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 1/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments that “a bicycle saddle is not an elongated bench seat, and the rear rack is not part of a bench seat…” - insomuch as applicant’s “bench” comprises 2 separated seating areas (6, 8 – see figures 1-2), KR ‘719 also comprises a “bench” with 2 seating areas (110, 200). Relatedly, in response to applicant’s arguments that “there is no single bench structure that provides both first and second seat areas in a common, continuous seat plane” – it does not appear that applicant’s “bench” meets this limitation, as explained below with respect to the 112 rejections. As such, it appears KR ‘719 meets this limitation insomuch as applicant’s invention.
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.
Claim 11 is 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. The originally filed disclosure does not provide support for “an elongated bench seat defining a continuous seat plane..”. The originally filed disclosure supports a “seat plane” but does not support a continuous seat plane – figures 1 -2 show a gap between the first seat area and the second seat area (comprising the bench). Therefore, the bench does not comprise a continuous set plane. Thus, this limitation is considered new matter. Appropriate correction is required.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11-15 and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites “an elongated bench seat defining a continuous seat plane..”. As shown in figures1 -2, a gap between the first seat area and the second seat area (comprising the bench). It is unclear what is meant by “a continuous seat plane”. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 11-15, 17-18, and 21 (as best understood) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR200445719, herein KR ‘719. KR ‘719 discloses a seat assembly for a tilting vehicle, comprising: an elongated bench seat defining a continuous seat plane comprising a first seat area (110) on which a rider is seatable for riding and operating the tilting vehicle, and a second seat area (200) rearward of the first seat area in which a passenger is seatable; a receiving unit integrated into the elongated bench seat comprising at least two mutually opposing wall elements which are movable from a seat position to a receiving position; wherein in the seat position, at least one of the at least two wall elements forms a seat surface (figure 4), extending in the seat plane, of the second seat area of the bench, and wherein in the receiving position, the at least two wall elements extend substantially transversely or obliquely to the seat plane, spaced apart from one another in a contactless manner, and define a receiving area on at least two sides, the receiving area being configured to receive at least one object (figures 5-6).
PNG
media_image1.png
443
569
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 12, at least one of the at least two all wall elements comprises a cushion body (260) on a side where the passenger is seatable, and at least one of the at least two wall elements comprises a hard-shell planar body on a side facing the receiving area in the receiving position (figures 5-6).
With regards to claim 13, at least two of the at least two wall elements are arranged overlapping one another in the seat position, or at least two of the at least two wall elements abut one another with their end faces extending transversely to the seat plane in the seat position, continuing with each other and together forming the seat surface of the second seat area (figure 3).
Regarding claim 14, the receiving unit further comprises at least two transverse walls extending transversely to the at least two wall elements, the at least two transverse walls arranged parallel to the at least one wall element forming the seat surface in the seat position, and arranged transversely or diagonally to the seat plane and transversely to the wall element in the receiving position, wherein the two transverse walls along with the wall elements, enclose the receiving area entirely in a framed manner (figures 5-6).
Regarding claim 21, the receiving unit further comprises a recess in the bench below the second seat area of the bench, in which recess at least one of the at least two wall elements and/or at least one of the at least two transverse wall is arranged in the seat position (figures 3-6).
With regards to claim 15, the receiving unit further comprises at least one fixing unit (270), by which the transverse walls and the wall elements are detachably fixable to one another at least in the receiving position.
With regards to claim 17, the wall elements in the receiving position extend substantially parallel or diagonally to a plane spanned by vertical and longitudinal axes of the tilting vehicle, and the transverse walls in the receiving position extend substantially parallel or diagonally to a plane spanned by the vertical axis and transverse axis of the tilting vehicle (figures 5-6).
In regards to claim 18, at least one of the at least two wall elements and at least one of the at least two transverse walls are rotatably movable from the seat position into the receiving position and are detachably fixed therein against movement via a fixing device (270)
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) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR200445719, herein KR ‘719, in view of Collins et al. (US 20200384840) or Gomolski (US 10150602). KR ‘719 discloses the invention of claim 11. However, KR ‘719 does not teach a cover. Collins et al. teach a vehicle comprising a receiving unit with a cover (56) that is movably fixed to a wall element or a transverse wall and is movable from a storage position, in which the cover is arranged parallel to and alongside the wall element or transverse wall, to a covering position in which the cover extends parallel or diagonally to the seat plane and transversely or diagonally to the wall element or transverse wall and covers the receiving area (14) against access from outside entirely or at least partially. Similarly, Gomolski teaches a cover (10) to protect cargo (col. 3, lines 12-16). KR ‘719, Collins et al. and Gomolski are analogous because they are from the same problem solving area, i.e. cargo compartments. Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a cover with the invention to KR ‘719. The motivation would have been to protect the cargo from the elements (weather). Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the invention to KR ‘719 as specified in claim 19.
With regards to claim 20, the cover is foldable in the storage position, at least partially flexibly bendable or is capable of being wound onto a drum body.
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 JONATHAN LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-8227. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thurs, 6-6.
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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at 571-272-8105. 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.
/JONATHAN LIU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3631