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 § 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 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) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US Patent Number 10143310), optionally in view of Waldo et al. (US Patent Number 5984416).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses an armrest structure, comprising: a fixed frame (10) configured to be fixed to a side of a seat that includes a backrest (while not shown, this is at least viewed as inherent; 10 is described as mounted to a support member, which would necessarily be on a side of a seat for any functional armrest arrangement while backrests are nearly universally provided); and an armrest portion (at least 70) attached to the fixed frame to be swingable in a horizontal direction, wherein the armrest portion includes a button member (at least 62, optionally including 20, 30) disposed to be push-operable, and an urging member (50) configured to urge the button member in a direction in which the button member protrudes from an end of the armrest portion (the member biases the button outward from the front end), the fixed frame and the button member regulate swing of the armrest portion by causing a pin (40) provided on one of the fixed frame and the button member to engage with an engagement groove (13) provided on the other of the fixed frame and the button member, the urging member urges the button member in a direction in which the pin and the engagement groove engage with each other (as in Figure 4), and when the button member is pushed in against an urging force of the urging member, the pin disengages from the engagement groove to enable the armrest portion to swing (as in Figure 5). Wang may not clearly disclose the orientation of the structure as claimed. However, rearrangement of components requires only routine skill in the art. Further Waldo discloses a related device including an armrest with a button member disposed to be push operable and protruding from a front end of the armrest that faces away from a backrest (see figures). 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 (e.g. reorienting the button with respect to the armrest and/or the armrest with respect to the backrest) based on normal variation and/or as taught by Waldo because this could improve comfort, support, and convenience for various users.
Regarding claim 2, Wang further discloses the engagement groove comprises a plurality of engagement grooves (see figures), a guide groove (at a front of 10) connecting the plurality of the engagement grooves is provided (i.e. the generally open portion at the front of 10 forms such a groove), and the button member and the armrest portion move while the pin is housed in the guide groove (i.e. with the pin in front as in Figure 5).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Wang further discloses one of the fixed frame and the button member includes an engagement protrusion (at 14) including a tapered corner part, and the other of the fixed frame and the button member includes an engagement concave portion (25) with which the corner part of the engagement protrusion engages, and the engagement protrusion is configured to engage with the engagement concave portion when the pin engages with the engagement groove (this is the general arrangement).
Regarding claim 5, Wang discloses an arrangement as explained but does not disclose the motion of the engagement concave portion and engagement groove as claimed. However, reversal 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 (e.g. by reversing the engagement concave portion and engagement groove, which would provide the engagement concave portion fixed relative to the engagement groove, and able to move along with the engagement groove when the button member is pushed) based on normal variation because this could improve comfort or convenience for various users.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Waldo. Wang discloses an arrangement as explained but does not disclose the arrangement of the pin and engagement groove as claimed. Wide variation in locking structure arrangement is known as shown by Waldo who discloses a related device including wherein a direction in which a pin and an engagement groove engage with each other is the same as a direction in which a button member is pushed in (see at least Figure 6 showing button 22 operating in an engagement direction of pin/groove at 44, 60), and wherein the pin is fixed relative to the one of a fixed frame and the button member (at least in use and/or with member 44 as pin). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide an arrangement as taught by Waldo in Wang’s device because this could improve comfort and operation for various users.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant’s amendment. Note that the suggestion that it would not have been obvious to modify the orientation of the Wang device is not persuasive as no substantive change in size would need to take place for the modification. The claims are considered obvious as explained above.
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