Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/567,117

ARRANGEMENT AND METHOD FOR SUSPENDING A SEAT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 05, 2023
Examiner
WHITE, RODNEY BARNETT
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Ullman Dynamics AB
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
1790 granted / 2169 resolved
+30.5% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
2206
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
34.9%
-5.1% vs TC avg
§102
34.2%
-5.8% vs TC avg
§112
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 2169 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
January 12, 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, see the Response, filed 11/25/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-17 under 35 USC § 102 and 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly cited prior art. 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, 6-7, 9, 14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by GOMMA ANITVIBRANTI APPLIC (S.A.G.A. SOCIETA APPLICAZIONI GOMMA ANITVIBRANT (GB 622 620 A). As for Claim 1, GOMMA ANITVIBRANTI APPLIC teaches a seat arrangement (Fig.1) comprising a seat (4,5,7), wherein the seat is arranged to be suspended on a support structure (1,2) by a first resilient member (spring 3 on the front side) and a second resilient member (spring 3 on the rear side) attached to opposite longitudinal and/or lateral 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 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 2 lines 38-40). As for Claim 6, GOMMA ANITVIBRANTI APPLIC (S.A.G.A. SOCIETA APPLICAZIONI GOMMA ANITVIBRANT 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. 2). As for Claims 7 and 16, GOMMA ANITVIBRANTI APPLIC (S.A.G.A. SOCIETA APPLICAZIONI GOMMA ANITVIBRANT 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 9-10). As for Claim 9, GOMMA ANITVIBRANTI APPLIC (S.A.G.A. SOCIETA APPLICAZIONI GOMMA ANITVIBRANT teaches a surface vehicle comprising a seat wherein the surface vehicle is a motorboat or a wheeled or tracked land vehicle. As for Claim 14, GOMMA ANITVIBRANTI APPLIC (S.A.G.A. SOCIETA APPLICAZIONI GOMMA ANITVIBRANT 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. 2). Claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-10, and 12-16 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 Claim 1, 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 (3) and a second resilient member (4,5) attached to opposite longitudinal and/or lateral 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 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). 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 12, LOUIS HENRI DENIS MARIE BALLU teaches the method of providing a seat comprising a seat pan and a seat arrangement member extending vertically above a surface of the seat pan, - attaching the first resilient member to a front end of the seat, and- attaching the second resilient member to the seat arrangement member at a rear end of the seat (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 over GOMMA ANITVIBRANTI APPLIC (S.A.G.A. SOCIETA APPLICAZIONI GOMMA ANITVIBRANT. 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. 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. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3 and 11 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. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 05, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 25, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594862
BABY CARRIER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593917
FOLDING RECLINER WITH GUIDE MECHANISMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588769
CONVERTIBLE INFANT CHAIR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588763
SEATING FURNITURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589683
SEAT PAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+17.7%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 2169 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month