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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4 Jun2 2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim 2 is 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.
Claim 2 recites “the canopy bow connector” connected to “left and right canopy mounts.” It is unclear if Applicant intends to specify separate (left and right) canopy bow connectors (as appear to be disclosed) or simply that one canopy bow connector is either directly or indirectly connected to both side assemblies.
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, 2, 4, 5, 8, 11-15, and 49 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 Troutman et al. (US Patent Application Publication Number 2009/0235964).
Regarding claim 1, Troutman discloses a car seat canopy assembly comprising: at least one track (304) that protrudes from soft goods of a car seat and is positioned along a forward-facing portion of a front end of a sidewall of the car seat (see Figures 1 and 3 showing various “soft goods” of the seat from which the track protrudes as well as Figures 16-18 showing more details of the track including its arrangement relative to the soft goods and at a front end of a sidewall of 252 for instance; in particular see Figure 17 showing the track positioned along a forward-facing portion of a front end of a sidewall of 252); at least one canopy mount (302) slidably connected to the at least one track such that the canopy mount can translate along the at least one track; and a canopy bow connector (332 and/or 352) connected to the at least one canopy mount at a position that is above the at least one track (at least in part and/or based on position of the bow; see figures). While Troutman is thus viewed as disclosing the arrangement as claimed the positioning of the components may not clearly be as intended by Applicant. However, changes in shape and arrangement of components require only routine skill in the art and it accordingly would have been obvious to reposition the track and/or the bow connector (e.g. relative to 252 and/or soft goods, etc.) based on normal variation to improve performance and comfort for various users.
Regarding claim 2, Troutman further discloses the at least one track comprises left and right tracks respectively positioned along left and right sidewalls of the car seat; the at least one canopy mount comprises left and right canopy mounts connected to the left and right tracks respectively; and the canopy bow connector is connected to the left and right canopy mounts (this would be the general arrangement based on the figures and paragraph 30, etc., with at least 332, 352 combined connected to both mounts).
Regarding claim 4, Troutman further discloses the at least one track is a part of or attached to the soft goods of the car seat (it is at least attached thereto).
Regarding claim 5, Troutman further discloses the at least one track is molded with or secured to a frame of the car seat, and the soft goods define a slot from which the at least one track can protrude (see at least Figures 17 and 18; the track is secured to a frame and protrudes through a slot formed by soft goods).
Regarding claim 8, Troutman further discloses the at least one track is fastened to the soft goods (at least indirectly).
Regarding claim 11, Troutman further discloses each track has a flat plate that abuts a sidewall of the car seat (see figures showing 304 as a flat plate abutting 252 for instance).
Regarding claim 12, Troutman further discloses the at least one track includes detent positions (360) that provide predetermined positioning locations of the at least one canopy mount.
Regarding claim 13, Troutman further discloses the at least one canopy mount includes a passive flex beam (at 308) to position the canopy mount at a selected detent position along the at least one track.
Regarding claim 14, Troutman further discloses the at least one canopy mount includes a C-channel configured to receive the at least one track (a channel within 302 provides this general shape and arrangement; see at least Figures 4, 14, and 15).
Regarding claim 15, Troutman further discloses the at least one track includes a first unobstructed end and a second end including a stop (an upper end would be unobstructed while at least 260 would function as a stop).
Regarding claim 49, Troutman further discloses the at least one track further comprises a plurality of detents (360), and the canopy mount further comprises a channel (as above; see again Figures 4, 14, and 15) configured to receive the at least one track and a passive flex beam (at 308) spaced apart from the channel and configured to be engageable with one of the plurality of detents to position the canopy along the track (this is the general manner of operation).
Claim(s) 7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Troutman in view of Lacy (US Patent Number 5211696). Troutman discloses an assembly as explained above including the track coupled to the soft goods and being a separate part but may not disclose particular fastening or forming means. Sewing and molding are well-known as shown by Lacy who discloses a related device including sewn and molded components (see at least the paragraph bridging columns 2 and 3 as well as the second full paragraph of column 3). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a sewn and/or molded component as taught by Lacy in Troutman’s device because this could provide a simple and robust means of connection or manufacture.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Troutman in view of Gaudreau (US Patent Application Publication Number 2015/0175036). Troutman discloses an assembly as explained above including the canopy mount includes a stud including a plurality of teeth (320) that allow the canopy to rotate to various positions between a cocooning position and a stored position but does not specifically disclose ratcheting. Ratcheting arrangements for canopies are well-known as shown by Gaudreau who discloses a related device including a ratcheting canopy arrangement (see at least paragraph 35). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a ratcheting canopy arrangement as taught by Gaudreau in Troutman’s device because this could improve convenience or comfort for various users.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, Applicant argues that Troutman does not disclose or render obvious a track arranged as claimed, and that Troutman does not disclose or render obvious a canopy bow connector as claimed.
Regarding the track arrangement, Applicant's arguments that this would be non-obvious in view of Troutman is not persuasive much as explained in the advisory action of 8 May 2026. Regarding the protrusion from soft goods, it is noted that Figures 16 and 17 show the track protruding as claimed. That it is fastened to a frame does not have any impact on this arrangement. Regarding the positioning, it is maintained that a "forward-facing portion of a front end of a sidewall" would depend at least to some degree on frame of reference (i.e. "forward-facing" and "front" relative to what?). Even if one were to assume that that this language required a position/direction generally away from a seatback and/or forward relative to a user occupying the seat in a typical position, the arrangement would still appear to meet the limitation (as it is certainly positioned along such a portion), and at the very least be obvious as previously set forth. That is, while Applicant may have various reasons for the arrangement of the invention and these purported benefits may or may not apply directly to the Troutman arrangement, the positioning as described above would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill and motivated as set forth.
Regarding the canopy bow positioning, again, Troutman would appear to provide the arrangement as claimed. See Figures 14-16 for instance showing components 332 and 352 above track 304. Much as with the track, even if this were not clearly as Applicant intends, the positioning as described above would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as set forth above.
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights