Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/963,663

FLEXIBLE VIBRATION CUSHION AND CONTROL METHOD FOR DRIVING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 11, 2022
Examiner
BALLER, KELSEY E
Art Unit
3785
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Korea Advanced Institute Of Science And Technology
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
122 granted / 198 resolved
-8.4% vs TC avg
Strong +62% interview lift
Without
With
+62.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
224
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
49.1%
+9.1% vs TC avg
§102
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
§112
27.6%
-12.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 198 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 Election/Restrictions Claims 13-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 03/02/26. Claim Objections Claims 11-12 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 11, line 2 "a flexible cushion of claim 1" should be changed to --the flexible cushion of claim 1-- to correct antecedent basis. In claim 12, line 1 "a headrest of claim 11" should be changed to --the headrest of claim 11-- to correct antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required. 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 11-12 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. Claim 11 recites the limitation "the support structure" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. All remaining claims are rejected based on their dependency of a rejected base claim. 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Grundei (DE19628228). With respect to claim 1, Grundei discloses a flexible vibration cushion (10, fig 1) comprising a cover member (2, fig 2); a first soft filler material (3, fig 2) filled in the cover member (see fig 2 and [0019] of Grundei translation); and a vibration generation device (elements inside 2 in fig 2) comprising components made of a soft material (spheres in the liquid; see [0011] of Grundei translation) and disposed in the soft filler (see [0011] of Grundei translation), and configured to generate vibration as an electrostatic force is repeatedly generated and released (through the electrodes and rheological liquid; see [0019] where the current applied can be controlled repetitively). 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grundei (DE19628228) in view of Browne (2007/0246979). With respect to claim 11, Grundei discloses the cushion of a seat (see [0001] of Grundei translation) with a second soft filler material (sphere fill; see [0009] of Grundei translation) but lacks the cushion being a headrest of a vehicle. However, Browne teaches a headrest (10, fig 1) of a vehicle (see [0019]) comprising the flexible vibration cushion (see headrest 300 in fig 8 that is flexible). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cushion of Grundei to be part of a vehicle headrest as taught by Browne so as to allow for contouring to a user’s head shape for comfort. With respect to claim 12, the modified Grundei shows a vehicle (the vehicle that has the seat as described in [0019] of Browne) comprising a headrest of claim 11 (see claim 11 above). Allowable Subject Matter As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a). Claims 2-10 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELSEY E BALLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8153. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 4 PM. 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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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. /KELSEY E BALLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3785 /TU A VO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 11, 2022
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599539
THERAPEUTIC MASSAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594210
FLEXIBLE WEARABLE ROBOT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585427
VOICE-CUE BASED MOTORIZED SKIN TREATMENT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576217
Multi Surface Acoustic Nebuliser
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12558289
GASTROINTESTINAL TREATMENT SYSTEM INCLUDING A VIBRATING CAPSULE AND METHOD OF USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+62.5%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 198 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month