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 .
Response to Amendment
The objection to the claims has been withdrawn. The 35 USC 112 rejections of claims 1, 3, 4, 9, 10 have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the references as used in the current rejection.
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 1, 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ward (US 20090256293) in view of Brodersen (US 5954400) in view of Bremner (US 6886650).
In regards to claim 1, Ward discloses an active vehicle seat suspension system, comprising:
a lower part (Fig. 5 ref. 125) and an upper part of a vehicle seat (Fig. 5 ref. 121); and
a scissor frame arranged therebetween with at least one first (Fig. 5 ref. 122) and at least one second scissor arm articulatedly connected thereto (Fig. 5 ref. 123),
wherein at least the first scissor arm is articulatedly connected with a first end to the upper part (Fig. 5 ref. 122) and is articulatedly connected with a second end to the lower part and is displaceable thereon (as suggested in Fig. 5, [0035] “The lower portion of the first support 122 is slidably connected to the base 125”),
wherein at least one traction means (ref. 134) operable to move the second end of the first scissor arm forwards or backwards ([003] “The motor 132 drives the belt 134, and the belt 134 and pin 136 cause the supports to move”), as seen in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle seat (as seen in Fig. 5),
Ward does not expressly disclose:
Wherein the at least one traction means is connected to at least one rolling axle that is arranged at the second end of the first scissor arm.
Brodersen teaches at least one rolling axle which is arranged at the second end of a scissors part (Fig. 1 and 2 ref. 99, disclosed as roller, having a rolling axle, which sits firmly within a track).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Ward with Brodersen by providing at least one rolling axle which is arranged at the second end of the first scissor arm in order to allow the scissors unit to move smoothly without binding against the lower portion.
While Ward discloses “a bladder that can hold a range of volumes of a medium, such as air or liquid, where the bladder is located under the sitting area. When the value in the bladder is increased”,
Ward does not expressly disclose:
wherein an air spring is arranged between the upper and lower parts with a main volume and an additional volume that is configured to be switched on or off,
Bremner teaches an air spring/pneumatic bladder connected to a pressurized source which may be switched on or off to inflate (Fig. 1 ref. 42, pressurized source for ref. 40 air bag, additional volume provided by ref. 40).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Ward as combined with Bremner by providing an air spring is arranged between the upper and lower parts with a main volume and an additional volume that is configured to be switched on or off in order to allow for adjustment of the seat a cushioning of the seat over terrain.
While Ward as combined discloses: wherein the traction means is driven in its movement by a motor (Ward ref. 132), Ward as combined does not expressly disclose: [the traction means motor] which overcomes a friction force of 50-200 N.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to provide the means for the motor to overcome frictional forces in operation of 50-200 N in order to be able to move the seat suspension system for the greater number of riders of given weight upon the seat, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Ward as combined further discloses:
wherein the traction means is a gear belt (Ward [0037] “the energy-transferring assembly can comprise one or more gears, which are driven by the motor 132”, as suggested in Fig. 5 ref. 134 comprises a belt, thus motor driving gears to drive belt).
In regards to claim 8, Ward as combined discloses the vehicle seat suspension system according to claim 1, further comprising: at least one acceleration sensor device for measuring acceleration values of a vibrational movement introduced into the system from outside the system ([0033] “The suspension system 100 can further include a movement sensor 142d (e.g., a three-axis accelerometer)”).
Claim 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ward, Brodersen, Bremner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shoemaker et al (US 20110024601).
In regards to claim 9, Ward as combined discloses the vehicle seat suspension system according claim 1, further comprising; a control device (Ward ref. 140 disclosed as control system). Ward as combined does not expressly disclose: the control device which, when measuring acceleration values of an oscillating movement introduced into the system, calculates and controls a movement force opposite to the introduced oscillating movement by forward or backward rotation of the motor and thus a forward or backward pulling of the gear belt on the rolling axle in order to bring an end of each of the scissor arms together or apart ([0033] “The suspension system 100 can further include a movement sensor 142d (e.g., a three-axis accelerometer)”).
Shoemaker teaches a vehicle suspension control system using sensor including accelerometer to measure and adjust the movement/oscillating of a seat ([0017]), the system controls the movement/oscillation of the seat through motor rotation ([0024] “The motor 40 may be rotated in one rotational direction for upward movement of the seat 28 and in the opposite rotational direction for downward movement of the seat 28”, [0025]), thus calculating the response of the motor needed to offset.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Ward as combined Shoemaker by providing the means for the control device to measuring acceleration values of an oscillating movement introduced and to calculate and control a movement force opposite to the introduced oscillating movement by forward or backward rotation of the motor causing forward or backward pulling of the gear belt on the rolling axle in order to bring an end of each of the scissor arms together or apart in order to provide a more stable platform for operators of the device.
Claim 3-7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ward, Brodersen, Bremner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Plante et al (US 20180072189).
In regards to claim 3, Ward as combined discloses the vehicle seat suspension system according to claim 1, wherein the traction means is self-contained (Fig. 5 of Ward for ref. 134 belt, contained within base of seat) and has a constant length (Ward as suggested in Fig. 5 for ref. 134, does not extend or retract, to retract would remove would loosen the tension needed for engagement).
However, if it is found the Ward does not disclose the traction means has a constant length, Plante teaches a belt system for adjusting a seat height using a system of constant length belt and gears (seen in Figs. 3 and 4, belt ref. 31)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Ward with Plante by providing the traction means has a constant length in order to keep constant tension upon the belt for engagement with the adjustment mechanism.
In regards to claim 4, Wards as combined discloses the vehicle seat suspension system according to claim 3, wherein the traction means is deflected as a gear belt, viewed in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle seat, in front of the rolling axle and in front of a gear belt connecting element on the motor and behind the gear belt connecting element by at least one pulley (Ward the belt ref. 134 of ward will deflect in a forward or reverse direction in adjusting the height of the seat, the at least one pully is seen in Fig. 5 of Ward, belt attached to, Plante Figs. 3 and 4).
In regards to claim 5, Ward as combined discloses the vehicle seat suspension system according to claim 4, wherein the pulley and the motor are stationarily attached to the lower part (Ward motor ref. 132 stationary as suggested in Fig. 5, pulley that which belt attached to).
In regards to claim 6, Ward as combined discloses the vehicle seat suspension system according to claim 3, wherein when the gear belt is driven by means of the motor (Ward ref. 132), the rolling axle is moved forwards or backwards within at least one guide rail (Ward as combined, Brodersen seen in Fig. 1) of the lower part in order to change a height distance of the upper part relative to the lower part (Ward [0037] “The motor 132 drives the belt 134, and the belt 134 and pin 136 cause the supports to move” moving the supports changes the height of the seat).
In regards to claim 7, Ward as combined discloses the vehicle seat suspension system according to claim 1, but does not expressly disclose: further comprising: at least one height sensor device that measures a height distance of the upper part relative to the lower part.
Plante teaches a height sensor for a seat which measures the distance from the seat to base ([0146] “sensor 311A that detects the angular position of the pulley 41A, from which a controller system may determine the height of the seat base 23”, the height of the seat base is the distance from an upper part relative to a lower part or base).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Ward with Plante by providing at least one height sensor device which measures the height distance of the upper part relative to the lower part in order to notify the system if the seat is a the bottom or top range of movement to determine if more adjustment is possible.
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 VICENTE RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4798. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 7-5.
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 sbmissions 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.
/V.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights