September 1, 2026
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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: On line 5 of Claim 7, it appears the word - - to - - should be inserted after the word “relative”. 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 1-2,4,6-1 1,13 and 15-17 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.
In Claims 1 and 11, Applicant claims “wherein the second resilient member is arranged on the seat at a height above a seat pan surface such that an imaginary line extending between the support structure end of the first resilient member and the support structure end of the second resilient member extends essentially above an occupant's contact point of mass load on the seat”. However, this language is unclear and confusing language, since “an occupant's contact point of mass load on the seat” is not true for every person sitting on the seat, since a person’s height, weight, dimensions, and/or body type are going to vary from person to person. It is not recommended for claim limitations to be based on “an occupant” of a seat since no two people are alike. Furthermore, would a child occupant of the seat have a “contact point of mass load on the seat” the same as an adult’s “contact point of mass load on the seat”? Claim limitations should be based on the structure of the invention.
The aforementioned problem renders the claims vague and indefinite. Clarification and/or correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-2, 6, 9-11, and 15, so far as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ketels et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10,377,275 B2).
PNG
media_image1.png
172
182
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
164
152
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As for Claims 1 and 11, Ketels et al. teach a seat arrangement comprising a seat, wherein the seat is arranged to be suspended on a support structure 12 by a first resilient member 38 and a second resilient member 42 attached to opposite longitudinal sides of the seat, wherein the first and second resilient members are attached to the seat at a seat end of the first and second resilient members and to the support structure 12 at a support structure end of the first and second resilient members respectively, wherein the seat comprises a seat pan 44 and a seat arrangement member 46 extending vertically above the surface of the seat pan, wherein the first resilient member 38 is arranged to be attached to a front end of the seat and the second resilient member 42 is arranged to be attached to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat, wherein the second resilient member 42 is arranged on the seat at a height above a seat pan surface such that an imaginary line extending between the support structure end of the first resilient member and the support structure end of the second resilient member extends essentially above an occupant's contact point of mass load on the seat, wherein, when a load causes translational and/or rotational movement of the seat at least in a y-z plane of the seat, elastic shear deformation in the first and second resilient members controls the translational and/or rotational movement of the seat.
As for Claim 2, Ketels et al. teach that the resilient members are one or more elastomeric elements (see column 5, lines 27-38 where it reads “In some embodiments, suspension-control system 42 further includes dampers 38 as shown in FIG. 4. Dampers 38 are coupled to backing 40 and seat frame 12 to control the movement of backing 40 during acceleration of seat frame 12. For example, dampers 38 block backing 40 from coming to an abrupt stop when moving relative to seat frame 12. Dampers 38 may include micro-dampers. Dampers 38 may include bias members. Dampers 38 may include compression springs, air cylinders, padding, friction damper, tuned or controlled mass dampers, elastic bands, magnets, etc. Such devices may have translational and rotational versions and may be passive or active.”).
As for Claims 6 and 15, Ketels et al. teach that at least one resilient member 56 is arranged to be attached to a first lateral side of the seat arrangement member and at least one resilient member 56is arranged to be attached to a second lateral side of the seat arrangement member.
As for Claim 9-10, Ketels et al. teach a surface vehicle comprising a seat arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the surface vehicle is a sailboat, a motorboat or a wheeled or tracked land vehicle; a rail vehicle comprising a seat arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the rail vehicle is a passenger or cargo train.
Claims 1-2, 4, and 9-11, so far as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takeuchi et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,975,458 B2).
PNG
media_image3.png
212
168
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
262
168
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As for Claims 1 and 11, Takeuchi et al. teach a seat arrangement comprising a seat, wherein the seat is arranged to be suspended on a support structure 3, 5 by a first resilient member 40 and a second resilient member 50,60 attached to opposite longitudinal sides of the seat, wherein the first and second resilient members are attached to the seat at a seat end of the first and second resilient members and to the support structure 3, 5 at a support structure end of the first and second resilient members respectively, wherein the seat comprises a seat pan 7 and a seat arrangement member 8 extending vertically above the surface of the seat pan, wherein the first resilient member 40 is arranged to be attached to a front end of the seat and the second resilient member 50,60 is arranged to be attached to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat, wherein the second resilient member 50,60 is arranged on the seat at a height above a seat pan surface such that an imaginary line extending between the support structure end of the first resilient member and the support structure end of the second resilient member extends essentially above an occupant's contact point of mass load on the seat, wherein, when a load causes translational and/or rotational movement of the seat at least in a y-z plane of the seat, elastic shear deformation in the first and second resilient members controls the translational and/or rotational movement of the seat.
As for Claim 2, Takeuchi et al. teach that the resilient members are one or more of wire-rope isolators or elastomeric elements (see column 9, lines 2-10 where it reads “For example, the seat portion restoring force generating mechanism 40 may be formed by an elastic member that is connected to the seat portion 7 or the thrust shaft 11 that are rotating portions, and the first seat frame portion 4 or the thrust bearing 10 that are non-rotating portions. Also, this elastic member may be a spring, for example, and this spring may be a coil spring, a bar spring, a plate spring, a torsion bar, or a flat spiral spring, for example.” And column 16, lines 62-67 and column 17, lines 1-2 where it reads “For example, the seatback restoring force generating mechanism 50 may be an elastic member that is connected to the seatback 8 or the thrust shaft 14 that are rotating portions, and the second seat frame portion 5 or the thrust bearing 13 that are non-rotating portions. Also, this elastic member may be a spring, for example, and this spring may be a coil spring, a bar spring, a plate spring, a torsion bar, or a flat spiral spring, for example.” and Figures 7-16 that show wires).
As for Claim 9-10, Takeuchi et al. teach a surface vehicle comprising a seat arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the surface vehicle is a sailboat, a motorboat or a wheeled or tracked land vehicle; a rail vehicle comprising a seat arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the rail vehicle is a passenger or cargo train.
Claims 1-2, 4, 9-11, and 13 so far as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ilievski et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10,2937,18 B1).
PNG
media_image5.png
256
424
media_image5.png
Greyscale
As for Claims 1 and 11, Ilievski et al. teach a seat arrangement comprising a seat, wherein the seat is arranged to be suspended on a support structure by a first resilient member208 and a second resilient member 208 attached to opposite longitudinal sides of the seat, wherein the first and second resilient members are attached to the seat at a seat end of the first and second resilient members and to the support structure 12 at a support structure end of the first and second resilient members respectively, wherein the seat comprises a seat pan 202a and a seat arrangement member 202b extending vertically above the surface of the seat pan, wherein the first resilient member 208 is arranged to be attached to a front end of the seat and the second resilient member 208 is arranged to be attached to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat, wherein the second resilient member 208 is arranged on the seat at a height above a seat pan surface such that an imaginary line extending between the support structure end of the first resilient member and the support structure end of the second resilient member extends essentially above an occupant's contact point of mass load on the seat, wherein, when a load causes translational and/or rotational movement of the seat at least in a y-z plane of the seat, elastic shear deformation in the first and second resilient members controls the translational and/or rotational movement of the seat.
As for Claim 2, Ilievski et al. teach that the resilient members are one or more elastomeric elements.
As for Claim 4, Ilievski et al. teach that the seat arrangement member comprises a number of vertically spaced attachment points for the seat end of the second resilient member to be attached to and the support structure comprises corresponding vertically spaced attachment points for the support structure end of the second resilient member to be attached to (see annotated Fig. 2 above).
As for Claim 9-10, Ilievski et al. teach a surface vehicle comprising a seat arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the surface vehicle is a sailboat, a motorboat or a wheeled or tracked land vehicle; a rail vehicle comprising a seat arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the rail vehicle is a passenger or cargo train.
As for Claim 13, Ilievski et al. teach that the method comprises: providing the seat arrangement member with a number of vertically spaced attachment points for the seat end of the second resilient member to be attached to,
- providing the support structure with corresponding vertically spaced attachment points for the support structure end of the second resilient member to be attached to.
Claims 1-2, 6, 8-11, 15, and 17, so far as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU (FR 1 384 130 A).
PNG
media_image6.png
216
430
media_image6.png
Greyscale
As for Claims 1 and 11, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches a seat arrangement comprising a seat, wherein the seat is arranged to be suspended on a support structure 1a by a first resilient member 4,5 and a second resilient member 3 attached to opposite longitudinal sides of the seat, wherein the first and second resilient members are attached to the seat at a seat end of the first and second resilient members and to the support structure 1a at a support structure end of the first and second resilient members respectively, wherein the seat comprises a seat pan and a seat arrangement member extending vertically above the surface of the seat pan, wherein the first resilient member 4,5 is arranged to be attached to a front end of the seat and the second resilient member 3 is arranged to be attached to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat, wherein the second resilient member 3 is arranged on the seat at a height above a seat pan surface such that an imaginary line extending between the support structure end of the first resilient member and the support structure end of the second resilient member extends essentially above an occupant's contact point of mass load on the seat, wherein, when a load causes translational and/or rotational movement of the seat at least in a y-z plane of the seat, elastic shear deformation in the first and second resilient members controls the translational and/or rotational movement of the seat.
As for Claim 2, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches that the resilient members are one or more elastomeric elements.
As for Claims 6 and 15, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches that wherein at least one resilient member 4 is arranged to be attached to a first lateral side of the seat pan and at least one resilient member 5 is arranged to be attached to a second lateral side of the seat pan.
As for Claims 8 and 17, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches that the seat arrangement comprises two first resilient members 4,5, wherein the two first resilient members are separated in a y-direction by a lateral distance.
As for Claim 9-11, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches a surface vehicle comprising a seat arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the surface vehicle is a sailboat, a motorboat or a wheeled or tracked land vehicle; a rail vehicle comprising a seat arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the rail vehicle is a passenger or cargo train.
Claims 1-2, 6-11, and 15-17, so far as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ketels et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10,493,878 B2).
PNG
media_image7.png
288
208
media_image7.png
Greyscale
As for Claims 1 and 11, Ketels et al. teach a seat arrangement comprising a seat, wherein the seat is arranged to be suspended on a support structure 20,30 by a first resilient member 56,58 and a second resilient member 42,44 attached to opposite longitudinal sides of the seat, wherein the first and second resilient members are attached to the seat at a seat end of the first and second resilient members and to the support structure 20,30 at a support structure end of the first and second resilient members respectively, wherein the seat comprises a seat pan 15 and a seat arrangement member 14 extending vertically above the surface of the seat pan, wherein the first resilient member 56,58 is arranged to be attached to a front end of the seat and the second resilient member 42,44 is arranged to be attached to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat, wherein the second resilient member 42,44 is arranged on the seat at a height above a seat pan surface such that an imaginary line extending between the support structure end of the first resilient member and the support structure end of the second resilient member extends essentially above an occupant's contact point of mass load on the seat, wherein, when a load causes translational and/or rotational movement of the seat at least in a y-z plane of the seat, elastic shear deformation in the first and second resilient members controls the translational and/or rotational movement of the seat.
As for Claim 2, Ketels et al. teach that the resilient members are one or more elastomeric elements.
As for Claims 6 and 15, Ketels et al. teach that at least one resilient member 56 is arranged to be attached to a first lateral side of the seat pan and at least one resilient member 58 is arranged to be attached to a second lateral side of the seat pan and/or wherein at least one resilient member 42 is arranged to be attached to a first lateral side of the seat arrangement member and at least one resilient member 44 is arranged to be attached to a second lateral side of the seat arrangement member.
As for Claims 7 and 16, Ketels et al. teach that wherein the first resilient member 56,58 has a first extension direction relative to one or more of an x-y plane, an X-Z plane and the y-z plane of the seat and wherein the second resilient member 42,44 has a second extension direction relative to one or more of the x-y plane, the x-z plane and the y-z plane of the seat, wherein the first and second extension directions are between 0° and 90° relative each of the x-y plane, the X-Z plane and the y-z plane of the seat.
As for Claims 8 and 17, Ketels et al. teach that the seat arrangement comprises two first resilient members 56,58, wherein the two first resilient members are separated in a y-direction by a lateral distance.
As for Claim 9-10, Ketels et al. teach a surface vehicle comprising a seat arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the surface vehicle is a sailboat, a motorboat or a wheeled or tracked land vehicle; a rail vehicle comprising a seat arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the rail vehicle is a passenger or cargo train.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because it teaches structures and concepts similar to those of the present invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rodney B. White whose telephone number is (571)272-6863. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM-5:00 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, David R. Dunn can be reached at (571) 272-6670. 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.
/Rodney B White/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights