Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/680,684

PASSENGER SEATING

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 31, 2024
Examiner
BARFIELD, ANTHONY DERRELL
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Thompson Aero Seating Limited
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
975 granted / 1218 resolved
+28.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
1241
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
38.3%
-1.7% vs TC avg
§102
45.2%
+5.2% vs TC avg
§112
13.1%
-26.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1218 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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. Claim(s) 1-2,4-6,9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Orson et al (8,944,379). Orson et al. shows the use of a seating arrangement (22,24) for a passenger-carrying vehicle, said seating comprising: a first seat (30,32) and a third (30,32) seat arranged in a first row (22B) adjacent each other and facing in a forward direction; and a second seat (30,32) and a fourth seat (30,32) arranged adjacent each other in a second row (24A), the second and fourth seats each facing in the forward direction, the second row being located rearwardly of the first row (Fig. 3); wherein the third seat is offset forwardly in the forward direction with respect to the first seat, the fourth seat is offset forwardly in the forward direction with respect to the second seat (Figs. 3,5) and wherein the second seat is offset with respect to each of the first and third seats in a transverse direction that is perpendicular to the forward direction such that it is located between the first and third seats (as seat (32) rearward of the first row is between the first and second seat) in the transverse direction; and wherein the second seat overlaps with each of the first seat and the third seat in the transverse direction, and wherein the fourth seat overlaps with third seat in said transverse direction (Fig. 4) but does not overlap with said first seat in the transverse direction as its rearward of the third seat (Fig.3). Orson et al., shows the first row and the second row are spaced apart from each other by an inter-row pitch (Figs. 3-4) that provides a gap between the first row and the second row the gap providing passenger access to the second seat and to the fourth seat (Fig. 5). Regarding claims 2, the first, second, third and fourth seats face parallely with each other in the forward direction (as show in Figs. 1-2). Regarding claim 4, the first and third seat overlap each other in the forward direction and the second and fourth seat overlap each other in the forward direction (Fig. 1). Regarding claim 5, Orson et al. shows the first and second seat in do not overlap (Fig. 3) when both seats (34) are in an upright position and reclined position (Fig. 4). Regarding claim 9, the forward direction obliquely disposed with respect to a longitudinal direction so the passenger-carrying vehicle (Fig. 4). 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(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orson et al in view of Derbyshire. Orson et al. teaches the seat can recline between an upright and reclined or semi-reclined position but fails to show the seat pan having a rear portion that is at a lower level in the reclined position relative to the position of the rear portion of the seat pan in the upright position. Derbyshire teaches the conventional use of a seat that when reclined a seat pan (3b) is in a position forward with respect to the seat pan in an upright position so that a rear portion is at a level lower than a level of the rear portion of the seat pan in the upright state (see Figs. 4a-4c). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the seat of Orson et al. with the teachings of Derbyshire in order to allow for better spacing and comfort for a user. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3 and 7 is 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. Claims 21-30 are allowed over the prior art made of record. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Reference No. 2017/0129611 shows features of the claimed invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY D BARFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-6852. 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. 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. /ANTHONY D BARFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636 adb December 26, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 31, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 28, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jun 03, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 06, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 21, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600480
VEHICLE PASSENGER SEAT ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594860
VEHICLE SEAT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12594859
VEHICLE SEAT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593921
SEAT SUPPORT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593918
CROSS-ELASTIC DIRECTOR'S CHAIR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+13.9%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1218 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month