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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6, 8-22 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.
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.
(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, 8-12, 15-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (9,010,857).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a child seat 100 comprising: an outer shell 1 (figures 1-4) having a seating portion, and a back portion, wherein the seating portion includes a seat configured to hold a child's lower body, wherein the back portion includes a seat back configured to hold a child's upper body, wherein the outer shell has a front end corresponding with a front edge of the seating portion; a base assembly 2 (figure 3), wherein the base assembly has a base front end and a rear end, and wherein the base assembly has a base bottom parallel to a surface on which the base assembly is placed; and a recline mechanism 3 operatively coupled to the base assembly and the outer shell, wherein the recline mechanism selectively adjusts the incline of outer shell relative to the base assembly; wherein the recline mechanism operatively couples to the front end of the outer shell and the base front end; wherein the recline mechanism comprises a recline actuator 34 operable by a user and pivotally connected to the outer shell, at least one engaging component 32 extending from the recline actuator, at least one side wall, and at least one limiting mechanism 211 fixed to the base assembly, wherein the at least one limiting mechanism defines a plurality of pockets 211a-c to engage with the at least one engaging component, wherein the at least one limiting mechanism is perpendicular to the base bottom, wherein the recline actuator has a first end aligned with the front end of the outer shell and the base front end and a second end is opposite the first end, wherein the first end comprises a handle 34, wherein the at least one engaging component is located on the second end, wherein the at least one side wall includes a channel 11c with a first channel end and a second channel end, wherein the at least one engaging component 32 extends through the channel, and wherein the at least one engaging component translates from the first channel end to the second channel end.
Regarding claim 8, Chen discloses when the at least one engaging component 32 is engaged with one of the plurality of pockets 211a-c of at least one of the limiting mechanism, the outer shell is held static relative to the base assembly.
Regarding claim 9, Chen discloses wherein actuating the recline actuator 34 allows a user to selectively disengage the at least one engaging component 32 from an engaged one of the pockets 211a-c, wherein the user can selectively translate the at least one engaging component to a second one of the pockets.
Regarding claim 10, Chen discloses each one of the plurality of pockets 211a-c defines a different arc corresponding with a different angle at which the outer shell is held static relative to the base assembly.
Regarding claim 11, Chen discloses the at least one limiting mechanism defines the plurality of pockets 211a-c in a chevron or parabola geometry.
Regarding claim 12, Chen discloses a child seat 100 comprising: an outer shell 1 having a seat portion and a back portion, wherein the outer shell has a front end corresponding with a front edge of the seat portion; a base assembly 2, wherein the base assembly has a base front end and a rear end, and wherein the base assembly has a base bottom parallel to a surface on which the base assembly is placed; and a recline mechanism 3 operatively situated between to the outer shell and the base assembly, the recline mechanism comprising: a handle 34; at least one engaging component 32 extending from the handle; at least one side wall; and at least one limiting mechanism fixed to the base assembly, wherein the at least one limiting mechanism defines a plurality of pockets 211a-c to engage with the at least one engaging component, wherein the at least one limiting mechanism is perpendicular to the base bottom, wherein the recline mechanism is operatively situated at the front end of the outer shell and the base front end, wherein the at least one side wall includes a channel 11c with a first channel end and a second channel end, wherein the at least one engaging component 32 extends through the channel 11c, and wherein the at least one engaging component translates from the first channel end to the second channel end.
Regarding claim 15, Chen discloses the geometry of the plurality of pockets 211a-c orients the at least one engaging component 32 to engage with a pocket if it has not been received by a pocket.
Regarding claim 16, Chen discloses actuating the handle 34 disengages the at least one engaging component 32 and a first pocket.
Regarding claim 17, Chen discloses when the at least one engaging component 32 is disengaged from a first pocket 211a, the outer shell can be moved relative to the base assembly.
Regarding claim 18, Chen discloses the recline mechanism 3 further comprises at least one urging component 33 that orients the at least one engaging component 32 such that it engages with a pocket 211a-c.
Regarding claim 19, Chen discloses the at least one urging component is a spring 33.
Regarding claim 20, Chen discloses a child seat 100 comprising, an outer shell 1 having a seating portion and a back portion, wherein the outer shell has a front end corresponding with a front edge of the seating portion; a base assembly 2, wherein the base assembly has a base front end and a rear end and wherein the base assembly has a base bottom parallel to a surface on which the base assembly is placed; and a recline mechanism 3 operatively situated between to the outer shell and the base assembly, the recline mechanism comprising: a recline actuator 34; at least one engaging component 32 extending from the recline actuator; at least one side wall; and at least one limiting mechanism fixed to the base assembly, wherein the at least one limiting mechanism defines a plurality of pockets 211a-c to engage with the at least one engaging component, wherein the at least one limiting mechanism is perpendicular to the base bottom, wherein the recline mechanism is operatively situated at the front end of the outer shell and the base front end, wherein the at least one side wall includes a channel 11c with a first channel end and a second channel end, wherein the at least one engaging component extends through the channel, and wherein the at least one engaging component translates from the first channel end to the second channel end.
Regarding claim 21, Chen discloses actuating the recline actuator 34 disengages the at least one engaging component 32 and a first pocket 211a-c.
Regarding claim 22, Chen discloses the at least one engaging component 32 is disengaged from a first pocket 211a-c, the seating portion can be moved relative to the base assembly.
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) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Hutchinson et al.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Hutchinson et al. disclose the child seat 10 comprises an adjustable headrest 35 coupled to the back portion with an actuator 44 configured to selectively change the height of the headrest as defined as the relative distance between a distal end of the back portion and a proximal end of the headrest, wherein the actuator comprises a handle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Hutchinson et al. and use an adjustable headrest with handle in the invention of Chen in order to provide additional safety to the user.
Regarding claim 4, Hutchinson et al. disclose the child seat 10 can be installed in a rear-facing configuration (figure 9) in which the seating portion of the child seat faces a vehicle seat.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Hutchinson et al. and include a rear facing option in the invention of Chen because it is simple, efficient and cost effective.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Hutchinson et al. as applied to claim 4 above and further in view of Mason et al. (US 2020/0223333).
Regarding claim 5, Mason et al. disclose the child seat 104 further comprises an anti-rebound bar 140 coupled to the front of the seating portion and configured to interact with the vehicle seat to prevent the child seat from rotating towards the vehicle seat when force is applied on the child seat in a direction towards the vehicle seat.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Mason et al. and use an extendable anti-rebound bar in the invention of Chen as modified because it allows the user to easily store the bar therefore saving space.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Bass (US 2009/0179470).
Regarding claim 6, Bass discloses the child seat further comprises an energy absorption system 26 configured to absorb forces imparted on the child seat.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Bass and use the energy absorption system in the invention of Chen because it is simple and inexpensive way to provide protection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 14 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: regarding claim 12, Chen fails to disclose the handle further comprises a first end and a second end, wherein there is a pivot point between the first end and second end. No other prior art references in the record whether taken alone or in combination can solve these dissimilarities.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED A ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-7768. The examiner can normally be reached 10am-10pm.
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, David Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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.
/SYED A ISLAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636