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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information referred to in the IDS filed February 18, 2026 has been considered.
The information referred to in the IDS filed October 2, 2025 has been considered.
The information referred to in the IDS filed August 1, 2024 has been considered.
The information referred to in the IDS filed January 11, 2024 has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings filed January 11, 2024 are approved.
Claim Objections
Claims 15 and 20 are objected to as including minor informalities. Note that the term “said” should appear after “wherein” in each of the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 9-11 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wilson (US5161765).
Note a seat positioning system comprising: a bottom support structure (62, 22, 24); a frame (see Figure 1) having a seat portion and a backrest portion; a rotatable plate mounted to said bottom support structure, said rotatable plate (38) movable with respect to said bottom support structure; a first track (36) and a second track (34), said second track oriented generally perpendicular to said first track; a first locking mechanism (46, 46) and a second locking mechanism (60, 60), wherein said first locking mechanism is adapted to engage with said first track to prevent movement of said first track with respect to said first locking mechanism, and wherein said second locking mechanism is adapted to engage with said second track to prevent movement of said second track with respect to said second locking mechanism; a locking pin (82) to prevent movement of said rotatable plate with respect to said bottom support structure, wherein said locking pin is receivable within an aperture (80) in said bottom support structure; and a handle located proximate said seat portion of said frame, said handle (32) adapted to operate said first locking mechanism, said second locking mechanism, and said locking pin.
Regarding claim 10, note a third track (the other 34) oriented generally perpendicular to said first track. See Figure 2.
Regarding claim 11, note a third locking mechanism (the other 60, 60) adapted to engage with said third track to prevent movement of said third track with respect to said third locking mechanism.
Regarding claim 13, note the handle is also adapted to operate said third locking mechanism. See lines 28-33 in column 2.
Regarding claim 14, note the locking pin is spring biased in a downward position. See Figure 15, and the first paragraph in column 5.
Regarding claim 15, note the locking pin has a tapered sidewall. See Figure 15.
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.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson (US5161765) in view of Erhel et al (US10583926).
The primary reference shows all claimed features of the instant invention with the exception of the first, second, and third tracks being tubular members.
The secondary reference teaches configuring a slide rod (58) of a seating assembly as tubular.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the primary reference in view of the teachings of the secondary reference by substituting a tubular configuration for the solid tracks of the primary reference. This modification reduces assembly weight while maintaining structural integrity.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 and 16-20 are allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. A slidably adjustable seat assembly is shown by each of Kume et al (US9010860), Sutton, Sr (US6691970), and Williamson et al (US7108325).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MILTON NELSON JR whose telephone number is (571)272-6861. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30am-1:30pm.
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.
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.
mn /MILTON NELSON JR/March 5, 2026 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights