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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “at least one auxiliary stowable passenger is provided through a side-to-side movement without removal or addition of components to the baby stroller” of claim 2 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Similarly, the “retractable canopy that covers the primary seat and the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat” of claims 1 and 18 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Also, the “auxiliary stowable passenger seat” of claims 1 and 18 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. The drawings are replete with such issues and lack several of the limitations in the claims as noted above and below regarding indefiniteness and, therefore should be thoroughly reviewed and corrected.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-20 are 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. The claims are replete with limitations that are not illustrated by the drawings or discussed in the specification in a manner in which Examiner can ascertain the scope of the claim. For example, claim 1 recites “a retractable canopy that covers the primary seat and the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat.” However, the drawings do not show a canopy covering both seats. Based on the original disclosure, it is not clear how the canopy deploys to cover either one or two seats, especially since the disclosure indicates a laterally opening stroller as well as a longitudinally telescoping stroller (at least claims 2 vs 3). Claim 2 recites the secondary seat “provided through a side-to-side movement without removal or addition of components.” This is unclear and confusing because the original disclosure is not clear as to how this is achieved and the scope of the claim is therefore indefinite. Claim 4 recites “wherein the front-to-back movement is through the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat folding under the primary seat.” This is not shown in the drawings and the scope of the limitation is therefore rendered indefinite as Examiner is not able to ascertain the structure covered by this claim limitation. As noted, the claims are replete with such issues and should be carefully reviewed and corrected before resubmission.
Claims 2 and 3 recite the limitation "the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger" in lines 1-2 of the claims. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claims recite a stowable passenger seat, but do not previously recite a stowable passenger.
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, 7-16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krieger (US Pat. No. 8,256,793) in view of Gondobintoro (US Pat. No. 6,676,140).
Regarding claim 1, Krieger discloses A multi-functional baby stroller (title) comprising: a primary seat (generally at 30); a retractable canopy (28) that covers the primary seat; a spring-loaded umbrella (20) that is capable of opening to cover a person operating the multi-functional baby stroller; and a storage area (at least area under seat as shown in fig 1) capable of receiving a diaper bag.
Krieger does not specifically disclose at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat; the canopy covering the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat.
At least Gondobintoro discloses at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat (Abst, figs 2-3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the stowable passenger seat as in Gondobintoro with the stroller arrangement of Krieger to provide at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat; the canopy covering the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat, since it would have allowed for greater occupancy without significant modification.
Regarding claim 2, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro discloses wherein the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger is provided through a side-to-side movement without removal or addition of components to the baby stroller (since a front-rear direction or side-to-side direction have not been established and Gondobintoro may be interpreted as side-to-side expansion in view of indefiniteness noted above).
Regarding claim 3, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro discloses wherein the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger is provided through a front-to-back movement without removal or addition of components to the baby stroller (at least Abst, figs 2-3 of Gondobintoro).
Regarding claim 4, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro discloses wherein the front-to-back movement is through the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat folding under the primary seat (at least fig 2, where the secondary seat is stored behind and below the primary seat; as best understood in view of indefiniteness noted above).
Regarding claim 5, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro discloses wherein the storage area is provided under the baby stroller (at least annotated fig below).
PNG
media_image1.png
844
744
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro discloses the invention except for specifically pointing out wherein the stroller is formed of titanium and composite metals.
However, the use of composite metals or titanium as materials for the frame of the stroller is an obvious matter of design choice.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated wherein the stroller is formed of titanium and composite metals, since it would have made a sturdy and lightweight frame and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Regarding claim 8, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro discloses further comprising: a slot at a side of the stroller to expand the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat (at least slots 30, figs of Gondobintoro).
Regarding claim 9, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro discloses wherein the spring-loaded umbrella is detachable (at least fig 1 of Krieger).
Regarding claim 10, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro discloses wherein the retractable canopy is removable (at least col 3, lines 28-29 of Krieger).
Regarding claim 11, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro discloses further comprising: an extender portion capable of pulling forward to extend the baby stroller to receive the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat in a front-to-back direction (telescoping frame, fig 3 of Gondobintor as best understood in view of indefiniteness).
Regarding claims 12-16, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro discloses further comprising: a detachable foot rest capable of being stored in the storage area when not in use (see annotated fig below); further comprising: a detachable tray capable of being stored in the storage area when not in use (see annotated fig below); further comprising: an opening on a side of the baby stroller to allow a child riding in the baby stroller to see out the side of the baby stroller while seated (see annotated fig below); further comprising: a detachable handle capable of being stored in the storage area when not in use (see annotated fig below); further comprising: a receiver that receives the spring-loaded umbrella when not in use (see annotated fig below).
PNG
media_image2.png
844
807
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 18-20, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro discloses A multi-functional baby stroller comprising: a primary seat; at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat; an extender portion capable of pulling forward to extend the baby stroller to receive the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat in a front-to-back direction; a slot at a side of the stroller to expand the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat; a retractable canopy that covers the primary seat and the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat; a spring-loaded umbrella that is capable of opening to cover a person operating the multi-functional baby stroller; and a storage area capable of receiving a diaper bag (see discussion of claims 1, 8 and 11 above); wherein the storage area is capable of receiving a plurality of detachable accessories selected from the group comprising: a handle, a foot rest, and a tray (wherein the storage area is capable of storing these items, also see discussion of claims 12-13 and 15 above); further comprising: a receiver that receives the spring-loaded umbrella when not in use (see discussion of claim 16 above).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krieger and Gondobintoro as discussed above and further in view of Cortez (US Pat. No. 9,668,589).
Regarding claim 6, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro disclose the invention except for specifically pointing out wherein the storage area is a baby strap carrier that is capable of being converted to a diaper changing pad attachable underneath the primary seat or the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat.
However, at least Cortez discloses a baby strap carrier that is capable of being converted to a diaper changing pat attachable to the stroller for changing (at least figs 2-7).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the strap carrier capable use as a changing table technique of Cortez with the teachings of Krieger to provide wherein the storage area is a baby strap carrier that is capable of being converted to a diaper changing pad attachable underneath the primary seat or the at least one auxiliary stowable passenger seat, since it would have provided a dual use of the diaper bag and made the stroller more versatile.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krieger and Gondobintoro as discussed above and further in view of Guimaraens (US Pat. No. 8,991,409).
Regarding claim 17, Krieger in view of Gondobintoro disclose the invention except for specifically pointing out the receiver further comprising: a fastening mechanism capable of securing the receiver around the spring-loaded umbrella for storage when not in use.
However, at least Guimaraens discloses an umbrella storage arrangement for a stroller (at least figs 5 and 6) wherein the receiver (at least figs 1A, 1B) further comprising: a fastening mechanism (generally at 128) capable of securing the receiver around the spring-loaded umbrella for storage when not in use (at least col 5, lines 1-7).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the storage securing means of Guimaraens with the umbrella of Krieger, since it would have provided a simple means of storage that keeps the umbrella out of view and secure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references cited disclose numerous aspects of the claims. Accordingly, a thorough review of the references cited prior to amending the claims may be useful for an indication of what would be considered obvious in view of the prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB B MEYER whose telephone number is (571)270-3535. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-7.
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, J Allen Shriver can be reached at 303.297.4337. 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.
JACOB B. MEYER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3613
/JACOB B MEYER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613