March 13, 2026
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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments filed 03/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Drawings
The drawing was received on 03/02/2026. This drawing is approved.
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.
PNG
media_image1.png
146
168
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
150
168
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 22, 27 and 29-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida (U.S. Patent No. 7,232,182 B2) in view of Takahashi et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,880,277).
As for claim 22, Yoshida teaches a child automobile safety seat, comprising a seat body having a sitting space, and a restraint system used for restraining a child in the sitting space, the seat body comprising a seat and a backrest, the restraint system comprises a restraint piece 6,6 and a protective piece 7A,
wherein the restraint piece is connected with at least one of the seat and the backrest, the protective piece is movably disposed in the front part of the seat, the protective piece is provided with a protective surface which faces the sitting space and is used for protecting waist and abdomen of the child,
the restraint system has a restraint state and an open state, when the restraint system is in the restraint state, the restraint piece is attached to the protective piece (See Fig.4); and when the restraint system is in the open state, the restraint piece is detached from the protective piece (not shown but it is inherent for the restraint piece to be detached from the protective piece since the restraint piece has to be unlatched in order to place the child in the child automobile safety seat).
Yoshida teaches that the restraint system further comprises a hollow airbag 21, the airbag is arranged on the protective piece, the protective piece is provided with an accommodating chamber, the airbag has a storage state and an inflated state, when the airbag is in the storage state, the airbag is accommodated in the accommodating chamber; and when the airbag is in the inflated state, the airbag is inflated and expanded to the outside the protective piece.
PNG
media_image3.png
635
732
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Yoshida, when given the broadest reasonable interpretation, teaches that the accommodating chamber is provided with an opening positioned on a front side of the protective piece (see annotated Fig. 6(a) above), when the airbag is converted from the storage state to the inflated state, the airbag is stretched above the front side of the protective piece; and when the airbag is in the inflated state, at least part of the airbag is positioned above the front side of the protective piece but does not teach that the protective piece is rotatably disposed on the seat through a first shaft, when the restraint system is in the restraint state, the protective piece rotates to the position where the protective surface faces the backrest; and when the restraint system is in the open state, the protective piece rotates to the position where the protective surface faces upwards.
PNG
media_image4.png
160
236
media_image4.png
Greyscale
However, Takahashi et al. teach the concept of a protective piece is rotatably disposed on the seat through a first shaft, when the restraint system is in the restraint state, the protective piece rotates to the position where the protective surface faces the backrest; and when the restraint system is in the open state, the protective piece rotates to the position where the protective surface faces upwards; wherein the protective piece comprises a restraint lever 51 rotatably disposed on the seat through the first shaft, and a protective block 5 rotatably disposed on the restraint lever; wherein the restraint lever is further provided with a first end and a second end respectively arranged at opposite ends of the restraint lever in a length direction, wherein the first end is disposed on the seat, the protective block is arranged at the second end, the restraint lever is gradually curved towards the sitting space from the first end to the second end; wherein the protective surface is disposed on the protective block, and a width of the protective surface is gradually increased in a direction extending from the first end to the second end; the protective block is in a triangular shape with a wide upper portion and a narrow lower portion. It would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art to modify the protective piece, as taught by Yoshida, to rotatably disposed on the seat through a first shaft, as taught by Takahashi et al., since it would make the protective piece easier to handle when securing the child in the child automobile safety seat.
As for claim 29, Yoshida teaches that the restraint system comprises a second driving piece disposed between the seat and the restraint piece, when the restraint system is in the open state, the second driving piece drives the restraint piece to be away from the sitting space (see the specification at column 8, lines 18-23 where it reads “A rear portion of each of the child seatbelts 6 is drawn into the backrest 10 and is wound around a seatbelt retractor (not shown in the drawings) with an emergency lock mechanism provided inside the seat body 2. In case of an automobile collision, the retractor is activated and locked, thereby preventing the child seatbelt 6 from being pulled out.
As for claim 30, Yoshida teaches that two sets of restraint pieces are respectively arranged on a left side and a right side of the backrest, each set of restraint piece comprises a harness strap and an insertion piece disposed at one end of the harness strap, and the protective piece is provided with an insertion slot; when the restraint system is in the restraint state, the two sets of insertion pieces are respectively inserted into the insertion slots correspondingly; and when the restraint system is in the open state, the two sets of insertion pieces are respectively released from the insertion slots.
As for claim 31, Yoshida teaches that one side of the protective piece which faces the sitting space is provided with a flexible protective cushion, and the protective surface is formed on the protective cushion.
As for claim 32, Yoshida teaches that the protective surface is a cambered surface which is gradually curved towards the sitting space from inside to outside in the left-right direction of the seat body.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida (U.S. Patent No. 7,232,182 B2) in view of Takahashi et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,880,277), as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Powell (U.S. Patent No. 11,214,216 B2).
Yoshida in view of Takahashi et al. teaches that the restraint system further comprises an air generating device 25 but is silent as to whether or not the air generating device comprises an air generator, an electronic control unit and a power supply, all of which are arranged on the seat body, the electronic control unit is electrically connected to the power supply and the air generator respectively, and the air generator is fluidly interconnected with the airbag. However, Powell teaches a similar child automobile safety seat that comprises electronic control unit and a power supply, all of which are arranged on the seat body, the electronic control unit is electrically connected to the power supply and the air generator respectively, and the air generator is fluidly interconnected with the airbag (see the specification at column at column 6, lines 50-51 where it reads “The respective control device may be an electronic control device.” and column 8, lines 45-52 where it reads “An airbag 15 is provided in an impact shield 14 (in an upper section or adjoining an upper surface). In FIG. 1 the airbag 15 is in the non-activated state. An acceleration sensor 17 (not shown in detail) is arranged in a seat anchorage 16. The acceleration sensor 17 is connected to a control device 19 (not shown in detail) via cable 18, which control device triggers the airbag 15 (when a predetermined acceleration threshold value is exceeded.”) It would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art to modify the child automobile safety seat, as taught by Yoshida in view of Takahashi et al., to include an air generating device comprises an air generator, an electronic control unit and a power supply, all of which are arranged on the seat body, the electronic control unit is electrically connected to the power supply and the air generator respectively, and the air generator is fluidly interconnected with the airbag, as taught by Powell, since it would deploy the airbag when a predetermined acceleration threshold value is exceeded.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida (U.S. Patent No. 7,232,182 B2) in view of Takahashi et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,880,277) and Powell (U.S. Patent No. 11,214,216 B2), as applied to claim 25 above, further in view of ZHANG, Shao-wei et al. (CN 109204218 A).
Yoshida in view of Takahashi et al. and Powell teaches the structure substantially as claimed but is silent as to whether or not the air generating device comprises an air guide pipe. However, ZHANG, Shao-wei et al. teach an air generating device further comprises an air guide pipe, a first end of the air guide pipe is connected with the air generator, a second end of the air guide pipe is connected with the outer edge of the airbag to be old (See Figures 1-4 and the specification). The air guide pipe would be far away from one side of the child, said gas generator is set in the front of the front baffle, far away from one side of the children, front baffle of the front part of the airbag is folded on the child seat, avoid the air flow when the children arm generate impact.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 28 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that the prior art, specifically Yoshida (U.S. Patent No. 7,232,182 B2), fails to teach that “the accommodating chamber is provided with an opening positioned on a front side of the protective piece, when the airbag is converted from the storage state to the inflated state, the airbag is stretched above the front side of the protective piece; and when the airbag is in the inflated state, at least part of the airbag is positioned above the front side of the protective piece”. However, as explained and shown above in annotated Fig. 6(a) of the Yoshida patent, Yoshida reads on the claim when given the broadest reasonable interpretation. While the airbag may open from the top surface, that top surface is still located on "a front side of the protective piece", and not the rear side. For context, the hood of most cars is located on the front side of the vehicle. However, the hood has an opening located at the top surface of the car or the interior of the hood is accessed through an opening at the top of the car. The location of the airbag and the location of the opening in the Yoshida patent is similar. Furthermore, much like the airbag of the present invention, the airbag in Yoshida is stretched above the front side of the protective piece; and when the airbag is in the inflated state, at least part of the airbag in Yoshida is positioned above the front side of the protective piece, much like the present invention, see Fig. 6(b) above.
Conclusion
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 Rodney B. White whose telephone number is (571)272-6863. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM-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, David R. Dunn can be reached at (571) 272-6670. 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.
/Rodney B White/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636