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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has amended to include the limitations of claim 3 into claim 1. However, the applicant has not presented any reasoning to support that Navarro et al. fail to disclose these limitations.
Applicant has amended to add “seventh foam layer” to claims 13 and 17. However, there is no support for a seventh layer in the specifications.
Claims 18 and 20 has been amended to include “a fourth density less than the third density”.
However, there no support for it in the specifications.
Newly added claim recites a wall behind seat comprises a portion of the receptacle. However, there is no support for it in the specifications.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “the seventh layer” as claimed in claims 13 and 17 and “seat wall with receptacle” as claimed in claim 21 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 13, 17, 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 13 and 17 recite the limitations of seventh foam layer. However, there is no support for a seventh layer in the specifications.
Claims 18 and 20 recite the limitations of “a fourth density less than the third density”. However, there no support for it in the specifications.
Claim 21 recite the limitations of a wall behind seat comprises a portion of the receptacle. However, there is no support for it in the specifications.
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, 7-19, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Embach (US 2006/0273650) in view of Navarro et al. (10,377,287).
Regarding claim 1, Embach discloses a seat assembly 10 for a vehicle, the seat assembly comprising: a seat portion comprising: a seat back 16 comprising: a first layer 42 comprising a first foam material having a first density (para 0018); a second layer 40 on the first layer and comprising a second foam material having a second density less than the first density (para 0018); and a third layer 38 on the second layer and comprising a third foam material having a third density less than the second density (para 0018); and a seat base 14 comprising: a fourth layer 42 comprising a fourth foam material having a fourth density (para 0018); a fifth layer 40 on the fourth layer and comprising a fifth foam material having a fifth density less than the fourth density (para 0018); and a sixth layer 38 on the fifth layer and comprising a sixth foam material having a sixth density (para 0018) less than the fifth density. Embach discloses the foam arrangement is used for both seat back and seat base.
However, Embach fails to disclose a headrest portion connected above a top edge of the seat back, wherein the headrest portion comprises a vertical portion for supporting a head of a passenger seated in the seat and a horizontal portion connected to a rear of the vertical portion, the horizontal portion comprising a receptacle configured to restrain a headset on the horizontal portion.
Instead, Navarro et al. disclose a headrest portion 1 connected above a top edge of the seat back 2, wherein the headrest portion comprises a vertical portion 4 for supporting a head of a passenger seated in the seat and a horizontal portion 4.3/4.2 connected to a rear of the vertical portion, the horizontal portion comprising a receptacle (the recess between 4.3/4.2 also includes a holder 5) configured to restrain a headset on the horizontal portion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Navarro et al. and use the headrest with space in the invention of Embach for the purpose of storing an item.
Regarding claim 4, Embach further discloses the vertical portion of the headrest portion 26 comprises a cushioned front surface comprising one of the first, second, or third foam materials (para 0005).
Regarding claims 5, 6, Embach fails to disclose the first density is 15-20% greater than the second density and second density is 15-20% greater than the third density, wherein the fourth density is 15-20% greater than the fifth density and the fifth density is 15-20% greater than the sixth density.
However, Embach discloses any arrangements and ranges can be used for the foam members in order to exhibit increasing spring constant. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to increase the density with 15-20% range in order to keep the cost low, since it has been held that where the general condition 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.
Regarding claim 7, Embach discloses the first foam material 42 is identical to the fourth foam material 42.
Regarding claim 8, Embach discloses the second foam 40 material is identical to the fifth foam material 40.
Regarding claim 9, Embach discloses the third foam material 38 is identical to the sixth foam material 38.
Regarding claim 10, Embach discloses thigh support bolsters 48 on opposite sides of the seat base 14.
Regarding claim 11 Embach discloses the thigh support bolsters 48 comprise the fifth foam material or the sixth foam material 38.
Regarding claim 12, Embach discloses a comfort layer 46 on the sixth layer 38 and between the thigh support bolsters 48.
Regarding claim 13, Embach discloses the comfort layer 46 comprises a seventh foam material 48’.
Embach fails to disclose the seventh foam material have a density less than sixth material.
However, Embach discloses any arrangements and ranges can be used for the foam members in order to exhibit increasing spring constant. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to have different layers with different density in order to keep the cost low, since it has been held that where the general condition 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.
Regarding claim 14, Embach discloses lateral support bolsters 48 on opposite sides of the seat back 16.
Regarding claim 15, Embach discloses the lateral support bolsters 48 comprise the third foam material 38.
Regarding claim 16, Embach discloses a lumbar support layer 46 on the third layer between the lateral support bolsters 48.
Regarding claim 17, Embach discloses the comfort layer 46 comprises a seventh foam material 48’.
Embach fails to disclose the seventh foam material have a density less than sixth material.
However, Embach discloses any arrangements and ranges can be used for the foam members in order to exhibit increasing spring constant. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to have different layers with different density in order to keep the cost low, since it has been held that where the general condition 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.
Regarding claim 18, Embach discloses a passenger seat for an aircraft a seat assembly 10 for a vehicle, the seat assembly comprising: a seat portion comprising: a seat back 16 comprising: a first layer 42 comprising a first foam material having a first density (para 0018); a second layer 40 on the first layer and comprising a second foam material having a second density less than the first density (para 0018); and a third layer 38 on the second layer and comprising a third foam material having a third density less than the second density (para 0018); and a seat base 14 comprising: a fourth layer 42 comprising a fourth foam material having a fourth density (para 0018); a fifth layer 40 on the fourth layer and comprising a fifth foam material having a fifth density less than the fourth density (para 0018); and a sixth layer 38 on the fifth layer and comprising a sixth foam material having a sixth density (para 0018) less than the fifth density (Embach discloses the foam arrangement is used for both seat back and seat base), thigh support bolsters 48 disposed along opposite sides of the seat base 14; a comfort layer 46 comprising the third foam material disposed on the seat base between the thigh support bolsters; lateral support bolsters 48 disposed along on opposite sides of the seat back 16; and a lumbar support layer 46 comprising the third foam material between the lateral support bolsters; and a headrest portion 26 connected above the seat portion, the headrest portion comprising a support portion comprising one of the first, second, and third foam materials, wherein a front surface of the support portion is contoured to support a head of a passenger seated in the seat portion.
However, Embach fail to disclose the headrest portion further comprising a platform extending rearwardly from the support portion, the platform configured to stow a headset behind the support portion.
Instead, Navarro et al. disclose the headrest portion further comprising a platform 4.3, 4.2 extending rearwardly from the support portion, the platform configured to stow a headset behind the support portion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Navarro et al. and use the headrest with space in the invention of Embach for the purpose of storing an item.
Embach fails to disclose the fourth density less than third density.
However, Embach discloses any arrangements and ranges can be used for the foam members in order to exhibit increasing spring constant. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to have different layers with different density in order to keep the cost low, since it has been held that where the general condition 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.
Regarding claim 19, Embach fails to disclose second layer is thicker than the first layer and the first layer is thicker than the third layer.
However, Embach discloses any arrangements and ranges can be used for the foam members in order to exhibit increasing spring constant. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to any arrangement of thickness in order to keep the cost low, since it has been held that where the general condition 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.
Regarding claim 21, Embach as modified with Navarro et al. disclose a wall 4 (Navarro et al. ) behind the seat assembly comprises a portion of the receptacle configured to restrain the headset on the horizontal portion.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Embach in view of Navarro et al. (10,377,287) and Saylik et al. (US 2021/0331807).
Regarding claim 20, Embach discloses a passenger seat for an aircraft a seat assembly 10 for a vehicle, the seat assembly comprising: a seat portion comprising: a seat back 16 comprising: a first layer 42 comprising a first foam material having a first density (para 0018); a second layer 40 on the first layer and comprising a second foam material having a second density less than the first density (para 0018); and a third layer 38 on the second layer and comprising a third foam material having a third density less than the second density (para 0018); and a seat base 14 comprising: a fourth layer 42 comprising a fourth foam material having a fourth density (para 0018); a fifth layer 40 on the fourth layer and comprising a fifth foam material having a fifth density less than the fourth density (para 0018); and a sixth layer 38 on the fifth layer and comprising a sixth foam material having a sixth density (para 0018) less than the fifth density (Embach discloses the foam arrangement is used for both seat back and seat base), thigh support bolsters 48 disposed along opposite sides of the seat base 14; a comfort layer 46 comprising the third foam material disposed on the seat base between the thigh support bolsters; lateral support bolsters 48 disposed along on opposite sides of the seat back 16; and a lumbar support layer 46 comprising the third foam material between the lateral support bolsters; and a headrest portion 26 connected above the seat portion, the headrest portion comprising a support portion comprising one of the first, second, and third foam materials, wherein a front surface of the support portion is contoured to support a head of a passenger seated in the seat portion.
However, Embach fail to disclose the headrest portion further comprising a platform extending rearwardly from the support portion, the platform configured to stow a headset behind the support portion.
Instead, Navarro et al. disclose the headrest portion further comprising a platform 4.3, 4.2 extending rearwardly from the support portion, the platform configured to stow a headset behind the support portion.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Navarro et al. and use the headrest with space in the invention of Embach for the purpose of storing an item.
Embach also fail to disclose an aircraft comprising: a fuselage; at least one wing connected to the fuselage; and a passenger seat within the fuselage.
Instead, Saylik et al. disclose an aircraft 301 comprising: a fuselage; at least one wing connected to the fuselage; and a passenger seat within the fuselage.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Saylik et al. and the seat of Embach in a aircraft because the seats are compact and increases efficiency.
Embach fails to disclose the fourth density less than third density.
However, Embach discloses any arrangements and ranges can be used for the foam members in order to exhibit increasing spring constant. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made to have different layers with different density in order to keep the cost low, since it has been held that where the general condition 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.
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 SYED A ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-7768. The examiner can normally be reached 10am-10pm.
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, David Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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.
/SYED A ISLAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights