DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
Claim Interpretation
Applicant’s claim limitations are given their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), consistent with the specification. The meaning of a claim term is interpreted by looking at how those terms are described, explained and used in the specification. In this case, the claim limitation “base portion” is being interpreted as including a plurality of plates and supporting stands consistent with applicant’s disclosed invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitations uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: cushion operating portion in claim 1; cover operating portion in claim 1; fastening portion in claim 2; grip portion in claim 3, coupling portion in claim 3; lifting portion in claim 3; transfer portion in claim 10; and support portion in claim 10.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Applicant’s disclosure as originally filed recites a cushion operating portion may be the combination of a cushion placing stand and a fastening portion and equivalents thereof ([0010]). Applicant’s disclosure as originally filed recites a cover operating portion may be the combination of a cover placing stand, a transfer portion; a lifting portion; a support portion and a holder and equivalents thereof ([0019]). Applicant’s disclosure as originally filed recites a fastening portion may be the combination of a grip portion; a coupling portion and a lifting portion and equivalents thereof ([0012]). Applicant’s disclosure as originally filed recites a grip portion may be the combination of a first bar formed with a first groove and a second bar with a second groove facing the first groove and equivalents thereof ([0104]). Applicant’s disclosure as originally filed recites a coupling portion may be the combination of a drive portion and guide portion that may be the combination of a first guide rail and a second guide rail and equivalents thereof ([0112], [0123] and [0124]). Applicant’s disclosure as originally filed recites a lifting portion may be a gear, a cam, or link operated by pneumatic, hydraulic or electric cylinder and equivalents thereof ([0120] and [0121]). Applicant’s disclosure as originally filed recites a transfer portion may be the combination of a pair of second frames coupled to a plate; a plurality of shafts coupled in parallel between the second frames and a second table coupled to the shafts and capable of reciprocating between the second frames and equivalents thereof ([0167]). Applicant’s disclosure as originally filed recites a support portion may be the combination of a cylinder coupled to a plurality of frames that are coupled to a plurality of supporting stands and a second plurality of frames and supporting stands ([0181]).
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Osada (JP 08-010473 A) as provided by (JP, 08-010473,A(1996)) as an English language equivalent.
Claim 1:
Osada discloses a vehicle seat assembly device comprising:
a base portion (20) (figs. 1-3, [0019]);
a cushion operating portion (80) coupled to one side of the base portion (20), configured to allow a seat cushion (2 and 12) formed with a plurality of first through holes to be disposed, and configured to couple a seat cover (1 and 11) to the seat cushion (2 and 12) (figs. 21 and 22, [0019] and [0041] – [0042]); and
a cover operating portion (60) coupled to another side of the base portion (20), configured to allow the seat cover (1 and 11) to be disposed, and configured to transfer the seat cover (1 and 11) onto the seat cushion (2 and 12),
wherein the cushion operating portion (80) includes a cushion placing stand (21) that is coupled to the base portion (20) and configured to allow a wire and the seat cushion (2 and 12) to be disposed (figs. 21 and 22, [0019], [0023] and [0036]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-10 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 2:
The prior art of record fails to disclose or fairly suggest the vehicle seat assembly device according to claim 1, wherein the cushion operating portion includes a fastening portion that is coupled to the base portion, configured to lower a clip coupled to a suspender of the seat cover to the first through hole, and configured to fix the clip to the wire located below the seat cushion. Instead, Osada discloses a cover operating portion including a fastening portion coupled to the base portion and configured to fix a seat cover clip to a wire located below the seat cushion.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ormachea et al. (US 2007/0028435 A1) discloses a device for securing trim to a seat. Tillner (US 2002/0108222 A1) discloses a method for installing a seat cover and a seat cover installation device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lee Holly whose telephone number is (571)270-7097. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 to 5:00 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 Interv7iew Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sunil Singh can be reached at (571) 272-3460. 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.
/Lee A Holly/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726