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 § 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 23 and 24 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 23 is indefinite because line 7 recites “an alarm device,” while claim 8, line 2 previously recites “an alarm.” It is unclear whether these terms refer to the same alarm or to different alarms. Because the specification discloses only one alarm, it appears that the same alarm is intended.
Claim 24 recites “an alarm,” but this appears to refer to the sound produced by the alarm device. As such, the use of “an alarm” to refer to both the device and the sound introduces ambiguity into the claim. The Examiner recommends changing all recitations of the actual device to “alarm device” for consistency.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 9, 11-15, 17-18, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams et al. (US 20200391625) in view of Woellert (US 7837275).
As concerns claims 1 and 2, Williams teaches a child safety seat comprising: a base (fig. 7: 11’) including a top rod (fig. 7: 1311’), a first end of the top rod protruding upwardly from a rear portion of the base; a seat (fig. 7: 12’) connected to the base; a tether (fig. 7: 133’) telescopically connected to the base and configured to connect to an anchor device within a vehicle wherein a first end of the tether is affixed at an interior of the base (note: Fig 7 shows tether 133’ extending into the base) proximate the first end of the top rod; wherein one end of the tether is provided in the base and the tether can be automatically retracted when it is extended relative to the base (as indicated by the arrows in fig.7). Williams shows a first action point of a pulling force exerted by the tether is located on the top rod ( as shown by the tether routing over the handle).
However, Williams does not explicitly show the second action point.
Woellert teaches a retractor assembly (Woellert, fig. 1: 10), and the retractor assembly comprises: a retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); a retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40), both ends of which are pivotally fixed to the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); and an elastic member connected to the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20) and the retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40), and applying a torsion force to the retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40).
Woellert teaches an action point (Woellert, fig. 1: pins 41, 43) of a pulling force exerted by the tether.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention to modify Williams et al. with the teachings of Woellert with the retractor assembly as taught by Woellert in order to be able to provide increased control and retraction to the tether. As such the use of the retractor in Williams et al. would provide the second action which is located at a component positioned between the first end of the tether and the first action point.
As concerns claim 3, Woellert teaches a driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54) movably provided on the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); a restore member (Woellert, fig. 1:56) and applying a pressure to the driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54); and a switch (Woellert, fig. 6: 330) provided on the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20), wherein the tether (Williams, fig. 1: 13) bypasses and contacts the driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54), and the driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54) can actuate the switch (Woellert, fig. 6: 330).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the teachings of Williams to include a retractor assembly and components as taught by Woellert in order to provide increased control and retraction of the tether.
As concerns claim 5, Woellert teaches wherein an engaging member (Woellert, fig. 9: 460) is formed on the retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40), an engaged member (Woellert, fig. 9: 460) is provided on the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20), and the engaged member (Woellert, fig. 9: 460) can be operated to engage and disengage with the engaging member (Woellert, fig. 9: 460).
As concerns claim 6, Williams teaches wherein the top rod (Williams, fig. 7: 1311’) is formed in a U shape (Williams, paragraph 0045, lines 16-17), a through hole (Williams, the tether loops over the handle part and then feeds into an opening in the base as shown in fig. 7) is centrally formed in a top portion of the top rod, and the tether (Williams, fig. 7: 13’) passes through the through hole (Williams, the tether loops over the handle part and then feeds into an opening in the base as shown in fig. 7).
As concerns claim 9, Williams teaches wherein the base has an anchoring portion extending backward (see anchors in Fig. 7; also identified by 118 in Fig 1), the anchoring portion is an ISOFIX connector, and the tether is a TOP TETHER connector.
As concerns claims 11 and 12, Williams teaches a child safety seat comprising: a base (fig. 7: 11’) including a top rod (fig. 7: 1311’), a first end of the top rod protruding upwardly from a rear portion of the base; a seat (fig. 7: 12’) connected to the base; a tether (fig. 7: 133’) telescopically connected to the base and configured to connect to an anchor device within a vehicle wherein a first end of the tether is affixed at an interior of the base (note: Fig 7 shows tether 133’ extending into the base) proximate the first end of the top rod; wherein one end of the tether is provided in the base and the tether can be automatically retracted when it is extended relative to the base (as indicated by the arrows in fig.7). Williams shows a first action point of a pulling force exerted by the tether is located on the top rod ( as shown by the tether routing over the handle).
However, Williams does not explicitly show the second action point.
Woellert teaches a retractor assembly (Woellert, fig. 1: 10), and the retractor assembly comprises: a retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); a retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40), both ends of which are pivotally fixed to the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); and an elastic member connected to the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20) and the retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40), and applying a torsion force to the retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40).
Woellert teaches an action point (Woellert, fig. 1: pins 41, 43) of a pulling force exerted by the tether.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention to modify Williams et al. with the teachings of Woellert with the retractor assembly as taught by Woellert in order to be able to provide increased control and retraction to the tether. As such the use of the retractor in Williams et al. would provide the second action which is located at a component positioned between the first end of the tether and the first action point.
As concerns claim 13, Williams teaches the base (11’); the tether being unlocked from the anchor device within the vehicle; wherein an end of the tether is fixed and wound on; and the other end of the tether (13’) is configured to connect to the anchor device in the vehicle.
Williams does not teach the retractor assembly and its components such as a retractor, retractor bracket and an electric motor.
Woellert teaches a retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40), both ends of which are pivotally fixed to the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); and an electric motor (Woellert, fig. 10: 515) connected to the retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40); wherein the retractor assembly (Woellert, fig. 1: 10) comprises: a retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the child safety seat of Williams to include the retractor assembly and its components as taught by Woellert in order to better secure the child in the seat.
As concerns claim 14, Williams et al. is discussed above but does not show a retractor assembly and components.
Woellert teaches the retractor assembly further comprising: a driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54) movably provided on the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); a switch (Woellert, fig. 6: 330) provided on the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); and a restore member (Woellert, fig. 1:56) and applying a restoring force to the driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54) in a direction away from the switch (Woellert, fig. 6: 330): and the driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54) is able to actuate the switch (Woellert, fig. 6: 330).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the child safety seat as taught by Williams to include the retractor assembly and its components as taught by Woellert in order to better secure the child in the seat
As concerns claim 15, Williams et al. is discussed above but does not show a retractor assembly and components.
Woellert teaches the retractor assembly further comprising: a driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54) movably provided on the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); a switch (Woellert, fig. 6: 330) provided on the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20): and a restore member (Woellert, fig. 1:56) and applying a restoring force to the driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54) in a direction away from the switch (Woellert, fig. 6: 330); and the driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54) is able to actuate the switch (Woellert, fig. 6: 330).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the child safety seat as taught by Williams to include the retractor assembly and its components as taught by Woellert in order to better secure the child in the seat
As concerns claim 17, Williams et al. is discussed above but does not show a retractor assembly and components.
Woellert teaches wherein the retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40) is formed with an engaging member (Woellert, fig. 9: 460), the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20) is also provided with an engaged member (Woellert, fig. 9: 460), and the engaged member (Woellert, fig. 9: 460) is able to be operated to engage and disengage from the engaging member (Woellert, fig. 9: 460).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the child safety seat as taught by Williams to include the retractor assembly and its components as taught by Woellert in order to better secure the child in the seat
As concerns claim 18, Williams teaches wherein a through hole (Williams, the tether loops over the handle part and then feeds into an opening in the base as shown in fig. 7) is formed at a center of a top portion of the top rod (1311’), and the tether is slidably fixed in the through hole (Williams, the tether loops over the handle part and then feeds into an opening in the base as shown in fig. 7).
As concerns claim 21, Williams et al. is discussed above but does not show a retractor assembly and components.
Woellert teaches the engaging member (Woellert, fig. 9: 460) is a ratchet and the engaged part is a pawl; the restore member (Woellert, fig. 1:56) is a torsion spring, an end of the torsion spring abuts against the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20), and the other end of the torsion spring abuts against the driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the child safety seat as taught by Williams to include the retractor assembly and its components as taught by Woellert in order to better secure the child safety seat
Claims 8, 20, 23, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams et al. (US 20200391625) in view of Woellert (US 7837275), and further in view of Gou (US 12179645) .
As concerns claim 8, 20 and 24, the combination of Williams and Woellert is discussed above. As noted, combined they teach a tether (13’) on a child safety seat and a switch (Woellert, fig. 6: 330) on a retractor assembly. Williams and Woellert combined fail to teach an alarm to inform that the tether is tightened.
However, Gou teaches wherein the child safety seat issues an alarm (Guo, fig. 3: 50).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the combination of Williams and Woellert to include an alarm as taught by Gou in order to confirm the tether is tightened properly for safety.
As concerns claims 23 and 24, the combination of Williams et al. and Woellert is discussed above but does not show a retractor assembly and components or an alarm device.
Woellert teaches a retractor assembly (Woellert, fig. 1: 10), wherein the retractor assembly (Woellert, fig. 1: 10) comprises: a retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); a retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40), both ends of which are pivotally fixed to the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); and an elastic member or an electric motor (Woellert, fig. 10: 515) connecting the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20) to the retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40) and applying a torsional force to the retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40); a driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54) movably arranged on the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); a restore member (Woellert, fig. 1:56); and a switch (Woellert, fig. 6: 330) arranged on the retractor bracket (Woellert, fig. 1: 20); and the driving member (Woellert, fig. 1: 54) is movable to actuate the switch (Woellert, fig. 6: 330); wherein the retractor (Woellert, fig. 1: 40) is rotatable about its axis.
However, Woellert does not discuss an alarm device.
Guo teaches an alarm device (Guo, fig. 3: 50) operable to indicate when the tether is tightened.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the retractor assembly as taught by Woellert to include an alarm device on the tether as taught by Gou in order to confirm the tether is tightened properly for safety.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4, 7, 10, 16, 19, and 22 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 filed 04/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments regarding the newly recited claim limitations have been fully considered. However, as set forth in the new grounds of rejection above, the current Office Action addresses these amended limitations in detail. The Examiner has reviewed the claim amendments and has provided support in the new rejections, explaining how the cited references disclose and render obvious the newly added features. Accordingly, Applicant is respectfully referred to the discussion and rationale provided in the rejection sections above for a full response to these arguments.
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 JESSICA K THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3620. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00 ET.
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 571-272-6670. 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.
JESSICA K THOMPSON
Examiner
Art Unit 3636
/DAVID R DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights