DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the communication(s) filed on 3/2/2026.
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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/2/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With regards to the argument of the prior art not teaching the newly amended subject matter, see rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claims 1-8, 11-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jaradi et al. (US 11,180,110 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Jaradi discloses a vehicle seat assembly (fig. 2, 3, 8) comprising: a seat bottom (30); a seat back (28) pivotably coupled (fig. 2, 3, 8) to the seat bottom (30); and a buckle assembly (18) coupled to the seat bottom (30) at an anchorage point (fig. 2, 3, 8); wherein the anchorage point is adapted to be translated forwards and downwards relative to the seat bottom upon detection of an impact event or impending impact event (fig. 2, 3, 8), thereby pre-tensioning a lap belt coupled to the buckle assembly (fig. 2, 3, 8), wherein the anchorage point is adapted to be translated from a first anchorage point relative to the seat bottom to a second anchorage point relative to the seat bottom by a biasing force provided by a pre-tensioner and directed from the first anchorage point to the second anchorage point such that the lap belt is snugged against a pelvis of a vehicle occupant during or just before the impact event (column 3 lines 40-51, it is noted that at some point during the impact that the seat belt would be snugged against the pelvis of the vehicle occupant since the job of the seatbelt is to hold the occupant in place. The occupant will eventually catch up to the seatbelt after the second anchorage point is reached (stopper 44 of Jaradi) during the impact event even if assuming that the seatbelt is not snugged against the occupant’s pelvis the entire time, thus meeting the language of the claim).
Regarding claim 2, Jaradi discloses wherein the pre-tensioner is operably coupled between the buckle assembly and the seat bottom, and is configured to translate the anchorage point forward and downwards relative to the seat bottom upon detection of the impact even or impending impact event (fig. 2, 3, 8).
Regarding claim 3, Jaradi further discloses wherein the pre-tensioner comprises at least one of an explosive pre-tensioner, a mechanical pre-tensioner, or an electronic pre-tensioner (column 2 lines 25-50, figs. 2, 3, 8).
Regarding claim 4, Jaradi further discloses wherein the pre-tensioner is configured to provide a variable biasing force to translate the anchorage point such that the degree of pre-tensioning is determined by amount of biasing force provided by the pre-tensioner (column 2 lines 25-50, fig. 2, 3, 8).
Regarding claim 5, Jaradi further discloses wherein the anchorage point of the seat bottom comprises at least one of a track structure, a slot defined in the seat bottom, or a lever (fig. 2-8).
Regarding claim 6, Jaradi further discloses further comprising: an anchorage assembly coupled to the seat bottom opposite the buckle assembly at an additional anchorage point; wherein the additional anchorage point is also adapted to be translated forwards and downwards relative to the seat bottom upon detection of the impact event or impending impact event, thereby further pre-tensioning the lap belt coupled to the anchorage assembly (fig. 2-8).
Regarding claim 7, Jaradi further discloses further comprising: an additional pre-tensioner operably coupled between the anchorage assembly and the seat bottom, the additional pre-tensioner configured to translate the additional anchorage point forward and downwards relative to the seat bottom upon detection of the impact even or impending impact event (fig. 2-8).
Regarding claim 8, Jaradi discloses a vehicle (fig. 1) comprising: a plurality of seat assemblies (column 1, lines 5-15), at least one seat assembly (fig. 2, 3, 8) of the plurality of seat assemblies configured as a tensioning seat assembly (fig. 2, 3, 8) comprising: a seat bottom (30); a seat back (28) pivotably coupled (fig. 2, 3, 8) to the seat bottom (30); and a buckle assembly (18) coupled to the seat bottom (30) at an anchorage point (fig. 2, 3, 8); wherein the anchorage point is adapted to be translated forwards and downwards relative to the seat bottom upon detection of an impact event or impending impact event (fig. 2, 3, 8), thereby pre-tensioning a lap belt coupled to the buckle assembly (fig. 2, 3, 8), wherein the anchorage point is adapted to be translated from a first anchorage point relative to the seat bottom to a second anchorage point relative to the seat bottom by a biasing force provided by a pre-tensioner and directed from the first anchorage point to the second anchorage point such that the lap belt is snugged against a pelvis of a vehicle occupant during or just before the impact event (column 3 lines 40-51, it is noted that at some point during the impact that the seat belt would be snugged against the pelvis of the vehicle occupant since the job of the seatbelt is to hold the occupant in place. The occupant will eventually catch up to the seatbelt after the second anchorage point is reached (stopper 44 of Jaradi) during the impact event even if assuming that the seatbelt is not snugged against the occupant’s pelvis the entire time, thus meeting the language of the claim).
Regarding claim 11, Jaradi further discloses wherein the pre-tensioner is operably coupled between the buckle assembly and the seat bottom, and is configured to translate the anchorage point forward and downwards relative to the seat bottom upon detection of the impact even or impending impact event (fig. 2-8).
Regarding claim 12, Jaradi further discloses the tensioning seat assembly further comprising: an anchorage assembly coupled to the seat bottom opposite the buckle assembly at an additional anchorage point; wherein the additional anchorage point is also adapted to be translated forwards and downwards relative to the seat bottom upon detection of the impact event or impending impact event, thereby further pre-tensioning the lap belt coupled to the anchorage assembly (fig. 2-8).
Regarding claim 13, Jaradi discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions stored in at least one memory that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to carry out steps comprising (column 5, lines 26-61): determining an impact event or impending impact event of a vehicle comprising the at least one memory and the one or more processors (62, 64, 66); communicating, in response to the determination of the impact event or impending impact event of the vehicle, a signal to a pre-tensioner of a vehicle seat assembly of the vehicle, the vehicle seat assembly further comprising a seat bottom (30), a seat back (28) pivotably coupled to the seat bottom (30), and a buckle assembly (18) coupled to the seat bottom (30) at an anchorage point (fig. 2, 3, 8); and translating, in response to the communication, the anchorage point forwards and downwards relative to the seat bottom utilizing the pre-tensioner such that a lap belt coupled to the buckle assembly is pre-tensioned (fig. 2, 3, 8), wherein the anchorage point is adapted to be translated from a first anchorage point relative to the seat bottom to a second anchorage point relative to the seat bottom by a biasing force provided by a pre-tensioner and directed from the first anchorage point to the second anchorage point such that the lap belt is snugged against a pelvis of a vehicle occupant during or just before the impact event (column 3 lines 40-51, it is noted that at some point during the impact that the seat belt would be snugged against the pelvis of the vehicle occupant since the job of the seatbelt is to hold the occupant in place. The occupant will eventually catch up to the seatbelt after the second anchorage point is reached (stopper 44 of Jaradi) during the impact event even if assuming that the seatbelt is not snugged against the occupant’s pelvis the entire time, thus meeting the language of the claim).
Regarding claim 16, Jaradi further discloses wherein the steps further comprise: determining a severity of the impact event or impending impact event, wherein the signal is only communicated to the pre-tensioner when the determined severity is over a threshold severity (column 5, lines 10-61).
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.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jaradi et al. (US 11,180,110 B2).
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Jaradi disloses the invention above and further discloses wherein a controller communicatively coupled to the seat assembly, the controller configured to cause the anchorage point of at least one selected tensioning seat assembly to translate forwards and downwards relative to the seat bottom upon detection of an impact event or impending impact event (fig. 2-8). Jaradi, however, appears silent as to having multiple assemblies all with the tensioning seat assembly. It would have been an obvious design choice to have all the seats in the vehicle be tension seat assemblies in order to avoid discomfort for all passengers in the vehicle in the event of an impact even or impending impact event.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-15 and 17-20 are 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.
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 XIAO EN MO whose telephone number is (571)272-9970. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5:30 EST.
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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached at 571-270-5426. 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.
/XIAO EN MO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747