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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “52” has been used to designate both “tension tabs” and “upper edges of the sidewalls”.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 15, the recitation “the lock receptacle” appears that it should read –the lock element--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the back support" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 7 and 12, the claim recites both “a back support mounting bracket” and a “back support bracket” yet the figures and the description do not appear to show multiple brackets within the assembly. Is the claim reciting the same bracket or is the claim reciting multiple brackets?
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) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 114698966 A to Ye.
PNG
media_image1.png
633
586
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, an attachment system for an office chair back support, comprising: a chair base (See Figure above); a seat back (See Figure above) having a support portion (See Figure above) and an attachment portion (See Figure above), the support portion having a forward surface (See Figure above) for supporting the back of a user; a seat (See Figure above) mounted on the chair base, the seat having an upper surface (See Figure above) for supporting a user; and a locking element (See Figure above) connected between the attachment portion of the seat back and the base, the locking element locking the attachment portion in place with respect to the base (See Figure 5), the locking element capable of toolless attachment to the base (pin is capable of being removed without a tool).
Regarding claim 2, wherein, prior to the connection of the locking element, the seat back is pivotable with respect to the chair base between a shipping position and an upright position (Fig.1-3; capable of being rotated to different positions, further the “shipping position” is not defined by the claim), the connection of the locking element locking the seat back in the upright position (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 3, wherein the locking element is a pin (See Figure above), the base defining a locking element receptacle (See Figure above), the pin inserted into the receptacle (Fig.5).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 114698966 A to Ye.
Regarding claim 4, Ye discloses wherein the pin (locking element, See Figure above) includes a first end (one end of pin), a second end (second end of pin), and a longitudinal length between the ends (length of pin).
Ye discloses an elastic body on the pin to aid in removal prevention but does not disclose wherein the pin has an does not disclose wherein the pin defining a notch along the longitudinal length.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided a notch along the pin so to aid in locking with the elastic body and thereby preventing unwanted removal of the pin from the assembly.
Regarding claim 5, Ye discloses wherein the base includes a resilient element (fourth resilient body inserted on pin) that extends onto the pin to prevent removal of the pin.
Ye does not disclose wherein the resilient element extends into the notch.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the resilient member engaging the notch so to ensure the pin is not mistakenly displaced while in the locked orientation.
Regarding claim 6, wherein the base includes a back support mounting rod (See Figure above), the attachment portion of the seat back connected to the back support mounting rod (attached through support bracket; See Figure above).
Claim(s) 8-11 and 13-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 114698966 A to Ye in view of CN 2657487 Y to Cai.
Regarding claim 8, Ye discloses a back support attachment system comprising: a chair base (See Figure above) having a lock receptacle (See Figure above); a seat (See Figure above) mounted on the chair base, the seat having an upper surface (See Figure above) for supporting a user; a seat back (See Figure above) having a support portion (See Figure above) and an attachment portion (See Figure above), the support portion having a forward surface (See Figure above) for supporting the back of a user, the seat back pivotally connected to the base (Fig.1-3) such that the seat back is movable between a folded position and an upright position (Fig.1-3); and a locking element (See Figure above) capable of toolless insertion into the lock receptacle to lock the seat back in the upright position (Fig.1).
Ye discloses a rotatable, adjustable seat back but does not specifically disclose wherein the forward surface of the seat back faces the upper surface of the seat in the folded ship position.
Cai discloses an office chair wherein the seat back is capable of being folded such that the seat back surface faces the seat surface (Fig.5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the ability to the chair of Ye to be folded flat as taught by Cai so to enable the chair to be stored or shipped in a more compact configuration, thereby saving space and lowering shipping costs.
Regarding claim 9, Ye discloses wherein the chair base includes a lock spring (fourth elastic body engaging the locking pin), the lock spring engaging the locking element upon insertion of the locking element to retain the locking element in the lock receptacle (See Figure above).
Regarding claim 10, Ye discloses wherein the locking element is a lock pin (See Figure above) having a first end (one side of pin), a second end (other side of pin), and a longitudinal length therebetween (length of pin).
Ye discloses an elastic body on the pin to aid in removal prevention but does not disclose wherein the pin defining a notch along the longitudinal length.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided a notch along the pin so to aid in locking with the elastic body and thereby preventing unwanted removal of the pin from the assembly.
Regarding claim 11, Ye discloses wherein the base includes a back support mounting rod (See Figure above), the attachment portion of the seat back connected to the back support mounting rod (attached through the support bracket; See Figure above).
Regarding claim 13, Ye discloses a method of installing a seat back on an office chair, comprising the steps of: providing an office chair base (See Figure above) having an upper surface (See Figure above), a seat back support rod (See Figure above) and a lock receptacle (See Figure above); mounting a seat on the office chair base (Fig.1), the seat extending over at least a portion of the upper surface of the base (Fig.1), the seat having an upper surface (See Figure above) for supporting a user; attaching a support bracket (See Figure above) to the support rod such that the support bracket is pivotable about the support rod (pivots about the rod); providing a seat back (See Figure above) having a support portion (See Figure above) and an attachment portion (See Figure above), the support portion having a user support surface (See Figure above); connecting the seat back attachment portion to the support bracket (See Figure above) such that the seat back is pivotable about the support rod (See Figure above); pivoting the seat back to a position (Fig. 1-3); and providing a lock element (See Figure above) with the office chair, wherein upon pivoting the seat back from the position to an upright position, the lock element is insertable into the lock receptacle to retain the seat back in the upright position and prevent pivoting of the seat back to the ship position (Fig.1).
Ye discloses a rotatable, adjustable seat back but does not specifically disclose wherein the forward surface of the seat back faces the upper surface of the seat in the folded ship position.
Cai discloses an office chair wherein the seat back is capable of being folded such that the seat back surface faces the seat surface (Fig.5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the ability to the chair of Ye to be folded flat as taught by Cai so to enable the chair to be stored or shipped in a more compact configuration, thereby saving space and lowering shipping costs.
Regarding claim 14, Ye discloses wherein the lock receptacle extends through the base (See Figure above), and the support bracket (See Figure above), such that the insertion of the lock element includes insertion of the lock element through the chair base and at least one of the seat back and the support bracket (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 15, Ye discloses wherein the lock receptacle is an elongated pin (See Figure above).
Regarding claim 16, including the step of providing a lock retainer on the base (fourth elastic body), the lock retainer engaging the lock element upon insertion of the lock element to prevent removal of the lock element (elastic body is inserted into the locking element).
Regarding claim 17, Ye discloses an elastic body on the pin to aid in removal prevention but does not disclose wherein the pin defining a notch along the longitudinal length.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided a notch along the pin so to aid in locking with the elastic body and thereby preventing unwanted removal of the pin from the assembly.
Regarding claim 18, Ye discloses wherein the lock retainer is a spring element that snaps onto lock retainer, but does not specifically disclose wherein the retainer is steel nor wherein the retainer engages the notch.
Ye does not disclose wherein the resilient element extends into the notch.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the resilient member engaging the notch so to ensure the pin is not mistakenly displaced while in the locked orientation.
Further forming a spring from steel is a relatively well known concept. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have formed the resilient body of Ye from steel so to ensure the spring is strong, durable, and resilient which will ensure a long lasting resilient lock retainer member.
Regarding claim 19, Ye discloses wherein the step of connecting the seat back attachment portion to the support bracket includes extending a fastener through the seat back attachment portion and the support bracket (See Figure above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 12, and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record fails to disclose or render obvious the combination of elements if the office chair back support attachment system. The portions of the back rest may be known individually within the prior art but the required elements are not taught in combination.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D KWIECINSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-5160. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday from 8:30 am to 4:00 pm.
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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571) 272-3238. 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.
RDK
/RYAN D KWIECINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635