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 Amendment
The amendment filed June 29, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1 and 11 have been amended. No claims have been cancelled or added. Claims 1–20 remain pending, and claims 1 and 11 are independent.
The rejections of claims 1–20 are set forth below on the same references applied in the prior Office action. The findings for independent claims 1 and 11 have been extended to address the added limitation, which each dependent claim incorporates, and the findings for the dependent claims are restated in full.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 29, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The arguments are directed to the limitation added to independent claims 1 and 11, which requires that the target seat be allowed to be in the operating mode "after the at least one adjacent seat is in the specified state." That limitation is addressed in the rejections below, and the arguments are addressed as follows.
A. Applicant's Arguments
Applicant argues that the amended limitation requires "a sequential, conditional control architecture" in which "completion of the adjacent-seat state transition is a prerequisite that must be satisfied before the control device permits the target seat to enter the operating mode," relying on paragraph [0087] and FIG. 7 (S730) of the present disclosure. Applicant contends that Abt "focuses on an efficient arrangement of an aircraft cabin for collision-free movement of a seat/group seat and merely prevents physical collisions," that Abt describes a movement model that "separates motion design from control software" (citing Abt [0018]–[0019]), and that Abt "does not disclose, teach, or suggest a control logic in which a target seat is conditionally enabled only after an adjacent seat has reached a specified state". Applicant further argues that Yamaguchi, Penilla, and Park do not cure this alleged deficiency, and that claim 11 and the dependent claims are allowable for the same reasons.
B. Abt Teaches Allowing the Target Seat to Be in the Operating Mode After the Adjacent Seat Is in the Specified State
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Abt expressly teaches the sequential dependency that Applicant describes. In the embodiment of FIGS. 3a–3c, Abt describes two closely adjacent vehicle seats that are displaced sideways (FIG. 3b, arrows K) and then rotated approximately 45° (FIG. 3c, arrows L and M). Abt states the dependency between these two movements directly:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (Abt, [0036])
This passage expressly teaches the prerequisite relationship that Applicant argues is missing. The increased inter-seat distance is a specified state of the adjacent seat. The rotation is the operating mode of the target seat. The word "beforehand" establishes the temporal order, and the phrase "in order to be able to rotate them" establishes that the adjacent seat's state is a prerequisite for the target seat's operation. Abt does not merely describe two movements that happen to occur in sequence. It states that the rotation cannot occur until the spacing has been achieved. That is a conditional, sequential relationship in which the target seat's operation depends on the adjacent seat first being in the specified state.
Abt expressly discloses the physical sequence and the prerequisite. Abt does not expressly describe a controller step that confirms the adjacent seat's position before starting the rotation, and the rejection does not contend otherwise. That implementation is taught by the structure Abt provides and would have been obvious. Abt's movement model describes, for each movement, "start and stop conditions, diverse termination conditions for the movement, and also a description of the dependencies on other objects" ([0060]). Abt further teaches that movable parts "can also be expediently equipped with a communication interface in order to also be able to incorporate the data of their actual position and arrangement into the movement control" ([0058]), that the seat control system comprises "suitable path sensors and angle sensors 45" ([0054]), and that "[i]n the case of adjacent seats, the same controller can evaluate the sensor signals and carry out the control" ([0058]). Abt therefore provides both the actual-position information and the dependency-based start conditions needed to gate one seat's movement on another's position. A person of ordinary skill in the art, implementing Abt's express requirement that the spacing be increased "beforehand," would have used the adjacent seat's actual-position data as the start condition for the rotation.
Applicant's reliance on FIG. 7 and paragraph [0087] of the present disclosure does not change this result. The claims, not the specification, define the invention, and although claims are read in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 1184 (Fed. Cir. 1993); MPEP § 2111.01(II). Claim 1 recites that the target seat is allowed to be in the operating mode "after the at least one adjacent seat is in the specified state." It does not recite the determination step S730 of FIG. 7 or any particular manner of confirming completion. Notably, dependent claim 5 separately recites allowing the target seat to be in the operating mode "based on the at least one adjacent seat completely allowed to be in the specified state," which indicates that independent claim 1 is not itself limited to that narrower condition. In any event, even if claim 1 were read to require that the adjacent seat's transition be complete before the target seat operates, Abt teaches that requirement. A spacing that "must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them" is a spacing that must be achieved, not merely begun, before the rotation can occur.
C. Abt's Collision Prevention Is Not a Distinction from the Claimed Invention
Applicant characterizes Abt as "merely prevent[ing] physical collisions." This characterization does not distinguish the claims. Abt prevents collisions in the FIG. 3 embodiment precisely by requiring the adjacent seat to reach a specified state before the target seat operates. Collision prevention is the reason for the claimed sequencing, not an alternative to it. Applicant's own disclosure confirms this. The present application describes the specified state as a state of the adjacent seat that prevents "interference caused by the at least one adjacent seat in a process of moving (or transitioning) the target seat from a current state to the operating mode" ([0072]), and Applicant characterizes the invention as "minimizing interference with an adjacent seat during operation of a target seat". Abt's requirement that the adjacent seats be spaced apart "beforehand" so that the rotating seats do not collide addresses the same problem in the same way.
Applicant also notes that Abt's movement model separates the description of seat movements from the basic control software (citing Abt [0018]–[0019]). That Abt has an additional objective, simplifying configuration and testing of the movement control, does not detract from what Abt teaches about how the seats are moved. A reference is relevant for all that it contains, including disclosures that are not its primary focus. MPEP § 2123(I); Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807 (Fed. Cir. 1989). The rejection relies on Abt's description of the seat movements themselves ([0036], [0054], [0058], [0060]), which Applicant has not addressed.
D. The Secondary References Are Not Relied Upon for the Amended Limitation
Applicant argues that Yamaguchi, Penilla, and Park each fail to disclose the amended limitation and therefore do not cure the alleged deficiency of Abt. The examiner has considered Applicant's contention that the combination as a whole lacks the claimed sequencing, and it is answered on the merits in Section B above: Abt, the primary reference, supplies the sequencing, so the combination includes it. The secondary references are relied upon for other limitations. To the extent Applicant argues that each secondary reference individually lacks the sequencing, that argument does not address the combination as applied. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 426 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 1097 (Fed. Cir. 1986); MPEP § 2145(IV). As Applicant acknowledges, Yamaguchi is relied upon for identifying an operating mode included in an operation input, Penilla for the memory, instruction-execution, and notification architecture, and Park for the sliding-rail and cushion-frame mechanics.
The examiner further notes that Applicant's description of Yamaguchi as disclosing "an efficient arrangement of an aircraft cabin for collision-free movement of a seat/group seat" appears to describe Abt rather than Yamaguchi. Yamaguchi is directed to a vehicle seat that is selectively switchable between a walk-in mode and a luggage mode through distinct operation inputs (Yamaguchi, [0009], [0012], [0079]), which is the teaching relied upon in the rejection. Likewise, Applicant's argument that Penilla "does not disclose controlling an operating mode of a seat" is not responsive to the rejection, because Penilla is not relied upon for that feature. The operating mode is taught by Abt as modified by Yamaguchi.
E. The Motivation to Combine Has Not Been Rebutted
Applicant asserts generally that the prior art does not "provide any motivation or rationale that would have led one having ordinary skill in the art to arrive at the claimed subject matter". Beyond the sequencing argument addressed above, this statement does not identify any error in the specific rationales articulated in the rejections, each of which is grounded in the teachings of the references themselves (e.g., Abt's selection among multiple predefined seat configurations and Yamaguchi's teaching that distinct mode inputs let "the occupant ... select either the walk-in mode or the luggage mode depending on the intended use," Yamaguchi [0078]). Moreover, with respect to the amended limitation, no combination is required: the sequential dependency is taught by Abt itself. The rejections are consistent with KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007), which requires an articulated reasoning with rational underpinning, as provided in each rejection below.
F. Independent Claim 11 and the Dependent Claims
Applicant argues that independent claim 11 is allowable for the same reasons as claim 1. Claim 11 recites the same amended limitation in method form, and Abt teaches it for the reasons discussed above. Applicant argues that dependent claims 2–10 and 12–20 are allowable by virtue of their dependency and "in addition to reciting further distinguishing features", without identifying any particular feature. Each dependent claim is nonetheless addressed on its merits in the rejections below, and claims 1–20 remain rejected as set forth below.
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.
Claims 1 and 4–10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abt (US 2008/0007101 A1) in view of Yamaguchi (US 2012/0261964 A1), and further in view of Penilla (US 2018/0024725 A1).
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abt in view of Yamaguchi and Penilla, and further in view of Park (US 2018/0272896 A1).
Claims 11, 14–17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abt in view of Yamaguchi.
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abt in view of Yamaguchi, and further in view of Park.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abt in view of Yamaguchi, and further in view of Penilla.
Regarding Claim 1,
Disclosure by Abt
Abt discloses:
A seat control apparatus,
See at least:
"The electronic device 51 is an adjusting system for vehicle seats or groups of vehicle seats, particularly aircraft seats, comprising one or more control units 43 and one or more adjusting units 47." (0055)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses an adjusting system for vehicle seats having control units and adjusting units. That discloses A seat control apparatus.
the apparatus comprising:
See at least:
"The invention relates to a vehicle seat, an adjusting system and a method for moving at least one vehicle seat ... comprising seat components ... the location and/or inclination of which can be adjusted by means of at least one driving device, with an electronic device for collision-free movement..." (0002)
Rationale:
Abt expressly describes a multi-component seat-adjusting system, which supports the apparatus comprising:.
an input device;
See at least:
"communication with a manual operating unit" (0061)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses a manual operating unit, which a PHOSITA would have understood to be a user input device for seat-control commands. That discloses an input device.
a driving device;
See at least:
"the control unit 43 controls a driving device 47 in such a way that at least one seat can be moved and adjusted" (0051)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses a driving device.
wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, cause the seat control apparatus to
See at least:
"The control unit provides the primary control functions and comprises a processing section, which comprises software and hardware" (0046); "The control unit comprises software (operating system)" (0062)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses software and an operating system executed by the control unit. A PHOSITA would have understood such software to be machine-executable instructions that, when executed by the control device, cause seat-control operations.
when receiving the operation input
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant..." (0004)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches the control unit receiving the occupant's request, thereby disclosing when receiving the operation input.
to a target seat
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant to adjust his/her seat..." (0004)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches a request directed to the occupant's own seat. That discloses to a target seat.
through the input device,
See at least:
"communication with a manual operating unit" (0061) and "This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant..." (0004)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches communication with a manual operating unit and receipt of the occupant's request. A PHOSITA would have understood the request to be received through the input device.
identify a specified state
See at least:
"The movement model describes ... the maximum and minimum position, the adjustment speed, start and stop ramps and start and stop conditions, diverse termination conditions for the movement, and also a description of the dependencies on other objects." (0060)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the movement model defines seat conditions, positions, and dependencies. That discloses, or at least renders obvious, identify a specified state.
of at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"In the case of adjacent seats, the same controller can evaluate the sensor signals and carry out the control." (0058)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses adjacent seats under common control, thereby disclosing of at least one adjacent seat.
adjacent to the target seat
See at least:
"position changes in the y direction (adjacent seats being pulled apart)" (0011)
Rationale:
Abt expressly refers to adjacent seats and their relative repositioning, thereby disclosing adjacent to the target seat.
based on the operating mode,
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036)
Rationale:
Abt expressly links the intended seat operation, namely rotation, with the need to first change the state of nearby seats by increasing spacing. Thus, Abt discloses or at least renders obvious based on the operating mode,.
allow the at least one adjacent seat to be in the specified state
See at least:
"The movement of the seats is coupled automatically in order to achieve the most economical and space-saving possible arrangement of the seats." (0059)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches automatically coupled movement of multiple seats. A PHOSITA would have understood this to include causing the adjacent seat to assume the required condition or specified state.
by using the driving device,
See at least:
"the control unit 43 controls a driving device 47 in such a way that at least one seat can be moved and adjusted" (0051); "one or more adjusting units 47" (0055)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that seat movement occurs by using the driving device.
and after the at least one adjacent seat is in the specified state,
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036); "Other movable parts can also be expediently equipped with a communication interface in order to also be able to incorporate the data of their actual position and arrangement into the movement control." (0058)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses a required preliminary spacing: the distance between the seats "must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them" ([0036]). That increased spacing is the specified state of the adjacent seat identified above, and the rotation is the target seat's operating mode. Abt thus expressly discloses the physical sequence and the prerequisite: the spacing must exist before the rotation, and the rotation depends on it ("in order to be able to rotate them"). Abt does not expressly describe a controller step that confirms the adjacent seat has reached the required spacing before starting the rotation. That implementation would have been obvious from Abt's teachings. Abt's movement model defines start conditions and "dependencies on other objects" for each movement ([0060]), and the movement control incorporates "the data of their actual position and arrangement" of the movable parts ([0058]), obtained from path and angle sensors 45 ([0054]). A PHOSITA implementing Abt's express prerequisite in Abt's collision-free control ([0051]) would have used that actual-position data as the start condition for the rotation, so that the target seat enters the operating mode after the adjacent seat is in the specified state. Starting the rotation earlier would risk the very collision that Abt's prerequisite is meant to avoid. Abt also displaces both seats sideways before rotating them (FIG. 3b). The claim does not preclude a preliminary movement of the target seat, so this does not detract from the mapping.
allow the target seat to be in the operating mode
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant to adjust his/her seat and carries out the corresponding adjustment..." (0004)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the requested target-seat adjustment is carried out. A PHOSITA would have understood that carrying out the corresponding adjustment places the target seat into the requested operating configuration or mode.
by using the driving device.
See at least:
"the control unit 43 controls a driving device 47 in such a way that at least one seat can be moved and adjusted" (0051)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the target seat is adjusted by using the driving device.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations:
a memory configured to store instructions;
and a control device electrically connected to the input device, the driving device, and the memory,
identify an operating mode
included in an operation input
Disclosure by Yamaguchi
Yamaguchi discloses:
identify an operating mode
See at least:
"the vehicle seat [is] switched from the normal mode to a walk-in mode or a luggage mode" (0030)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly discloses selectable, expressly named seat modes, thereby making explicit identify an operating mode.
included in an operation input
See at least:
"operation of the first switching portion causes the seatback to switch to the folded-down position in the walk-in mode in which a seat slide is unlocked, and operation of the second switching portion causes the seat back to switch to the folded-down position in a luggage mode in which the seat slide is locked" (0012)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly links different user operations to different seat modes, thereby expressly disclosing that the requested mode is included in the operation input.
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to implement Abt's occupant-request-based, coordinated seat-adjustment system using Yamaguchi's express mode-selection input arrangement, because doing so would have predictably improved the explicitness and reliability of user-selected seat-mode identification while applying a known vehicle-seat input technique in a technically compatible manner to Abt's programmable seat-control framework.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Abt and Yamaguchi
After combining the teachings of Abt and Yamaguchi, the following claim limitations are not explicitly disclosed:
a memory configured to store instructions;
and a control device electrically connected to the input device, the driving device, and the memory,
Disclosure by Penilla
Penilla discloses:
a memory configured to store instructions;
See at least:
"The vehicle computer can include any number of electronic systems, such as a processor, memory, logic, networking circuits, hardware, and software." (0270)
"The various embodiments may be embodied in computer readable media, which is saved in storage." (0312)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that the vehicle computer includes memory, and that its functionality is embodied in computer readable media saved in storage. That is a memory configured to store instructions.
and a control device electrically connected to the input device, the driving device, and the memory,
See at least:
"a vehicle can include electronics that utilize memory and a processor to execute program instructions to provide services." (0114)
"Vehicle systems such as chairs and climate fans, cooling, heating elements may be connected to the vehicle computer either in a wired or wireless fashion." (0292)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses a processor that executes program instructions from memory, which requires an electrical connection between the processor and the memory. Penilla also discloses that the chairs are connected to the vehicle computer in a wired or wireless fashion ([0292]) and that the user's input device communicates with the vehicle computer ([0295]). In the combination, Abt's control unit 43 is implemented as such a processor, electrically connected to Abt's manual operating unit (the input device), driving devices 47, and the memory.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla before them, to implement Abt's coordinated seat-control system, further clarified by Yamaguchi's express mode-selection input, using Penilla's explicit computer-memory control architecture, because doing so would have predictably improved programmability, implementation clarity, and electronic integration of known seat-control functions using well-understood vehicle computer architecture.
Regarding Claim 2,
The combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla establishes the apparatus of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 2.
Claim 2 recites two alternatives joined by "or": (A) the front-seat and rear-seat branch ending "by using the driving device; or," and (B) the rear-seat branch that follows. Either alternative is sufficient. Alternative (B) independently meets Claim 2. Alternative (A) is also addressed because Claim 3 relies on its terms ("the front seat," "the first distance," and "the 1-1st angle").
Disclosure by Abt
Abt discloses:
when the operating mode is a relaxation mode, to:
See at least:
"FIG. 1b shows one of the rows of seats 22a-22c in the so-called full-flat position in which a leg rest is lifted and a backrest is lowered." (0034)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses a full-flat position in which the leg rest is lifted and the backrest is lowered, which is a seat position for occupant rest. Abt also discloses adjusting "one seat ... in a more comfortable position than the remaining ones" ([0037]). A seat mode selected so that the occupant can recline and rest is a relaxation mode.
forwardly slide a front seat of the target seat
See at least:
"The seat part 2 can move longitudinally (direction arrow F)" (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses fore-aft movement of the seat part of each seat. In the full-flat position, the target seat's leg rest is lifted forward ([0034]) and therefore extends into the space behind the seat ahead of it. Abt teaches that an adjacent seat is repositioned "beforehand" to provide the clearance a seat's movement requires ([0036]) and expressly accounts for the "front seat" boundary ([0038]). A person of ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) applying Abt's clearance principle would have found it obvious to slide the front seat of the target seat forward, because doing so enlarges the space behind the front seat into which the target seat's leg rest extends.
among the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"taking into account both the boundaries consisting of front seat or rear seat as well as cabin boundaries" (0038)
Rationale:
Abt expressly treats the front seat of a moving seat as one of the neighboring seats that bound its movement. The front seat is therefore among the at least one adjacent seat.
by a first distance,
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches increasing the distance between seats before a seat movement that requires clearance. The amount of that displacement is a distance. The claim places no numerical value on the "first distance," which is satisfied by the displacement amount used in the relaxation mode.
control a reclining angle of the front seat
See at least:
"FIG. 2 shows a sketch of a vehicle seat 1 comprising a seat part 2, to which a backrest 3 and a leg rest 4 are articulated such that they can be pivoted (as shown by direction arrows A and B)." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that each seat has a backrest pivotable in both directions (arrow B), which is control of that seat's reclining angle. This applies to the front seat.
control a cushion angle of the front seat
See at least:
"The seat frame 9 is adjustable in height (direction arrow H) and can be inclined in at least one other direction or it can be displaced linearly (back and forth (direction arrow I) or to the right and to the left (direction arrow J))." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that the seat frame supporting the seat part can be inclined. Inclining the seat frame changes the angle of the seat part, which is the cushion angle. This applies to the front seat.
and control a reclining angle of a rear seat of the target seat
See at least:
"FIG. 4a shows a group of seats comprising two rows 31 and 33 of seats 31a, 31b and 33a, 33b, each of which comprises two vehicle seats 1, which are aligned in the same direction" (0037)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses rows of seats aligned in the same direction, one behind another, so the seat in the row behind the target seat is a rear seat of the target seat. Every seat has Abt's pivotable backrest ([0035]), so Abt discloses controlling the reclining angle of that rear seat.
among the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"taking into account both the boundaries consisting of front seat or rear seat as well as cabin boundaries" (0038)
Rationale:
Abt expressly treats the "rear seat" of a moving seat as one of the neighboring seats that bound its movement. The rear seat is therefore among the at least one adjacent seat.
by using the driving device; or
See at least:
"Actuating or driving devices 47, which can be activated and operated electrically, provide a particularly good activating ability and high positioning accuracy." (0054)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that the seat components, including the seat part, the seat frame, and the backrest, are moved by electrically operated driving devices 47.
backwardly slide the rear seat
See at least:
"The seat frame 9 is adjustable in height (direction arrow H) and can be inclined in at least one other direction or it can be displaced linearly (back and forth (direction arrow I) or to the right and to the left (direction arrow J))." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses displacing the seat frame "back and forth," which includes sliding the rear seat backward. When the target seat is placed in the full-flat position, its backrest is lowered rearward ([0034]) into the space in front of the rear seat. Abt's teaching that the distance between seats is increased "beforehand" to provide the clearance a seat's movement requires ([0036]), together with its express accounting for the "rear seat" boundary ([0038]), would have led a PHOSITA to slide the rear seat backward so that the lowered backrest of the target seat has room.
by the first distance
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036)
Rationale:
The backward displacement of the rear seat is performed through a displacement amount, which satisfies "the first distance." Claim 2 does not require the relaxation-mode displacement values of the two alternatives to be derived from each other.
and control the reclining angle of the rear seat
See at least:
"FIG. 2 shows a sketch of a vehicle seat 1 comprising a seat part 2, to which a backrest 3 and a leg rest 4 are articulated such that they can be pivoted (as shown by direction arrows A and B)." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses the pivotable backrest of each seat, including the rear seat.
by using the driving device.
See at least:
"the electronic device activates the driving device in such a way that at least one vehicle seat can be moved and adjusted in relation to this coordinate system in a collision-free manner in three dimensions." (0056)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that the seat movements are carried out by the electronic device activating the driving device.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations:
wherein the instructions,
when executed by the control device,
further cause the seat control apparatus,
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
by a 1-1st angle,
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
by a 1-2nd angle,
such that the reclining angle of the rear seat is changed to a maximum value or a minimum value,
such that the reclining angle of the rear seat is changed to the maximum value or the minimum value,
Disclosure by Yamaguchi
Yamaguchi discloses:
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
See at least:
"The seat back 3 tilts forward until it comes to be in a folded-down position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion 2" (0074)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly discloses tilting a seat back forward, which is a forward change of its reclining angle. Yamaguchi explains the purpose of the forward tilt: the seat back is then "less apt to get in the way" of the space behind the seat ([0076]). In the relaxation mode of the combination, the lifted leg rest and the legs of the target seat's occupant occupy the space behind the front seat's backrest. Tilting the front seat's backrest forward, as Yamaguchi teaches, moves it out of that space.
by a 1-1st angle,
See at least:
"Therefore, the seat back 3 can be restricted from tilting forward or backward too far." (0035)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly discloses stoppers that limit the forward tilt of the seat back, so the forward tilt is performed through a defined angular amount. The claim places no numerical value on the "1-1st angle," which is satisfied by the forward tilt amount used in the relaxation mode.
such that the reclining angle of the rear seat is changed to a maximum value or a minimum value,
See at least:
"The luggage mode is a mode (i.e., a state) in which the seat back 3 is in a folded-over position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion 2, similar to the walk-in mode, thus enabling the back of the seat back 3 to be used as a surface on which to put luggage or the like" (0030)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly discloses folding a seat back forward "until it comes to be in a folded-down position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion" ([0074]), and discloses stoppers that keep the seat back from tilting "forward or backward too far" ([0035]). Yamaguchi does not state expressly that the folded-down position is the limit set by those stoppers. However, a seat back that lies on top of its own seat cushion cannot rotate further forward, so the folded-down position is the forward extreme of the seat back's travel, which is a maximum or minimum value of its reclining angle. At a minimum, selecting that fully folded end position, rather than an intermediate forward tilt, would have been an obvious modification for the reasons that follow. Yamaguchi also teaches that the folded seat back forms a surface on its upper side ([0030]). In the combination, the target seat's backrest is lowered rearward in the relaxation mode ([0034] of Abt) and extends over the rear seat's cushion. An upright rear seat back stands in that space. A PHOSITA applying Abt's clearance principle ([0036], [0038]) would have found it obvious to fold the rear seat's back to its folded-down end position, because that removes the upright rear seat back from the space the target seat's backrest occupies and leaves a flat surface beneath it, as Yamaguchi teaches. Driving the backrest to its end-of-travel position also gives the controller a defined, repeatable target.
such that the reclining angle of the rear seat is changed to the maximum value or the minimum value,
See at least:
"Therefore, the seat back 3 can be restricted from tilting forward or backward too far." (0035)
Rationale:
The folded-down position of the rear seat's back, discussed above, is the forward extreme of its travel because the seat back lies on its seat cushion. It is therefore the maximum or minimum value of its reclining angle, or at a minimum an obvious choice of end position, for the reasons discussed above.
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to configure the relaxation mode of Abt's seat control apparatus so that, as part of placing the target seat in the relaxation (full-flat) position, the front seat is slid forward and its backrest is tilted forward, and the rear seat is slid backward and its backrest is driven to its folded-down end position. Abt teaches that neighboring seats are repositioned "beforehand" to provide the clearance a seat's movement requires ([0036]) and that the front and rear seats bound that movement ([0038]). Yamaguchi teaches that tilting a seat back forward, up to folding it onto its cushion, makes it "less apt to get in the way" of the space behind it ([0076]) and leaves a usable surface ([0030]). The full-flat position intrudes forward (lifted leg rest) and rearward (lowered backrest), so these complementary teachings together identify which neighboring seats to move and how. Combining them is the predictable use of known seat movements for their established functions, and it yields improved occupant safety and comfort (KSR).
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Abt and Yamaguchi
After combining the teachings of Abt and Yamaguchi, the following claim limitations are not explicitly disclosed:
wherein the instructions,
when executed by the control device,
further cause the seat control apparatus,
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
by a 1-2nd angle,
Disclosure by Park
Park discloses:
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
See at least:
"the connection end portion 320 of the second sliding rails 300 drags and moves the front end portion of the cushion frame 10 and the cushion links 220 connected to the rear end portion of the cushion frame 10 and the seat back link 500 connected to the seat back frame 20 are rotated" (0057); see also FIGS. 5 and 6
Rationale:
Park expressly discloses a powered seat whose cushion frame is moved from an inclined orientation in the seated state (FIG. 5) to a horizontal orientation (FIG. 6) as the seat is moved forward by the driving device, with the front end portion of the cushion frame dragged and the cushion links rotated ([0057]). Comparing FIGS. 5 and 6 shows that the front of the cushion frame is lowered relative to its rear, which is a downward change of the cushion angle. Abt already provides an inclinable seat frame ([0035]). Park shows that lowering the front of the cushion together with forward travel is a known powered-seat movement. Applied to the front seat of the combination, lowering the front of its cushion as it moves forward tilts the whole front seat forward and down. This lowers its profile and carries its backrest further forward, which enlarges the space behind it that the adjacent seat's movement requires ([0036] of Abt).
by a 1-2nd angle,
See at least:
"the seat cushion and the seat back are spread horizontally as shown in FIG. 3 and FIG. 6" (0057); compare FIG. 5
Rationale:
Park expressly discloses a defined angular change of the cushion frame between the inclined orientation of FIG. 5 and the horizontal orientation of FIG. 6. The claim places no numerical value on the "1-2nd angle," which is satisfied by the downward cushion-angle change used in the relaxation mode.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park before them, to further lower the front of the front seat's cushion while sliding the front seat forward, as taught by Park. Park shows that lowering the front of a powered seat's cushion together with forward travel is a known, motor-driven seat movement ([0057]; FIGS. 5–6). Abt's inclinable seat frame ([0035]) provides the actuator. Tilting the front seat forward and down in this way lowers its profile and carries its backrest further forward, which further enlarges the space behind it. That is the result Abt seeks when it repositions an adjacent seat "beforehand" ([0036]). This is the predictable use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way (KSR).
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park
After combining the teachings of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park, the following claim limitations are not explicitly disclosed:
wherein the instructions,
when executed by the control device,
further cause the seat control apparatus,
Disclosure by Penilla
Penilla discloses:
wherein the instructions,
See at least:
"apps access vehicle software APIs that allow access to kernel level restricted classes and functions that allow direct manipulation of seat, window, climate hardware drivers, etc." (0296)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses software resident on the vehicle computer that directly manipulates the seat hardware drivers. These are stored instructions directed to seat control.
when executed by the control device,
See at least:
"FIG. 25 describes one embodiment of a vehicle computer using a software stack to execute instructions from and send instructions to a passenger mobile device." (0295)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that the vehicle computer, which is the device controlling the seat hardware, executes the instructions of its software stack.
further cause the seat control apparatus,
See at least:
"Instructions are interpreted and processed for translation into electrical signals to be sent and/or data sent in this case to the vehicle seat the passenger is sitting in." (0297)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that executing its instructions produces electrical signals that cause the seat hardware to carry out the commanded adjustment. Executed instructions therefore cause the seat control apparatus to perform the further seat operation recited in this claim.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, Park, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, Park, and Penilla before them, to implement the relaxation-mode seat control of the Abt–Yamaguchi–Park combination as stored instructions executed by the control device, as taught by Penilla. Penilla shows that seat adjustments are conventionally performed by a vehicle computer executing stored program instructions translated into electrical signals for the seat hardware ([0114], [0297]). This is the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way, with predictable results (KSR).
Regarding Claim 3,
The combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, Park, and Penilla establishes the apparatus of Claim 2, which is the basis for Claim 3.
Claim 3 refers to "the front seat," "the first distance," and "the 1-1st angle," which are the relaxation-mode values of alternative (A) of Claim 2, as addressed above.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt discloses:
forwardly slide the front seat
See at least:
"The seat part 2 can move longitudinally (direction arrow F)" (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses fore-aft movement of the seat part of each seat, including the front seat.
by a second distance
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches increasing the distance between seats before a seat movement that requires clearance. The forward displacement of the front seat in the walk-in mode is performed through a displacement amount, which is a second distance.
different from the first distance,
See at least:
"These properties are, for example, the location and the path, the maximum and minimum position, the adjustment speed, start and stop ramps and start and stop conditions, diverse termination conditions for the movement, and also a description of the dependencies on other objects." (0060)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that the movement model defines the location and path of each movement and its dependencies on other objects ([0060]), and that its limit parameters are generated from the environmental descriptions ([0043]). The clearance each mode requires is therefore derived from what intrudes into the space behind the front seat in that mode. In the relaxation mode of Claim 2, the intrusion is the target seat's lifted leg rest and its occupant's legs, which extend forward roughly at cushion height (Abt [0034]; Park [0058], FIG. 3). In the walk-in mode, the target seat's back folds forward onto its cushion and the seat slides forward (Yamaguchi [0030], [0067]), so the intrusion is the arc swept by the upper end of the folding seat back, whose radius is the height of the seat back, plus the target seat's forward travel. These are different intrusion geometries at different heights and extents. A single conservative setting sized for the larger of the two intrusions could clear both. A PHOSITA, however, would have had reason to select a distinct setting for each mode. Abt seeks "the most economical and space-saving possible arrangement of the seats" ([0059]), which favors moving a neighboring seat no farther than the movement at hand requires. Using the walk-in clearance in the relaxation mode would displace the front seat, and any occupant of it, farther than necessary. Using the relaxation clearance in the walk-in mode would not clear the folding seat back. Sizing each mode's displacement to that mode's own intrusion, as Abt's per-movement model permits ([0043], [0060]), therefore yields a walk-in displacement that differs from the relaxation displacement. Abt identifies the clearance distance as the variable that determines whether the movement can occur ("must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them," [0036]), and choosing its value for each mode, for the space-saving reason Abt gives, is the kind of optimization contemplated by In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456 (CCPA 1955), and MPEP § 2144.05(II).
control the reclining angle of the front seat
See at least:
"FIG. 2 shows a sketch of a vehicle seat 1 comprising a seat part 2, to which a backrest 3 and a leg rest 4 are articulated such that they can be pivoted (as shown by direction arrows A and B)." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses a backrest pivotable in both directions for each seat, including the front seat.
different from the 1-1st angle,
See at least:
"Provision is made for the limit parameters of the movement model to be generated automatically based on defined environmental descriptions." (0043)
Rationale:
The forward tilt of the front seat's backrest in each mode is likewise derived from what that backrest must clear. In the relaxation mode, the backrest is tilted forward to clear the target occupant's extended legs and leg rest, which lie low behind the front seat. In the walk-in mode, it must clear the upper end of the target seat's forward-folding seat back, whose arc reaches the height of the front seat's upper backrest (Yamaguchi [0030], FIGS. 3A–3D). A single forward tilt sized for the larger obstruction could serve both modes. For the same space-saving reason discussed for the distances (Abt [0059]), a PHOSITA would have tilted the front seat's backrest no farther than each mode requires. A backrest that remains occupied in the relaxation mode would not be tilted as far forward as the walk-in mode needs, and a relaxation-mode tilt would not clear the folding seat back in the walk-in mode. Setting each mode's angle from its own obstruction, which Abt's movement model permits ([0019], [0060]), therefore yields a walk-in angle that differs from the relaxation angle. In re Aller; MPEP § 2144.05(II).
and control the cushion angle of the front seat
See at least:
"The seat frame 9 is adjustable in height (direction arrow H) and can be inclined in at least one other direction or it can be displaced linearly (back and forth (direction arrow I) or to the right and to the left (direction arrow J))." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that the seat frame supporting the seat part can be inclined, which changes the cushion angle of the front seat.
by using the driving device.
See at least:
"the electronic device activates the driving device in such a way that at least one vehicle seat can be moved and adjusted in relation to this coordinate system in a collision-free manner in three dimensions." (0056)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that the seat movements are carried out by the electronic device activating the driving device.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations:
wherein the instructions,
when executed by the control device,
further cause the seat control apparatus,
when the operating mode is a walk-in mode, to:
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
by a 2-1st angle
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
by a 2-2nd angle,
Disclosure by Yamaguchi
Yamaguchi discloses:
when the operating mode is a walk-in mode, to:
See at least:
"The walk-in mode is a mode (i.e., a state) in which the seat back 3 is in a folded-over position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion 2, thus enabling a person to get into and out of the rear seat (FIG. 3D)." (0030)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly discloses a walk-in mode in which a seat's back is folded over onto its cushion so that a person can get into and out of the seat row behind it. Yamaguchi's seat may be "a second row seat when there is a third row seat" ([0081]). In the combination, the target seat is the seat placed in the walk-in mode, and its front seat is the seat in the row ahead of it.
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
See at least:
"the seat back 3 is less apt to get in the way when the person gets into and out of the rear seat" (0076)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly discloses tilting a seat back forward so that it is less in the way of the space behind it ([0074], [0076]). In the walk-in mode of the combination, the target seat's back folds forward and the target seat slides forward (Yamaguchi [0030], [0067]), advancing into the space behind the front seat. Tilting the front seat's backrest forward moves it out of that space, which is a forward change of the front seat's reclining angle.
by a 2-1st angle
See at least:
"Therefore, the seat back 3 can be restricted from tilting forward or backward too far." (0035)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly discloses stoppers that limit the forward tilt of a seat back, so the forward tilt is a defined angular amount. The claim places no numerical value on the "2-1st angle."
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to provide a walk-in mode in Abt's seat control apparatus in which, before the target seat folds forward and slides forward, the front seat is slid forward and its backrest is tilted forward, by amounts determined for the walk-in mode. Yamaguchi teaches the walk-in mode and teaches that a seat back tilted forward is less in the way of the space behind it ([0076]). Abt teaches repositioning an adjacent seat "beforehand" to provide the clearance a seat's movement requires ([0036]), with movement parameters derived for each movement from the environment ([0043], [0060]). Combining these complementary teachings is the predictable use of known seat movements for their established functions, and it improves ease of ingress and egress and occupant safety (KSR).
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Abt and Yamaguchi
After combining the teachings of Abt and Yamaguchi, the following claim limitations are not explicitly disclosed:
wherein the instructions,
when executed by the control device,
further cause the seat control apparatus,
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
by a 2-2nd angle,
Disclosure by Park
Park discloses:
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
See at least:
"the connection end portion 320 of the second sliding rails 300 drags and moves the front end portion of the cushion frame 10 and the cushion links 220 connected to the rear end portion of the cushion frame 10 and the seat back link 500 connected to the seat back frame 20 are rotated" (0057); see also FIGS. 5 and 6
Rationale:
Park expressly discloses a powered seat whose cushion frame is moved from an inclined orientation in the seated state (FIG. 5) to a horizontal orientation (FIG. 6) as the seat is moved forward by the driving device, with the front end portion of the cushion frame dragged and the cushion links rotated ([0057]). Comparing FIGS. 5 and 6 shows that the front of the cushion frame is lowered relative to its rear, which is a downward change of the cushion angle. Abt already provides an inclinable seat frame ([0035]). Park shows that lowering the front of the cushion together with forward travel is a known powered-seat movement. Applied to the front seat of the combination, lowering the front of its cushion as it moves forward tilts the whole front seat forward and down. This lowers its profile and carries its backrest further forward, which enlarges the space behind it into which the target seat folds and slides ([0036] of Abt).
by a 2-2nd angle,
See at least:
"the seat cushion and the seat back are spread horizontally as shown in FIG. 3 and FIG. 6" (0057); compare FIG. 5
Rationale:
Park expressly discloses a defined angular change of the cushion frame between the inclined orientation of FIG. 5 and the horizontal orientation of FIG. 6. The claim places no numerical value on the "2-2nd angle."
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park before them, to further lower the front of the front seat's cushion while sliding the front seat forward, as taught by Park. Park shows that lowering the front of a powered seat's cushion together with forward travel is a known, motor-driven seat movement ([0057]; FIGS. 5–6). Abt's inclinable seat frame ([0035]) provides the actuator. Tilting the front seat forward and down in this way lowers its profile and carries its backrest further forward, which further enlarges the space behind it. That is the result Abt seeks when it repositions an adjacent seat "beforehand" ([0036]). This is the predictable use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way (KSR).
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park
After combining the teachings of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park, the following claim limitations are not explicitly disclosed:
wherein the instructions,
when executed by the control device,
further cause the seat control apparatus,
Disclosure by Penilla
Penilla discloses:
wherein the instructions,
See at least:
"apps access vehicle software APIs that allow access to kernel level restricted classes and functions that allow direct manipulation of seat, window, climate hardware drivers, etc." (0296)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses software resident on the vehicle computer that directly manipulates the seat hardware drivers. These are stored instructions directed to seat control.
when executed by the control device,
See at least:
"FIG. 25 describes one embodiment of a vehicle computer using a software stack to execute instructions from and send instructions to a passenger mobile device." (0295)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that the vehicle computer, which is the device controlling the seat hardware, executes the instructions of its software stack.
further cause the seat control apparatus,
See at least:
"Instructions are interpreted and processed for translation into electrical signals to be sent and/or data sent in this case to the vehicle seat the passenger is sitting in." (0297)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that executing its instructions produces electrical signals that cause the seat hardware to carry out the commanded adjustment. Executed instructions therefore cause the seat control apparatus to perform the further seat operation recited in this claim.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, Park, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, Park, and Penilla before them, to implement the walk-in-mode seat control of the Abt–Yamaguchi–Park combination as stored instructions executed by the control device, as taught by Penilla ([0114], [0297]). This is the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way, with predictable results (KSR).
Regarding Claim 4,
The combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla establishes the apparatus of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 4.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt discloses:
control a reclining angle of a front seat of the target seat
See at least:
"FIG. 2 shows a sketch of a vehicle seat 1 comprising a seat part 2, to which a backrest 3 and a leg rest 4 are articulated such that they can be pivoted (as shown by direction arrows A and B)." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that each seat has a backrest pivotable in both directions, which is control of that seat's reclining angle. Abt arranges seats in rows one behind another ([0037]), so the seat in the row ahead of the target seat is its front seat, and that seat's reclining angle is controlled by Abt's system.
among the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"taking into account both the boundaries consisting of front seat or rear seat as well as cabin boundaries" (0038)
Rationale:
Abt expressly treats the front seat as one of the neighboring seats that bound the movement of the seat being moved. The front seat is therefore among the at least one adjacent seat.
by using the driving device.
See at least:
"Actuating or driving devices 47, which can be activated and operated electrically, provide a particularly good activating ability and high positioning accuracy." (0054)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that the seat components, including the backrest, are moved by electrically operated driving devices 47.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations:
wherein the instructions,
when executed by the control device,
further cause the seat control apparatus,
when the operating mode is a folding mode, to:
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
by a third angle,
Disclosure by Yamaguchi
Yamaguchi discloses:
when the operating mode is a folding mode, to:
See at least:
"The luggage mode is a mode (i.e., a state) in which the seat back 3 is in a folded-over position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion 2, similar to the walk-in mode, thus enabling the back of the seat back 3 to be used as a surface on which to put luggage or the like" (0030)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly discloses a user-selectable mode in which the seat back is folded over onto the seat cushion. That is a folding mode. In the combination, the target seat is the seat placed in the folding mode.
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
See at least:
"The seat back 3 tilts forward until it comes to be in a folded-down position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion 2" (0074)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly discloses tilting a seat back forward, which is a forward change of its reclining angle, and explains that a forward-tilted seat back is "less apt to get in the way" of the space behind it ([0076]). In the folding mode, the target seat's back folds forward until it lies on its cushion (Yamaguchi [0030], [0074]; FIGS. 3F–3H). The upper end of the folding seat back, including its headrest, sweeps forward along an arc whose radius is the height of the seat back. Where rows are closely spaced, as in Abt's space-saving arrangements of closely adjacent seats ([0036], [0059]), the reclined backrest of the front seat extends rearward into that arc. Tilting the front seat's backrest forward removes it from the arc and so removes the obstruction to the target seat's folding.
by a third angle,
See at least:
"Therefore, the seat back 3 can be restricted from tilting forward or backward too far." (0035)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly discloses stoppers that limit the forward tilt, so the forward change is a defined angular amount. The claim places no numerical value on the "third angle." Selecting a magnitude sufficient to clear the arc swept by the target seat's folding seat back is routine optimization of a result-effective variable. In re Aller; MPEP § 2144.05(II).
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to provide Abt's seat control apparatus with a folding mode for the target seat, as taught by Yamaguchi, and, when that mode is selected, to tilt the backrest of the front seat forward by a predetermined angle before the target seat folds. Abt teaches repositioning an adjacent seat "beforehand" to provide the clearance a seat's movement requires ([0036]) and accounts for the front-seat boundary ([0038]). Where the front seat's reclined backrest lies within the arc swept by the target seat's folding seat back, Abt's principle identifies that backrest as the obstruction to remove, and Yamaguchi teaches the forward tilt that removes it ([0076]). This is the predictable use of known seat movements for their established functions, with improved safety and space utilization (KSR).
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Abt and Yamaguchi
After combining the teachings of Abt and Yamaguchi, the following claim limitations are not explicitly disclosed:
wherein the instructions,
when executed by the control device,
further cause the seat control apparatus,
Disclosure by Penilla
Penilla discloses:
wherein the instructions,
See at least:
"apps access vehicle software APIs that allow access to kernel level restricted classes and functions that allow direct manipulation of seat, window, climate hardware drivers, etc." (0296)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses software resident on the vehicle computer that directly manipulates the seat hardware drivers. These are stored instructions directed to seat control.
when executed by the control device,
See at least:
"FIG. 25 describes one embodiment of a vehicle computer using a software stack to execute instructions from and send instructions to a passenger mobile device." (0295)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that the vehicle computer, which is the device controlling the seat hardware, executes the instructions of its software stack.
further cause the seat control apparatus,
See at least:
"Instructions are interpreted and processed for translation into electrical signals to be sent and/or data sent in this case to the vehicle seat the passenger is sitting in." (0297)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that executing its instructions produces electrical signals that cause the seat hardware to carry out the commanded adjustment. Executed instructions therefore cause the seat control apparatus to perform the further seat operation recited in this claim.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla before them, to implement the folding-mode control of the front seat as stored instructions executed by the control device, as taught by Penilla. Penilla shows that seat adjustments in a vehicle are conventionally carried out by a vehicle computer executing stored program instructions that are translated into electrical signals for the seat hardware ([0114], [0297]). Adding a further routine to such a stored-program controller is the use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way, with predictable results (KSR).
Regarding Claim 5,
The combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla establishes the apparatus of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 5.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt discloses:
wherein the instructions,
See at least:
"The control unit comprises software (operating system), which is made accountable for the respective seat application..." (0062)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses software in the control unit. A PHOSITA would have understood such software to be implemented as machine-executable instructions. This discloses wherein the instructions,.
when executed by the control device,
See at least:
"The control unit provides the primary control functions and comprises a processing section, which comprises software and hardware." (0046)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches software processed by the control unit, corresponding to instructions executed by the control device. This discloses when executed by the control device,.
further cause the seat control apparatus to:
See at least:
"The control unit provides the primary control functions..." (0046)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses controller-executed functions that cause seat-control operations. This discloses further cause the seat control apparatus to:.
allow the target seat to be in the operating mode,
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant to adjust his/her seat and carries out the corresponding adjustment..." (0004) and "FIG. 1b shows one of the rows of seats ... in the so-called full-flat position..." / "FIG. 1c shows a row of seats ... in a rotated position." (0034)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the control unit receives a request to adjust the occupant's seat and carries out the corresponding adjustment into a selected seating configuration, such as full-flat or rotated position. This discloses allow the target seat to be in the operating mode,.
based on the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036) and "The method for displacing the vehicle seats ... makes it possible to displace the vehicle seats ... taking into account both the boundaries consisting of front seat or rear seat..." (0038)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that target-seat reconfiguration depends on the condition and spacing of neighboring seats and that seat displacement is carried out taking into account front-seat or rear-seat boundaries. This discloses based on the at least one adjacent seat.
completely allowed to be in the specified state.
See at least:
"The movement of the seats is coupled automatically..." (0059) and "The movement model describes ... start and stop conditions, diverse termination conditions for the movement, and also a description of the dependencies on other objects." (0060)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches automatically coupled seat movement governed by movement conditions, termination conditions, and dependencies on other objects. A PHOSITA would have understood that the target-seat movement is carried out once the adjacent seat has reached the required allowed condition defined by those dependencies and movement conditions, i.e., once the adjacent seat is completely allowed to be in the specified state. This discloses, or at least renders obvious, completely allowed to be in the specified state..
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla before them, to implement Abt's coordinated multi-seat seat-control system, as supplemented by Yamaguchi's explicit operating-mode selection through user input and Penilla's programmable controller-memory instruction architecture, such that the target seat is allowed to enter the operating mode based on the adjacent seat having been brought into the required specified state, because doing so would have predictably improved coordinated seat control, ensured orderly dependency-based seat repositioning in a multi-seat environment, and implemented known user-selectable vehicle-seat control using a technically compatible computer-controlled seat-adjustment architecture.
Regarding Claim 6,
The combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla establishes the apparatus of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 6.
The five "when" conditions are recited in the alternative ("or"). Only one needs to be disclosed or rendered obvious. The conditions "when a user is seated in the at least one adjacent seat" and "when the at least one adjacent seat is operating" are each relied upon below. The others are not relied upon and need not be met.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt discloses:
suspend control of the at least one adjacent seat and the target seat
See at least:
"Such actions can include: stopping, moving backwards, dodging, speed adaptations or even an emission of a warning signal." (0048)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses stopping a requested seat movement as a response to a detected condition. In the combination, a requested operating mode is carried out as a sequence: the adjacent seat is moved into the specified state and the target seat is then moved into the operating mode (Claim 1). In the combination, when the operation input arrives and a listed condition exists, the controller does not start the requested sequence: neither the adjacent seat nor the target seat is driven. This is suspension of the requested control of both seats, not merely a delay of the target seat while the adjacent seat moves.
while an operation input is received,
See at least:
"This movement model 41 enables a separation of the basic functions of the control unit, such as, e.g., the communication with a manual operating unit" (0042)
Rationale:
The application describes suspending control of the seats "while receiving an operation input from the user" ([0092]), that is, not carrying out the requested seat control when the operation input is received and a listed condition exists. Abt expressly discloses that seat-movement requests are received from the occupant through a manual operating unit and that the control system checks for violations of limit parameters before and during the requested movement ([0048]). In the combination, the listed condition is evaluated when the operation input is received, and the requested control is suspended if the condition exists.
or when the at least one adjacent seat is operating.
See at least:
"Since the environment is not fixed in most applications, but rather consists of moving elements such as neighboring seats or cabin partitions, it is important that the adjusting system also be designed for the variation of the environmental descriptions during operation." (0047)
Rationale:
Abt expressly recognizes that neighboring seats are moving elements that may be individually adjusted during operation ([0047], [0053]), and that the seats exchange information about such changes ([0053]). Abt does not expressly state a rule of suspending a requested sequence while the adjacent seat is already moving. However, the adjacent seat is the very seat the requested sequence must first reposition, and its position is changing under another command. A PHOSITA would have found it obvious to suspend the requested sequence in that circumstance rather than issue a second, conflicting command to a seat already in motion. Doing so avoids conflicting commands and the collision risk Abt addresses when limits are violated ([0048]), and it is a predictable, conservative implementation of Abt's collision-free control (KSR).
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations:
wherein the instructions,
when executed by the control device,
further cause the seat control apparatus to:
when a user is seated in the at least one adjacent seat,
Disclosure by Penilla
Penilla discloses:
wherein the instructions,
See at least:
"apps access vehicle software APIs that allow access to kernel level restricted classes and functions that allow direct manipulation of seat, window, climate hardware drivers, etc." (0296)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses software resident on the vehicle computer that directly manipulates the seat hardware drivers. These are stored instructions directed to seat control.
when executed by the control device,
See at least:
"FIG. 25 describes one embodiment of a vehicle computer using a software stack to execute instructions from and send instructions to a passenger mobile device." (0295)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that the vehicle computer, which is the device controlling the seat hardware, executes the instructions of its software stack.
further cause the seat control apparatus to:
See at least:
"Instructions are interpreted and processed for translation into electrical signals to be sent and/or data sent in this case to the vehicle seat the passenger is sitting in." (0297)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that executing its instructions produces electrical signals that cause the seat hardware to carry out the commanded adjustment. Executed instructions therefore cause the seat control apparatus to perform the further seat operation recited in this claim.
when a user is seated in the at least one adjacent seat,
See at least:
"sensors within the vehicle can identify occupied seats" (0275)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses sensors that identify whether a seat is occupied. Automatically sliding or tilting an occupied adjacent seat would move its occupant without that occupant's input. Abt already stops a requested movement when an obstacle is detected ([0048]) and contemplates sensing obstacles that provide no position feedback ([0040]). Penilla does not expressly teach suspending seat control based on occupancy. Using Penilla's occupancy detection as a condition for suspending the requested sequence is a proposed modification, which a PHOSITA would have made for occupant safety.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla before them, to implement the suspension logic of the combination as stored instructions executed by the control device, and to include Penilla's seat-occupancy detection as a suspension condition. Penilla teaches stored-program seat control ([0114], [0297]) and occupancy sensing ([0275]). Abt teaches suspending a requested movement when a condition makes it unsafe ([0048]). Using a known sensing technique to trigger a known safety response improves occupant safety and yields predictable results (KSR).
Regarding Claim 7,
The combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla establishes the apparatus of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 7.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt discloses:
wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, further cause the seat control apparatus to:
See at least:
"It comprises basic software, which can be interpreted as an operating system ... The control unit provides the primary control functions and comprises a processing section, which comprises software and hardware." (0046)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses software executed by the control unit to carry out seat-control functions, which discloses wherein the instructions, when executed by the control device, further cause the seat control apparatus to:.
allow the target seat to be in the operating mode
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant to adjust his/her seat and carries out the corresponding adjustment..." (0004)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the requested seat adjustment is carried out, thereby allowing the target seat to reach the requested configuration or operating mode. This discloses allow the target seat to be in the operating mode.
or when it is identified that the at least one adjacent seat is not moved.
See at least:
"suitable path sensors and angle sensors 45" are provided for the seat control system, and "other movable parts can also be expediently equipped with a communication interface in order to also be able to incorporate the data of their actual position and arrangement into the movement control." (0054, 0058)
Rationale:
This limitation is in the disjunctive. Abt expressly teaches sensor-based and communication-based monitoring of actual seat position and arrangement for adjacent seats in coordinated control. A PHOSITA would have understood that such actual-position monitoring allows the controller to determine whether the adjacent seat has not moved, and to then permit the target seat operation accordingly. Because the claim uses "or," this single disclosed trigger path is sufficient to satisfy the recited alternative-trigger limitation. Thus, Abt discloses or at least renders obvious or when it is identified that the at least one adjacent seat is not moved. Consistent with the requirement of Claim 1 that the target seat enter the operating mode after the adjacent seat is in the specified state, the combination identifies the adjacent seat as not moved when its actual-position data ([0058]) shows it stationary at the specified position. A stop caused instead by a stall or an obstruction is handled by Abt's violation response of stopping or reversing ([0048]), rather than by starting the target seat.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla before them, to implement Abt's coordinated multi-seat seat-control system, as supplemented by Yamaguchi's explicit operating-mode selection through seat input and Penilla's programmable controller-memory architecture, such that the target seat is allowed to enter the operating mode after the adjacent-seat status is evaluated within the coordinated control sequence, because doing so would have predictably improved reliability, orderly dependency-based seat repositioning, and implementation clarity in a multi-seat vehicle seating environment.
Limitations Recited in the Alternative
Claim 7 recites the following conditions in the alternative. Because at least one alternative is disclosed or rendered obvious as mapped above, the following alternatives need not be met:
when a specified time elapses from a point in time when the at least one adjacent seat starts to be controlled,
Regarding Claim 8,
The combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla establishes the apparatus of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 8.
The four points in time are recited in the alternative ("at least one of"). The third and fourth points are relied upon below, and either one is sufficient. The first and second points are not relied upon and need not be met.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt discloses:
to provide a user with a notification function
See at least:
"Such actions can include: stopping, moving backwards, dodging, speed adaptations or even an emission of a warning signal." (0048)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses emitting a warning signal. A warning signal is emitted to be perceived by the seat occupant, and so is a notification function provided to a user.
at at least one of:
See at least:
"In case of violations of limit parameters and environmental descriptions, the adjusting system is allowed to carry out definable actions." (0048)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that the warning is issued in response to a defined event during seat control, namely a violation of the limit parameters. The notification is therefore provided at a defined point in time, which is the third point discussed below.
a third point in time when it is identified that it is impossible to control the at least one adjacent seat;
See at least:
"In the simplest case, obstacles can be detected by means of a di/dt evaluation after a contact or by means of ultrasound sensors even before a possible collision." (0048)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that, when a requested movement would violate limit parameters, for example because an obstacle is detected in its path, the adjusting system carries out a definable action. It lists "stopping, moving backwards, dodging, speed adaptations or even an emission of a warning signal" among those actions ([0048]). A stop by itself does not establish that the adjacent seat can never reach the specified state, and Abt does not expressly describe a determination of impossibility. It would have been obvious, however, to configure Abt's controller to determine that the adjacent seat cannot reach the specified state when the limit violation persists and Abt's other available responses, such as moving backwards or dodging, cannot bring the adjacent seat to the required position within the limit parameters. At that point the requested mode cannot be carried out, and a PHOSITA would have emitted Abt's warning signal so that the occupant knows why. Abt presents the stop and the warning as available actions for the same violation, so pairing them at that determination is the predictable use of Abt's own responses.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations:
further comprising a notification device,
wherein the instructions,
when executed by the control device,
further cause the seat control apparatus
by using the notification device
a fourth point in time when the target seat is completely controlled;
Disclosure by Penilla
Penilla discloses:
further comprising a notification device,
See at least:
"The notifications can be by cell phone, smartphone, tablet computer, mobile device, text messages, phone calls" (0126)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses devices, such as a cell phone, smartphone, or tablet, through which notifications are delivered to the user. Each is a notification device.
wherein the instructions,
See at least:
"apps access vehicle software APIs that allow access to kernel level restricted classes and functions that allow direct manipulation of seat, window, climate hardware drivers, etc." (0296)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses software resident on the vehicle computer that directly manipulates the seat hardware drivers. These are stored instructions directed to seat control.
when executed by the control device,
See at least:
"FIG. 25 describes one embodiment of a vehicle computer using a software stack to execute instructions from and send instructions to a passenger mobile device." (0295)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that the vehicle computer, which is the device controlling the seat hardware, executes the instructions of its software stack.
further cause the seat control apparatus
See at least:
"Instructions are interpreted and processed for translation into electrical signals to be sent and/or data sent in this case to the vehicle seat the passenger is sitting in." (0297)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that executed instructions cause the vehicle's seat-control system to act.
by using the notification device
See at least:
"The vehicle updates the user's device graphical interface to show that the light was turned on." (0293)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses informing the user through the user's device interface of the result of a commanded vehicle-system operation. This is providing the notification by using the notification device.
a fourth point in time when the target seat is completely controlled;
See at least:
"The signals are executed by the seat and the results are sent back to the vehicle computer, which serves the mobile application all graphical changes." (0297)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that, after the seat executes the commanded adjustment, the results are sent back to the vehicle computer, which updates the passenger's mobile application. Penilla gives the parallel example of a light that reports back that it is now on, after which the user's device interface shows that the light was turned on ([0293]). Penilla thus teaches reporting to the user the completed result of a commanded device operation. In the combination, placing the target seat in the operating mode is the final step of the requested sequence. A PHOSITA applying Penilla's completion reporting to that sequence would have notified the user when the target seat's adjustment has been executed, that is, when the target seat is completely controlled.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla before them, to deliver the seat-control notifications of the combination through a notification device such as the occupant's mobile device, both when control of the adjacent seat is identified as impossible and when the target seat's adjustment is complete. Abt already warns the occupant when a requested seat movement is interrupted ([0048]). Penilla teaches reporting the executed result of a commanded seat adjustment to the user's device ([0293], [0297]). Informing the occupant of both outcomes of automatic seat motion improves safety and usability, and combining these complementary, known notification techniques yields predictable results (KSR).
Regarding Claim 9,
The combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla establishes the apparatus of Claim 8, which is the basis for Claim 9.
The changed items are recited in the alternative ("at least one of ... or a combination thereof"). On/off of the notification function is relied upon below. The condition of allowing the target seat to be in the operating mode is not relied upon and need not be met.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations:
wherein the instructions,
when executed by the control device,
further cause the seat control apparatus to:
change at least one of on/off of the notification function,
based on settings of the user.
Disclosure by Penilla
Penilla discloses:
wherein the instructions,
See at least:
"apps access vehicle software APIs that allow access to kernel level restricted classes and functions that allow direct manipulation of seat, window, climate hardware drivers, etc." (0296)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses software resident on the vehicle computer that directly manipulates the seat hardware drivers. These are stored instructions directed to seat control.
when executed by the control device,
See at least:
"FIG. 25 describes one embodiment of a vehicle computer using a software stack to execute instructions from and send instructions to a passenger mobile device." (0295)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that the vehicle computer, which is the device controlling the seat hardware, executes the instructions of its software stack.
further cause the seat control apparatus to:
See at least:
"Instructions are interpreted and processed for translation into electrical signals to be sent and/or data sent in this case to the vehicle seat the passenger is sitting in." (0297)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that executing its instructions produces electrical signals that cause the seat hardware to carry out the commanded adjustment. Executed instructions therefore cause the seat control apparatus to perform the further seat operation recited in this claim.
change at least one of on/off of the notification function,
See at least:
"wear and tear settings and notifications" (0138); "In other cases, notifications may not be sent." (0214)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly lists notifications among the settings associated with a user's login, and it discloses that in some cases notifications are not sent ([0214]). A setting that determines whether notifications are sent is an on/off setting of the notification function. Penilla does not expressly apply this setting to the seat-control notification of the combination. A PHOSITA would have found it obvious to do so, as discussed in the motivation below.
based on settings of the user.
See at least:
"every login may have settings that the user of the login can toggle to their liking" (0136); "These settings can be toggled via a network connected device such as a computer, web application, smart-phone or directly on the vehicle." (0137)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly discloses that users toggle their settings to their liking, through a mobile device or directly on the vehicle. The on/off state of the notification function is therefore changed based on settings of the user.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla before them, to let the user turn the seat-control notifications of the combination on or off through user settings, as taught by Penilla. Penilla teaches user-toggleable vehicle settings, including notification settings, so that each occupant can tailor the vehicle's behavior "to their liking" ([0136]). Applying this known personalization technique to the seat-control notifications of the combination is the predictable use of a known element for its established function. It improves usability by letting the occupant suppress notifications that are unwanted in routine use (KSR).
Regarding Claim 10,
The combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla establishes the apparatus of Claim 1, which is the basis for Claim 10.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt discloses:
wherein the specified state is set for the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"Provision is made for the limit parameters of the movement model to be generated automatically based on defined environmental descriptions." (0043)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that the movement model's limit parameters, including the positions a seat must occupy relative to its neighbors, are generated and set by the system. The position the adjacent seat must reach is therefore a state set for that seat.
adjacent to the target seat
See at least:
"FIG. 3a shows two closely adjacent vehicle seats 1, which are displaced sideways in FIG. 3b as shown by direction arrows K and are co-rotated about approx. 45° in FIG. 3c as shown by rotation arrows L and M." (0036)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses two closely adjacent seats. The seat whose state is set is adjacent to the seat to be rotated, which is the target seat.
in response to the operating mode,
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036)
Rationale:
Abt expressly ties the required position of the adjacent seat to the particular movement being performed ("in order to be able to rotate them"). The state is therefore set in response to the operating mode.
and wherein the specified state includes a boundary section
See at least:
"The enveloping surfaces are included as virtual boundaries in the calculation of the maximum displacement ranges in the method according to the invention so as to be able to preclude a collision with known obstacles." (0040)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses virtual boundaries, the enveloping surfaces, that define the permissible displacement ranges of the seats. Abt forms those boundaries from the positions of the neighboring seats ([0053]). The target seat's requested path therefore divides the possible positions of the adjacent seat into two groups: positions that leave the target seat's path clear and positions that encroach on it. In FIG. 3, for example, lateral spacings at or beyond the required spacing leave room for the rotation, and smaller spacings do not ([0036]). The position at which the adjacent seat just clears the target seat's path is the boundary between these groups. The specified state, which is the required position of the adjacent seat, includes that boundary section.
between an allowable state where interference does not occur
See at least:
"It is possible to ensure that a collision is prevented for every movement of the seat in all the spatial directions by controlling the movement of the seat and its components within a spatial boundary, which is characterized by a three-dimensional flat or curved enveloping surface." (0057)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses that movement within the boundary is collision-free. Adjacent-seat positions on the clear side of the boundary are therefore an allowable state where interference does not occur.
due to the at least one e adjacent seat
See at least:
"In order to be able to take into account even individually adjusted neighboring seats or cabin boundaries when preventing collisions, it is also possible to change the position and form of the spatial boundary" (0053)
Rationale:
Abt expressly identifies neighboring seats as a source of the boundary. The interference the boundary prevents is therefore interference due to the adjacent seat.
and an unallowable state where interference occurs,
See at least:
"In case of violations of limit parameters and environmental descriptions, the adjusting system is allowed to carry out definable actions." (0048)
Rationale:
Abt expressly treats positions beyond the boundary as violations that trigger corrective action. Adjacent-seat positions on the encroaching side of the boundary are therefore an unallowable state. The application describes interference as occurring "due to at least one of a space, a trajectory, or any combination thereof, which is occupied by each of a plurality of seats" (application [0258]). Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, interference therefore includes overlap of the space or trajectory occupied by the seats, which is what Abt's boundary guards against. If Abt's boundary includes a safety margin, a position just beyond it may not yet produce an actual overlap of occupied space or trajectory. To that extent, it would have been obvious to derive the boundary from the geometric space occupied by the seats, which Abt's model already describes. Abt generates its limit parameters from the environmental descriptions ([0043]) and contemplates deriving the model directly from the seat manufacturer's CAD design data ([0061]). Deriving the boundary from that geometry places it at the transition to actual interference. This avoids moving the adjacent seat farther than the target seat's path requires, consistent with Abt's space-saving objective ([0059]).
in a process of controlling the target seat.
See at least:
"the control unit 43 controls a driving device 47 in such a way that at least one seat can be moved and adjusted in a collision-free manner in three dimensions in relation to this coordinate system." (0051)
Rationale:
Abt expressly applies the boundary during the controlled movement of the seat, so the boundary operates in a process of controlling the target seat.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla before them, to define the specified state of the adjacent seat in the combination of Claim 1 by the boundary between adjacent-seat positions that leave the target seat's path clear and positions that encroach on it, as taught by Abt. The combination already relies on Abt's collision-free control and on Abt's requirement that the adjacent seat be repositioned "beforehand" so that the target seat can move ([0036]). Abt's enveloping surfaces, formed from the positions of neighboring seats, are the mechanism Abt uses to separate permissible positions from positions that would cause a collision ([0040], [0053], [0057]). Using that same boundary to define the adjacent seat's required state in the mode-selectable, stored-program seat control of the combination is the predictable use of a known collision-avoidance technique within a compatible system. It improves occupant safety and avoids moving the adjacent seat farther than necessary, consistent with Abt's space-saving objective ([0059]) (KSR).
Regarding Claim 11,
Disclosure by Abt
Abt teaches:
A seat control method,
See at least:
"The invention relates to a vehicle seat, an adjusting system and a method for moving at least one vehicle seat arranged in a vehicle cabin..." (0002)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses a method for moving a vehicle seat, which teaches A seat control method,.
the method comprising:
See at least:
"The method for displacing the vehicle seats with the help of a three-dimensional coordinate system makes it possible to displace the vehicle seats ... automatically or semi-automatically..." (0038)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses a multi-step seat-displacement method, which supports the method comprising:.
when receiving the operation input
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant..." (0004)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches receipt of a seat occupant request, which teaches when receiving the operation input.
to a target seat
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant to adjust his/her seat..." (0004)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the request is directed to the occupant's own seat. That teaches to a target seat.
through an input device;
See at least:
"communication with a manual operating unit" (0042)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches communication with a manual operating unit. A PHOSITA would have understood the occupant request of 0004 to be received through that manual operating unit, thereby teaching through an input device;.
identifying, by the control device, a specified state
See at least:
"The movement model describes the movement-characterizing properties ... the maximum and minimum position, the adjustment speed, start and stop ramps and start and stop conditions, diverse termination conditions for the movement, and also a description of the dependencies on other objects." (0060)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the control logic defines particular movement conditions, positions, and dependencies. That teaches identifying, by the control device, a specified state.
of at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"In the case of adjacent seats, the same controller can evaluate the sensor signals and carry out the control." (0058)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches controller-based control of adjacent seats, which teaches of at least one adjacent seat.
adjacent to the target seat
See at least:
"position changes in the y direction (adjacent seats being pulled apart)" (0011)
Rationale:
Abt expressly refers to adjacent seats and their relative repositioning, thereby teaching adjacent to the target seat.
based on the operating mode;
See at least:
"Future first class and business class seats will require distinctly more space with the 'fully reclined comfort requirement (full flat).' ... position changes in the y direction (adjacent seats being pulled apart) or rotary movements of the seats are necessary. Furthermore, the requirement of bringing such seats/rows of seats into conference positions ... is also being recognized." (0011)
Rationale:
Abt expressly links the required adjacent-seat condition to the intended seating configuration, such as full-flat or conference positions. Thus, the adjacent-seat state is identified based on the operating mode;.
allowing, by the control device, the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"The movement of the seats is coupled automatically..." (0059)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches automatically coupled movement of multiple seats. A PHOSITA would have understood this as controller-directed allowing of the adjacent seat to assume the required condition. This teaches allowing, by the control device, the at least one adjacent seat.
to be in the specified state
See at least:
"The enveloping surfaces are included as virtual boundaries in the calculation of the maximum displacement ranges ... so as to be able to preclude a collision with known obstacles." (0040)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches movement within permitted boundary-defined conditions to avoid collision, which teaches to be in the specified state.
by using a driving device; and
See at least:
"the control unit 43 controls a driving device 47 in such a way that at least one seat can be moved and adjusted..." (0051)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches movement by use of the driving device, which teaches by using a driving device; and.
after the at least one adjacent seat is in the specified state,
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036); "Other movable parts can also be expediently equipped with a communication interface in order to also be able to incorporate the data of their actual position and arrangement into the movement control." (0058)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches a required preliminary spacing: the distance between the seats "must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them" ([0036]). That increased spacing is the specified state of the adjacent seat identified above, and the rotation is the target seat's operating mode. Abt thus expressly teaches the physical sequence and the prerequisite: the spacing must exist before the rotation, and the rotation depends on it ("in order to be able to rotate them"). Abt does not expressly describe a controller step that confirms the adjacent seat has reached the required spacing before starting the rotation. That implementation would have been obvious from Abt's teachings. Abt's movement model defines start conditions and "dependencies on other objects" for each movement ([0060]), and the movement control incorporates "the data of their actual position and arrangement" of the movable parts ([0058]), obtained from path and angle sensors 45 ([0054]). A PHOSITA implementing Abt's express prerequisite in Abt's collision-free control ([0051]) would have used that actual-position data as the start condition for the rotation, so that the target seat enters the operating mode after the adjacent seat is in the specified state. Starting the rotation earlier would risk the very collision that Abt's prerequisite is meant to avoid. Abt also displaces both seats sideways before rotating them (FIG. 3b). The claim does not preclude a preliminary movement of the target seat, so this does not detract from the mapping.
allowing, by the control device, the target seat
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant to adjust his/her seat and carries out the corresponding adjustment..." (0004)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the control unit carries out the requested seat adjustment, which teaches allowing, by the control device, the target seat.
to be in the operating mode
See at least:
"One seat is adjusted in a more comfortable position..." and "two vehicle seats ... are rotated about 180°..." (0037)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches different seat configurations and positions, such as a more comfortable position and a rotated configuration. A PHOSITA would have understood these as operating modes. This teaches to be in the operating mode.
by using the driving device.
See at least:
"the control unit 43 controls a driving device 47 in such a way that at least one seat can be moved and adjusted..." (0051)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the target seat is moved and adjusted by using the driving device, which teaches by using the driving device..
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly teach the following claim limitations:
identifying, by a control device, an operating mode
included in an operation input
Disclosure by Yamaguchi
Yamaguchi teaches:
identifying, by a control device, an operating mode
See at least:
"the vehicle seat [is] switched from the normal mode to a walk-in mode or a luggage mode" (0030)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly discloses selectable, expressly named seat modes, thereby making explicit identifying, by a control device, an operating mode.
included in an operation input
See at least:
"operation of the first switching portion causes the seatback to switch to the folded-down position in the walk-in mode in which a seat slide is unlocked, and operation of the second switching portion causes the seat back to switch to the folded-down position in a luggage mode in which the seat slide is locked" (0012)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly links different user operations to different seat modes, thereby teaching that the selected mode is included in the operation input. This teaches included in an operation input.
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to implement Abt's occupant-request-based seat-control method using Yamaguchi's express mode-selection input arrangement, because doing so would have predictably improved the explicitness and reliability of user-selected seat-mode identification while applying a known vehicle-seat input technique in a technically compatible manner to Abt's programmable seat-control framework.
Regarding Claim 12,
The combination of Abt and Yamaguchi establishes the method of Claim 11, which is the basis for Claim 12.
Claim 12 recites two alternatives joined by "or": (A) the front-seat and rear-seat branch ending "by using the driving device; or," and (B) the rear-seat branch that follows. Either alternative is sufficient. Alternative (B) independently meets Claim 12. Alternative (A) is also addressed because Claim 13 relies on its terms ("the front seat," "the first distance," and "the 1-1st angle").
Disclosure by Abt
Abt teaches:
wherein allowing, by the control device, the target seat to be in the operating mode by using the driving device,
See at least:
"the electronic device activates the driving device in such a way that at least one vehicle seat can be moved and adjusted in relation to this coordinate system in a collision-free manner in three dimensions." (0056)
Rationale:
This limitation refers back to the target-seat step of Claim 11, which Abt teaches as the control device moving the target seat into its operating mode using the driving device. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim places the recited adjacent-seat movements within the operation of placing the target seat in the relaxation mode. In the combination, those movements are performed as part of carrying out the requested relaxation mode, before the target seat reaches that mode.
when the operating mode is a relaxation mode, further includes:
See at least:
"FIG. 1b shows one of the rows of seats 22a-22c in the so-called full-flat position in which a leg rest is lifted and a backrest is lowered." (0034)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches a full-flat position in which the leg rest is lifted and the backrest is lowered, which is a seat position for occupant rest. Abt also teaches adjusting "one seat ... in a more comfortable position than the remaining ones" ([0037]). A seat mode selected so that the occupant can recline and rest is a relaxation mode.
forwardly sliding, by the control device, a front seat of the target seat
See at least:
"The seat part 2 can move longitudinally (direction arrow F)" (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches fore-aft movement of the seat part of each seat. In the full-flat position, the target seat's leg rest is lifted forward ([0034]) and therefore extends into the space behind the seat ahead of it. Abt teaches that an adjacent seat is repositioned "beforehand" to provide the clearance a seat's movement requires ([0036]) and expressly accounts for the "front seat" boundary ([0038]). A person of ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) applying Abt's clearance principle would have found it obvious to slide the front seat of the target seat forward, because doing so enlarges the space behind the front seat into which the target seat's leg rest extends. Abt's control unit carries out the control of adjacent seats ([0058]), so the sliding is performed by the control device.
among the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"taking into account both the boundaries consisting of front seat or rear seat as well as cabin boundaries" (0038)
Rationale:
Abt expressly treats the front seat of a moving seat as one of the neighboring seats that bound its movement. The front seat is therefore among the at least one adjacent seat.
by a first distance,
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches increasing the distance between seats before a seat movement that requires clearance. The amount of that displacement is a distance. The claim places no numerical value on the "first distance," which is satisfied by the displacement amount used in the relaxation mode.
controlling a reclining angle of the front seat
See at least:
"FIG. 2 shows a sketch of a vehicle seat 1 comprising a seat part 2, to which a backrest 3 and a leg rest 4 are articulated such that they can be pivoted (as shown by direction arrows A and B)." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that each seat has a backrest pivotable in both directions (arrow B), which is control of that seat's reclining angle. This applies to the front seat.
controlling a cushion angle of the front seat
See at least:
"The seat frame 9 is adjustable in height (direction arrow H) and can be inclined in at least one other direction or it can be displaced linearly (back and forth (direction arrow I) or to the right and to the left (direction arrow J))." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the seat frame supporting the seat part can be inclined. Inclining the seat frame changes the angle of the seat part, which is the cushion angle. This applies to the front seat.
and controlling a reclining angle of a rear seat of the target seat
See at least:
"FIG. 4a shows a group of seats comprising two rows 31 and 33 of seats 31a, 31b and 33a, 33b, each of which comprises two vehicle seats 1, which are aligned in the same direction" (0037)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches rows of seats aligned in the same direction, one behind another, so the seat in the row behind the target seat is a rear seat of the target seat. Every seat has Abt's pivotable backrest ([0035]), so Abt teaches controlling the reclining angle of that rear seat.
among the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"taking into account both the boundaries consisting of front seat or rear seat as well as cabin boundaries" (0038)
Rationale:
Abt expressly treats the "rear seat" of a moving seat as one of the neighboring seats that bound its movement. The rear seat is therefore among the at least one adjacent seat.
by using the driving device; or
See at least:
"Actuating or driving devices 47, which can be activated and operated electrically, provide a particularly good activating ability and high positioning accuracy." (0054)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the seat components, including the seat part, the seat frame, and the backrest, are moved by electrically operated driving devices 47.
backwardly sliding, by the control device,
See at least:
"The seat frame 9 is adjustable in height (direction arrow H) and can be inclined in at least one other direction or it can be displaced linearly (back and forth (direction arrow I) or to the right and to the left (direction arrow J))." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches displacing the seat frame "back and forth," which includes sliding the rear seat backward. When the target seat is placed in the full-flat position, its backrest is lowered rearward ([0034]) into the space in front of the rear seat. Abt's teaching that the distance between seats is increased "beforehand" to provide the clearance a seat's movement requires ([0036]), together with its express accounting for the "rear seat" boundary ([0038]), would have led a PHOSITA to slide the rear seat backward so that the lowered backrest of the target seat has room. Abt's control unit carries out the control of adjacent seats ([0058]), so the sliding is performed by the control device.
the rear seat
See at least:
"FIG. 4a shows a group of seats comprising two rows 31 and 33 of seats 31a, 31b and 33a, 33b, each of which comprises two vehicle seats 1, which are aligned in the same direction" (0037)
Rationale:
The rear seat is the seat in the row behind the target seat, as discussed above for the rear seat of the target seat.
by the first distance
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036)
Rationale:
The backward displacement of the rear seat is performed through a displacement amount, which satisfies "the first distance." Claim 12 does not require the relaxation-mode displacement values of the two alternatives to be derived from each other.
and controlling the reclining angle of the rear seat
See at least:
"FIG. 2 shows a sketch of a vehicle seat 1 comprising a seat part 2, to which a backrest 3 and a leg rest 4 are articulated such that they can be pivoted (as shown by direction arrows A and B)." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches the pivotable backrest of each seat, including the rear seat.
by using the driving device.
See at least:
"the electronic device activates the driving device in such a way that at least one vehicle seat can be moved and adjusted in relation to this coordinate system in a collision-free manner in three dimensions." (0056)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the seat movements are carried out by the electronic device activating the driving device.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly teach the following claim limitations:
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
by a 1-1st angle,
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
by a 1-2nd angle,
such that the reclining angle of the rear seat is changed to a maximum value or a minimum value,
such that the reclining angle of the rear seat is changed to the maximum value or the minimum value,
Disclosure by Yamaguchi
Yamaguchi teaches:
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
See at least:
"The seat back 3 tilts forward until it comes to be in a folded-down position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion 2" (0074)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly teaches tilting a seat back forward, which is a forward change of its reclining angle. Yamaguchi explains the purpose of the forward tilt: the seat back is then "less apt to get in the way" of the space behind the seat ([0076]). In the relaxation mode of the combination, the lifted leg rest and the legs of the target seat's occupant occupy the space behind the front seat's backrest. Tilting the front seat's backrest forward, as Yamaguchi teaches, moves it out of that space.
by a 1-1st angle,
See at least:
"Therefore, the seat back 3 can be restricted from tilting forward or backward too far." (0035)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly teaches stoppers that limit the forward tilt of the seat back, so the forward tilt is performed through a defined angular amount. The claim places no numerical value on the "1-1st angle," which is satisfied by the forward tilt amount used in the relaxation mode.
such that the reclining angle of the rear seat is changed to a maximum value or a minimum value,
See at least:
"The luggage mode is a mode (i.e., a state) in which the seat back 3 is in a folded-over position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion 2, similar to the walk-in mode, thus enabling the back of the seat back 3 to be used as a surface on which to put luggage or the like" (0030)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly teaches folding a seat back forward "until it comes to be in a folded-down position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion" ([0074]), and teaches stoppers that keep the seat back from tilting "forward or backward too far" ([0035]). Yamaguchi does not state expressly that the folded-down position is the limit set by those stoppers. However, a seat back that lies on top of its own seat cushion cannot rotate further forward, so the folded-down position is the forward extreme of the seat back's travel, which is a maximum or minimum value of its reclining angle. At a minimum, selecting that fully folded end position, rather than an intermediate forward tilt, would have been an obvious modification for the reasons that follow. Yamaguchi also teaches that the folded seat back forms a surface on its upper side ([0030]). In the combination, the target seat's backrest is lowered rearward in the relaxation mode ([0034] of Abt) and extends over the rear seat's cushion. An upright rear seat back stands in that space. A PHOSITA applying Abt's clearance principle ([0036], [0038]) would have found it obvious to fold the rear seat's back to its folded-down end position, because that removes the upright rear seat back from the space the target seat's backrest occupies and leaves a flat surface beneath it, as Yamaguchi teaches. Driving the backrest to its end-of-travel position also gives the controller a defined, repeatable target.
such that the reclining angle of the rear seat is changed to the maximum value or the minimum value,
See at least:
"Therefore, the seat back 3 can be restricted from tilting forward or backward too far." (0035)
Rationale:
The folded-down position of the rear seat's back, discussed above, is the forward extreme of its travel because the seat back lies on its seat cushion. It is therefore the maximum or minimum value of its reclining angle, or at a minimum an obvious choice of end position, for the reasons discussed above.
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to configure the relaxation mode of Abt's seat control method so that, as part of placing the target seat in the relaxation (full-flat) position, the front seat is slid forward and its backrest is tilted forward, and the rear seat is slid backward and its backrest is driven to its folded-down end position. Abt teaches that neighboring seats are repositioned "beforehand" to provide the clearance a seat's movement requires ([0036]) and that the front and rear seats bound that movement ([0038]). Yamaguchi teaches that tilting a seat back forward, up to folding it onto its cushion, makes it "less apt to get in the way" of the space behind it ([0076]) and leaves a usable surface ([0030]). The full-flat position intrudes forward (lifted leg rest) and rearward (lowered backrest), so these complementary teachings together identify which neighboring seats to move and how. Combining them is the predictable use of known seat movements for their established functions, and it yields improved occupant safety and comfort (KSR).
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Abt and Yamaguchi
After combining the teachings of Abt and Yamaguchi, the following claim limitations are not explicitly disclosed:
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
by a 1-2nd angle,
Disclosure by Park
Park teaches:
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
See at least:
"the connection end portion 320 of the second sliding rails 300 drags and moves the front end portion of the cushion frame 10 and the cushion links 220 connected to the rear end portion of the cushion frame 10 and the seat back link 500 connected to the seat back frame 20 are rotated" (0057); see also FIGS. 5 and 6
Rationale:
Park expressly teaches a powered seat whose cushion frame is moved from an inclined orientation in the seated state (FIG. 5) to a horizontal orientation (FIG. 6) as the seat is moved forward by the driving device, with the front end portion of the cushion frame dragged and the cushion links rotated ([0057]). Comparing FIGS. 5 and 6 shows that the front of the cushion frame is lowered relative to its rear, which is a downward change of the cushion angle. Abt already provides an inclinable seat frame ([0035]). Park shows that lowering the front of the cushion together with forward travel is a known powered-seat movement. Applied to the front seat of the combination, lowering the front of its cushion as it moves forward tilts the whole front seat forward and down. This lowers its profile and carries its backrest further forward, which enlarges the space behind it that the adjacent seat's movement requires ([0036] of Abt).
by a 1-2nd angle,
See at least:
"the seat cushion and the seat back are spread horizontally as shown in FIG. 3 and FIG. 6" (0057); compare FIG. 5
Rationale:
Park expressly teaches a defined angular change of the cushion frame between the inclined orientation of FIG. 5 and the horizontal orientation of FIG. 6. The claim places no numerical value on the "1-2nd angle," which is satisfied by the downward cushion-angle change used in the relaxation mode.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park before them, to further lower the front of the front seat's cushion while sliding the front seat forward, as taught by Park. Park shows that lowering the front of a powered seat's cushion together with forward travel is a known, motor-driven seat movement ([0057]; FIGS. 5–6). Abt's inclinable seat frame ([0035]) provides the actuator. Tilting the front seat forward and down in this way lowers its profile and carries its backrest further forward, which further enlarges the space behind it. That is the result Abt seeks when it repositions an adjacent seat "beforehand" ([0036]). This is the predictable use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way (KSR).
Regarding Claim 13,
The combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park establishes the method of Claim 12, which is the basis for Claim 13.
Claim 13 refers to "the front seat," "the first distance," and "the 1-1st angle," which are the relaxation-mode values of alternative (A) of Claim 12, as addressed above.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt teaches:
wherein allowing, by the control device, the target seat to be in the operating mode by using the driving device,
See at least:
"the electronic device activates the driving device in such a way that at least one vehicle seat can be moved and adjusted in relation to this coordinate system in a collision-free manner in three dimensions." (0056)
Rationale:
This limitation refers back to the target-seat step of Claim 11, which Abt teaches as the control device moving the target seat into its operating mode using the driving device. In the combination, the recited front-seat movements are performed as part of carrying out the requested walk-in mode.
forwardly sliding, by the control device,
See at least:
"The seat part 2 can move longitudinally (direction arrow F)" (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches fore-aft movement of the seat part of each seat, including the front seat. Abt's control unit carries out the control of adjacent seats ([0058]), so the sliding is performed by the control device.
the front seat
See at least:
"taking into account both the boundaries consisting of front seat or rear seat as well as cabin boundaries" (0038)
Rationale:
Abt expressly treats the front seat of a moving seat as one of the neighboring seats that bound its movement. That is the front seat that is slid forward.
by a second distance
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches increasing the distance between seats before a seat movement that requires clearance. The forward displacement of the front seat in the walk-in mode is performed through a displacement amount, which is a second distance.
different from the first distance,
See at least:
"These properties are, for example, the location and the path, the maximum and minimum position, the adjustment speed, start and stop ramps and start and stop conditions, diverse termination conditions for the movement, and also a description of the dependencies on other objects." (0060)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the movement model defines the location and path of each movement and its dependencies on other objects ([0060]), and that its limit parameters are generated from the environmental descriptions ([0043]). The clearance each mode requires is therefore derived from what intrudes into the space behind the front seat in that mode. In the relaxation mode of Claim 12, the intrusion is the target seat's lifted leg rest and its occupant's legs, which extend forward roughly at cushion height (Abt [0034]; Park [0058], FIG. 3). In the walk-in mode, the target seat's back folds forward onto its cushion and the seat slides forward (Yamaguchi [0030], [0067]), so the intrusion is the arc swept by the upper end of the folding seat back, whose radius is the height of the seat back, plus the target seat's forward travel. These are different intrusion geometries at different heights and extents. A single conservative setting sized for the larger of the two intrusions could clear both. A PHOSITA, however, would have had reason to select a distinct setting for each mode. Abt seeks "the most economical and space-saving possible arrangement of the seats" ([0059]), which favors moving a neighboring seat no farther than the movement at hand requires. Using the walk-in clearance in the relaxation mode would displace the front seat, and any occupant of it, farther than necessary. Using the relaxation clearance in the walk-in mode would not clear the folding seat back. Sizing each mode's displacement to that mode's own intrusion, as Abt's per-movement model permits ([0043], [0060]), therefore yields a walk-in displacement that differs from the relaxation displacement. Abt identifies the clearance distance as the variable that determines whether the movement can occur ("must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them," [0036]), and choosing its value for each mode, for the space-saving reason Abt gives, is the kind of optimization contemplated by In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456 (CCPA 1955), and MPEP § 2144.05(II).
controlling the reclining angle of the front seat
See at least:
"FIG. 2 shows a sketch of a vehicle seat 1 comprising a seat part 2, to which a backrest 3 and a leg rest 4 are articulated such that they can be pivoted (as shown by direction arrows A and B)." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches a backrest pivotable in both directions for each seat, including the front seat.
different from the 1-1st angle,
See at least:
"Provision is made for the limit parameters of the movement model to be generated automatically based on defined environmental descriptions." (0043)
Rationale:
The forward tilt of the front seat's backrest in each mode is likewise derived from what that backrest must clear. In the relaxation mode, the backrest is tilted forward to clear the target occupant's extended legs and leg rest, which lie low behind the front seat. In the walk-in mode, it must clear the upper end of the target seat's forward-folding seat back, whose arc reaches the height of the front seat's upper backrest (Yamaguchi [0030], FIGS. 3A–3D). A single forward tilt sized for the larger obstruction could serve both modes. For the same space-saving reason discussed for the distances (Abt [0059]), a PHOSITA would have tilted the front seat's backrest no farther than each mode requires. A backrest that remains occupied in the relaxation mode would not be tilted as far forward as the walk-in mode needs, and a relaxation-mode tilt would not clear the folding seat back in the walk-in mode. Setting each mode's angle from its own obstruction, which Abt's movement model permits ([0019], [0060]), therefore yields a walk-in angle that differs from the relaxation angle. In re Aller; MPEP § 2144.05(II).
and controlling the cushion angle of the front seat
See at least:
"The seat frame 9 is adjustable in height (direction arrow H) and can be inclined in at least one other direction or it can be displaced linearly (back and forth (direction arrow I) or to the right and to the left (direction arrow J))." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the seat frame supporting the seat part can be inclined, which changes the cushion angle of the front seat.
by using the driving device.
See at least:
"the electronic device activates the driving device in such a way that at least one vehicle seat can be moved and adjusted in relation to this coordinate system in a collision-free manner in three dimensions." (0056)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the seat movements are carried out by the electronic device activating the driving device.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly teach the following claim limitations:
when the operating mode is a walk-in mode, further includes:
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
by a 2-1st angle
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
by a 2-2nd angle,
Disclosure by Yamaguchi
Yamaguchi teaches:
when the operating mode is a walk-in mode, further includes:
See at least:
"The walk-in mode is a mode (i.e., a state) in which the seat back 3 is in a folded-over position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion 2, thus enabling a person to get into and out of the rear seat (FIG. 3D)." (0030)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly teaches a walk-in mode in which a seat's back is folded over onto its cushion so that a person can get into and out of the seat row behind it. Yamaguchi's seat may be "a second row seat when there is a third row seat" ([0081]). In the combination, the target seat is the seat placed in the walk-in mode, and its front seat is the seat in the row ahead of it.
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
See at least:
"the seat back 3 is less apt to get in the way when the person gets into and out of the rear seat" (0076)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly teaches tilting a seat back forward so that it is less in the way of the space behind it ([0074], [0076]). In the walk-in mode of the combination, the target seat's back folds forward and the target seat slides forward (Yamaguchi [0030], [0067]), advancing into the space behind the front seat. Tilting the front seat's backrest forward moves it out of that space, which is a forward change of the front seat's reclining angle.
by a 2-1st angle
See at least:
"Therefore, the seat back 3 can be restricted from tilting forward or backward too far." (0035)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly teaches stoppers that limit the forward tilt of a seat back, so the forward tilt is a defined angular amount. The claim places no numerical value on the "2-1st angle."
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to provide a walk-in mode in Abt's seat control method in which, before the target seat folds forward and slides forward, the front seat is slid forward and its backrest is tilted forward, by amounts determined for the walk-in mode. Yamaguchi teaches the walk-in mode and teaches that a seat back tilted forward is less in the way of the space behind it ([0076]). Abt teaches repositioning an adjacent seat "beforehand" to provide the clearance a seat's movement requires ([0036]), with movement parameters derived for each movement from the environment ([0043], [0060]). Combining these complementary teachings is the predictable use of known seat movements for their established functions, and it improves ease of ingress and egress and occupant safety (KSR).
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of Abt and Yamaguchi
After combining the teachings of Abt and Yamaguchi, the following claim limitations are not explicitly disclosed:
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
by a 2-2nd angle,
Disclosure by Park
Park teaches:
such that the cushion angle of the front seat is downwardly changed
See at least:
"the connection end portion 320 of the second sliding rails 300 drags and moves the front end portion of the cushion frame 10 and the cushion links 220 connected to the rear end portion of the cushion frame 10 and the seat back link 500 connected to the seat back frame 20 are rotated" (0057); see also FIGS. 5 and 6
Rationale:
Park expressly teaches a powered seat whose cushion frame is moved from an inclined orientation in the seated state (FIG. 5) to a horizontal orientation (FIG. 6) as the seat is moved forward by the driving device, with the front end portion of the cushion frame dragged and the cushion links rotated ([0057]). Comparing FIGS. 5 and 6 shows that the front of the cushion frame is lowered relative to its rear, which is a downward change of the cushion angle. Abt already provides an inclinable seat frame ([0035]). Park shows that lowering the front of the cushion together with forward travel is a known powered-seat movement. Applied to the front seat of the combination, lowering the front of its cushion as it moves forward tilts the whole front seat forward and down. This lowers its profile and carries its backrest further forward, which enlarges the space behind it into which the target seat folds and slides ([0036] of Abt).
by a 2-2nd angle,
See at least:
"the seat cushion and the seat back are spread horizontally as shown in FIG. 3 and FIG. 6" (0057); compare FIG. 5
Rationale:
Park expressly teaches a defined angular change of the cushion frame between the inclined orientation of FIG. 5 and the horizontal orientation of FIG. 6. The claim places no numerical value on the "2-2nd angle."
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Park before them, to further lower the front of the front seat's cushion while sliding the front seat forward, as taught by Park. Park shows that lowering the front of a powered seat's cushion together with forward travel is a known, motor-driven seat movement ([0057]; FIGS. 5–6). Abt's inclinable seat frame ([0035]) provides the actuator. Tilting the front seat forward and down in this way lowers its profile and carries its backrest further forward, which further enlarges the space behind it. That is the result Abt seeks when it repositions an adjacent seat "beforehand" ([0036]). This is the predictable use of a known technique to improve a similar device in the same way (KSR).
Regarding Claim 14,
The combination of Abt and Yamaguchi establishes the method of Claim 11, which is the basis for Claim 14.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt teaches:
wherein allowing, by the control device, the target seat to be in the operating mode by using the driving device,
See at least:
"the electronic device activates the driving device in such a way that at least one vehicle seat can be moved and adjusted in relation to this coordinate system in a collision-free manner in three dimensions." (0056)
Rationale:
This limitation refers back to the target-seat step of Claim 11, which Abt teaches. In the combination, the recited front-seat movement is performed as part of carrying out the requested folding mode.
controlling, by the control device,
See at least:
"the control unit 43 controls a driving device 47 in such a way that at least one seat can be moved and adjusted in a collision-free manner in three dimensions in relation to this coordinate system." (0051)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that control unit 43 controls the seat movements, so the controlling is performed by the control device.
a reclining angle of a front seat of the target seat
See at least:
"FIG. 2 shows a sketch of a vehicle seat 1 comprising a seat part 2, to which a backrest 3 and a leg rest 4 are articulated such that they can be pivoted (as shown by direction arrows A and B)." (0035)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that each seat has a backrest pivotable in both directions, which is control of that seat's reclining angle. Abt arranges seats in rows one behind another ([0037]), so the seat in the row ahead of the target seat is its front seat, and that seat's reclining angle is controlled by Abt's system.
among the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"taking into account both the boundaries consisting of front seat or rear seat as well as cabin boundaries" (0038)
Rationale:
Abt expressly treats the front seat as one of the neighboring seats that bound the movement of the seat being moved. The front seat is therefore among the at least one adjacent seat.
by using the driving device.
See at least:
"Actuating or driving devices 47, which can be activated and operated electrically, provide a particularly good activating ability and high positioning accuracy." (0054)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the seat components, including the backrest, are moved by electrically operated driving devices 47.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly teach the following claim limitations:
when the operating mode is a folding mode, further includes:
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
by a third angle,
Disclosure by Yamaguchi
Yamaguchi teaches:
when the operating mode is a folding mode, further includes:
See at least:
"The luggage mode is a mode (i.e., a state) in which the seat back 3 is in a folded-over position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion 2, similar to the walk-in mode, thus enabling the back of the seat back 3 to be used as a surface on which to put luggage or the like" (0030)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly teaches a user-selectable mode in which the seat back is folded over onto the seat cushion. That is a folding mode. In the combination, the target seat is the seat placed in the folding mode.
such that the reclining angle of the front seat is forwardly changed
See at least:
"The seat back 3 tilts forward until it comes to be in a folded-down position in which it substantially lies on top of the seat cushion 2" (0074)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly teaches tilting a seat back forward, which is a forward change of its reclining angle, and explains that a forward-tilted seat back is "less apt to get in the way" of the space behind it ([0076]). In the folding mode, the target seat's back folds forward until it lies on its cushion (Yamaguchi [0030], [0074]; FIGS. 3F–3H). The upper end of the folding seat back, including its headrest, sweeps forward along an arc whose radius is the height of the seat back. Where rows are closely spaced, as in Abt's space-saving arrangements of closely adjacent seats ([0036], [0059]), the reclined backrest of the front seat extends rearward into that arc. Tilting the front seat's backrest forward removes it from the arc and so removes the obstruction to the target seat's folding.
by a third angle,
See at least:
"Therefore, the seat back 3 can be restricted from tilting forward or backward too far." (0035)
Rationale:
Yamaguchi expressly teaches stoppers that limit the forward tilt, so the forward change is a defined angular amount. The claim places no numerical value on the "third angle." Selecting a magnitude sufficient to clear the arc swept by the target seat's folding seat back is routine optimization of a result-effective variable. In re Aller; MPEP § 2144.05(II).
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to provide Abt's seat control method with a folding mode for the target seat, as taught by Yamaguchi, and, when that mode is selected, to tilt the backrest of the front seat forward by a predetermined angle before the target seat folds. Abt teaches repositioning an adjacent seat "beforehand" to provide the clearance a seat's movement requires ([0036]) and accounts for the front-seat boundary ([0038]). Where the front seat's reclined backrest lies within the arc swept by the target seat's folding seat back, Abt's principle identifies that backrest as the obstruction to remove, and Yamaguchi teaches the forward tilt that removes it ([0076]). This is the predictable use of known seat movements for their established functions, with improved safety and space utilization (KSR).
Regarding Claim 15,
The combination of Abt and Yamaguchi establishes the method of Claim 11, which is the basis for Claim 15.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt teaches:
wherein allowing, by the control device, the target seat to be in the operating mode by using the driving device
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant to adjust his/her seat and carries out the corresponding adjustment..." (0004) and "the electronic device activates the driving device in such a way that at least one vehicle seat can be moved and adjusted in relation to this coordinate system in a collision-free manner in three dimensions" (0056)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches controller-directed seat adjustment in response to an occupant request and expressly teaches use of a driving device for seat movement and adjustment. This teaches wherein allowing, by the control device, the target seat to be in the operating mode by using the driving device.
further includes:
See at least:
"The method for displacing the vehicle seats ... makes it possible to displace the vehicle seats ... automatically or semi-automatically..." (0038)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses additional coordinated seat-displacement operations within the method, which teaches further includes:.
allowing, by the control device, the target seat to be in the operating mode,
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant to adjust his/her seat and carries out the corresponding adjustment..." (0004)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the control unit carries out the requested seat adjustment, thereby allowing the target seat to reach the requested configuration or operating mode. This teaches allowing, by the control device, the target seat to be in the operating mode,.
based on the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"In order to represent this economically, it is obvious that in addition to linear movements in the ZX direction, even position changes in the y direction (adjacent seats being pulled apart) ... are necessary." (0011) and "In the case of adjacent seats, the same controller can evaluate the sensor signals and carry out the control." (0058)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that target-seat repositioning depends on adjacent-seat conditions and expressly teaches controller-based evaluation and control of adjacent seats. This teaches based on the at least one adjacent seat.
completely allowed to be in the specified state.
See at least:
"The movement of the seats is coupled automatically..." (0059) and "The movement model describes ... start and stop conditions, diverse termination conditions for the movement, and also a description of the dependencies on other objects." (0060)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches automatically coupled seat movement governed by start conditions, stop conditions, termination conditions, and dependencies on other objects. A PHOSITA would have understood that the target-seat operation is permitted when the adjacent seat has reached the required allowed condition defined by those dependencies and conditions, i.e., when the adjacent seat is completely allowed to be in the specified state. This teaches, or at least renders obvious, completely allowed to be in the specified state..
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to implement Abt's coordinated multi-seat seat-control method using Yamaguchi's explicit operating-mode selection through user input, such that the target seat is allowed to enter the selected operating mode based on the adjacent seat having been brought into the required specified state, because doing so would have predictably improved coordinated seat control, ensured orderly dependency-based seat repositioning in a multi-seat environment, and applied a known vehicle-seat mode-selection technique in a technically compatible manner to Abt's movement-model-based control framework.
Regarding Claim 16,
The combination of Abt and Yamaguchi establishes the method of Claim 11, which is the basis for Claim 16.
The five "when" conditions are recited in the alternative ("or"). Only one needs to be taught. The condition "when the at least one adjacent seat is operating" is relied upon below. The others are not relied upon and need not be met.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt teaches:
further comprising: suspending, by the control device,
See at least:
"Such actions can include: stopping, moving backwards, dodging, speed adaptations or even an emission of a warning signal." (0048)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches stopping a requested seat movement as a response to a detected condition. In the combination, a requested operating mode is carried out as a sequence: the adjacent seat is moved into the specified state and the target seat is then moved into the operating mode (Claim 11). In the combination, when the operation input arrives and a listed condition exists, the controller does not start the requested sequence: neither the adjacent seat nor the target seat is driven. This is suspension of the requested control of both seats, not merely a delay of the target seat while the adjacent seat moves. The stopping is an action of the adjusting system governed by control unit 43 ([0054]), so it is performed by the control device.
control of the at least one adjacent seat and the target seat
See at least:
"In order to prevent collisions, it is necessary to check for any violation of limit parameters and environmental descriptions." (0048)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the requested movement is checked against limit parameters and environmental descriptions. The suspended control is the control of the requested sequence, which in the combination includes both the adjacent seat and the target seat, as discussed above.
while an operation input is received,
See at least:
"This movement model 41 enables a separation of the basic functions of the control unit, such as, e.g., the communication with a manual operating unit" (0042)
Rationale:
The application describes suspending control of the seats "while receiving an operation input from the user" ([0092]), that is, not carrying out the requested seat control when the operation input is received and a listed condition exists. Abt expressly teaches that seat-movement requests are received from the occupant through a manual operating unit and that the control system checks for violations of limit parameters before and during the requested movement ([0048]). In the combination, the listed condition is evaluated when the operation input is received, and the requested control is suspended if the condition exists.
or when the at least one adjacent seat is operating.
See at least:
"Since the environment is not fixed in most applications, but rather consists of moving elements such as neighboring seats or cabin partitions, it is important that the adjusting system also be designed for the variation of the environmental descriptions during operation." (0047)
Rationale:
Abt expressly recognizes that neighboring seats are moving elements that may be individually adjusted during operation ([0047], [0053]), and that the seats exchange information about such changes ([0053]). Abt does not expressly state a rule of suspending a requested sequence while the adjacent seat is already moving. However, the adjacent seat is the very seat the requested sequence must first reposition, and its position is changing under another command. A PHOSITA would have found it obvious to suspend the requested sequence in that circumstance rather than issue a second, conflicting command to a seat already in motion. Doing so avoids conflicting commands and the collision risk Abt addresses when limits are violated ([0048]), and it is a predictable, conservative implementation of Abt's collision-free control (KSR).
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to include in the seat control method of the Abt–Yamaguchi combination a step of suspending the requested control of both the adjacent seat and the target seat when the operation input is received while the adjacent seat is operating. In the combination, a user-selected mode (Yamaguchi [0079]) is carried out as a sequence that begins by repositioning the adjacent seat (Abt [0036]). Abt recognizes that neighboring seats may be moving under their own adjustment during operation ([0047], [0053]) and teaches stopping a requested movement when the seat environment makes it unsafe ([0048]). Declining to start the requested sequence while the adjacent seat is already in motion avoids issuing a conflicting command to that seat and avoids the collision risk Abt addresses. It is a predictable, conservative implementation of Abt's collision-free control that improves safety and reliability (KSR). After combining the teachings of Abt and Yamaguchi, all limitations of Claim 16 are taught or rendered obvious. The additional limitations of Claim 16 are taught or rendered obvious by Abt. The remaining conditions are recited in the alternative and need not be met.
Regarding Claim 17,
The combination of Abt and Yamaguchi establishes the method of Claim 11, which is the basis for Claim 17.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt teaches:
wherein allowing, by the control device, the target seat to be in the operating mode by using the driving device
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant to adjust his/her seat and carries out the corresponding adjustment..." (0004), and "the electronic device controls the driving device in such a way that at least one seat can be moved and adjusted in a collision-free manner..." (0018)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches controller-directed seat adjustment using the driving device, which teaches wherein allowing, by the control device, the target seat to be in the operating mode by using the driving device.
further includes:
See at least:
"a method for moving at least one vehicle seat arranged in a vehicle cabin, thereby enabling an economical, space-saving arrangement and the displacement of the vehicle seats into other predetermined or individually controllable positions or arrangements while preventing any possible collisions" (0017)
Rationale:
Abt expressly discloses additional coordinated seat-control steps within the method, which teaches further includes:.
allowing, by the control device, the target seat to be in the operating mode
See at least:
"This control unit accepts the request of the seat occupant to adjust his/her seat and carries out the corresponding adjustment..." (0004)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches carrying out the requested seat adjustment, thereby allowing the target seat to enter the requested operating mode. This teaches allowing, by the control device, the target seat to be in the operating mode.
or when it is identified that the at least one adjacent seat is not moved.
See at least:
"suitable path sensors and angle sensors 45" are provided (0054); "In order to be able to take into account environmental changes, an information exchange takes place between the seats or their control systems" (0053); and "The movement model describes ... start and stop conditions, diverse termination conditions for the movement, and also a description of the dependencies on other objects." (0019/0060)
Rationale:
This limitation is disjunctive. Abt expressly teaches path and angle sensing, exchange of actual seat-position information between adjacent seats, and movement control based on start, stop, and termination conditions tied to dependencies on other objects. A PHOSITA would have understood that this control architecture identifies whether an adjacent seat has not moved and, on that basis, permits the target-seat operation to proceed. Because the claim uses "or," this single disclosed trigger path is sufficient. Thus, Abt teaches, or at least renders obvious, or when it is identified that the at least one adjacent seat is not moved. Consistent with the requirement of Claim 11 that the target seat enter the operating mode after the adjacent seat is in the specified state, the combination identifies the adjacent seat as not moved when its actual-position data ([0058]) shows it stationary at the specified position. A stop caused instead by a stall or an obstruction is handled by Abt's violation response of stopping or reversing ([0048]), rather than by starting the target seat.
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to implement Abt's coordinated multi-seat seat-control method with Yamaguchi's explicit operating-mode selection through seat input, such that the target seat is allowed to enter the selected operating mode after evaluation of adjacent-seat status within the coordinated control sequence, because doing so would have predictably improved reliability, orderly dependency-based seat repositioning, and practical operation of user-selectable seat-control functions in a multi-seat vehicle environment.
Limitations Recited in the Alternative
Claim 17 recites the following conditions in the alternative. Because at least one alternative is disclosed or rendered obvious as mapped above, the following alternatives need not be met:
when a specified time elapses from a point in time when the at least one adjacent seat starts to be controlled,
Regarding Claim 18,
The combination of Abt and Yamaguchi establishes the method of Claim 11, which is the basis for Claim 18.
The four points in time are recited in the alternative ("at least one of"). The third and fourth points are relied upon below, and either one is sufficient. The first and second points are not relied upon and need not be met.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt teaches:
further comprising providing, by the control device,
See at least:
"the seat control system described comprises a control unit 43, actuators and suitable path sensors and angle sensors 45." (0054)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches control unit 43 as the component that governs the seat control system and its actions, including the warning discussed below. The providing is therefore performed by the control device.
a user with a notification function
See at least:
"Such actions can include: stopping, moving backwards, dodging, speed adaptations or even an emission of a warning signal." (0048)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches emitting a warning signal. A warning signal is emitted to be perceived by the seat occupant, and so is a notification function provided to a user.
at at least one of:
See at least:
"In case of violations of limit parameters and environmental descriptions, the adjusting system is allowed to carry out definable actions." (0048)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the warning is issued in response to a defined event during seat control, namely a violation of the limit parameters. The notification is therefore provided at a defined point in time, which is the third point discussed below.
a third point in time when it is identified that it is impossible to control the at least one adjacent seat;
See at least:
"In the simplest case, obstacles can be detected by means of a di/dt evaluation after a contact or by means of ultrasound sensors even before a possible collision." (0048)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that, when a requested movement would violate limit parameters, for example because an obstacle is detected in its path, the adjusting system carries out a definable action. It lists "stopping, moving backwards, dodging, speed adaptations or even an emission of a warning signal" among those actions ([0048]). A stop by itself does not establish that the adjacent seat can never reach the specified state, and Abt does not expressly describe a determination of impossibility. It would have been obvious, however, to configure Abt's controller to determine that the adjacent seat cannot reach the specified state when the limit violation persists and Abt's other available responses, such as moving backwards or dodging, cannot bring the adjacent seat to the required position within the limit parameters. At that point the requested mode cannot be carried out, and a PHOSITA would have emitted Abt's warning signal so that the occupant knows why. Abt presents the stop and the warning as available actions for the same violation, so pairing them at that determination is the predictable use of Abt's own responses.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly teach the following claim limitations:
by using a notification device
a fourth point in time when the target seat is completely controlled;
Disclosure by Penilla
Penilla teaches:
by using a notification device
See at least:
"The notifications can be by cell phone, smartphone, tablet computer, mobile device, text messages, phone calls" (0126)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly teaches delivering notifications to the user by a device such as a cell phone, smartphone, or tablet. Each is a notification device.
a fourth point in time when the target seat is completely controlled;
See at least:
"The signals are executed by the seat and the results are sent back to the vehicle computer, which serves the mobile application all graphical changes." (0297)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly teaches that, after the seat executes the commanded adjustment, the results are sent back to the vehicle computer, which updates the passenger's mobile application. Penilla gives the parallel example of a light that reports back that it is now on, after which the user's device interface shows that the light was turned on ([0293]). Penilla thus teaches reporting to the user the completed result of a commanded device operation. In the combination, placing the target seat in the operating mode is the final step of the requested sequence. A PHOSITA applying Penilla's completion reporting to that sequence would have notified the user when the target seat's adjustment has been executed, that is, when the target seat is completely controlled.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla before them, to deliver the seat-control notifications of the combination through a notification device such as the occupant's mobile device, both when control of the adjacent seat is identified as impossible and when the target seat's adjustment is complete. Abt already warns the occupant when a requested seat movement is interrupted ([0048]). Penilla teaches reporting the executed result of a commanded seat adjustment to the user's device ([0293], [0297]). Informing the occupant of both outcomes of automatic seat motion improves safety and usability, and combining these complementary, known notification techniques yields predictable results (KSR). After combining the teachings of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla, all limitations of Claim 18 are taught or rendered obvious. The first and second points in time are recited in the alternative and need not be met. The third and fourth points together also satisfy "or a combination thereof."
Regarding Claim 19,
The combination of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla establishes the method of Claim 18, which is the basis for Claim 19.
The changed items are recited in the alternative ("at least one of ... or a combination thereof"). On/off of the notification function is relied upon below. The condition of allowing the target seat to be in the operating mode is not relied upon and need not be met.
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by Abt
Abt does not explicitly teach the following claim limitations:
further comprising: changing, by the control device,
at least one of on/off of the notification function,
based on settings of the user.
Disclosure by Penilla
Penilla teaches:
further comprising: changing, by the control device,
See at least:
"If the user's login is recognized, the system will apply settings and use privileges to the vehicle prescribed by the login." (0135)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly teaches that the vehicle system applies the settings associated with the user's login. The vehicle computer that controls the seats ([0297]) is therefore the device that changes the vehicle's behavior according to those settings, which in the combination is the control device.
at least one of on/off of the notification function,
See at least:
"wear and tear settings and notifications" (0138); "In other cases, notifications may not be sent." (0214)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly lists notifications among the settings associated with a user's login, and it teaches that in some cases notifications are not sent ([0214]). A setting that determines whether notifications are sent is an on/off setting of the notification function. Penilla does not expressly apply this setting to the seat-control notification of the combination. A PHOSITA would have found it obvious to do so, as discussed in the motivation below.
based on settings of the user.
See at least:
"every login may have settings that the user of the login can toggle to their liking" (0136); "These settings can be toggled via a network connected device such as a computer, web application, smart-phone or directly on the vehicle." (0137)
Rationale:
Penilla expressly teaches that users toggle their settings to their liking, through a mobile device or directly on the vehicle. The on/off state of the notification function is therefore changed based on settings of the user.
Motivation to Combine Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla before them, to let the user turn the seat-control notifications of the combination on or off through user settings, as taught by Penilla. Penilla teaches user-toggleable vehicle settings, including notification settings, so that each occupant can tailor the vehicle's behavior "to their liking" ([0136]). Applying this known personalization technique to the seat-control notifications of the combination is the predictable use of a known element for its established function. It improves usability by letting the occupant suppress notifications that are unwanted in routine use (KSR).
Claim Limitations Not Explicitly Disclosed by the Combination of All References
After combining the teachings of Abt, Yamaguchi, and Penilla, all limitations of Claim 19 are taught or rendered obvious. The condition of allowing the target seat to be in the operating mode is recited in the alternative and need not be met.
Regarding Claim 20,
The combination of Abt and Yamaguchi establishes the method of Claim 11, which is the basis for Claim 20.
Disclosure by Abt
Abt teaches:
wherein the specified state is set for the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"Provision is made for the limit parameters of the movement model to be generated automatically based on defined environmental descriptions." (0043)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that the movement model's limit parameters, including the positions a seat must occupy relative to its neighbors, are generated and set by the system. The position the adjacent seat must reach is therefore a state set for that seat.
adjacent to the target seat
See at least:
"FIG. 3a shows two closely adjacent vehicle seats 1, which are displaced sideways in FIG. 3b as shown by direction arrows K and are co-rotated about approx. 45° in FIG. 3c as shown by rotation arrows L and M." (0036)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches two closely adjacent seats. The seat whose state is set is adjacent to the seat to be rotated, which is the target seat.
in response to the operating mode,
See at least:
"The distance of the seats from one another must be increased beforehand in order to be able to rotate them." (0036)
Rationale:
Abt expressly ties the required position of the adjacent seat to the particular movement being performed ("in order to be able to rotate them"). The state is therefore set in response to the operating mode.
and wherein the specified state includes a boundary section
See at least:
"The enveloping surfaces are included as virtual boundaries in the calculation of the maximum displacement ranges in the method according to the invention so as to be able to preclude a collision with known obstacles." (0040)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches virtual boundaries, the enveloping surfaces, that define the permissible displacement ranges of the seats. Abt forms those boundaries from the positions of the neighboring seats ([0053]). The target seat's requested path therefore divides the possible positions of the adjacent seat into two groups: positions that leave the target seat's path clear and positions that encroach on it. In FIG. 3, for example, lateral spacings at or beyond the required spacing leave room for the rotation, and smaller spacings do not ([0036]). The position at which the adjacent seat just clears the target seat's path is the boundary between these groups. The specified state, which is the required position of the adjacent seat, includes that boundary section.
between an allowable state where interference does not occur
See at least:
"It is possible to ensure that a collision is prevented for every movement of the seat in all the spatial directions by controlling the movement of the seat and its components within a spatial boundary, which is characterized by a three-dimensional flat or curved enveloping surface." (0057)
Rationale:
Abt expressly teaches that movement within the boundary is collision-free. Adjacent-seat positions on the clear side of the boundary are therefore an allowable state where interference does not occur.
due to the at least one adjacent seat
See at least:
"In order to be able to take into account even individually adjusted neighboring seats or cabin boundaries when preventing collisions, it is also possible to change the position and form of the spatial boundary" (0053)
Rationale:
Abt expressly identifies neighboring seats as a source of the boundary. The interference the boundary prevents is therefore interference due to the adjacent seat.
and an unallowable state where interference occurs,
See at least:
"In case of violations of limit parameters and environmental descriptions, the adjusting system is allowed to carry out definable actions." (0048)
Rationale:
Abt expressly treats positions beyond the boundary as violations that trigger corrective action. Adjacent-seat positions on the encroaching side of the boundary are therefore an unallowable state. The application describes interference as occurring "due to at least one of a space, a trajectory, or any combination thereof, which is occupied by each of a plurality of seats" (application [0258]). Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, interference therefore includes overlap of the space or trajectory occupied by the seats, which is what Abt's boundary guards against. If Abt's boundary includes a safety margin, a position just beyond it may not yet produce an actual overlap of occupied space or trajectory. To that extent, it would have been obvious to derive the boundary from the geometric space occupied by the seats, which Abt's model already describes. Abt generates its limit parameters from the environmental descriptions ([0043]) and contemplates deriving the model directly from the seat manufacturer's CAD design data ([0061]). Deriving the boundary from that geometry places it at the transition to actual interference. This avoids moving the adjacent seat farther than the target seat's path requires, consistent with Abt's space-saving objective ([0059]).
in a process of controlling the target seat.
See at least:
"the control unit 43 controls a driving device 47 in such a way that at least one seat can be moved and adjusted in a collision-free manner in three dimensions in relation to this coordinate system." (0051)
Rationale:
Abt expressly applies the boundary during the controlled movement of the seat, so the boundary operates in a process of controlling the target seat.
Motivation to Combine Abt and Yamaguchi
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having Abt and Yamaguchi before them, to define the specified state of the adjacent seat in the combination of Claim 11 by the boundary between adjacent-seat positions that leave the target seat's path clear and positions that encroach on it, as taught by Abt. The combination already relies on Abt's collision-free control and on Abt's requirement that the adjacent seat be repositioned "beforehand" so that the target seat can move ([0036]). Abt's enveloping surfaces, formed from the positions of neighboring seats, are the mechanism Abt uses to separate permissible positions from positions that would cause a collision ([0040], [0053], [0057]). Using that same boundary to define the adjacent seat's required state in the mode-selectable seat control of the combination is the predictable use of a known collision-avoidance technique within a compatible system. It improves occupant safety and avoids moving the adjacent seat farther than necessary, consistent with Abt's space-saving objective ([0059]) (KSR).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 OLUWABUSAYO ADEBANJO AWORUNSE whose telephone number is (571)272-4311. The examiner can normally be reached M - F (8:30AM - 5PM).
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, Jelani Smith can be reached at (571) 270-3969. 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.
/OLUWABUSAYO ADEBANJO AWORUNSE/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/JELANI A SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights