DETAILED ACTION
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) 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abro et al. (US 9,421,892) in view of Browne et al. (US 8,061,550) and Takeda (US 10,946,806).
Regarding claims 1-4, Abro discloses a headrest storage pocket (Figure 5) for use in a vehicle seat, said headrest storage pocket comprising: a pocket 52, said pocket is attached to a rear surface 36 of a headrest 30 of the vehicle seat, said pocket having first and second side edges 54, and a bottom edge 52, wherein said first side edge, said second side edge and said bottom edge are secured by being sewn to said rear surface of the headrest (col. 3 lines 59-62).
Abro does not disclose the pocket being made of netting and an elastic band being attached to a top edge of the pocket, the elastic band alternating through predetermined orifices at the top edge. Browne et al. discloses that it is known to make a pocket on the backside of a vehicle seat 18 from netting 14 having an elastic band 20 at a top edge of the pocket. Additionally, Takeda teaches that it is known to form an elastic edge of a pocket via an elastic member threading through predetermined orifices in the edge of the pocket – see Figure 2, elastic 18 being threaded through orifices in the edge of the pocket. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to make the pocket of Abro with netting having an elastic band in order to allow larger and/or different shaped articles to be held on the backside of the headrest. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to weave/thread the elastic member through the orifices of the netting in order to provide a simple way of securing the netting and elastic together without the need for additional fasteners.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
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 COREY NELSON SKURDAL whose telephone number is (571)272-9588. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-4pm 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, Nathan Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. 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.
/COREY N SKURDAL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights