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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 8-12, 14, 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by US 10,442,330 B2 to Le et al.
Regarding claim 1: Le teaches a seat device with a backrest (figs. 1-2: seat back 100) having a base frame (112) which comprises two lateral frame elements (fig. 3: the flanges on either side of panel 112), and having a shell element (forward panel 104) which is made at least partly from a fiber composite material (c. 9, ℓ. 27-47: carbon fiber composites) and is directly connected by force fit and/or form fit to the two lateral frame elements (c. 8, ℓ. 61-67) and at least partly forms a backrest support surface (c. 3, ℓ. 13-21).
Regarding claim 6: Le teaches the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shell element comprises at least one passage which forms a mounting region for a connection of the backrest to a mounting unit (c. 7, ℓ. 47-49: “quadrant arms 120 may be formed as an integral part of the forward panel 104”; figs. 1-2: each quadrant arm 120 has an aperture for a connection of the backrest to a mounting unit).
Regarding claim 8: Le teaches the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shell element, in a lower region of the shell element, has a shape that is convex towards a mounting plane (c. 8, ℓ. 19-27: forward panel 104 has a convex face 108 and a concave face 106; fig. 4: the concave face 106 is convex with respect to a mounting plane formed by quadrant arms 120 and pivot axis holes 130, see also fig. 3).
Regarding claim 9: Le teaches the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shell element, on a top side of the shell element, is connected to a crossbeam of the backrest (c. 7, ℓ. 57-67, fig. 3: the top flange 118 connects to the top side of forward panel 104 when the panels are assembled).
Regarding claim 10: Le teaches the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shell element extends over at least 60 % of a maximal longitudinal extent of the backrest (figs. 1 and 3: substantially the full maximal longitudinal extent).
Regarding claim 11: Le teaches the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shell element comprises at least one function element which is molded onto the shell element (c. 7, ℓ. 45-56: such as quadrant arms 120, which may be formed as an integral part of forward panel 104, or c. 8, ℓ. 64-67: the integrated tabs or fittings which allow the panels to snap together).
Regarding claim 12: Le teaches the seat device as claimed in claim 11, wherein the at least one function element is arranged on at least one lateral end of the shell element (c. 8, ℓ. 45-67: the perimeter flanges 110 and 118 of the forward and aft panels may be joined in various methods in which at least one function element is arranged on the lateral ends of the forward panel, such as the integrated tabs or fittings which allow the panels to snap together) and forms a receiving space for a cover fastening element (fig. 4: internal volume 134 is formed by the joint 132 between flanges 110 and 118 of the forward and aft panels, and the internal volume forms a receiving space capable of use with a fastening element, such as if fasteners were used in the joint 132, see c. 8, ℓ. 59-67).
Regarding claim 14: Le teaches the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the shell element at least partly forms a rear visible surface of the backrest (the shell element may alternatively be considered as aft panel 112, with the lateral frames considered as the side walls 110, as the aft panel also is a main load bearing structure, c. 7, ℓ. 20-24; c. 3, ℓ. 13-21: the exterior surface may provide the surface geometry, see also c. 9, ℓ. 24-27, aft panel 112 at least partly forms a rear visible surface of the backrest).
Regarding claim 16: Le teaches an aircraft seat (c. 7, ℓ. 9-11: airline passenger seat) with the seat device as claimed in claim 1.
Regarding claim 18: Le teaches a seat device with a backrest (figs. 1-2: seat back 100) having a base frame (112) which comprises two lateral frame elements (fig. 3: the flanges on either side of panel 112), and having a shell element (forward panel 104) which is made at least partly from a fiber composite material (c. 9, ℓ. 27-47: carbon fiber composites) and is directly connected by force fit and/or form fit to the two lateral frame elements (c. 8, ℓ. 61-67) and at least partly forms a backrest support surface (c. 3, ℓ. 13-21),
wherein the shell element, on a top side of the shell element, is connected to a crossbeam of the backrest (c. 7, ℓ. 57-67, fig. 3: the top flange 118 connects to the top side of forward panel 104 when the panels are assembled), wherein the crossbeam is arranged in an upper region of the backrest (see fig. 3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later 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) 13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 10,442,330 B2 to Le et al.
Regarding claim 13: Le teaches the seat device as claimed in claim 11. Le does not specifically disclose at least one function element arranged on a rear side of the shell element and configured for attachment of at least one functional component to the backrest.
However, Le teaches an integrated monitor surround 124, integrated stowage pocket 122 and internal baffle 128 which is sandwiched between the front and aft panels and may be used to provide structure within the enclosed volume of the seat back (c. 7, ℓ. 26-56; see fig. 3). Le is silent to an attachment of the integrated element to the forward panel 104, but does disclose that the seat back “may be formed with integrated fixtures, mounting points, or features that would otherwise have to be separately made or attached” (c. 8, ℓ. 1-11; note also c. 7, ℓ. 24-27).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have configured the seat device of Le with a function element arranged on a rear side of the shell element and configured for attachment of the integrated monitor surround, stowage pocket and internal baffle, for the purpose of strengthening the structure provided by the internal baffle to the seat back. In so doing, the integrated element would form at least one functional component attached to the function element.
Regarding claim 15: Le teaches the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the backrest has a further shell element (fig. 3: integrated monitor surround 124 and stowage pocket 122), which at least substantially terminates the backrest rearwards and forms a rear visible surface of the backrest (at least integrated stowage pocket 122 will be a visible rear surface, such as shown in fig. 2).
Le does not specifically disclose that the shell element and the further shell element are directly connected together, however Le does disclose that the seat back “may be formed with integrated fixtures, mounting points, or features that would otherwise have to be separately made or attached” (c. 8, ℓ. 1-11; note also c. 7, ℓ. 24-27).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have configured the seat device of Le such that the forward panel and the integrated monitor surround, stowage pocket and internal baffle are directly connected together, for the purpose of strengthening the structure provided by the internal baffle to the seat back.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6, 9-12, 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,530,044 B2 to Smith et al. in view of US 8,696,067 B2 to Galbreath et al.
Regarding claim 1: Smith teaches a seat device (200) with a backrest (seat back 220) having a base frame (frame 224) which comprises two lateral frame elements (figs. 3B, 4B: first and second segments 226a, 226b), and having a shell element (222) which is directly connected by force fit and/or form fit to the two lateral frame elements and at least partly forms a backrest support surface (figs. 3A-4B, c. 5, ℓ. 20-35: frame 224 is form fit into grooves 227 of foam back 222, and foam back 222 can dissipate at least 50% of the load).
Smith teaches that the foam support elements may include a foam structural layer, foam comfort layer and a covering which can encompass and protect the structural and comfort layers (c. 2, ℓ. 35-42), but Smith does not specifically disclose a shell element which is made at least partly from a fiber composite material.
Galbreath teaches a seat device comprising a trim material cover and a fiber composite material which may be applied to the back of the trim material or a foam backing of the trim material to provide an increase in strength (c. 8, ℓ. 20-40).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modify the seat device of Smith such that the shell element is made at least partly from a fiber composite material, using the teachings of Galbreath, such as by applying a fiber composite reinforcing material to the back of the trim cover material, for the purpose of increasing the strength of the protective cover.
Regarding claim 2: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shell element is arranged exclusively in a lower region of the backrest (Smith fig. 2: foam back 222 does not extend into the upper region of the backrest).
Regarding claim 6: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shell element comprises at least one passage which forms a mounting region for a connection of the backrest to a mounting unit (Smith figs. 3B, 4B: groove 227 is a passage which forms a mounting region).
Regarding claim 9: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shell element, on a top side of the shell element, is connected to a crossbeam of the backrest (Smith fig. 3A: the top side of foam back 222 is indirectly connected to cross segment 228).
Regarding claim 10: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shell element extends over at least 60 % of a maximal longitudinal extent of the backrest (Smith fig. 2: foam back 222 is show to extend over at least two thirds of the length of the backrest).
Regarding claim 11: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the shell element comprises at least one function element which is molded onto the shell element (Smith figs. 3B, 4B: groove 227).
Regarding claim 12: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 11, wherein the at least one function element is arranged on at least one lateral end of the shell element and forms a receiving space for a cover fastening element (Smith figs. 3B, 4B: groove 227 forms a receiving space which could be used for receiving a cover fastening element).
Regarding claim 16: Smith, as modified, provides an aircraft seat with the seat device as claimed in claim 1 (Smith c. 2, ℓ. 11-12).
Regarding claim 18: Smith teaches a seat device (200) with a backrest (seat back 220) having a base frame (frame 224) which comprises two lateral frame elements (figs. 3B, 4B: first and second segments 226a, 226b), and having a shell element (222) which is directly connected by force fit and/or form fit to the two lateral frame elements and at least partly forms a backrest support surface (figs. 3A-4B, c. 5, ℓ. 20-35: frame 224 is form fit into grooves 227 of foam back 222, and foam back 222 can dissipate at least 50% of the load).
wherein the shell element, on a top side of the shell element, is connected to a crossbeam of the backrest (Smith fig. 3A: the top side of foam back 222 is indirectly connected to cross segment 228), wherein the crossbeam is arranged in an upper region of the backrest (Smith figs. 3A-4B).
Claim(s) 3-5, 7, 13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,530,044 B2 to Smith et al. in view of US 8,696,067 B2 to Galbreath et al., as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of DE 10 2013 100 533 A1 to Goetz et al. (for citations to the text of Goetz, refer to the appended machine translation document).
Regarding claim 3: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 1.
Smith does not specifically disclose at least one covering element coupled to the base frame and to the shell element and partly forming the backrest support surface.
Goetz teaches a seat device comprising a covering element (¶ 0028: outer shell shape 14 of backrest 13) which is coupled to a base frame (10) adjacent to the shell below (visible in fig. 15).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the seat device of Smith, as modified, such that the backrest has at least one covering element which is coupled to the base frame and to the shell element and partly forms the backrest support surface, using the teachings of Goetz, such as by providing another foam block in the headrest area, for the purpose of supporting the head of the passenger. In so doing, it would be obvious to couple the covering element to the shell element for the purpose of limiting relative movement or gaps between the elements.
Regarding claim 4: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 3, wherein the at least one covering element is arranged between the shell element and a crossbeam of the backrest, wherein the crossbeam is arranged in an upper region of the backrest (Smith figs. 2-4B: between foam back 222 and third segment 228 at the top of the backrest).
Regarding claim 5: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 3, wherein the shell element has at least one attachment region in which the at least one covering element is attached to the shell element (Smith figs. 2-4B: as modified, the top region of the shell element is an attachment region where the shell element is attached to the covering element).
Regarding claim 7: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 4.
Smith does not specifically disclose a protrusion in an upper region of the shell element extending towards the crossbeam (Smith figs. 3A-4B: third segment 228).
Galbreath teaches that it is known to use mechanical fastening components such as attachment clips in coupling components in a seat device (c. 8, ℓ. 41-63).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the seat device of Smith by using mechanical fastening components in coupling the covering element to the shell element, using the teachings of Galbreath, for the purpose of providing a secure connection. In so doing, the mechanical fastening components would be protrusions extending towards the crossbeam.
Regarding claim 13: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 11.
Smith does not specifically disclose at least one function element arranged on a rear side of the shell element and configured for attachment of at least one functional component to the backrest.
Goetz teaches a seat device having at least one functional component attached to the rear side of the backrest (fig. 15: a tray table and a net pocket; or ¶ 0003: it is known to attach a handle to the backrest).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the seat device of Smith, as modified, such that at least one function element is arranged on a rear side of the shell element and is configured for attachment of at least one functional component to the backrest, using the teaching of Goetz, for the purpose of providing functional components such as storage pockets.
Regarding claim 15: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 1.
Smith does not specifically disclose a further shell element, which at least substantially terminates the backrest rearwards and forms a rear visible surface of the backrest, wherein the shell element and the further shell element are directly connected together.
Goetz teaches a seat device comprising a further shell element (¶ 0028: outer shell shape 14 of backrest 13), which at least substantially terminates the backrest rearwards and forms a rear visible surface of the backrest (see fig. 15).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the seat device of Smith, as modified, such that the backrest has a further shell element, which at least substantially terminates the backrest rearwards and forms a rear visible surface of the backrest, using the teachings of Goetz, such as by providing another foam block in the headrest area, for the purpose of supporting the head of the passenger. In so doing, it would be obvious to couple the shell element to the further shell element for the purpose of limiting relative movement or gaps between the elements.
Claim(s) 8 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,530,044 B2 to Smith et al. in view of US 8,696,067 B2 to Galbreath et al., as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 10,442,330 B2 to Le et al.
Regarding claim 8: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 1.
Smith does not specifically disclose that the shell element, in a lower region of the shell element, has a shape that is convex towards a mounting plane.
Le teaches a seat device comprising a shell element (forward panel 104) which, in a lower region of the shell element, has a shape that is convex towards a mounting plane (c. 8, ℓ. 19-27: forward panel 104 has a convex face 108 and a concave face 106; fig. 4: the concave face 106 is convex with respect to a mounting plane formed by quadrant arms 120 and pivot axis holes 130, see also fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the seat device of Smith such that the shell element, in a lower region of the shell element, has a shape that is convex towards a mounting plane, using the teachings of Le, for the purpose of increasing passenger comfort.
Regarding claim 14: Smith, as modified, provides the seat device as claimed in claim 1.
Smith does not specifically disclose that at least a portion of the shell element at least partly forms a rear visible surface of the backrest.
Le teaches a seat device comprising a shell element (forward panel 104) wherein at least a portion of the shell element at least partly forms a rear visible surface of the backrest (the shell element may alternatively be considered as aft panel 112, with the lateral frames considered as the side walls 110, as the aft panel also is a main load bearing structure, c. 7, ℓ. 20-24; c. 3, ℓ. 13-21: the exterior surface may provide the surface geometry, see also c. 9, ℓ. 24-27, aft panel 112 at least partly forms a rear visible surface of the backrest).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the seat device of Smith such that wherein at least a portion of the shell element at least partly forms a rear visible surface of the backrest, using the teachings of Le, for the purpose of simplifying and reducing weight compared with an additional covering element.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,530,044 B2 to Smith et al. in view of US 8,696,067 B2 to Galbreath et al. and DE 10 2013 100 533 A1 to Goetz et al.
Regarding claim 17: Smith teaches a seat device (200) with a backrest (seat back 220) having a base frame (frame 224) which comprises two lateral frame elements (figs. 3B, 4B: first and second segments 226a, 226b), and having a shell element (222) which is directly connected by force fit and/or form fit to the two lateral frame elements and at least partly forms a backrest support surface (figs. 3A-4B, c. 5, ℓ. 20-35: frame 224 is form fit into grooves 227 of foam back 222, and foam back 222 can dissipate at least 50% of the load).
Smith teaches that the foam support elements may include a foam structural layer, foam comfort layer and a covering which can encompass and protect the structural and comfort layers (c. 2, ℓ. 35-42), but Smith does not specifically disclose a shell element which is made at least partly from a fiber composite material.
Galbreath teaches a seat device comprising a trim material cover and a fiber composite material which may be applied to the back of the trim material or a foam backing of the trim material to provide an increase in strength (c. 8, ℓ. 20-40).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modify the seat device of Smith such that the shell element is made at least partly from a fiber composite material, using the teachings of Galbreath, such as by applying a fiber composite reinforcing material to the back of the trim cover material, for the purpose of increasing the strength of the protective cover.
Smith teaches that wherein the shell element is arranged exclusively in a lower region of the backrest (fig. 2: foam back 222 does not extend into the upper region of the backrest), but Smith does not disclose at least one covering element coupled to the base frame and to the shell element and partly forming the backrest support surface, wherein the at least one covering element is connected to the two lateral frame elements by form fit.
Goetz teaches a seat device comprising a covering element (¶ 0028: outer shell shape 14 of backrest 13) which is coupled to a base frame (10) adjacent to the shell below (visible in fig. 15).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the seat device of Smith, as modified, such that the backrest has at least one covering element which is coupled to the base frame and to the shell element and partly forms the backrest support surface, using the teachings of Goetz, such as by providing another foam block in the headrest area, for the purpose of supporting the head of the passenger. In so doing, it would be obvious to couple the covering element to the shell element for the purpose of limiting relative movement or gaps between the elements.
Smith does not specifically disclose that the shell element is curved or arched.
Goetz shows that it is known for aircraft seat backrests to be curved and/or arched (figs. 15-16). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have configured the shell element of Smith, as modified, such that the shell element is designed as a curved and/or arched flat component, using the teachings of Goetz, for the purpose of increasing passenger comfort.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 Richard Green whose telephone number is (571)270-5380. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 11:00 to 7:00.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at (571) 272-6909. 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.
/Richard Green/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647