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 30th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-5, 7, and 9 remain pending in the application.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuzawa US 20140217787 A1, in view of Levin et al. US 20210206438 A1, and further in view of Hellrung et al. US 20120248841 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Fukuzawa discloses a seat assembly (Fukuzawa 10) attached to a vehicle body (Fukuzawa paragraph 0066), comprising:
a slide frame (Fukuzawa 18) attached to the vehicle body frame so as to move in a front-rear direction (Fukuzawa paragraph 0044);
a seat (Fukuzawa 11) attached to the slide frame (Fukuzawa paragraph 0044);
a reclining adjuster (Fukuzawa paragraphs 0042-0043) that performs an operation of tilting a back portion (Fukuzawa 14) of the seat back and forth (Fukuzawa paragraph 0043);
a lift adjuster that performs an operation of moving the seat up and down (Fukuzawa paragraphs 0046); and
a seatbelt (Fukuzawa 30) that secures an occupant in the seat (Fukuzawa paragraph 0005),
wherein the seatbelt includes a side belt (Fukuzawa 32B) corresponding to a side portion of an abdomen of the occupant (Fukuzawa paragraph 0049), and the side belt is attached to the slide frame (Fukuzawa Fig. 3; Fukuzawa paragraph 0076), and
wherein the seatbelt includes an attachment portion (Fukuzawa 38) attaching the side belt to the slide frame (Fukuzawa Fig. 3; Fukuzawa paragraph 0076), and the attachment portion is positioned on a vehicle-width outside with respect to the lift adjuster as viewed from above (Fukuzawa Fig. 1).
Fukuzawa does not disclose a vehicle body frame, nor that the attachment portion is positioned on a vehicle-width outside with respect to the reclining adjuster as viewed from above.
However, Levin et al. disclose a seat (Levin et al. 24/26) attached to a vehicle body frame (Levin et al. 20) (Levin et al. paragraph 0136). This body frame comprises a seat frame (Levin et al. 150) with structural tubes (Levin et al. 156) that support the seat (Levin et al. paragraph 0139).
Therefore, it 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 to provide the seat assembly of Fukuzawa with the vehicle body frame as taught by Levin et al. with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of preventing undesired upward vertical movement in the seat assembly, since the assembly would be constructively integrated into the vehicle body frame (Levin et al. paragraph 0177).
Additionally, Hellrung et al. disclose a reclining adjuster (Hellrung et al. 10; Hellrung et al. Fig. 1) that is fixedly attached to a seat (Hellrung et al. Figs. 21-22; Hellrung et al. paragraph 0041).
The attachment portion position of Fukuzawa with the reclining adjuster position of Hellrung et al. could be combined as the attachment portion is positioned on a vehicle-width outside with respect to the reclining adjuster as viewed from above.
Therefore, it 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 to combine the seat assembly and attachment portion of Fukuzawa with the reclining adjuster position as taught by Hellrung et al. with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of creating more abdominal space for an occupant as the side belt increases in length, as would be known by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 9, Fukuzawa discloses a vehicle (Fukuzawa paragraph 0005) comprising:
a vehicle body (Fukuzawa paragraph 0018); and
a seat assembly (Fukuzawa 10) attached to the vehicle body,
wherein the seat assembly includes
a slide frame (Fukuzawa 18) attached to the vehicle body frame so as to move in a front-rear direction (Fukuzawa paragraph 0044),
a seat (Fukuzawa 11) attached to the slide frame,
a reclining adjuster (Fukuzawa paragraphs 0042-0043) that performs an operation of tilting a back portion (Fukuzawa 14) of the seat back and forth (Fukuzawa paragraph 0043);
a lift adjuster that performs an operation of moving the seat up and down (Fukuzawa paragraphs 0046); and
a seatbelt (Fukuzawa 30) that secures an occupant in the seat (Fukuzawa paragraph 0005), and
the seatbelt includes a side belt (Fukuzawa 32B) corresponding to a side portion of an abdomen of the occupant (Fukuzawa paragraph 0049), and the side belt is attached to the slide frame (Fukuzawa Fig. 3; Fukuzawa paragraph 0076), wherein the seatbelt includes an attachment portion (Fukuzawa 38) attaching the side belt to the slide frame (Fukuzawa Fig. 3; Fukuzawa paragraph 0076), and the attachment portion is positioned on a vehicle-width outside with respect to the lift adjuster as viewed from above (Fukuzawa Fig. 1).
Fukuzawa does not disclose an off-road vehicle, a vehicle body frame, nor that the attachment portion is positioned on a vehicle-width outside with respect to the reclining adjuster as viewed from above.
However, Levin et al. disclose an off-road vehicle (Levin et al. 2) and a seat (Levin et al. 24/26) attached to a vehicle body frame (Levin et al. 20) (Levin et al. paragraph 0136). This body frame comprises a seat frame (Levin et al. 150) with structural tubes (Levin et al. 156) that support the seat (Levin et al. paragraph 0139).
Therefore, it 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 to provide the seat assembly of Fukuzawa with the off-road vehicle and vehicle body frame as taught by Levin et al. with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of preventing undesired upward vertical movement in the seat assembly, since the assembly would be constructively integrated into the vehicle body frame (Levin et al. paragraph 0177). Providing this seat assembly on an off-road vehicle can be advantageous as these vehicles are frequently used on various terrains that often contain large bumps (Levin et al. paragraph 0003), and when driven over these features, can create undesired upward vertical movements of the seat assembly, as known by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Additionally, Hellrung et al. disclose a reclining adjuster (Hellrung et al. 10; Hellrung et al. Fig. 1) that is fixedly attached to a seat (Hellrung et al. Figs. 21-22; Hellrung et al. paragraph 0041).
The attachment portion position of Fukuzawa with the reclining adjuster position of Hellrung et al. could be combined as the attachment portion is positioned on a vehicle-width outside with respect to the reclining adjuster as viewed from above.
Therefore, it 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 to combine the seat assembly and attachment portion of Fukuzawa with the reclining adjuster position as taught by Hellrung et al. with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of creating more abdominal space for an occupant as the side belt increases in length, as would be known by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 2-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuzawa US 20140217787 A1 and Levin et al. US 20210206438 A1, in view of Hellrung et al. US 20120248841 A1, and further in view of Suzuki et al. US 20140265470 A1.
Regarding claim 2, Fukuzawa, in view of Levin et al., and further in view of Hellrung et al., disclose the seat assembly of claim 1, as discussed above, further comprising:
a reclining operator (Fukuzawa 16) that operates the reclining adjuster to tilt the back portion of the seat back and forth (Fukuzawa paragraph 0043).
Fukuzawa, in view of Levin et al., and further in view of Hellrung et al. do not disclose that the attachment portion is positioned in front with respect to the reclining operator.
Regarding claim 3, Fukuzawa, in view of Levin et al., and further in view of Hellrung et al., disclose further comprising:
a lift operator (Fukuzawa 28) that operates the lift adjuster to move performs an operation of moving the seat up and down (Fukuzawa paragraph 0046),
wherein the lift operator is positioned in front with respect to the reclining operator (Fukuzawa Fig. 3).
Fukuzawa, in view of Levin et al., and further in view of Hellrung et al., do not disclose that the attachment portion is positioned between the reclining operator and the lift operator in the front-rear direction.
An edge can be seen where a seat back (Fukuzawa 14) and a seat cushion (Fukuzawa 12) meet (see annotated Fukuzawa Fig. 3). Fukuzawa discloses the reclining operator being aligned with this edge in the front-rear direction (see annotated Fukuzawa Fig. 3). This is the general location where the attachment portion is also located (Fukuzawa Fig. 3; Fukuzawa paragraph 0081).
However, Suzuki et al. disclose a reclining operator (Suzuki et al. 12) that is positioned rearwardly behind an edge of similar structure as previously described above (see annotated Suzuki et al. Fig. 1). In combining the seat assembly of Fukuzawa, in view of Levin et al., and further in view of Hellrung et al., with the reclining operator rearward alignment as taught by Suzuki et al., the attachment portion would be positioned in front with respect to the reclining operator and the attachment portion would be positioned between the reclining operator and the lift operator in the front-rear direction.
Therefore, it 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 to provide the seat assembly of Fukuzawa, in view of Levin et al., and further in view of Hellrung et al., with the reclining operator rearward alignment as taught by Suzuki et al. with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of avoiding potential damage to both (attachment portion and reclining operator) structural components if an impact were to take place in a single location, as could occur in the design of Fukuzawa, in view of Levin et al., and further in view of Hellrung et al. If the reclining operator was placed farther back in a rearward position, as taught by Suzuki et al., and an impact were to take place in the same single location, damage could occur in one structural component instead, as known by one of ordinary skill in the art.
PNG
media_image1.png
706
543
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
707
568
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Fukuzawa, in view of Levin et al., do not disclose the seat assembly of claim 2, wherein the reclining operator is a circular columnar dial operator.
However, Hellrung et al. disclose a rotatable adjustment operator for seat assemblies (Hellrung et al. 10; Hellrung et al. Fig. 1).
Therefore, it 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 to provide the seat assembly of Fukuzawa and Levin et al., in view Suzuki et al., with the dial operator as taught by Hellrung et al. with a reasonable expectation of success for the advantage of preventing potential damage to a recliner mechanism when reclining a back portion of a seat from a forward position to an upright position, in cases where an occupant desires to access a vehicle cargo area, as undesired damage can occur when using conventional seat assembly reclining mechanisms (Hellrung et al. paragraph 0007).
Regarding claim 5, Fukuzawa, in view of Levin et al. and Hellrung et al., and further in view of Suzuki et al., disclose the seat assembly of claim 3, as discussed above, wherein the reclining operator is a rod-shaped lever operator (Fukuzawa 16; Fukuzawa Fig. 3), and
the reclining operator, the lift operator, and the attachment portion are linearly located in the front-rear direction as viewed from above (see annotated Fukuzawa Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
706
543
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Fukuzawa, in view of Levin et al. and Hellrung et al., and further in view of Suzuki et al., disclose the seat assembly of claim 2, as discussed above, wherein the reclining operator is a rod-shaped lever operator (Fukuzawa 16; Fukuzawa Fig. 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 30th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, in combining the seat assembly of Fukuzawa with the reclining adjuster position as taught by Hellrung et al. would render amended claim 1 as obvious. The attachment portion position of Fukuzawa with the reclining adjuster position of Hellrung et al. could be combined as the attachment portion is positioned on a vehicle-width outside with respect to the reclining adjuster as viewed from above, with a motivation to create more abdominal space for an occupant as the side belt increases in length, as would be known by one of ordinary skill in the art. This is further described in the claim 1 rejection above. This reasoning is applied to amended claim 9 for similar reasons.
Therefore, the combines references of Fukuzawa, in view of Levin et al., and further in view of Hellrung et al., meet the aforementioned limitations regarding amended claim 1 and amended claim 9, and the examiner respectfully finds the arguments set forth by the applicant as not persuasive.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Anayansi Santiago whose telephone number is (571) 272-3138. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:30AM - 4:30PM.
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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Amy Weisberg can be reached at (571) 270-5500. 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.
/Anayansi Santiago/Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/AMY R WEISBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612
Prosecution Insights