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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/15/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed on 4/15/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-4, 7, 12, 13, and 17 have been amended. Claim 10 has been cancelled. Claims 1-9 and 11-17 are still pending in this application, with claim 1 being independent.
In consideration of the cancellation of Claim 10, the previous drawing objection has been withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1-4, 9, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ruggiero et al. (US 2017/0313339, hereinafter Ruggiero).
In regards to claim 1, Ruggiero discloses in Figures 1-3 and 5-7, a child carrier (100), comprising: a frame (102); a seat support member (134) configured to support a seat (200); and a handle (110) pivotally connected to the frame (at 112), wherein the handle (110) is capable of rotating relative to the frame (via 112) to change a moving direction of the frame (now from the opposing side, noting the “moving direction” is considered to be the direction resulting from pushing of the handle, such being the opposite when the handle of Ruggiero is rotated as claimed) while driving the seat support member (134) to move relative to the frame (102) from a first position to a second position (see Figs. 5-7, Par. [0038]).
In regards to claim 2, Ruggiero discloses in Figures 1-3 and 5-7, the frame (102) comprises a support rod (106), the seat support member (134) is slidably connected to the support rod (106, Par. [0038]), and the handle (110) is capable of rotating to drive the seat support member to slide along the support rod (see Figs. 5-7, Par. [0038]).
In regards to claim 3, Ruggiero discloses in Figures 1-3 and 5-7, the support rod (106) is arranged along a first direction (down and to the right as oriented in Fig. 5), the handle (110) is capable of rotating relative to the frame (102) to change a moving direction of the frame from the first direction (down and to the right) to a second direction (substantially to the right as oriented in Fig. 7), and to drive the seat support member (134) to move relative to the frame from the first position to the second position (see movement from Fig. 5 to Fig. 7), the second position is located in the first direction of the first position (the second position is located down and to the right of the first position, see Figs. 5 and 7 for illustration).
In regards to claim 4, Ruggiero discloses in Figures 1-3 and 5-7, a first linkage assembly (140), wherein the handle (110) drives the seat support member (134) to slide along the support rod (106) through the first linkage assembly (Par. [0032]).
In regards to claim 9, Ruggiero discloses in Figures 1-3 and 5-7, the seat support member (134) is slidably sleeved on the support rod (106, Par. [0038]).
In regards to claim 12, Ruggiero discloses in Figures 1-3 and 5-7, a second linkage assembly (second instance of 140), wherein the frame comprises a support rod (106), the seat support member (134) is connected to the support rod (106) through the second linkage assembly (see Figs 1-2 and 5-7), and the handle (110) is capable of driving the seat support member (134) to move relative to the support rod through the second linkage assembly during the rotation of the handle (106, Par. [0032, 0038]).
In regards to claim 13, Ruggiero discloses in Figures 1-3 and 5-7, the support rod (106) is arranged along a first direction (down and to the right as oriented in Fig. 5), the handle (110) is capable of rotating relative to the frame (102) to change a moving direction of the frame from the first direction (down and to the right) to a second direction (substantially to the right as oriented in Fig. 7), and to drive the seat support member (134) to move relative to the frame from the first position to the second position (see movement from Fig. 5 to Fig. 7), the second position is located in the first direction of the first position (the second position is located down and to the right of the first position, see Figs. 5 and 7 for illustration).
In regards to claim 14, Ruggiero discloses in Figures 1-3 and 5-7, the support rod (106) is arranged along a first direction (down and to the right as oriented in Fig. 5), and the second position is located above or below the first position (the second position is located below the first position, see Figs. 5 and 7 for illustration).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8, 11, and 15-17 are still 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record, including that which is listed on the attached PTO-892, notably Ruggiero as discussed above, Fey (DE 102005029448 A1), Tao (CN 111409683 A), Tang (CN 214267743 U), and Lin (EP 3590789 A1), while either alone or in combination teaching a child carrier with frame, seat support, support rod, and linkage assemblies as detailed in the rejection above, fails to disclose or render obvious in particular the first linkage assembly comprises a rotating member and a driving member, one end of the rotating member is connected to the handle, another end of the rotating member is pivotally connected to one end of the driving member, and another end of the driving member is pivotally connected to the seat support member as recited and called for in the claimed combination of dependent claim 5, Claims 6-8 and 11 allowable due to their dependence thereto, and the second linkage assembly comprises a first linkage rod and a second linkage rod, one end of the first linkage rod is fixed to the handle, another end of the first linkage rod is pivotally connected to one end of the seat support member, another end of the seat support member is pivotally connected to one end of the second linkage rod, and another end of the second linkage rod is pivotally connected to the support rod; and wherein the first linkage rod, the seat support member, the second linkage rod, and the support rod are connected in sequence to form a deformable quadrilateral structure as recited and called for in the claimed combination of dependent claim 15, Claims 16-17 allowable due to their dependence thereto.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the Examiner’s rejection of Claims 1-4, 9, and 12-14 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ruggiero, the applicant argues that the cited reference fails to disclose all the features of the claimed invention, specifically wherein the handle is capable of rotating relative to the frame to change a moving direction of the frame while driving the seat support member to move relative to the frame from a first position to a second position.
First, to reiterate from the rejection above, Ruggiero indeed discloses the handle (110) is capable of rotating relative to the frame (via 112) to change a moving direction of the frame (now from the opposing side, noting the “moving direction” is considered to be the direction resulting from pushing of the handle, such being the opposite when the handle of Ruggiero is rotated as claimed) while driving the seat support member (134) to move relative to the frame (102) from a first position to a second position (see Figs. 5-7, Par. [0038]). The applicant is respectfully advised that while the claims of issued patents are interpreted in light of the specification, prosecution history, prior art and other claims, this is not the mode of claim interpretation to be applied during examination. During examination, the claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow. In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 70 USPQ2d 1827 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2004). In this case, Ruggiero is considered to disclose a “moving direction” as claimed. It is noted that even if Applicant’s intended read of “moving direction" of the frame “refers to a "travel direction" of the frame, i.e., the travel direction of the child carrier” that such could be interpreted simply by the side on which the handle is rotated to, as the examiner has done in the above rejection. Additionally, the rotation of the handle does not necessarily point to a certain travel direction, as the handle could be pulled or pushed from either side, and from the stored or deployed positions.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art of record, now additionally including that which is listed on the attached PTO-892, namely Gu et al. (US 9,168,939) which still teaches either alone or in combination a child carrier with frame, seat support, support rod, and linkage assemblies similar to that which is currently claimed above.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ALEXANDER K GARLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3599. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 PM.
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, Jessica Han can be reached at 571-272-2078. 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.
/ALEXANDER K GARLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights