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 and 14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sakakibara et al. (English Translation of JPS6185232).
Regarding claim 1, Sakakibara et al. discloses a vehicle seat (Fig. 1), comprising: a seat main body (110); a drive device (MT) for moving the seat main body; an operation input device (SW) for receiving an operation input instructing a forward/backward movement of the seat main body from a seated occupant; a sensor (601 to 605) provided in the seat main body to detect approach and contact of an object; and a controller (CONT) for stopping a movement of the seat main body caused by the drive device when approach or contact of an object is detected by the sensor, wherein, upon receiving an operation input via the operation input device and determining that a seated occupant is present, the controller sets a moving speed of the seat main body lower than when no seated occupant is present (page 2 lines 16 – 17; page 8 lines 11 – 13).
Regarding claim 14, Sakakibara et al. discloses a method of manufacturing a vehicle seat (Fig. 1), the method comprising: providing a seat main body (110), assembling a drive device (MT) configured to move the seat main body, installing an operation input device (SW) configured to receive, from a seated occupant, an operation input instructing a forward or backward movement of the seat main body; providing a sensor (601 to 605) in the seat main body, the sensor being configured to detect approach or contact of an object; and providing a controller (CONT) in the seat main body, the controller being configured to stop a movement of the seat main body caused by the drive device when approach or contact of the object is detected by the sensor, wherein, upon receiving an operation input via the operation input device and determining that a seated occupant is present, the controller sets a moving speed of the seat main body lower than when no seated occupant is present (page 2 lines 16 – 17; page 8 lines 11 – 13).
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) 1, 5, 8 – 11, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomokazu (JP 2011201517) in view of Sakakibara et al. (English Translation of JPS6185232).
Regarding claim 1, Tomokazu discloses a vehicle seat (Fig. 3), comprising: a seat main body (22); a drive device (23) for moving the seat main body; a sensor (24a, 24b) provided in the seat main body to detect approach and contact of an object; and a controller (25) for stopping a movement of the seat main body caused by the drive device when approach or contact of an object is detected by the sensor.
Tomokazu fails to teach an operation input device for receiving an operation input instructing a forward/backward movement of the seat main body from a seated occupant, and wherein, upon receiving an operation input via the operation input device and determining that a seated occupant is present, the controller sets a moving speed of the seat main body lower than when no seated occupant is present. However, Sakakibara et al. discloses an operation input device (SW) for receiving an operation input instructing a forward/backward movement of the seat main body from a seated occupant, wherein, upon receiving an operation input via the operation input device and determining that a seated occupant is present, the controller sets a moving speed of the seat main body lower than when no seated occupant is present (page 2 lines 16 – 17; page 8 lines 11 – 13). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed, with reasonable expectation of success, to include this feature taught by Sakakibara et al. in the invention of Tomokazu for improved safety in the vehicle seat of Tomokazu.
Regarding claim 5, Tomokazu discloses that the seat main body includes a skin exposed to outside, and the sensor is positioned behind the skin so as to emit detection radio wave (Abstract) to the outside of the skin through the skin and receive the detection radio wave reflected by the object and coming back via the skin to detect approach of the object.
Regarding claim 8, Tomokazu discloses that the seat main body includes: a seat cushion, a seat back (Fig. 3 shows a seat cushion and a seat back) provided pivotably in a rear part of the seat cushion and a headrest (Fig. 3 shows a headrest) provided at an upper part of the seat back, and wherein the drive device is configured to move the seat cushion in a fore and aft direction while the sensor is provided in at least one of a lower part of the seat cushion, a rear end part of the seat cushion, and a rear part of the seat back (paragraph [0049] discloses that the sensor may be attached to any desired location), the controller being configured to stop a rearward movement of the seat cushion caused by the drive device when approach or contact of an object is detected by the sensor.
Regarding claim 9, Tomokazu discloses that the seat main body includes: a seat cushion, a seat back (Fig. 3 shows a seat cushion and a seat back) provided pivotably in a rear part of the seat cushion and a headrest provided at an upper part of the seat back, wherein the drive device is configured to rotate the seat cushion (Figs. 3 – 6), the sensor is provided in at least one of a corner of the seat cushion, a side of the seat cushion and a shoulder part of the seat back (paragraph [0049] discloses that the sensor may be attached to any desired location), and the controller is configured to stop a rotational movement of the seat cushion caused by the drive device when approach or contact of an object is detected by the sensor.
Regarding claim 10, Tomokazu discloses that the seat main body includes: a seat cushion, a seat back provided pivotably in a rear part of the seat cushion and a headrest (Fig. 3 shows a seat cushion, a seat back, and a headrest) provided in an upper part of the seat back, and wherein the drive device is configured to pivot the seat back relative to the seat cushion, the sensor is provided in at least one of a lower part of the seat cushion , a rear end part of the seat cushion, a rear part of the seat back and a rear part of the headrest (paragraph [0049] discloses that the sensor may be attached to any desired location), and the controller is configured to stop a rearward movement of the seat back caused by the drive device when approach or contact of an object is detected by the sensor.
Regarding claim 11, Tomokazu discloses that the seat main body includes: a seat cushion, a seat back (Fig. 3 shows a seat cushion and a seat back) provided pivotably in a rear part of the seat cushion and a headrest provided in an upper part of the seat back, and wherein the drive device is configured to move the seat cushion laterally (Figs. 3 – 6), the sensor is provided in at least one of a lower part of the seat cushion, a side part of the seat cushion, a side part of the seat back and a side part of the headrest (paragraph [0049] discloses that the sensor may be attached to any desired location), and the controller is configured to stop a lateral movement of the seat back caused by the drive device when approach or contact of an object is detected by the sensor.
Regarding claim 14, Tomokazu discloses a method of manufacturing a vehicle seat (Fig. 3), the method comprising: providing a seat main body (22), assembling a drive device (23) configured to move the seat main body, providing a sensor (24a, 24b) in the seat main body, the sensor being configured to detect approach or contact of an object; and providing a controller (25) in the seat main body, the controller being configured to stop a movement of the seat main body caused by the drive device when approach or contact of the object is detected by the sensor.
However, Tomokazu fails to teach installing an operation input device (CONT) configured to receive, from a seated occupant, an operation input instructing a forward or backward movement of the seat main body; and wherein, upon receiving an operation input via the operation input device and determining that a seated occupant is present, the controller sets a moving speed of the seat main body lower than when no seated occupant is present. However, Sakakibara et al. discloses installing an operation input device (CONT) configured to receive, from a seated occupant, an operation input instructing a forward or backward movement of the seat main body; and wherein, upon receiving an operation input via the operation input device and determining that a seated occupant is present, the controller sets a moving speed of the seat main body lower than when no seated occupant is present (page 2 lines 16 – 17; page 8 lines 11 – 13). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed, with reasonable expectation of success, to include this feature taught by Sakakibara et al. in the invention of Tomokazu for improved safety in the vehicle seat of Tomokazu.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 12, 13, 15, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomokazu (JP 2011201517) as modified by Sakakibara et al. and further in view of Ryuichi et al. (JP 2018197027).
Regarding claim 2, Tomokazu as modified by Sakakibara et al. fails to disclose that the controller controls the drive device in such a manner that when the sensor detects that a distance to the object has come to be a predetermined first distance while the drive device is moving the seat main body, the controller reduces a moving speed of the seat main body caused by the drive device, and stops a movement of the seat main body when the sensor has detected that the distance to the object has come to be a second distance smaller than the first distance. However, Ryuichi et al. discloses the controller (10) controls the drive device in such a manner that when the sensor detects that a preset threshold distance to the object has come to be a predetermined first distance while the drive device is moving the seat main body, the controller reduces a moving speed of the seat main body caused by the drive device, and stops a movement of the seat main body when the sensor has detected that the distance to the object has come to be a second distance smaller than the first distance. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed, with reasonable expectation of success, to include the controller of Ryuichi et al. in the vehicle seat of Tomokazu as modified by Sakakibara et al. for safety purposes.
Regarding claim 3, Tomokazu as modified by Sakakibara et al. and Ryuichi et al. discloses that the controller is configured to reduce a moving speed of the seat main body by the drive device when the sensor detects an approach of an object thereto while the drive device is moving the seat main body and stops a movement of the seat main body by the drive device when the sensor detects contact of the object thereto – Ryuichi et al. discloses that the control unit 10 is capable of reducing the speed as well as stopping movement altogether.
Regarding claims 12, 13, 15, and 16, the discussion above is relied upon.
Claim(s) 4, 6, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomokazu (JP 2011201517) as modified by Sakakibara et al. and further in view of in view of Harkema et al. (WO 2020/055259).
Regarding claim 4, Tomokazu fails to teach that the seat main body includes a skin exposed to outside and having a detection light hole formed in a part thereof, and the sensor is provided on a back side of the skin so that the sensor emits detection light via the detection light hole and receives the detection light that is reflected by the object and has come back via the detection light hole to detect approach of the object. However, Harkema et al. discloses a detection light hole (16). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed, with reasonable expectation of success, to use the sensor and detection light hole taught by Harkema et al. since it would provide a more accurate detection of the object.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Tomokazu as modified by Sakakibara et al. and Harkema et al., more specifically Harkema et al. discloses that the sensor includes a plurality of proximity detection units (2) arranged in a row each configured to detect approach of an object, and a plurality of contact detection units (touch sensor) provided integrally with the corresponding proximity detection units to detect contact of an object.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 – 16 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
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 VALENTINA XAVIER whose telephone number is (571)272-9853. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am - 6:30 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, 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 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.
/VALENTINA XAVIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights