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 .
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 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.
Examiner's Note.
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and/or columns and line numbers and/or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
The Examiner notes that it has been held that a recitation that a structural element is "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to” perform a function does not limit the claim to a particular structure and thus only requires the ability to so perform the function. (See In re Hutchison, 69 USPQ 138. See also, MPEP 2111.04) As such, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims and the prior art, the recitations of "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to” will be deemed met by an element in the prior art capable of performing the function recited in connection with "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to”.
The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. SEE MPEP 2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). See also MPEP §2123.
Reference of prior art
Griepentrog et al. (US 7475944 , Reclining And Convertible Seating Furniture With Trendelenburg Feature).
Cooper et al. (US 20200218288, INFLATABLE SEATING APPARATUS).
George et al. (US 20050253430, Modular Seating System).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, 7, 12, 13, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Griepentrog and further in view of Cooper.
Re claim 1 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Griepentrog discloses: An adjustable sofa, comprising a sofa armrest (item 28)fixed on one side of the sofa bottom frame (col. L, 25-29, … sofa, and item 28), a rear upper of the sofa bottom frame (item 28) is fixed with a rear frame (item 14), an inner upper of the sofa armrest (1) is provided with a seat cushion (item 16 upper portion), wherein a support pad (6) is provided between an inner lower of the sofa armrest (12) and an upper of the sofa bottom frame (item 16 lower portion and item 28); an extension pad (item 20) is provided,
However Griepentrog discloses the claimed invention except for between the seat cushion and the support pad to expand a width of the sofa. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include between the seat cushion and the support pad to expand a width of the sofa to provide a comfortable configuration for the user, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
a length adjustment component (114) is fixed on an opposite surface of the extension pad and the sofa bottom frame to extend and contract the extension pad (114, 20).
On the other hand Griepentrog, as modified above, fails to teach as disclosed by Cooper: a U-shaped sofa bottom frame (1200).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to add the Cooper teachings of a U-shaped sofa bottom frame into the Griepentrog, as modified above, to provide a firm and strong base frame to better withstand structural components.
PNG
media_image1.png
350
764
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 9 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Griepentrog, as modified above, discloses: The adjustable sofa according to claim 1, wherein a bottom of the U-shaped sofa bottom frame is fixedly installed with feet (see fig. above),
However Griepentrog, as modified above, fails to teach: a bottom of the feet is provided with a rubber pad.
The Examiner takes official notice that it is old and well known in the art that a bottom of the feet is provided with a rubber pad.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Griepentrog, as modified above, to comprise a bottom of the feet is provided with a rubber pad, as it is old and well known and it would have achieved the predictable result of using a bottom of the feet is provided with a rubber pad to help prevent distal end or foot 70 from slipping or sliding.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 12, 13, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Griepentrog in view of Cooper and further in view of George.
Re claim 9 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Griepentrog, as modified above, fails to teach as disclosed by George: The adjustable sofa according to claim 1, wherein an upper of the seat cushion is provided with an armrest pad leaning against the upper of the sofa armrest (item 177).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to add the George teachings of an upper of the seat cushion is provided with an armrest pad leaning against the upper of the sofa armrest into the Griepentrog, as modified above, to include a comfortable armrest.
Re claim 10 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Griepentrog, as modified above, fails to teach as disclosed by George: The adjustable sofa according to claim 1, wherein one side of the U-shaped sofa bottom frame away from the sofa armrest is provided with a pair of U-shaped clamp blocks for movably splicing other sofas (¶ 0042 and at least figs. 12, 7 and 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to add the George teachings of one side of the U-shaped sofa bottom frame away from the sofa armrest is provided with a pair of U-shaped clamp blocks for movably splicing other sofas into the Griepentrog, as modified above, to couple individual seating units together to form a larger sofa.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art of record including the disclosures above neither anticipates nor renders obvious the above recited combination.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP ~ 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEDHAT BADAWI whose telephone number is (571)270-5983. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri during office hours. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JOSHUA MICHENER can be reached on 571-272-1467. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MEDHAT BADAWI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642