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 § 102
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.
Claims 5-10, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schmidt (US20150234427)
Regarding claim 5, Schmidt teaches a holder 104 for a control unit 101 configured for machine seat adjustment, comprising: a body 104 defining a closed end, an open end, and a cavity 302 extending from the closed end to the open end (the cavity inherently defines an open end and a closed end), the cavity configured to receive at least a portion of the control unit, the cavity comprising a rearward portion (area near 106) proximate the closed end, the rearward portion comprising at least one holding surface (the cavity walls act as holding surface) and at least one fastening element 106 affixed to the at least one holding surface and configured for detachable contact with a corresponding fastening element 105 provided on the portion of the control unit (Figs. 1-5 and paragraphs 22-23).
Regarding claim 6, Schmidt teaches the holder 104 wherein the at least one fastening element 106 and the corresponding fastening element 105 correspond to magnetic fasteners (paragraph 28).
Regarding claim 7, Schmidt teaches the holder 104 wherein the at least one holding surface (cavity wall) corresponds to at least two concave holding surfaces (the cavity defines two concave walls, see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, Schmidt teaches the holder 104 wherein the rearward portion comprises a planar holding surface 301 separating the at least two concave holding surfaces (the cavity 301 separate the docking cavity side walls, see Fig, 3).
Regarding claim 9, Schmidt teaches the holder 104 wherein the holder defines a top planar surface, a bottom planar surface, and at least two lateral surfaces extending from the closed end to the open end, the at least two lateral surfaces extending from the top planar surface to the bottom planar surface (annotated figure below).
Regarding claim 10, Schmidt teaches the holder 104 wherein the at least two lateral surfaces comprise at least one access groove 301 extending at least partially between the top planar surface and the bottom planar surface and in a direction from the open end towards the closed end (annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
448
748
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Schmidt teaches the holder 104 wherein the top planar surface and the bottom planar surface comprise at least one mounting extension respectively (lateral walls act as a mounting extension, that mount the control unit to the holder, see annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 14, Schmidt teaches the holder wherein the holder 104 is detachably mounted on a machine seat (the holder is formed on the armrest, and the armrest is a part of the vehicle seat, see Fig. 5 and paragraph 27).
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.
Claims 1, 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Randleman (US20150352987) in view of Wnuk (US. Pat. 5,384,440).
Regarding claim 1, Randleman teaches a system for accessing one or more machine seat controls in a machine, comprising: a control unit 208 configured for machine seat adjustment; and a holder 202 comprising a body 202, the body defining a closed end, an open end, and a cavity 206 (the cavity inherently defines an open end and a closed end) extending from the closed end to the open end, the cavity configured to receive at least a portion of the rear casing of the control unit; and an extension cable 212 coupled with the control unit and configured to be extensible along with the control unit when the portion of the rear casing is removed from the cavity and the control unit is displaced away from the holder (Figs. 1-4 and paragraphs 20-21). Randleman does not teach the front and the rear casing. However Wnuk teaches a similar control unit comprising a front casing 112 and rear casing 118, the front casing comprising the one or more machine seat controls (144, 146); and the rear casing detachably affixed to the front casing (Figs. 1-2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make the casing into two parts (front and rear), since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 3, Randleman teaches the system wherein the holder defines at least one cable groove 206 extending at least partially in a direction from the open end to the closed end, the at least one cable groove configured for routing the extension cable 206 and positioned below the portion of the rear casing when placed inside the cavity (Figs. 3-4).
Regarding claim 4, Randleman teaches the system wherein the extension cable 212 is configured to recoil to an initial state of the extension cable prior to the extension and displacement of the control unit from the holder (Fig. 3 and paragraph 20).
Claims 15-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmidt (US20150234427) in view of Wnuk (US. Pat. 5,384,440).
Regarding claim 15, Schmidt teaches a control unit configured for machine seat adjustment, comprising: a casing (the casing of the touch pad 101) comprising at least one machine seat control (the controller controls vehicle electronics, and the seat being part of the vehicle electronic, see paragraph 3); wherein a portion of the casing is configured to be accommodated in a corresponding cavity 302 of a control unit holder 104, and wherein the portion of the casing comprises at least one docking surface 105 and at least one fastening element 105 affixed to the at least one docking surface for detachable contact with a corresponding fastening element 106 provided in the cavity of the control unit holder (Figs. 1-5 and paragraphs 22-23). Schmidt does not teach the front and the rear casing. However Wnuk teaches a control unit comprising a front casing 112 and rear casing 118, the front casing comprising the one or more machine seat controls (144, 146); and the rear casing detachably affixed to the front casing (Figs. 1-2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make the casing into two parts (front and rear), since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 16, Schmidt teaches the control unit wherein the at least one fastening element 106 and the corresponding fastening element 105 correspond to hook-and-loop fasteners or magnetic fasteners (paragraph 28).
Regarding claim 17, Schmidt teaches the control unit wherein the at least one docking surface 105 corresponds to at least two convex docking surfaces 106 (Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 18, Schmidt teaches the control unit wherein the portion of the rear casing comprises at least one concave groove separating the at least two convex docking surfaces (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 20, Schmidt teaches the control unit wherein a remaining portion of the rear casing comprises at least one concave groove 105 that is outside of or partially extends into the cavity 302 of the control unit holder 104 (the groove that is defined by the connector 105 is located outside the cavity prior to positioning the control unit into the cavity, see Fig. 1).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmidt and Wnuk as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Randleman (US20150352987).
Regarding claim 19, Schmidt does not teach the extension cable coupled with the control unit. Randleman teaches a similar control unit 208 with an extension cable 212 coupled with the control unit and configured to be extensible along with the control unit when the portion of the rear casing 210 is removed from the cavity 206 and the control unit is displaced away from the holder 202. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a cable to connect the control unit with the holder, since using connectors or cables to electrically connect two electronic components are known alternatives and are interchangeable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 11 and 13 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.
Regarding claim 2, the prior art fails to teach or show, alone or in combination, the claimed system wherein the portion of the rear casing comprises at least one docking surface and at least one first fastening element affixed to the at least one docking surface, and the cavity comprises a rearward portion proximate the closed end, the rearward portion comprising at least one holding surface and at least one second fastening element affixed to the at least one holding surface and configured for detachable contact with the at least one first fastening element, in junction with the limitations of claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art fails to teach or show, alone or in combination, the claimed holder wherein the holder defines at least one protrusion extending away from at least one lateral surface of the at least two lateral surfaces and the cavity, the at least one protrusion originating from a bottom surface of the at least one access groove and including a mounting hole.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art fails to teach or show, alone or in combination, the claimed holder wherein the bottom planar surface comprises at least one cable groove extending at least partially between the at least two lateral surfaces and in a direction from the open end towards the closed end, the at least one cable groove configured for routing an extension cable associated with the control unit.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED M SAEED whose telephone number is (571)270-7976. The examiner can normally be reached 10-8pm.
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, Renee Luebke can be reached at 571-272-2009. 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.
/AHMED M SAEED/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights