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 January 5th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-14 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 October 20th, 2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 3 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 3 line 2, “… the upper bracket opening.” should read “…the upper bracket portion.” for the purpose of consistency in the use of claim terminology.
In claim 13 lines 1-2, “…wherein the positioning of the frame member opening aligns with the positioning of the opening in the front wall…” should read “…wherein positioning of the frame member opening aligns with positioning of the opening in the front wall …” so that there is a sufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 4-5 recite limitation “the lower seat frame” which renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear if it is referring to a “seat cushion frame” or an “underframe”. For the examination purpose “the lower seat frame” is considered to be referring to “the seat cushion frame”.
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) 1-3, 5, 7 and 9-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pywell (US 2016/0193949) in view of Reida (US 4,061,396) in view of Spencer et al. (US 2025/0198448).
Regarding claim 1, Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) a vehicle seat assembly comprising:
a seat cushion portion (26) pivotable between a seated position (figure 1) and an access position (figure 5), the seat cushion portion including a seat cushion frame (Para 0013-0014; seat cushion frame provides structure to a seat cushion portion and includes lid (30));
an underframe having a pair of sidewalls (72, 74) and a front wall (54), the pair of sidewalls and the front wall define a battery cavity/storage cavity beneath the seat cushion portion (Para 0015); and
Pywell ‘949 further teaches different variations of one or more locking features to couple the lid (30) to the front wall/frame member (54) (Para 0016) but it is silent about the vehicle seat assembly comprising:
an opening formed in the front wall of the underframe;
a tie down bracket including a lower bracket portion extending beneath the seat cushion portion; and
a releasable fastener configured to extend through the opening.
Reida ‘396 teaches (figures 1-6) a vehicle seat (1) comprising back (2), seat cushion (3) supported by a metal base frame (4), wherein flat tie down tabs/tie down brackets (17s) extend downwardly below/beneath the seat cushion (3) and are swivally mounted in apertures (19) in the flat sides (16) of the seat cushion (3) using rivets (18s) which extend through apertures (19s) adjacent the upper end of tabs (17s), and tabs (17s) further include apertures (20s) adjacent lower end which receive attaching hooks/releasable fasteners (21s) anchored in seat cross frame member (9s) (Col. 1 Lines 61-68; Col. 2 Lines 12-33).
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 Pywell ‘949 to incorporate the teachings of Reida ‘396 to configure the vehicle seat assembly to include a flat tie down tab as a locking feature. This results in the vehicle seat assembly comprising:
an opening formed in the front wall of the underframe (front wall of the underframe extend between the seat cushion and the vehicle floor thus in order to use a hook/releasable fastener, a front wall must have an opening);
a tie down bracket including a lower bracket portion extending beneath the seat cushion portion; and
a releasable fastener configured to extend through the opening.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would provide easy access to the tie down bracket and make the tie down bracket visible to passengers as seat cushion and underframe are aligned.
Modified Pywell ‘949 is silent about the vehicle seat assembly comprising:
an underframe having a frame member,
releasable fastener configured to releasably couple the lower bracket portion to the frame member of the underframe to secure the seat cushion portion in the seated position.
Spencer et al. ‘448 teaches a bonded nut retainers/frame member preinstalled on the substrate/underframe and the head side drive fasteners installed from an exterior working surface of another substrate (Para 0034).
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 Pywell ‘949 to incorporate the teachings of Spencer et al. ‘448 to configure the vehicle seat assembly comprising:
an underframe having a frame member,
releasable fastener configured to releasably couple the lower bracket portion to the frame member of the underframe to secure the seat cushion portion in the seated position.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would provide a clamped joint and hold the tie down bracket in place using a releasable fastener.
Regarding claims 2-3, modified Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) the vehicle seat assembly wherein the tie down bracket further includes a central bracket portion and an upper bracket portion (clearly shown in the figure below),
a protrusion/rivet (18) configured to secure the seat cushion frame to the upper bracket opening (as modified by Reida ‘396; protrusion/rivet (18) passes through an opening in the upper bracket).
PNG
media_image1.png
329
498
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5 (as best understood), modified Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) the vehicle seat assembly wherein the central bracket portion and the upper bracket portion of the tie down bracket (17) are disposed within the lower seat frame/seat cushion frame (as modified by Reida ‘396).
Regarding claim 7, modified Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) the vehicle seat assembly further comprising a plurality of tie down brackets and a plurality of openings,
wherein the plurality of tie down brackets include the tie down bracket and the plurality of openings include the opening, such that each of the plurality of tie down brackets engages one of the plurality of openings (as modified by Reida ‘396; clearly seen in figure 2).
Regarding claim 9, modified Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) the vehicle seat assembly wherein, in the seated position (figure 1), the seat cushion portion (26) contacts at least a portion of the pair of side walls (72, 74) and the front wall (54) of the underframe, such that the battery cavity/storage cavity is inaccessible (clearly seen in figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, modified Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) the vehicle seat assembly wherein in the access position (figure 5), the seat cushion portion (26) is pivoted relative the underframe to expose the battery cavity/storage cavity (clearly seen in figure 5).
Regarding claim 11, modified Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) the vehicle seat assembly wherein the frame member is coupled to the front wall (as modified by Spencer et al. ‘448).
Regarding claim 12, modified Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) the vehicle seat assembly further comprising a frame member opening formed in the frame member of the underframe (as modified by Spencer et al. ‘448; frame member receives fastener via frame member opening).
Regarding claim 13, modified Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) the vehicle seat assembly wherein positioning of the frame member opening aligns with positioning of the opening in the front wall, such that the removable fastener may extend through the opening in the front wall and the frame member opening (fastener extends through the opening in the front wall and is received by the frame member).
Regarding claim 14, modified Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) the vehicle seat assembly further comprising a plurality of frame member openings,
wherein the plurality of frame member openings corresponds to the number of the plurality of openings (as modified by Spencer et al. ‘448).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pywell (US 2016/0193949), Reida (US 4,061,396) and Spencer et al. (US 2025/0198448) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Amazon (NPL).
Regarding claim 6, modified Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) the vehicle seat assembly wherein of claim 2 but it is silent about the vehicle seat assembly wherein the central bracket portion is non-planar with the lower bracket portion and the upper bracket portion of the tie down bracket.
Amazon (NPL) teaches a D rings tie down anchors comprising a lower, central and upper bracket portions wherein the central bracket portion is non-planar with the lower bracket portion and the upper bracket portion of the tie down bracket (clearly shown in the figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
332
500
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 Pywell ‘949 to incorporate the teachings of Amazon (NPL) to configure the vehicle seat assembly wherein the central bracket portion is non-planar with the lower bracket portion and the upper bracket portion of the tie down bracket.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable to attach a ring/strap/handle which would assist in pivoting a seat cushion portion between seated and access positions.
(Note: the rejection of claim 6 is based on/continuation of rejections of claims 2-3)
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pywell (US 2016/0193949), Reida (US 4,061,396) and Spencer et al. (US 2025/0198448) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Noding (US 2006/0072994).
Regarding claim 8, modified Pywell ‘949 teaches (figures 1-6) the vehicle seat assembly of claim 1 but it is silent about the vehicle seat assembly wherein the releasable fastener is a quick-release pin, a push-pull clip, a snap-fit clip, a slide latch, or a twist lock.
Noding ‘994 teaches (figure 1) securing the lower end leg (12) to member (21) using a quick release pin (Para 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 Pywell ‘949 to incorporate the teachings of Noding ‘994 to configure the vehicle seat assembly wherein the releasable fastener is a quick-release pin.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would allow to release the lower bracket portion easily without a need for a tool.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed January 5th, 2026, with respect to the amended claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made as explained in the rejection above.
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