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 Rejections - 35 USC §§ 102, 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 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.
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 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Okubo (US Patent Application Publication Number 2017/0225597).
Regarding claim 1, Okubo discloses a headrest for a vehicle seat, comprising: a frame (12) including a pair of main frame parts (at least center/main portions of 12c for instance) spaced apart from each other in a first direction and extending in a second direction intersecting the first direction (the parts are spaced laterally and extend up-and-down); a tension member (D; at the very least 17B) including a tension part extending between the pair of main frame parts (it is arranged in this manner; see figures); a cover (14) defining a bag (it is described as such) and accommodating the pair of main frame parts and the tension member in the bag; and a pad (formed by 44) enclosing the pair of main frame parts and the tension member, the pad being made of a material which has had fluidity and been injected in the bag through a specific portion of the cover (at 38) that is away from the tension part and faces the tension part in a third direction intersecting the first direction and the second direction (see at least Figure 8 showing the foam injection with the “facing” direction front-to-back; note also Figure 11 showing an alternative tension member placement), wherein the tension member is in the shape of a strip (see figures) and the tension part extends over a substantially whole longitudinal region of each of the pair of main frame parts in the second direction (at least depending on the definition of the frame parts/longitudinal regions for instance, this would appear to be the case). While Okubo is thus viewed as disclosing the invention as claimed, the particular shape or extent of components may not be explicit. Thus, even if anticipation were not clear, as changes in size and shape of components requires only routine skill in the art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the arrangement as claimed (i.e. by minor alteration in the shape of the tension member/part) based on normal variation to improve comfort, fit, and safety for various users.
Regarding claim 2, Okubo further discloses the tension member includes fixed parts (24A and 24B) respectively fixedly attached to the pair of main frame parts.
Claim(s) 3-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo.
Regarding claim 3-5, Okubo discloses a headrest as explained above and further discloses the tension member in the shape of a strip having a main face (see figures) and d the fixed parts fixedly attach the tension member to the pair of main frame parts, wherein the tension member is wound around the pair of the main frame parts (at least partially), wherein the tension member has one end overlapping another portion of the tension member that is different from the one end in a winding direction (17A overlapping 17B for instance). Okubo also discloses adhesive generally (see at least paragraph 137) and wound/overlapping components (member 16, as well as alternate mounts 124, etc.), but may not specifically disclose the arrangement of adhesive and winding as claimed. However, as duplication and rearrangement of components require only routine skill in the art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the arrangement as claimed (i.e. by providing specific adhesive and/or additional winding) based on normal variation to improve comfort, fit, and safety for various users.
Regarding claim 6, Okubo discloses a headrest as explained above and further discloses the frame further includes a connection part (12d including curved ends) that has a U-shape extending downward and connecting respective ends of the pair of main frame parts to each other, the connection part of the frame is accommodated in the bag and enclosed by the pad, and the head rest has a saddle shape (at least inasmuch as in the invention). Okubo may not clearly disclose the extent in the third direction as claimed. Okubo does disclose such an arrangement in other embodiments (see Figure 11 where the second direction/main frame extension would be front-to-back with the third/facing direction up-and-down with foaming as shown elsewhere) and rearrangement of components requires only routine skill in the art. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the arrangement as claimed (i.e. either by rearrangement of components or simply foaming the embodiment of Figure 11 as in Figure 8) based on normal variation to improve comfort, fit, and safety for various users.
Regarding claims 7-9, Okubo discloses and/or renders obvious a headrest structurally as claimed as explained above but may not explicitly describe a method of manufacture. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to perform the methods steps as claimed as the normal manufacture of the device would typically include these steps.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, Applicant argues that Okubo does not disclose a strip-shaped tension member as claimed and that Okubo does not disclose the pad injected relative to the tension part as claimed. Regarding the shape and extent of the tension member, it is maintained that Okubo’s D or at the very least 17B is in fact strip-shaped even if it may have a shape somewhat different from that of the invention. Similarly, the tension part provides the extension as claimed based on how the frame parts/longitudinal regions are defined. Moreover, even if these interpretations were not clear, the shapes would have been obvious as explained above. Further, Okubo is in fact viewed as disclosing the pad injected as claimed. Based on the Figures 8, 11, etc. as explained above, Okubo would provide the claimed arrangement. While Applicant’s arguments as to purported unworkability of the disclosed embodiments is appreciated, it is not clear that these issues would be present in the Okubo arrangement. Moreover, the arrangements are in fact disclosed in Okubo regardless of any potential problems noted by Applicant or supposed advantages of the invention.
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 PHILIP F GABLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2155. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00 - 4:30.
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 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.
/PHILIP F GABLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636