Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/617,367

LOWER RAIL FOR ADJUSTING POSITION OF VEHICLE SEAT

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 26, 2024
Examiner
KIM, SHIN H
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Dae Won San Up Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
76%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
735 granted / 1149 resolved
+12.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1184
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
54.2%
+14.2% vs TC avg
§102
28.4%
-11.6% vs TC avg
§112
9.7%
-30.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1149 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 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, 11-15, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satoshi Masunaga et al. U.S. Patent 7,314,242 B2 (Masunaga) in view of Jesse W. Richards U.S. Patent 3,202,453 (Richards). Regarding claims 1 and 20, Masunaga discloses a lower rail for a seat of a vehicle, the lower rail comprising: a curved inner channel bent at a predetermined angle (Figure 5 Element 12 with Elemnet 13, left); and a curved outer channel bent at about a same angle as the curved inner channel (Figure 5 Element 12, right), wherein the inner channel and the outer channel are disposed separately and configured to be mutually combined, such that combining the inner and outer channels results in one movement path for moving the seat (Figure 5 Column 3 Line 1-20). Masunaga does not directly disclose the movement path to be curved. Richards discloses a seat having a channel to provide a movement path wherein the path is a curved movement path (Element 29 and 31). Therefore it would have been an obvious modification well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Masunaga as taught by Richards to include Richards’ curved movement path. Such a modification would provide a means to move the seat along an elevated path within a vehicle. Regarding claim 2, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail wherein the inner channel and the outer channel are bent at the same angle providing a movement path (Figure 4). Masunaga in view of Richards disclose the movement path to be curved (Element 29 and 31). Regarding claim 3, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail wherein the inner channel and the outer channel are double-bent at the same angle (Figure 3-5, Element 12 bent). Regarding claim 4, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail wherein the curved movement path comprises at least a first curved movement section and a second curved movement section (Element 31, 34, Roberts). Regarding claim 5, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail wherein the curved movement path includes at least one of a first straight movement section, a first curved movement section, an oblique movement section, a second curved movement section, or a second straight movement section (Figure 1, Richards). Regarding claim 6, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail wherein the curved movement path comprises a first straight movement section, a first curved movement section, an oblique movement section, a second curved movement section, and a second straight movement section which are continuously connected (Figure 1, Richards). Regarding claim 7, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail wherein the inner channel comprises: a first vertical support plate (Figure 5 Element 58, Masunaga); a first top plate (Element 14, Masunaga) provided to protrude in an outer direction from an upper end of the first vertical support plate; a sliding guide (vertical short from Element 14, Masunaga) provided to protrude in the outer direction from a predetermined position on an inner surface of the first vertical support plate; and a first lower plate (bottom surface of Element 13, Masunaga) coupled to the outer channel by being bent in the outer direction from a lower end of the first vertical support plate. Regarding claims 11 and 14, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail, wherein the inner and outer channel is formed by being bent from a material having different material properties from the outer and inner channel (Column 4 Lines 22-38, Masunaga). Masunaga in view of Richards does not directly disclose an aluminum alloy of a soft material having a higher elongation rate compared with the outer channel. Material modification is common and well known in the art to provide rail materials made of resilient materials such as aluminum alloy. Such a modification would provide a means to enhance the material structure and properties of the rail. Regarding claim 12, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail wherein the outer channel comprises: a second vertical support plate (Figure 5 Element 58, Masunaga right side); a second top plate (Element 14, Masunaga right side) provided to protrude in an inner direction from an upper end of the second vertical support plate; and a second lower plate (bottom surface of near Element 13, Masunaga right side) coupled to the inner channel by being bent in the inner direction from a lower end of the second vertical support plate. Regarding claim 13, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail wherein a space between the second top plate and the second lower plate is provided as a roller insertion space into which a roller for moving the seat is inserted (Figure 5 bounded by Element 12. 13. 14, right side Masunaga). Regarding claim 15, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail wherein the lower rail comprises the inner channels and the outer channels, which are respectively coupled to each other (Figure 5, Masunaga channels shown). Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satoshi Masunaga et al. U.S. Patent 7,314,242 B2 (Masunaga) in view of Jesse W. Richards U.S. Patent 3,202,453 (Richards) in view of Antal Teer et al. U.S. Patent 11,584,261 B2 (Teer). Regarding claims 8-10, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail (Figure 5, Masunaga). Masunaga in view of Richards does not directly disclose wherein a busbar for supplying power is inserted and mounted in a space between the first top plate and the sliding guide; wherein a rack gear for moving the seat is assembled on an inner surface at a lower end of the first vertical support plate by being integrally formed or separately manufactured. Teer discloses a lower rail for guiding the slide movement of a vehicle seat along the channel wherein a busbar (Figure 4 area for Element 118) for supplying power is inserted and mounted in a space between the first top plate (Element 112 top portion plate) and the sliding guide; wherein a rack gear (Element 120) for moving the seat is assembled on an inner surface at a lower end of the first vertical support plate by being integrally formed or separately manufactured; wherein a slide bearing configured to guide movement of the seat is mounted on the sliding guide (Figure 4 Element 120). Therefore it would have been an obvious modification well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Masunaga in view of Richards as taught by Teer to include Teer’s busbar and rack gear. Such a modification would provide a means for elements that facilitate the movement of the seat to be housed securely within the rail. Claim(s) 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satoshi Masunaga et al. U.S. Patent 7,314,242 B2 (Masunaga) in view of Jesse W. Richards U.S. Patent 3,202,453 (Richards) in view of Tsukasa Meguro et al. U.S. Patent Publication 2021/039464 A1 (Meguro). Regarding claim 16, Masunaga in view of Richards discloses the lower rail having a first and second rail (Figure 5 is provided with a second rail Column 7 Line 60-67, Masunaga). Masunaga in view of Richards does not directly disclose a bracket connecting the two rails. Meguro discloses a lower rail comprising a first and second lower rail connected by a connection bracket (Element 7). Therefore it would have been an obvious modification well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Masunaga in view of Richards as taught by Meguro to include Meguro’s connection bracket. Such a modification would provide a means to connect the two lower rails together for a fixed attachment. Regarding claim 17, Masunaga in view of Richards in view of Meguro discloses the lower rail wherein the connection bracket is provided in a structure capable of keeping a width between the first lower rail and the second lower rail constant (Figure 2 Element 7 and 9, Meguro). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 18 and 19 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 The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIN H KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-7788. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM. 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. /SHIN H KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 26, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600276
INDEPENDANT AIR CONDITIONING SEAT FOR VEHICLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597370
Flag Label
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594866
VEHICLE USER SUPPORT INCLUDING UPPER HOOD MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583373
VEHICLE HEADREST
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579916
POPUP VIDEO DISPLAY SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
76%
With Interview (+11.6%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1149 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month