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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I, claims 1-13, and newly filed claims 19-22, is acknowledged. Non-elected claims 5 and 6 have been cancelled by Applicant. Non-elected claims 14-18 have been withdrawn.
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant has filed 15 separate Information Disclosure Statements with more than 1000 citations, including over 400 foreign language documents, many of which are apparently redundant and/or non-relevant. The volume of citations appears excessive and is overwhelming to the examination process. While the Office wants Applicants to file relevant documents that they become aware of, the filing of an IDS which blindly lists documents without apparent thought to what relevance may or may not exist to the claims of the instant application does not assist in examination and raises the question if there is intent to bury a relevant reference. Cloaking of a clearly relevant reference by inclusion in a long list of citations may not comply with the Applicant’s duty to disclose.
The information referred to in the IDS filed August 11, 2025 has been considered except where noted.
The information disclosure statement filed August 11, 2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1), which requires the following: (1) a list of all patents, publications, applications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office; (2) U.S. patents and U.S. patent application publications listed in a section separately from citations of other documents; (3) the application number of the application in which the information disclosure statement is being submitted on each page of the list; (4) a column that provides a blank space next to each document to be considered, for the examiner’s initials; and (5) a heading that clearly indicates that the list is an information disclosure statement. Foreign Patent Document DE202018104691U1 has been filed, however does not appear to be listed on the IDS. This document has not been considered.
The information disclosure statement filed August 11, 2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. Note Foreign Patent Documents Cite Nos. 1-3, 5-8, 14-15, 17-30, and 32-37. These documents have not been considered.
The information disclosure statement filed August 11, 2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. Note Foreign Patent Documents Cite Nos. 4 and 31. These documents have not been considered.
Numerous information disclosure statements were filed on December 20, 2024. The information referred to therein has been considered except where noted.
In the 13 page IDS, Foreign Patent Documents Cite Nos. 2-5, 7-15, 17-20, 23, 26-27, 31-33, 36-46 are in a foreign language yet lack a concise explanation of the relevance.
In the 13 page IDS, Foreign Patent Documents Cite Nos. and 6, 16, 25, and 47-50 are listed yet appear to lack a legible copy.
In the 13 page IDS, Non-Patent Literature Documents Cite Nos. 1-3 and 6 are listed yet appear to lack a legible copy.
In second the 13 page IDS, Foreign Patent Documents Cite Nos. 1-16, 19-21, 23-28, and 30-32 are in a foreign language yet lack a concise explanation of the relevance.
In the second 13 page IDS, Foreign Patent Documents Cite Nos. 17-18, 22, 29, and 41 are listed yet appear to lack a legible copy.
In the eight page IDS, Foreign Patent Documents Cite Nos. 16 and 17 are in a foreign language yet lack a concise explanation of the relevance.
In the eight page IDS, Foreign Patent Documents Cite No. 15 is listed yet appears to lack a legible copy.
In addition, the Information Disclosure Statements filed December 20, 2024 include numerous documents that are not listed on any of the statements, as is required. These documents have not been considered and are as follows: JP2006200119, JP2016189879, , JP861414, WO9218224, WO02061217, WO2023250026, GB721866, EP0894885, EP0890430, EP2532502, JP115282, Airstring 5 page document, Newton 2 page document, Airstring 5 page document, WO2006101929, EP0240388, EP0805064, and Breathair 16 page document.
The information referred to in the IDS filed October 2, 2024 has been considered.
Numerous information disclosure statements were filed on September 4, 2024. The information referred to therein has been considered except where noted.
In the 8 page IDS, Foreign Patent Documents Cite Nos. 21-23, 25-28, 30, 34-36, 39, 46 and 48-50 are listed yet appear to lack a legible copy.
In the second 8 page IDS, Foreign Patent Documents Cite No. 17 is listed yet appears to lack a legible copy.
In addition, the Information Disclosure Statements filed September 4, 2024 include numerous documents that are not listed on any of the statements, as is required. These documents have not been considered and are as follows: JPWO2017122370, JP2001328153, JP2015067935, JP2015067934, JP2002088634, JP2016221250, JP5165809, JP2006200118, JPWO2017119157, JP4907991, JP2016221749, JP2015151638JP2015151638, WO2006068120, WO0168967, JPH0861414, JP2002088631, JP2015110851, JPH0861411, JP2015067933, an untitled 40 page document, and an untitled 59 page document.
Several information disclosure statements were filed on February 22, 2024. The information referred to therein has been considered except where noted.
In the 4 page IDS, Foreign Patent Documents Cite Nos. 3 and 4 are listed yet a legible copy of none of these documents appears to have been included.
In the 8 page IDS, Foreign Patent Documents Cite Nos. 1-49 are listed yet a legible copy of none of these documents appears to have been included.
In the 26 page IDS, Foreign Patent Documents Cite Nos. 1-47 and 50 are listed yet a legible copy of none of these documents appears to have been included.
Applicant is advised that if any of the non-considered documents were considered in the parent application, which also included a plethora of Information Disclosure Statements, it is requested that these documents be identified by IDS date.
Drawings
The drawings filed November 21, 2023 are approved.
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.
Claim 7 is 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 plurality of unitary mesh segments". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stiller et al (US6592181).
Note an assembly comprising: a cushion (18) with an aperture (36) formed at least partially therein, wherein the aperture has a first cross-sectional dimension; and a trim cord (20) inserted at least partially within the aperture of the cushion, wherein the trim cord has a second cross-sectional dimension that is smaller than the first cross-sectional dimension of the aperture. See Figure 3.
Regarding claim 12, note the assembly of claim 1; and a trim cover (16) attached to the trim cord.
Claim(s) 1, 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shimbori et al (US4579389).
Note an assembly comprising: a cushion (A) with an aperture (a2) formed at least partially therein, wherein the aperture has a first cross-sectional dimension; and a trim cord (C) inserted at least partially within the aperture of the cushion, wherein the trim cord has a second cross-sectional dimension that is smaller than the first cross-sectional dimension of the aperture. See Figure 7.
Regarding claim 12, note the assembly of claim 1; and a trim cover (B’) attached to the trim cord.
Regarding claim 13, note a seat frame, wherein the cushion is attached to the seat frame. See Figure 2.
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) 1, 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Petzel (US20140167328) in view of Shimbori et al (US4579389).
The primary reference shows all claimed features of the instant invention with the exception of the cushion having an aperture formed at least partially therein, wherein the aperture has a first cross-sectional dimension; and a trim cord inserted at least partially within the aperture of the cushion, wherein the trim cord has a second cross-sectional dimension that is smaller than the first cross-sectional dimension of the aperture (claim 1); wherein a trim cover is attached to the trim cord (claim 12); and further including a seat frame, wherein the cushion is attached to the seat frame (claim 13).
In the primary reference, note an assembly comprising a cushion. See ¶ 0002 and ¶ 0031.
The secondary reference teaches configuring a cushion as having an aperture formed at least partially therein, wherein the aperture has a first cross-sectional dimension; and a trim cord inserted at least partially within the aperture of the cushion, wherein the trim cord has a second cross-sectional dimension that is smaller than the first cross-sectional dimension of the aperture; wherein a trim cover is attached to the trim cord; and further including a seat frame, wherein the cushion is attached to the seat frame. Note as described in the rejection above under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
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 configuring the cushion as having an aperture formed at least partially therein, wherein the aperture has a first cross-sectional dimension; and a trim cord inserted at least partially within the aperture of the cushion, wherein the trim cord has a second cross-sectional dimension that is smaller than the first cross-sectional dimension of the aperture (claim 1); wherein a trim cover is attached to the trim cord (regarding claim 12); and further including a seat frame, wherein the cushion is attached to the seat frame (regarding claim 13). These modifications adapt the cushion of the primary reference with improved aesthetics for a seating assembly.
Claim(s) 2-4, 7 and 10, as best understood with the above cited indefiniteness, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Petzel (US20140167328) in view of Shimbori et al (US4579389), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP2001341248A.
The primary reference, as modified above, shows all claimed features of the instant invention with the exception of the cushion comprises a unitary mesh of expanded thermoplastic resin strands (claim 2); wherein the trim cord is not welded to the unitary mesh (claim 3); wherein the trim cord is inserted into the aperture of the unitary mesh of expanded thermoplastic resin strands (claim 4).
In the modified primary reference, note cushioning that is a unitary mesh (1) of thermoplastic resin (polyester or polyamide, as discussed in ¶ 0046, with heat supplied to form resin (as discussed in ¶ 0032 and ¶ 0045) strands (fiber, as discussed in the abstract). Regarding claim 7, note that the plurality of unitary mesh segments is welded without adhesive (note ultrasonic welding as discussed in ¶ 0022). Also note that the trim cord is not welded to the unitary mesh, and the trim cord is inserted into the aperture of the mesh. Regarding claim 10, note the aperture of the unitary mesh has an inner dimension, and wherein the trim cord has a cross section that is smaller than the inner dimension of the aperture.
JP2001341248A teaches configuring a unitary mesh of thermoplastic resin strands as expanded. Note as discussed throughout the translation.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to further modify the primary reference by configuring the unitary mesh of thermoplastic resin strands as expanded. This modification provides a configuration that is cost effective in producing the thermoplastic resin strands while maintain its durability and suitability for the environment in which it is intended to be used. As per the modified structure as provided, the trim cord is not welded to the unitary mesh (regarding claim 3); and the trim cord is inserted into the aperture of the unitary mesh of expanded thermoplastic resin strands (regarding claim 4).
Claim(s) 2-4 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stiller et al (US6592181) in view of JP2001341248A.
The primary reference shows all claimed features of the instant invention with the exception of the cushion comprising an unitary mesh of expanded thermoplastic resin strands (claim 2); wherein the trim cord is not welded to the unitary mesh (claim 3); wherein the trim cord is inserted into the aperture of the unitary mesh of expanded thermoplastic resin strands (claim 4); wherein the aperture of the unitary mesh has an inner dimension, and wherein the trim cord has a cross section that is smaller than the inner dimension of the aperture (claim 10).
In the primary reference, note that the trim cord is not welded to the cushioning material. Also note that the trim cord is inserted into the aperture of the cushioning material. Additionally note that the aperture of the cushioning material has an inner dimension, and wherein the trim cord has a cross section that is smaller than the inner dimension of the aperture.
The secondary reference teaches configuring an interior cushioning component for use in a vehicle as a unitary mesh (see ¶ 0010 of the translation) of expanded thermoplastic resin strands (see ¶ 0008 and ¶ 0065 of the translation).
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 for the cushioning material of the primary reference, a unitary mesh of expanded thermoplastic resin strands (regarding claim 2). Note that the trim cord is necessarily not welded to the unitary mesh (regarding claim 3); and the trim cord is necessarily inserted into the aperture of the unitary mesh of expanded thermoplastic resin strands (regarding claim 4); and the aperture of the unitary mesh has an inner dimension, and wherein the trim cord has a cross section that is smaller than the inner dimension of the aperture (regarding claim 10). This modification provides a construction material that is readily available, durable, and suitable for use in cushioning devices.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stiller et al (US6592181) in view of EP0708000A2.
The primary reference shows all claimed features of the instant invention with the exception of the trim cord being comprised of a polyethylene material.
The secondary reference teaches forming a trim cord (50) as comprised of polyethylene material. See lines 18-20 in column 3.
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 polyethylene for the material of the trim cord. This modification provides a construction material that is readily available, has a low costs, and is recyclable.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimbori et al (US4579389) in view of EP0708000A2.
The primary reference shows all claimed features of the instant invention with the exception of the trim cord being comprised of a polyethylene material.
The secondary reference teaches forming a trim cord (50) as comprised of polyethylene material. See lines 18-20 in column 3.
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 polyethylene for the material of the trim cord. This modification provides a construction material that is readily available, has a low costs, and is recyclable.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stiller et al (US6592181) in view of Becher (US1843893).
The primary reference shows all claimed features of the instant invention with the exception of a seat frame, wherein the cushion is attached to the seat frame.
The secondary reference conventionally teaches providing a seat cushion (12) as attached to a seat frame (10).
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 adding a seat frame as attached to the seat cushion. This modification conventionally enhances structurally integrity and support of the seat cushion, thereby improving supporting capability of a user of the seat cushion.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 9, and 19-22 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.
Conclusion
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 4, 2026 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636