April 23, 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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments filed 04/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-11, and 13- 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1 and 11 are now directed to resilient members attached to opposite lateral sides of the seat (as shown in Figs. 8) and the resilient members attached to the front and rear of the seat (as in Figures 4-7). However, there is no disclosed embodiment of a seat arrangement comprising both a first resilient member and a second resilient member attached to opposite lateral sides of the seat and the first resilient member arranged to be attached to a front end of the seat and the second resilient member arranged to be attached to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat. As such, claims 1 and 11 recite new matter.
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, 4-11, and 13- 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 defines “a first resilient member and a second resilient member attached to opposite lateral sides of the seat” and that “the first resilient member is arranged to be attached to a front end of the seat and the second resilient member is arranged to be attached to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat.”. It would appear that Applicant is defining the embodiment shown in Figures 8a-8b where first resilient member 8 and a second resilient member 9 are attached to opposite lateral sides of the seat. It is also possible that Applicant is defining the embodiment shown in Figures 2a-2b where a first resilient member 8 and a second resilient member 9 are attached to what could be “opposite lateral sides of a seat”. Whichever sides in Figures 2a-2b where the first resilient member 8 and a second resilient member 9 are attached, they are either the longitudinal sides or the lateral sides but not both. However, in both embodiments of Figures 2a-2b and 8a-b, neither the first resilient member 8 nor the second resilient member 9 is attached at a front end of the seat and the second resilient member is arranged to be attached to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat. Therefore, Applicant cannot define that the first resilient member 8 and the second resilient member 9 are attached to opposite lateral sides of the seat” and then also define that “the first resilient member is arranged to be attached to a front end of the seat and the second resilient member is arranged to be attached to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat.” None of the embodiments show first resilient members and the second resilient members attached at “opposite lateral sides of the seat” and at a front end of the seat and a rear end of the seat.”
The aforementioned problems render 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, 4-7, 9-11, and 13-16, 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_image1.png
196
214
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
214
216
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As for Claims 1 and 11, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches a seat arrangement (Figures 1-2) comprising a seat (13), wherein the seat is arranged to be suspended on a support structure (1a,1b) by a first resilient member (4) and a second resilient member (5) attached to opposite lateral sides of the seat (as seen as in Fig. 2, resilient members 4-5 are on opposite lateral sides), 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 at a support structure end of the first and second resilient members respectively, 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 (page 1 of the translation cited on the IDS filed 09/05/2025), wherein the seat comprises a seat pan and a seat arrangement member extending vertically above a surface of the seat pan, wherein the first resilient member is arranged to be attached to a front end of the seat and the second resilient member is arranged to be attached to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat (as seen in Fig. 1 which shows a first resilient member 4 is attached to a front end of the seat and second resilient member 3 is attached to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat).
As for claim 2, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches that the resilient members (3,4,5) are one or more of wire-rope isolators or elastomeric elements.
As for claim 4, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches 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 Fig. 1).
As for claim 5, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches that the second resilient member is arranged on the seat at a height H 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 (PML) on the seat (see Fig. 2).
As for Claim 6, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches that the seat comprises a seat pan and a seat arrangement member, wherein at least one resilient member is arranged to be attached to a first lateral side of the seat pan and at least one resilient member is arranged to be attached to a second lateral side of the seat pan and/or wherein at least one resilient member is arranged to be attached to a first lateral side of the seat arrangement member and at least one resilient member is arranged to be attached to a second lateral side of the seat arrangement member (see Fig. 1).
As for Claims 7 and 16, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches that the first resilient member 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 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 00 and 900 relative each of the x-y plane, the x-z plane and the y-z plane of the seat (see page 1, lines 1-4).
As for Claim 9, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches a surface vehicle comprising a seat wherein the surface vehicle is a motorboat or a wheeled or tracked land vehicle.
As for Claim 10, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches a rail vehicle comprising a seat arrangement, wherein the rail vehicle is a passenger or cargo train (see Fig. 1).
As for Claim 13, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches 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 (see Fig. 2).
As for Claim 14, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches that the method comprises arranging one resilient member on the seat arrangement member at a height H above a seat-pan surface such that an imaginary line extends between a first support structure end of the first resilient member and the second support structure end of a second resilient member essentially above an occupant's contact point of mass load (PML) on the seat (see Fig. 1).
As for Claim 15, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches that the method comprises: providing a seat comprising a seat pan and a seat arrangement member, - attaching at least one resilient member to a first lateral side of the seat pan and attaching at least one resilient member to a second lateral side of the seat pan, and/or - attaching at least one resilient member to a first lateral side of the seat arrangement member and attaching at least one resilient member to a second lateral side of the seat arrangement member (see Fig. 2).
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.
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU.
It would have been the seat arrangement comprises two first resilient members, wherein the two first resilient members are abutting or are separated in a y-direction by a lateral distance.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) 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 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