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 .
Response to Amendments
The amendment filed December 23rd, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 6-11 and 16-20 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed September 26th, 2025.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 9-11, 16 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stepan (DE 102008061110) in view of Allen (US 7,900,798), Busaji et al. (US 2024/0076042) and Perry et al. (US 2025/0121749).
Regarding claim 1, Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) a seat back holder/device (4) comprising:
a mount/bearing part (6) (English Translation Pg. 5 Reference Signs List);
a body/holding part (5) coupled to the mount/bearing part (6) and configured to repeatably rotate around an axis/swivel axis (17) between mated/non-use position (figure 2) adjacent to the mount/bearing part (6) and a deployed position (figure 4) via a pivoting mechanism of the seat back holder/device (4), wherein the body/holding part (5) comprises a plate/ring section (9) defining a recess configured to receive an object/liquid container (19) (clearly shown in the figure below) (English Translation Pg. 4 Para 13; Pg. 5-6 Reference Signs List),
wherein the plate/ring section (9) comprises a first arm/leg section (10) and a second arm/leg section (10) on opposing sides of the recess (English Translation Pg. 4 Para 13; Pg. 6 Reference Signs List),
PNG
media_image1.png
418
424
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the seat back holder wherein the body comprises a void defined by, and passing through, at least one of the first arm or the second arm.
Allen ‘798 teaches (figure 1) a wall mounted cup holder (16) with a cup hole (28) and a toothbrush slots/void (18s) (Col. 3 Lines 63-65; Col. 4 Line 37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stepan ‘110 to incorporate the teachings of Allen ‘798 to configure the seat back holder wherein the body comprises a void defined by, and passing through, at least one of the first arm or the second arm.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable to hang accessories like sunglasses.
Modified Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) is silent about the seat back holder wherein the first arm and the second arm each comprise a tab extending up from an inner-top surface of the body and configured to prevent a display device from sliding off the inner-top surface.
Busaji et al. ‘042 teaches (figures 1-8) teaches a vehicle with a seat wherein a seat back (104) of a seat (102) includes at least one stowable cupholder apparatus (106) wherein at least one stowable cupholder apparatus (106) comprises lip members/tabs (136s) extending in a direction perpendicular to the base planar member/plate (122) (Para 0020, 0033-0035).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stepan ‘110 to incorporate the teachings of Busaji et al. ‘042 to configure the seat back holder wherein the first arm and the second arm each comprise a tab extending up from an inner-top surface of the body and configured to prevent a display device from sliding off the inner-top surface (display device placed against the tab is prevented from sliding off as tab restrict the movement of the display device towards the tab).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable to hang accessories like coat (Para 0037).
Modified Stepan ‘110 is silent about the seat back holder wherein each of the tabs comprise a magnet configured to mate to a corresponding mount magnet on the mount.
Perry et al. ‘749 teaches (figures 1-4) a seat member base (24) including a first substrate (32) and a second substrate (34) wherein the first substrate/mount (32) is fixed to a seat member base (24) and the second substrate/plate (34) is movable from a closed position to a deployed workstation position, wherein a living hinge (56) couples the second substrate (34) to a first substrate (32) and magnetic closure (58) selectively holds the second substrate (34) to the first substrate (32) in the closed position, wherein magnetic closure (58) comprises one or more first members (60) embedded in the first substrate (32) and one or more second members (62) embedded in the second substrate (34) which generate a magnetic field to draw the second substrate (34) toward the first substrate (32) for magnetic latching (Para 0021, 0027).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Stepan ‘110 to incorporate the teachings of Perry et al. ‘749 to configure the seat back holder wherein each of the tabs comprise a magnet configured to mate to a corresponding mount magnet on the mount (tabs extends from the arms and comes in contact with the mount).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable magnetic latching to secure the body in mated position.
Regarding claim 6, modified Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) the seat back holder wherein the recess is curved and thereby configured to receive a bottle neck of a bottle (clearly seen in the figure above).
Regarding claim 9, modified Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) the seat back holder wherein the pivoting mechanism comprises a shaft (clearly shown in the figure above).
Regarding claim 10, modified Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) the seat back holder wherein the pivoting mechanism comprises at least one spring configured to bias the body towards the mated/non-use position from the deployed position (English Translation Pg. 4 Para 5).
Regarding claim 11, Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) a body/holding part (5) for a seat back holder/device (4), the body/holding part (5);
configured to repeatably rotate around an axis/swivel axis (17) between mated/non-use position (figure 2) and a deployed position (figure 4) via a pivoting mechanism, wherein the body/holding part (5) comprises a plate/ring section (9) defining a recess configured to receive an object/liquid container (19) (clearly shown in the figure below) (English Translation Pg. 4 Para 13; Pg. 5-6 Reference Signs List),
wherein the plate/ring section (9) comprises a first arm/leg section (10) and a second arm/leg section (10) on opposing sides of the recess (English Translation Pg. 4 Para 13; Pg. 6 Reference Signs List),
PNG
media_image1.png
418
424
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the body wherein the body comprises a void defined by, and passing through, at least one of the first arm or the second arm.
Allen ‘798 teaches (figure 1) a wall mounted cup holder (16) with a cup hole (28) and a toothbrush slots/void (18s) (Col. 3 Lines 63-65; Col. 4 Line 37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stepan ‘110 to incorporate the teachings of Allen ‘798 to configure the body wherein the body comprises a void defined by, and passing through, at least one of the first arm or the second arm.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable to hang accessories like sunglasses.
Modified Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) is silent about the body wherein the first arm and the second arm each comprise a tab extending up from an inner-top surface of the body and configured to prevent a display device from sliding off the inner-top surface.
Busaji et al. ‘042 teaches (figures 1-8) teaches a vehicle with a seat wherein a seat back (104) of a seat (102) includes at least one stowable cupholder apparatus (106) wherein at least one stowable cupholder apparatus (106) comprises lip members/tabs (136s) extending in a direction perpendicular to the base planar member/plate (122) (Para 0020, 0033-0035).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stepan ‘110 to incorporate the teachings of Busaji et al. ‘042 to configure the body wherein the first arm and the second arm each comprise a tab extending up from an inner-top surface of the body and configured to prevent a display device from sliding off the inner-top surface (display device placed against the tab is prevented from sliding off as tab restrict the movement of the display device towards the tab).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable to hang accessories like coat (Para 0037).
Modified Stepan ‘110 is silent about the body wherein each of the tabs comprise a magnet configured to mate to a corresponding mount magnet on the mount.
Perry et al. ‘749 teaches (figures 1-4) a seat member base (24) including a first substrate (32) and a second substrate (34) wherein the first substrate/mount (32) is fixed to a seat member base (24) and the second substrate/plate (34) is movable from a closed position to a deployed workstation position, wherein a living hinge (56) couples the second substrate (34) to a first substrate (32) and magnetic closure (58) selectively holds the second substrate (34) to the first substrate (32) in the closed position, wherein magnetic closure (58) comprises one or more first members (60) embedded in the first substrate (32) and one or more second members (62) embedded in the second substrate (34) which generate a magnetic field to draw the second substrate (34) toward the first substrate (32) for magnetic latching (Para 0021, 0027).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Stepan ‘110 to incorporate the teachings of Perry et al. ‘749 to configure the body wherein each of the tabs comprise a magnet configured to mate to a corresponding mount magnet on the mount (tabs extends from the arms and comes in contact with the mount).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable magnetic latching to secure the body in mated position.
Regarding claim 16, modified Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) the body/holding part (5) wherein the recess is curved and thereby configured to receive a bottle neck of a bottle (clearly seen in the figure above).
Regarding claim 19, modified Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) the body/holding part (5) wherein the pivoting mechanism comprises a shaft (clearly shown in the figure above).
Regarding claim 20, modified Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) the body/holding part (5) wherein the pivoting mechanism comprises at least one spring configured to bias the body towards the mated/non-use position from the deployed position (English Translation Pg. 4 Para 5).
Claim(s) 7 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stepan (DE 102008061110), Allen (US 7,900,798), Busaji et al. (US 2024/0076042) and Perry et al. (US 2025/0121749) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Mackin (US 2006/0022106).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) the seat back holder/device (4) and the body/holding part (5) of claims 1 and 11 respectively but it is silent about the seat back holder/the body wherein the seat back holder/body has a width that is less than 8 inches wide and the body has a length less than 6 inches.
Mackin ‘106 teaches a cup holder for vehicle with a total width of 4-41/2 inches and a depth of 31/2 to 4 inches (Para 0024).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stepan ‘110 to incorporate the teachings of Mackin ‘106 to configure the seat back holder/the body wherein the seat back holder/body has a width that is less than 8 inches wide and the body has a length less than 6 inches.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would accommodate most cups (Para 0024).
Claim(s) 8 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stepan (DE 102008061110), Allen (US 7,900,798), Busaji et al. (US 2024/0076042) and Perry et al. (US 2025/0121749) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of ONO et al. (US 2013/0046049).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Stepan ‘110 teaches (figures 1-5) the seat back holder/device (4) and the body/holding part (5) of claims 1 and 11 respectively but it is silent about the seat back holder/the body wherein the body comprises at least one of a nylon material or thermoplastic material.
ONO et al. ‘049 teaches a thermoplastic elastomer composition used as an industrial material in a broad range of fields for applications such as automotive parts/cup holders (Para 0048).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stepan ‘110 to incorporate the teachings of ONO et al. ‘049 to configure the seat back holder/the body wherein the body comprises at least one of a thermoplastic material.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enhance durability and impact resistance of the cup holder.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 23rd, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument regarding Busaji et al. (US 2024/0076042) and Perry et al. (US 2025/0121749), the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
As explained in the rejection above, any display device placed against the tab is prevented from sliding off as tab restrict the movement of the display device towards the tab. Also, since tabs protrude from the surface of the plate/ring section (9), it would have been obvious to have tabs comprising magnets to mate to a corresponding mount magnets on the mount, as tabs would be the closest to the mount in mated position.
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 ASHESH DANGOL whose telephone number is (303)297-4455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0730-0530 MT.
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, Joshua J Michener can be reached at (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 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.
/ASHESH DANGOL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642