 38, further comprising an arm rest (see [0401]-[0402]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK REMALY whose telephone number is (571)270-1491. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00 - 6:00.
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, Christopher Koharski can be reached at (571) 272-7230. 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.
/MARK D REMALY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights