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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0029438 to Moon et al. in view of U.S. Pat. No. 2,745,212 to Guzzino, and further in view of U.S. Pat. No. 1,986,255 to Durfey et al.
Claims 18-19, Moon discloses a cushioning system 100, comprising a spring base layer 102 having an array of coil springs 108 surrounded by cushioning foam 106, including an upper foam soft layer 112; a topper layer 116 disposed on the upper foam
layer and co-extensive with said spring base layer, said topper layer comprising an elastomeric material layer 116 formed by a grid of elastomeric walls 41 defining intervening cells (fig. 2-3)[0027], and an outer cover 120 capable of including a plurality of panels and optional top layer 118 that enclose said spring base layer and said topper layer [0028]; wherein said topper layer further comprises an inferior cushioning layer 104, the elastomeric layer is a median elastomeric layer disposed on the inferior cushioning layer (fig. 1-3). Moon is silent to buttons. Guzzino discloses a superior layer defined by a cover 12 having a plurality of buttons 15 with a first end connecting the cover and a second end connected to an inferior cushioning layer defined by a backing layer 7. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the buttons in Guzzino with the cushioning system of Moon with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have provided a deep tufted appearance at a greatly reduced cost. Moon discloses cover having a layer 118 disposed on the median elastomeric layer, but is silent to a superior layer comprising a fabric material. Durfey discloses a cushioning assembly having a cover (13,14) including a stuffing/padding and a superior fabric layer 18. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the superior fabric layer and padding in Durfey with the cushioning system of Moon with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have provided a means to transmit the expansive force of the elastomeric layer to the cushioning assembly of Moon.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 18-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,655,241 to Higgins et al. discloses a pillow top mattress.
U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0343294 to DeMoss et al. discloses a mattress having a tufts.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FREDRICK C CONLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-7040. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:30pm.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached on (571) 270-3654. 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.
/FREDRICK C CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights