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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/03/2026 regarding claims 21-30 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 21, applicant argues that the base and seat bottom are of Adachi are not removably coupled. It is clearly shown the base 2 and seat bottom of main body 3 are attached via seat belt in the vehicle. The main body and base will stay together during the car ride without the seatbelt.
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) 21-26, 28-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sack et al. (10,589,643) in view of Adachi (7,163,265).
Regarding claim 21, Sack et al. disclose a child safety seat, comprising: main seat comprising: a seat bottom 104 comprising a pair of belt guides 114 that define a receiving space therebetween; a seatback 108 attached to the seat bottom, and a belt-positioning seat 106 configured to be received in the receiving space to removably couple the belt-positioning seat to the main seat, the belt-positioning seat including a seat body and at least one belt guide of the pair of belt guides 138, the seat body having an upper seating surface, and a bottom surface adapted to be placed on a vehicle seat, and the at least one belt guide protruding upward from the seat body.
However, Sack et al. fail to disclose a base; a main seat supported by the base, a seat bottom configured to be removably coupled to the base, the seatback being configured to move relative to the base such that the seatback moves between an upright configuration and a reclined configuration; a lock configured to selectively fix the main seat relative to the base in the upright and reclined configurations.
Instead, Adachi disclose a base 2; a main seat 3 supported by the base, a seat bottom configured to be removably coupled to the base (col. 2, lines 40-45), the seatback being configured to move relative to the base such that the seatback moves between an upright configuration and a reclined configuration (col. 2, lines 50-60); a lock (lever 33 and clamp, col, 7, lines 55-65) configured to selectively fix the main seat relative to the base in the upright and reclined configurations.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Adachi and place a reclinable base in the invention of Sack et al. in order to provide additional comfort with low cost.
Regarding claim 22, Sack et al. disclose the seat bottom comprises first and second belt guides 114 that are spaced from one another to define at least a portion of the receiving space therebetween.
Regarding claim 23, Sack et al. disclose the seat bottom comprises first and second armrests 114 that are spaced from one another to define at least a portion of the receiving space therebetween.
Regarding claim 24, Sack et al. disclose the seat bottom comprises a rear end 121 attached to the seatback, and a front end spaced from the rear end along a first direction; and the first and second armrests 114 are offset from the first and second belt guides, respectively, along the first direction (the belt guides are lower than the armrests).
Regarding claim 25, Sack et al. disclose the seat bottom 104 comprises an upper surface that defines a recess therein, wherein the recess 124a at least partially defines the receiving space, and the upper seating surface of the seat body defines a bottom surface of the recess.
Regarding claim 26, Adachi disclose the base 2 has a curved surface that conforms to a curved surface of the seat, and the seat 2 is configured to transition between the upright configuration and the reclined configuration by translating the curved surface of the seat along the curved surface of the base.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Adachi and place a reclinable base in the invention of Sack et al. in order to provide additional comfort with low cost.
Regarding claim 28, Sack et al. disclose the at least one belt guide 128 is configured to be transitioned between a deployed position (figure 9) in which the at least one belt guide protrudes upward from the upper seating surface, and a storage position (figure 8) in which the at least one belt guide is stowed in a storage cavity defined in the seat body.
Regarding claim 29, Sack et al. disclose the seat bottom 104 and the belt-positioning seat 106 are both configured to decouple from the seatback 108.
Regarding claim 30, Sack et al. disclose the belt-positioning seat 106 occupies a volume smaller than that of the seat bottom 104.
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sack et al. (10,589,643) in view of Adachi, as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Kirstein (9,592,751).
Regarding claim 17, Kirstein discloses the base comprises a foot 20 configured to be placed on a vehicle seat and move to transition the child safety seat between the upright configuration and the reclined configuration.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Kirstein and place a reclinable foot in the invention of Sack et al. in order to provide additional comfort with low cost.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance: There are many similarities and dissimilarities between applicant’s invention and the invention of Sack. Regarding claim 1, Sack fails to disclose a belt-positioning seat including a seat body, a crotch strap opening formed near a center of the seat body, and at least one belt-positioning seat belt guide, the seat body having a second seating surface, and a bottom surface configured to be placed on a vehicle seat, wherein: the at least one belt-positioning seat belt guide protrudes upward from the second seating surface; and the seat body is configured to be removably coupled to the seat bottom in the receiving space in overlapping arrangement with the first seating surface such that, when the seat body is positioned in the receiving space, the crotch buckle extends through the crotch strap opening and is positioned above the second seating surface to removably fasten to the first and second straps, the occupant being directly positionable on the second seating surface. No other prior art references in the record whether taken alone or in combination can solve these dissimilarities.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED A ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-7768. The examiner can normally be reached 10am-10pm.
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.
/SYED A ISLAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights