DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-10 are pending.
Claims 1-10 have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 3-5 recite “the first locking part” and/or “the second locking part” repeatedly. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims. For purposes of examination, it will be assumed claims 3-5 were meant to depend from claim 2 in order to provide proper context to the claims.
Claim 6 recites letters “E” and “F” when describing the configuration/function associated with the mechanical interface system. It is unclear whether the letter descriptions indicate that the previous functions of A-D are also present and/or required.
Claim 8 recites “[a] seat assembly comprising the modular squab cushion of claim 1 and a seat structure having a squab structure, or a backrest structure.” The alternative between the seat structure having a squab structure, or a backrest structure is unclear. First, the squab structure is previously recited in claim 1 so there is prior antecedent basis for the squab structure. Second, if the backrest structure is used in the alternative, then the seat structure and squab structure required from claim 1 is no longer present. Third, the claim appears to depend from claim 1 but recites all of the elements of claim 1 over again. As such, it is unclear what the scope of claim is or what limitations are being included by reciting “the modular squab cushion of claim 1.”
Claim 9 recites a method claim dependent on the apparatus claim of claim 8 which includes “providing a seat structure, in the assembled state, comprising a squab structure and a backrest structure” which appears to previously be required or provided in the alternative from claim 8. Further, the method steps do not appear to further narrow claim 1, as they recite the same structure previously provided. Additionally, there is improper/inconsistent use of antecedent basis throughout the claim (e.g. “the central padding” forming “a central portion” which was previously claimed and similarly, “the lateral base, a lateral padding […] the lateral trim.)
Claim 10 recites “the fastening system” which also lacks antecedent basis and appears to require dependency on claim 7 and recites steps C and D while no previous steps A and B are recited and “function” C is provided in claim 4. For purposes of examination, it will be assumed claim 10 is in some way dependent on claim 7 or requires the fastening system of claim 7 in order to provide proper context to the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kircher et al. (US 7252341) (“Kircher”) in view of Archambault et al. (US 20060152062) (“Archambault”). Kircher teaches a modular squab cushion configured to be attached to a squab structure, the squab structure being configured to removably attach the modular squab cushion, the modular squab cushion comprises, in the assembled state: - a main base (fig. 1: 15) having a lower surface configured to be attached to the squab structure (fig. 1: 11), - a central padding resting on an upper surface of the main base and forming a central portion (fig. 1: central portion of 25), - a central trim (fig. 2: 27) covering that covers the central padding, - at least one modular lateral bolster (fig. 1: 23) removably attached to the main base and comprising in the assembled state: - a lateral base (fig. 1: 23 panel portion), - a lateral padding resting on an upper surface of the lateral base and forming a raised edge (fig. 1: edge portion of 25), - a covering lateral covering covering the lateral padding (fig. 2: 27), the modular cushion comprising a mechanical interface system between the main base and the lateral base, the modular cushion being configured to allow disassembly of the modular lateral bolster of the main base (fig. 1: 23 may be disassembled by connection at axis 17)
Kircher does not teach wherein the lateral bolster and padding may be removed independently of the central padding and the central trim covering, which remain attached to the main base. However, Archimbault teaches providing separate cushions/padding (fig. 1: 12) for lateral bolsters (fig. 4: 18) which may be removed without removal of the central padding. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide a separate cushion/padding for the lateral support of Kircher in order to allow for removal/maintenance of the bolster or easier movement of the lateral support with respect to the central padding.
As concerns claims 8 and 9, as best understood, Kircher, as modified, teaches a seat assembly comprising the modular squab cushion of claim 1, as well as generally assembling the squab cushion to a seat structure (Kircher, fig. 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 3-6 and 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of Kircher and Archimbault fail to teach:
wherein the mechanical interface system comprises: - a rear mechanical interface comprising a first coupling part on the main base and a second coupling part on the lateral base, the first coupling part and the second coupling part cooperating by interlocking, - a front mechanical interface comprising a first locking part on the main base and a second locking part on the lateral base, and wherein the rear mechanical interface and the front mechanical interface are configured to allow the fastening of the modular lateral bolster onto the main base as follows: A. interlocking the first and second coupling parts, B. pivoting the modular bolster around the rear mechanical interface until the first locking part is joined to the second locking part;
wherein the mechanical interface system comprises a plurality of first coupling parts arranged on the lateral base and a plurality of second coupling parts arranged on the main base, the first coupling parts and the second coupling parts cooperating by interlocking, and wherein the mechanical interface system is configured to allow the fastening of the modular lateral bolster on the modular squab cushion as follows: E. facing the first coupling parts with respectively the second coupling parts, F. vertically translating the modular lateral bolster until the first coupling parts are interlocked with the second coupling parts;
wherein the lateral base comprises a peripheral edge comprising a groove and the lateral trim covering is provided with a system for fastening along at least one end part of the lateral trim covering, the fastening system being configured to penetrate the groove while fastening it (this is considered to also be included by “the fastening system” of claim 10).
Further, there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation to modify the prior art absent hindsight.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY J BRINDLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7231. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9am-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, David Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TIMOTHY J BRINDLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636