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
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (US 11241095) in view of Son (KR 20190039913) and further in view of Moreland (US2820509) and Lee et al (US 20100045078)
The limitations of the claims below are disclosed in Sun:
1, 8) (Original) A portable chair having an extended position (shown in Fig. 2a), a partially open position (Fig. 1 a), and a folded position (Fig. 3a), the chair comprising:
a) a lower back support 1;
c) a seat section 2 pivotally connected to the lower back support at a seat joint (at 5), wherein the seat section projects from the lower back support when in the extended and partially open positions and is substantially parallel to the lower back support when the chair is in the folded position (Clearly shown in Figs. 1-3); and
Son teaches what Sun does not
b) an upper back support 13b pivotally connected to the lower back support at a back joint 14, wherein the upper back support is substantially aligned with the lower back support when the chair is in the extended position (Fig. 1a) and substantially parallel to the lower back support when the chair is in the partially open position (Fig. 1b), wherein the lower back support comprises a lower back frame, the upper back support comprises an upper back frame, and the chair further comprises a cover 13a, 13b attaching to the upper back frame and lower back frame; It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and with reasonable expectation of success to use the folding back rest of Son in the invention of Sun in order to provide a longer back rest for a taller person.
Moreland teaches what Sun does not “a carrying strap” 62. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and with reasonable expectation of success to use the strap of Moreland in the invention of Sun in order to provide a means of easily carrying the folded chair.
Sun teaching an upper seat frame (Frame clearly shown at 8 in Fig. 4), wherein the upper seat frame pivotally connects to the lower back support (at 5); Lee teaches what the combination of Sun and references above does not: a lower seat frame 152 connected to the upper seat frame 112 with a swivel (234) configured to allow for 360 degree movement relative to the upper and lower seat frames and to cooperate with a plank style seat. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and with reasonable expectation of success to use the swivel of Lee in the invention of Sun in order to as stated in Lee, provide more comfort and versatile options to a portable seat.
.
2) (Original) The combination of Sun and Son teach The portable chair of claim 1 wherein the upper back support fits at least partly between the seat section and the lower back support when the chair is in the folded position (Clearly shown that when folded functionally from Fig 1b in Son the upper back rest would be between).
3) (Original) The portable chair of claim 2 wherein the seat section comprises: a cushion 2 attached to the upper seat frame.
4) (Original) The portable chair of claim 3 wherein the seat section further comprises an anchor assembly 4 attached to the lower seat frame which in combination would allow for the swivel of Lee to work as intended. See reasoning above,
5) (Original) The portable chair of claim 4 wherein the anchor assembly comprises at least two brackets 4.
9) (Original) Sun discloses The portable chair of claim 8 wherein the lower back support comprises: a) a first lower back frame side section connected to the seat section at a first seat joint (Side frames clearly shown in Fig. 1B);
b) a second lower back frame side section positioned substantially parallel to the first lower back frame side section at a spaced distance and connected to the seat section at a second seat joint (Side frames clearly shown in Fig. 1B); and
c) a lower back frame cross section connecting the first lower back frame side section to the second lower back frame side section (cross frame clearly shown in Fig. 1B).
10) (Original) The portable chair of claim 9 wherein the first lower back frame side section comprises a first elbow integrally formed in the first lower back frame side section near the first seat joint and the second lower back frame side section comprise a second elbow integrally formed in the second lower back frame side section near the second seat joint, the first and second elbows each configured to increase the space between the lower back support and seat section when the chair is in the folded position to accommodate the upper back support (Elbow sections although not labeled are clearly visible in Fig. 1A – separating the seat from the back support, the elbow being structurally the additional portion of the seat back frame that sticks out to allow the seat to fold flat).
11) (Presently amended) Son teaches what Sun does not The portable chair of claim 9 wherein the upper back support comprises:
a) a first upper back frame side section connected to the first lower back frame side section at a first back joint;
b) a first upper back frame connector section connected to the first upper back frame side section;
c) a second upper back frame side section positioned substantially parallel to the first upper back frame side section at a spaced distance and connected to the second lower back frame side section at a second back joint;
d) a second upper back frame connector section connected to the second upper back frame side section; and
e) an upper back frame cross section connecting the first upper back frame connector section to the second upper back frame connector section. (Shown in Fig. 1b – the frames of the upper and lower back portions are visible a crossing frame element behind attached to the joints of the upper back portion and the supporting legs connect each part together) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and with reasonable expectation of success to use the folding back rest of Son in the invention of Sun in order to provide a longer back rest for a taller person, the frames to provide adequate support for that person to lean on the backrest.
12) (Original) Son teaches what Sun does not The portable chair of claim 11 wherein the first upper back frame connector section comprises a first sloped frame section angled at an obtuse angle relative to the first upper back frame side section, the second upper back frame connector section comprise a second sloped frame section oriented at an obtuse angle relative to the second upper back frame side section (Angle clearly seen in Fig. 1B). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and with reasonable expectation of success to use the folding back rest of Son in the invention of Sun in order to provide a longer back rest for a taller person, the frames to provide adequate support for that person to lean on the backrest, the angle serving as a natural spring to allow for more weight to be borne by the hinge.
13, 20) (Presently amended) The examiner take official notice that it is old and well known in the art at the time of the invention to use a lock assembly, wherein the lock assembly attaches the seat section to the lower back frame cross section when the lock assembly is engaged and the chair is in the folded position. It would have been obvious to include a lock to secure the seat together as well as allow for locking of the seat in the unfolded position as well so as to not undesirably coming unfolded at an inopportune time.
14) ‘(Presently amended) Moreland teaches
a) a first backpack strap 62 connected at opposing ends to the lower back frame cross section and the first seat joint; and
but is silent to a second strap on the opposite side.
b) a second backpack strap connected at opposing ends to the lower back frame cross section and the second seat joint. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use two straps, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In this case it would have been obvious to use two incase one side was more comfortable or to use both as a back pack.
15) (Original) Sun discloses The portable chair of claim 1 wherein the seat section projects from the lower back support at an angle between 90 degrees and 180 degrees when the chair is in the extended position (clearly shown in Fig. 2A).
16) (Original) Sun discloses The portable chair of claim 15 wherein the seat section projects from the lower back support at an angle between 90 degrees and 110 degrees when the chair is in the extended position. (clearly shown in Fig. 2A).
The rejections above are applied mutatis mutandis to all of the limitations of claim 17, and 19.
6-7, 18 (Original) Sun teaches the brackets 4 and Lee teaches what Sun does not a strap (236). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention and with reasonable expectation of success to use the strap of Lee in the invention of Sun in order to provide a means of securing the seat when the brackets are not suitable or to provide a second means of securing the seat for safety.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 2/25/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 have been fully considered and are not persuasive in light of the additional reference Lee above.
In regards to applicants arguments regarding the teaching of Son, wherein applicant argues Son does not disclose the frames being stowed substantially parallel to the seat frames or rigid frames. Son brings in the teaching of having a multiple piece back portion and rigid frames. The examiner points out that the image used in the remarks seems to be from a different reference than what was used in the rejection.
In regards to applicants arguments regarding the elbows of the seat back, the examiner find these arguments not persuasive. The term elbow can loosely be interpreted as a joint and is not structurally defined in the claim. In Sun Fig 3A, clearly the joint created by the frame of the lower back portion of the seat and the bracket creates an elbow joint such that the frame has excess extending beyond the pivot point to allow for the seat to be folded in parallel, assuming arguendo that the applicant is referring to curved frame elements that allow for the compact folding of the apparatus please see additional references Williams US 5580130 where the bracket elements rotate with the frame creating a curved integral frame to fold in parallel.
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 JUSTIN M BENEDIK whose telephone number is (571)270-7824. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00-3:00.
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 Huson can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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.
/JUSTIN M. BENEDIK/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3642
/JUSTIN M BENEDIK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642