DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to Applicant Arguments and Remarks Made in an Amendment filed on 01/30/2026.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2022-0190052, filed on 12/30/2022.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/30/2026 have been fully considered and are addressed as follows:
Regarding the claim(s) objections:
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/30/2026 have been fully considered and are addressed as follows:
Regarding the claim(s) objections: Applicant’s arguments, see Pg. 12, with respect to the objection(s) of claim(s) 1 & 8 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of objection is made in view of claim 8.
Regarding the claim(s) rejections under 35 USC §103: Applicant’s arguments, see Pg. 12-15, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under USC §103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of reconsideration and reevaluation of prior art of record. Utilizing BRI, the combination of the prior art as a whole teaches the claim language of the instant application. Deters US 20170349128 A1 teaches the newly amended limitation ”deactivate transmission of an automatic mode seat operation request command to a plurality of seat controllers in response to determining the collision of the vehicle based on the collision occurrence signal, wherein the plurality of seat controllers are configured to control a seat of the vehicle by driving one or more seat motors in response to a seat operation request command, and wherein the seat operation request command comprises the automatic mode seat operation request command” in paragraphs [0016] & [0023], which reads on the deactivation of the automatic seat operation to the seat system in response to a collision signal. Pfeffer US 20200122608 A1 teaches “activate transmission of the automatic mode seat operation request command to the plurality of seat controllers to drive the one or more seat motors to control the seat of the vehicle in response to the automatic mode seat operation request command, when a dangerous situation caused by the collision is determined to be resolved” in paragraph [0019], which reads upon the relay being temporarily open until a second interaction once the collision signal is no longer present. Bauer US 5670853 A1 teaches “wherein the seat switch controller comprises at least one automatic mode button having one-touch function and at least one manual mode button” in section Col. 1, Ln. 60-68 & Col. 2, Ln. 1-5, wherein switches (buttons) are used to engage an automatic or manual mode of operation. In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8: the claim reads as “based on a determination that the manual mode operation condition is does not correspond to (…)”, which is grammatically incorrect as written. “does not” has a present tense verb of “is”, which isn’t needed. Example: “(…) condition does not (…)”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 1-2, 4-7, 9, 12-15, & 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deters US 20170349128 A1 (hereinafter Deters) in view of Pfeffer US 20200122608 A1 (hereinafter Pfeffer) and Bauer US 5670853 A (hereinafter Bauer).
Claim 1: Deters discloses a seat control apparatus comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the seat control apparatus to: detect a collision of a vehicle; output, a collision occurrence signal [[0013] & [0014]; The seat position control unit is configured to control automatic electrical seat position and/or a steering wheel adjustment control unit for automatic electrical steering wheel adjustment. (…) The accident detection device is designed in this case to output at least one accident signal via the communications connection in the event of the detection of a traffic accident of the motor vehicle]; deactivate transmission of an automatic mode seat operation request command to a plurality of seat controllers in response to determining the collision of the vehicle based on the collision occurrence signal, wherein the plurality of seat controllers are configured to control a seat of the vehicle by driving one or more seat motors in response to a seat operation request command, and wherein the seat operation request command comprises the automatic mode seat operation request command [[0016] & [0023]; a seat position control unit is provided that is designed to deactivate the automatic electrical seat position control on receiving an accident signal indicating a traffic accident of the motor vehicle, and a computer program product is provided comprising software components for operating such a seat position control unit. (...) The seat position adjustment device 3 and the steering wheel adjustment device 4 each comprise positioning motors, with which the vehicle seat 5 or the steering wheel 7 can be automatically brought into predetermined positions].
Deters does not explicitly disclose activate transmission of the automatic mode seat operation request command to the plurality of seat controllers to drive the one or more seat motors to control the seat of the vehicle in response to the automatic mode seat operation request command, when a dangerous situation caused by the collision is determined to be resolved, wherein the automatic mode seat operation request command is a command that, once a button implemented in a seat switch controller is recognized as being pressed, requests that a predetermined seat operation be completed by moving at least a portion of the seat, regardless of whether the button is still pressed during the predetermined seat operation, and wherein the seat switch controller comprises at least one automatic mode button having one-touch function and at least one manual mode button.
Pfeffer teaches activate transmission of the automatic mode seat operation request command to the plurality of seat controllers to drive the one or more seat motors to control the seat of the vehicle in response to the automatic mode seat operation request command, when a dangerous situation caused by the collision is determined to be resolved [[0019]; A method for operating a seat adjustment system of the type according to the invention is also conceivable, wherein the relay is closed by means of the control unit when an operating element is actuated and there is no collision signal indicating a collision of the motor vehicle, and the relay is left open at least temporarily, preferably up to a second actuation of the operating element after the collision signal has ceased when an operating element is actuated and there is a collision signal].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Deters in view of Pfeffer with a reasonable expectation of success, as both inventions are directed to the same field of endeavor – Vehicle seat controls. The combination would ensure operability and safety in case of emergencies [Pfeffer; [0011]; the relay is arranged downstream of the preferably load-switching switches to the motor, which has the advantage that the position of the switches can continue to be easily monitored via the microchip, which can be expedient for rescue workers in particular with respect to potential resetting. Since the relay is configured with an open connection, unless it is energized, operability and safety are also ensured in the case of undervoltage].
Deters in view of Pfeffer do not explicitly teach wherein the automatic mode seat operation request command is a command that, once a button implemented in a seat switch controller is recognized as being pressed, requests that a predetermined seat operation be completed by moving at least a portion of the seat, regardless of whether the button is still pressed during the predetermined seat operation, and wherein the seat switch controller comprises at least one automatic mode button having one-touch function and at least one manual mode button.
Bauer teaches wherein the automatic mode seat operation request command is a command that, once a button implemented in a seat switch controller is recognized as being pressed [Col. 6, Ln. 23-38; The occupant can store either a determined occupant position from the look-up table 100 or a manually selected seat location in memory 102 by actuating a memory switch of controls 98. (...) The vehicle ignition switch 120 is connected to controller 106. Preferably, the controller 106 will move the occupant to a determined occupant position selected from the look-up table 100, when the ignition switch 120 is actuated to an "ON" condition. Moving the seat to such a determined occupant position is the default condition of the controller 106, i.e., the seat is always moved to a determined occupant position from the look-up table 100 unless a command is received from the command function 104. The seat position from the look-up table 100 is stored in the memory 102 each time the vehicle is started independent of actuation of controls 98], requests that a predetermined seat operation be completed by moving at least a portion of the seat, regardless of whether the button is still pressed during the predetermined seat operation [Col. 1, Ln. 29-34; Movable seats in a vehicle are also well known in the art, as are power electric seats having seat memory locations. In such power electric seats, an occupant may store a particular seat position in an electric memory. Upon entering the vehicle, the operator can move the seat to a prestored location by activating a recall control], and wherein the seat switch controller comprises at least one automatic mode button having one-touch function and at least one manual mode button [Col. 1, Ln. 60-68 & Col. 2, Ln. 1-5; a step is given for permitting choice of manual control mode to be effected by a manual switch and automatic control mode to be effected by a memory switch capable of storing in memory data for positions of the seating posture adjustment device and calling said data, and in the manual control mode, initially a voltage is applied from a power source to the motor, thereby causing the motor to be driven at a high rotation rate, and then after a given time, the voltage is changed into a low voltage through a low-voltage power source automatically, thus driving the motor at a low rotation rate. In the automatic control mode, the voltage is applied to the motor constantly for driving it at a normal rotation rate].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Deters in view of Pfeffer and Bauer with a reasonable expectation of success, as all inventions are directed to the same field of endeavor – Vehicle seat controls. The combination would improve comfort and restraint potential [Bauer; Col. 6, Ln. 51-55; seat belt stiffness and the position of a seat belt anchor could also be controlled as a function of seat position to improve both comfort and restraining potential of the occupant as a function of the measured physical characteristics].
Claim 2: The combination of Deters, Pfeffer, and Bauer teach the apparatus of claim 1, accordingly, the rejection of claim 1 above is incorporated.
Deters discloses the seat control apparatus of claim 1, wherein the seat operation request command further comprises a manual mode seat operation request command [[0028]; A change of the seat position and/or the steering wheel adjustment by manually operating the control switch remains possible if the seat position control unit 6 and the seat position adjustment device 3, or the steering wheel adjustment control unit 8 and the steering wheel adjustment device 4 continue to be supplied with current].
Claim 4: The combination of Deters, Pfeffer, and Bauer teach the apparatus of claim 2, accordingly, the rejection of claim 2 above is incorporated. Deters does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 4.
Bauer teaches the seat control apparatus of claim 2, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the seat control apparatus to: determine, based on the automatic mode seat operation request command, whether an automatic mode operation condition corresponds to a predefined condition associated with an automatic mode; and based on a determination that the automatic mode operation condition corresponding to the predefined condition associated with the automatic mode, drive the one or more seat motors to control the seat [Col. 6, Ln. 12-20; If the occupant has commanded the seat 34 to be moved to a location stored in the memory 102, that location is recalled from the memory 102. The controller 106 determines the difference between the present seat position and the seat position recalled from memory. The controller 106 provides control signals to seat position motor drive circuits 90 which, in turn, actuate the motors 92, 94, and 96 to move the seat 34 to the recalled seat position].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Deters in view of Bauer with a reasonable expectation of success, as both inventions are directed to the same field of endeavor – Vehicle seat controls. The combination would improve comfort and restraint potential [Bauer; Col. 6, Ln. 51-55; seat belt stiffness and the position of a seat belt anchor could also be controlled as a function of seat position to improve both comfort and restraining potential of the occupant as a function of the measured physical characteristics].
Claim 5: The combination of Deters, Pfeffer, and Bauer teach the apparatus of claim 4, accordingly, the rejection of claim 4 above is incorporated.
Deters discloses the seat control apparatus of claim 4, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the seat control apparatus not to drive, based on a determination that the automatic mode operation condition does not correspond to the predefined condition associated with the automatic mode, the one or more seat motors [[0016]; a seat position control unit is provided that is designed to deactivate the automatic electrical seat position control on receiving an accident signal indicating a traffic accident of the motor vehicle].
Claim 6: The combination of Deters, Pfeffer, and Bauer teach the apparatus of claim 1, accordingly, the rejection of claim 1 above is incorporated.
Deters discloses the seat control apparatus of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the seat control apparatus to transmit the manual mode seat operation request command to the plurality of seat controllers regardless of whether the collision occurrence signal is outputted, and wherein the manual mode seat operation request command is a command that requests a manual adjustment to operate the seat only while the button is being pressed [[0030]; A change of the seat position and/or the steering wheel adjustment by manually operating the control switch remains possible if the seat position control unit 6 and the seat position adjustment device 3, or the steering wheel adjustment control unit 8 and the steering wheel adjustment device 4 continue to be supplied with current. Rescue forces can then adjust the vehicle seat 5 and/or the steering wheel 7 if necessary by operating the control switches].
Claim 7: The combination of Deters, Pfeffer, and Bauer teach the apparatus of claim 6, accordingly, the rejection of claim 6 above is incorporated.
Deters discloses the seat control apparatus of claim 6, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the seat control apparatus to: determine, based on the manual mode seat operation request command, whether a manual mode operation condition corresponds to a predefined condition associated with a manual mode; and based on a determination that the manual mode operation condition corresponding to the predefined condition associated with the manual mode, drive the one or more seat motors to control the seat [[0012]; in the event of deactivation of the ignition following a traffic accident is/are prevented with simple means. (...) The manual movement of the seat (...) remain unaffected by said control. Thus, it is always still possible for the rescue forces, for example, by manually operating control switches of the seat position control (...), to change the seat position].
Claim(s) 9, & 12-15: The claim(s) are directed towards an apparatus of the recited limitations performed by the apparatus of claim(s) 1, & 4-7, respectively. The cited portions of Deters, Pfeffer, and Bauer used in the rejection of claim(s) 1, & 4-7 teach the same steps to perform the apparatus of claim(s) 9, & 12-15, respectively. Therefore, claim(s) 9, & 12-15 are rejected under the same rationales used in the rejection of claim(s) 1, & 4-7 as outlined above.
Claim(s) 17: The claim(s) is directed towards a method of the recited limitations performed by the apparatus of claim(s) 1, respectively. The cited portions of Deters, Pfeffer, and Bauer used in the rejection of claim(s) 1 teach the same steps to perform the method of claim(s) 17, respectively. Therefore, claim(s) 17 is rejected under the same rationales used in the rejection of claim(s) 1 as outlined above.
Claim 18: The combination of Deters, Pfeffer, and Bauer teach the apparatus of claim 17, accordingly, the rejection of claim 17 above is incorporated. Deters does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 18.
Bauer teaches the seat control method of claim 17, further comprising: determining, based on the automatic mode seat operation request command, whether an automatic mode operation condition corresponds to a predefined condition associated with an automatic mode; and based on a determination that the automatic mode operation condition corresponding to the predefined condition associated with the automatic mode, driving the one or more seat motors to control the seat [Col. 6, Ln. 12-20; If the occupant has commanded the seat 34 to be moved to a location stored in the memory 102, that location is recalled from the memory 102. The controller 106 determines the difference between the present seat position and the seat position recalled from memory. The controller 106 provides control signals to seat position motor drive circuits 90 which, in turn, actuate the motors 92, 94, and 96 to move the seat 34 to the recalled seat position].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Deters in view of Bauer with a reasonable expectation of success, as both inventions are directed to the same field of endeavor – Vehicle seat controls. The combination would improve comfort and restraint potential [Bauer; Col. 6, Ln. 51-55; seat belt stiffness and the position of a seat belt anchor could also be controlled as a function of seat position to improve both comfort and restraining potential of the occupant as a function of the measured physical characteristics].
Claim 19: The combination of Deters, Pfeffer, and Bauer teach the apparatus of claim 18, accordingly, the rejection of claim 18 above is incorporated.
Deters discloses the seat control method of claim 18, further comprising: not driving, based on a determination that the automatic mode operation condition does not correspond to the predefined condition associated with the automatic mode, the one or more seat motors [[0010] & [0011]; The automatic electrical seat position control can be deactivated by the seat position control unit if no signal is received via the bus or the individually associated line. (...) In the event of damage to the bus or ENS lines by the traffic accident, this enables further safe and manual movement of the seat or of the steering wheel to be guaranteed. (...) Moreover, the automatic electrical seat position control can be deactivated by the seat position control unit if signals that cannot be identified by the seat position control unit are received].
Claim 20: The combination of Deters, Pfeffer, and Bauer teach the apparatus of claim 17, accordingly, the rejection of claim 17 above is incorporated.
Deters discloses the seat control method of claim 17, further comprising: based on a manual mode seat operation request command, driving the one or more seat motors to control the seat of a vehicle, regardless of the collision occurrence signal, wherein the manual mode seat operation request command is a command that requests a manual adjustment to operate the seat only while the button is being pressed [[0012] & [0028]; The manual movement of the seat (…) remain unaffected by said control. Thus, it is always still possible for the rescue forces, for example, by manually operating control switches of the seat position control (...), to change the seat position. (…) Rescue forces can then adjust the vehicle seat 5 and/or the steering wheel 7 if necessary by operating the control switches].
Claim 8 & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deters in view of Pfeffer and Bauer, further in view of Ogasawara US 5097185 A (hereinafter Ogasawara).
Claim 8: The combination of Deters, Pfeffer, and Bauer teach the apparatus of claim 7, accordingly, the rejection of claim 7 above is incorporated. Deters does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 8.
Ogasawara teaches the seat control apparatus of claim 7, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the seat control apparatus not to drive, based on a determination that the manual mode operation condition is does not correspond to the predefined condition associated with the manual mode, the one or more seat motors [Col. 4, Ln. 18-23; only during driving the car, namely, with the hand brake (58) in unlocked state, all manual and memory switches (12)(14) are prohibited against operation, thus serving to protect the occupant against undesired seating posture which might be result from the operation of those switches (12)(14)].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Deters in view of Ogasawara with a reasonable expectation of success, as both inventions are directed to the same field of endeavor – Vehicle seat controls. The combination would allow more accurate control over the occupant seat [Ogasawara; Col. 2, Ln. 16-23; in the automatic mode, the motor is driven constantly at a high rotation rate to move the seating posture adjustment device rapidly from a present position to a memory position, and in the manual mode, the motor is firstly driven at a high rotation rate and then after a given time driven at low rotation, which allows an accurate fine adjustment of position of the device at a desired point].
Claim(s) 16: The claim(s) is directed towards a apparatus of the recited limitations performed by the apparatus of claim(s) 8, respectively. The cited portions of Deters, Pfeffer, Bauer, & Ogasawara used in the rejection of claim(s) 8 teach the same steps to perform the apparatus of claim(s) 16, respectively. Therefore, claim(s) 16 is rejected under the same rationales used in the rejection of claim(s) 8 as outlined above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Hassenpflug (US 20190111807 A1) discloses the disclosure relates to a method for controlling a vehicle seat of a vehicle, wherein a position of the vehicle seat or a part of it can be adjusted within an adjustment range, the size of which can be determined, and wherein the method has the steps of determining a measure of danger, which indicates a degree of danger for a vehicle seat occupant as a result of an accident, on the basis of environmental data relating to the vehicle; and determining the size of the adjustment range on the basis of the determined measure of danger.
Sakai et al. (US 20090243353 A1) discloses a seat apparatus includes a seat adapted to be arranged on a floor of a vehicle, a motor driving the seat to move, and a control unit supplying electric power to the motor by controlling a duty ratio with duty cycle control. The control unit determines an initial start-up time in which the duty ratio is defined as a first duty ratio over a period between the time the motor is started up after being powered by the control unit and the time before the seat driven by the motor starts moving. The control unit reduces the duty ratio when the initial start-up time elapses and sets the duty ratio to a second duty ratio smaller than the first duty ratio when the seat starts moving.
Wnuk et al. (US 5475592 A) discloses a universal control board is disclosed that allows the easy connection of an optional memory function for a vehicle component positioning control. The universal control board includes a well that receives a plug-in memory pack to provide the memory function. In this way, the assembler need only have tools and assembly steps required for assembly of the universal control board. The assembler may easily plug in the memory option where appropriate.
Kang et al. (US 20210309123 A1) discloses the present disclosure relates to a system and method for performing integrated control of seats of a self-driving vehicle capable of performing integrated control of swivel and displacement of front seats, rear seats, and a console in the self-driving vehicle using predetermined operation modes. The system and method for performing integrated control of the seats of the self-driving vehicle are capable of smoothly controlling swivel and displacement of the front seats, the rear seats, and the console under the control of an integrated controller according to predetermined operation modes without interference based on information about the position values of motors for the forward and rearward movement, reclining, and swivel of the front seats and rear seats (information about the amount of rotation of the motors from the original positions thereof) and information about the position value of a motor for the forward and rearward movement of the console.
Steffens et al. (US 20050156411 A1) discloses a method and apparatus (12, 112) for helping to protect an occupant (30, 130) of a seat (14, 114) of a vehicle (10, 110) includes a sensor (36, 200) responsive to at least one of a side impact event or a rollover event for providing a crash event signal. A first vehicle occupant protection device (94, 210) is inflatable into a first position located beside the seat (14, 114). A second vehicle occupant protection device (50, 150) is inflatable into a second position located forward of the seat (14, 114). A controller (44, 144) is responsive to the crash event signal for immediately inflating the first vehicle occupant protection device (94, 210) and, a predetermined time after inflating the first vehicle occupant protection device (94, 210), inflating the second vehicle occupant protection device (50, 150).
Tozu (US 20070276568 A1) discloses A seat position control device for a vehicle includes a lateral direction actuator for moving a position of a seat of the vehicle in a lateral direction of the vehicle, a turning direction actuator for moving the position of the seat of the vehicle in a turning direction of the vehicle a motion condition identification device for identifying a motion condition of the vehicle, a lateral direction drive control device for moving the position of the seat in the lateral direction of the vehicle by driving the lateral direction actuator based on the motion condition of the vehicle identified by the motion condition identification device and a turning direction drive control device for moving the position of the seat in the turning direction of the vehicle by driving the turning direction actuator based on the motion condition of the vehicle identified by the motion condition identification device.
Freienstein et al. (US 20200062146 A1) discloses a pre-crash seat actuator system for moving a vehicle seat includes an occupant protection control system that determines a collision is imminent and provides a trigger signal and an enable signal. A vehicle seat controller receives the trigger signal and determines a moving the vehicle seat to a desired position to mitigate severity of a collision. In response to the trigger signal, the vehicle seat controller provides a fast mode voltage for moving the vehicle seat in a fast mode. A smart control adapter determines whether the fast mode voltage and the enable signal are both received, to provide the fast mode voltage to a vehicle seat electric drive. In another embodiment, the vehicle seat controller receives the trigger signal and a collision signal to provide fast mode voltage, and the seat is returned to an original position when a crash does not occur.
Murakami et al. (US 20180281626 A1) discloses provided is a vehicle seat control device which includes a collision prediction unit (50) which predicts whether a collision will occur in a vehicle and a time before the collision will occur, driving units (14a and 18a), each changing at least one of a position and a posture of a vehicle seat (10), and a control unit (80) which controls the driving units to bring the vehicle seat close to a target state during the time before the collision predicted by the collision prediction unit occurs.
Sagebiel (US 20190118680 A1) discloses described are active crash systems for seats and associated methods. The active crash system includes a seat for an occupant of a vehicle and a crash seat system. The crash seat system includes a seat velocity device and a trigger device. The seat velocity device is configured to selectively move the seat. The trigger device configured to estimate at least one of an impact time or an impact condition of an impact event based on a detectable condition and activate the seat velocity device at an activation time prior to the estimated impact time such that the seat is moved.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anthony G Mora whose telephone number is (571)272-2306. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday 8am-5pm PST, Alternating Friday 8am-4pm PST.
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, Kito R Robinson can be reached at (571)270-3921. 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.
/ANTHONY GABRIEL MORA/Examiner, Art Unit 3664 /KITO R ROBINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664