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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/25/2026 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: fastening device in claims 1, 4, 7-14, 16-22, actuating device in claim 10 and 13-14, engagement device in claims 1 and 17-22, control device in claims 8-9 and 12, and indicating device in claims 12-13.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 7-11, 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Karremans (US PgPub #2010/0207436).
For Claim 1, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose a child seat base (2) for receiving a seat element (3) of a child seat system and for mounting in a motor vehicle, comprising several fastening devices (14) for fastening the seat element to the child seat base, the several fastening devices configured to be brought from a locking position into a release position, wherein the several fastening device comprise: at least one first fastening device defining a first latching area, the at least one first fastening device configured to engage with an engagement device; and at least one second fastening device configured differently from the at least one first fastening device with respect to shape and lockability, wherein the at least one first fastening device is in the locking position when the engagement device is positioned at the first latching area.
For Claim 3, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose at least one of the several fastening devices comprises a hook.
For Claim 4, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose that at least one first fastening device is rotatable.
For Claim 7, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose that several second fastening devices are coupled to each other.
For Claim 8, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose that several first fastening devices interact with each other via a control device (24), wherein the control device can be moved into at least one first position and at least one second position by rotation, wherein the control device in the at least one first position locks the locking position of the several first fastening devices.
For Claim 9, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose that the several fastening devices are connected to each other at least in section, via a connecting device (31), wherein the connecting device: is connected to a control device (41).
For Claim 10, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose an actuating device (41) is provided, wherein by an actuation of the actuating device all fastening devices are transferable into the release position.
For Claim 11, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose that at least one spring device (26) is provided, which urges at least one of the several fastening devices in a direction of the release position.
For Claim 14, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose an actuating device (41) is provided, wherein by an actuation of the actuating device at least one of the several fastening devices are transferable into the release position, wherein the several fastening devices are connected to each other and to the actuating device, at least in sections, via a connecting device (42), wherein the connecting device is flexible.
For Claim 15, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose a child seat system for mounting in a motor vehicle, comprising the seat element as well as the child seat base according to Claim 1.
For Claim 16, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose that the at least one first fastening device is rotatable around an axis from the locking position to the release position.
For Claim 17, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose that the one first fastening device defines a second latching area, wherein the at least one first fastening device is in the release position when the engagement device is positioned at the second latching area.
For Claim 18, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose that the engagement device (28) is rotatable around a second axis to engage with the first latching area in the locking position, and to engage with the second latching area in the release position.
For Claim 19, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose that the first fastening device is blocked against rotation in both directions when the engagement device (28) is positioned at the first latching area.
For Claim 20, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose that the first spring device is configured to bias the first fastening device to the release position.
For Claim 21, the figures and Claim 5 of Karremans ‘436 disclose a child seat base (2) for receiving a seat element (3) of a child seat system and for mounting in a motor vehicle, comprising an engagement device and several fastening devices (14) for fastening the seat element to the child seat base, the several fastening devices configured to be transferred between a locking position and a release position, wherein the several fastening devices comprise: at least one first fastening device defining a first latching area, the at least one first fastening device configured to be transferred between a first fastening device release position and a first fastening device locking position; and at least one second fastening device configured to be transferred between a second fastening device release position and a second fastening device locking position, wherein the at least one first fastening device is lockable in the first fastening device locking position through engaging with the engagement device with the engagement device being positioned at the first latching area, wherein the at least one second fastening device is not lockable in the second fastening device locking position as the hooks are movable form the first to second position independently of the other hooks (Claim 5).
For Claim 22, the figures of Karremans ‘436 disclose a child seat base (2) for receiving a seat element (3) of a child seat system and for mounting in a motor vehicle, comprising several fastening devices (14) for fastening the seat element to the child seat base, the several fastening devices configured to be transferred between a locking position and a release position, wherein the several fastening devices comprise: at least one first fastening device defining a first latching area, the at least one first fastening device configured to engage with an engagement device; and at least one second fastening device configured differently from the at least one first fastening device with respect to rotatability, shape and lockability, wherein the at least one first fastening device is in the locking position when the engagement device is positioned at the first latching area, wherein the at least on first fastening device is rotatable around the pivot axis (15) and the at least one second fastening device is translationally displaceable, the spring (26) translates when it compresses and expands.
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) 6 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karremans (US PgPub #2010/0207436) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Applicant Admitted Prior Art (AAPA).
For Claim 6 and 12, while Karremans ‘436 discloses a control device (41), it is silent about an indicating device coupled to it. However, the AAPA teaches that it is well known in the art to have indication devices on a child seat connected to the control device to indicate if the seat is locked into the base for safety reasons. Therefore it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Karremans ‘436 with a known indicating device. The motivation to do so would be to increase safety of the seating system.
For Claim 13, while Karremans ‘436 discloses an actuating device (42) is designed in such a way that the at least one first fastening device is transferred to its release position, it is silent about it being coordinated with an indicating device. However, the AAPA teaches that it is well known in the art to have an indication device that coordinates with the system to indicate if the seat is securely locked. Therefore it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Karremans ‘436 with a known indicator device. The motivation to do so would be to increase the safety of the seating system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues that Karremans ‘436 does not teach a first and second fastening device that are different with respect to lockability, shape, or choice of material. However, the Examiner holds that the shapes of the first and second fastening devices are different as the hook themselves are mirrored shapes of each other and the connecting parts (24) vs (28) are different from each other which creates different lockability.
The Applicant has not argued the Official Notice for Claims 6 and 12-13. Per MPEP 2144.03 this is now taken to be Applicant Admitted Prior Art (AAPA).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP J BONZELL whose telephone number is (571)270-3663. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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 Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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.
/PHILIP J BONZELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642 8/8/2026
Prosecution Insights