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 .
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 29 June 2026, in which claims 2, 4, and 8 were amended, claim 16 was canceled, and claim 21 was added.
Drawings
The replacement drawings received on 29 June 2026 are acceptable.
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.
Claim 21 is 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.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the motor" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the position" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may be able to overcome this rejection by rephrasing to read --a position--.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 10661717 B2). Lee et al. discloses a sliding device (console box #20) comprising:
(claim 1) a guide rail module (fixed rails #11; column 5, lines 55-64);
a sliding rail (moving rails #12) slidably coupled to the guide rail module (#11; column 5, lines 55-
64);
a rail driving module (automatic operation unit #43 including motor #46) coupled to the sliding
rail (#12) and configured to move the sliding rail along the guide rail module (#11; column 7, line 16-
column 10);
a sliding mode switching module (including user manipulation of front and rear handles #42a, 42b to initiate manual operation unit #42, and user manipulation of manipulation unit #44 to initiate automatic operation unit #43) configured to switch an operation mode of the sliding rail (#12) from an electric sliding mode (automatic operation mode) to a manual sliding mode (manual operation mode; figures 2-14; column 6, line 31-column 10);
(claim 2) wherein the sliding mode switching module is configured to switch the operation mode of the sliding rail from the electric sliding mode to the manual sliding mode by blocking a driving force of the rail driving module from being transmitted to the sliding rail (when in manual operation mode, controller #45 is prevented from supplying electrical power to solenoids #43a, 630 and motor #46, thereby blocking a driving force of the automatic operation unit #43; column 6, line 31-column 10);
(claim 19) wherein in the electric sliding mode (automatic operation mode), the sliding rail (#12)
is configured to be electrically moved by the rail driving module (automatic operation unit #43 including
motor #46) along the guide rail module (#11; column 7, line 16-column 10);
(claim 20) wherein in the manual sliding mode (manual operation mode), the sliding rail (#12) is
configured to be manually moved along the guide rail module (#11) by a user (column 6, line 31-column
10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-15, 17, and 18 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.
Claim 21 appear to be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the allowable subject matter of claim 21 is a sliding mode switching module configured to switch an operation mode of the sliding rail from an electric sliding mode to a manual sliding mode, regardless of whether the motor is driven or the position of the sliding rail, in combination with other features of claim 21. Lee et al. (US 10661717 B2) does not disclose a structure that permits switching to a manual sliding mode regardless of whether the motor is driven.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 29 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regards to pages 10-11 and claim 1, Applicant argues that Lee et al. (US 10661717 B2) does not teach or suggest “a sliding mode switching module configured to switch an operation mode of the sliding rail from an electric sliding mode to a manual sliding mode”. As set forth above, Lee et al. (US 10661717 B2) discloses a sliding mode switching module (including user manipulation of front and rear handles #42a, 42b to initiate manual operation unit #42, and user manipulation of manipulation unit #44 to initiate automatic operation unit #43) configured to switch an operation mode of the sliding rail (#12) from an electric sliding mode (automatic operation mode) to a manual sliding mode (manual operation mode; figures 2-14; column 6, line 31-column 10).
In regards to pages 11-12 and claim 2, Applicant argues that Lee et al. (US 10661717 B2) does not disclose the claimed limitation requiring switching the operation mode "to the manual mode by blocking a driving force of the rail driving module from being transmitted to the sliding rail". As set forth above, Lee et al. (US 10661717 B2) discloses wherein the sliding mode switching module is configured to switch the operation mode of the sliding rail from the electric sliding mode to the manual sliding mode by blocking a driving force of the rail driving module from being transmitted to the sliding rail (when in manual operation mode, controller #45 is prevented from supplying electrical power to solenoids #43a, 630 and motor #46, thereby blocking a driving force of the automatic operation unit #43; column 6, line 31-column 10).
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 LAURA FREEDMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2442. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4:30pm.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached at 571-270-5985. 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.
/LAURA FREEDMAN/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights