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 .
Claims 1-16 are pending.
Claims 1-16 have been examined.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the second front flange (515) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Watanabe (US 10183596).
As concerns claim 1, Watanabe discloses a seat back comprising: an upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33); a first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31) coupled to one side of the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33); and a first belt bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A and 77B) coupled to a section at which the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33) and the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31) are connected, and guiding the seat belt (Watanabe, fig. 19: 66), wherein the first belt bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A and 77B) comprises: a front bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A) disposed in front of the section at which the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33) and the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31) are connected; and a rear bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77B) manufactured so as to separable from the front bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A), coupled to the front bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A), and disposed behind the section at which the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33) and the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31) are connected.
As concerns claim 2, Watanabe discloses wherein an upper surface of the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33) has a straight section at a portion that enters the first belt bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A and 77B), and one side surface of the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31) has a straight section at the portion that enters the first belt bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A and 77B).
As concerns claim 3, Watanabe discloses wherein the front bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A) comprises: a front bracket body (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A) configured to guide the seat belt (Watanabe, fig. 19: 66) passing through the front; a first front flange (Watanabe, see annotated fig. 19) formed to extend rearwards from one side surface of the front bracket body (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A) and coupled to a first rear flange (Watanabe, see annotated fig. 19) of the rear bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77B); and a second front flange (Watanabe, see annotated fig. 19) formed to extend rearwards from one side surface of the front bracket body (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A) and coupled to the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33).
As concerns claim 4, Watanabe discloses wherein the first front flange (Watanabe, see annotated fig. 19) is coupled to an upper surface of the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33), and the second front flange (Watanabe, see annotated fig. 19) is coupled to a front surface of the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33).
As concerns claim 5, Watanabe discloses wherein the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33) has a reinforcing back plate (Watanabe, fig. 2: 50) that is coupled around a portion connected to the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31) and reinforces the rear of the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33).
As concerns claim 6, Watanabe discloses wherein the rear bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77B) comprises: a rear bracket body (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77B) configured to guide the seat belt (Watanabe, fig. 19: 66) passing through the rear; a first rear flange (Watanabe, see annotated fig. 19) formed to extend forwards from one side surface of the rear bracket body (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77B) and coupled to the first front flange (Watanabe, see annotated fig. 19) of the front bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A); a second rear flange (Watanabe, see annotated fig. 19) formed to extend forwards from one side surface of the rear bracket body (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77B) and coupled to a reinforcing back plate (Watanabe, fig. 2: 50) of the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33); and a third rear flange (Watanabe, see annotated fig. 19) formed to extend downwards from a lower portion of the rear bracket body (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77B) and coupled to the rear of the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31).
As concerns claim 10, Watanabe discloses wherein the front bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A), the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31), and the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33) are coupled in an overlapping state in an upper region of the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31) in a front-rear direction.
PNG
media_image1.png
792
920
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 10183596).
As concerns claim 7, Watanabe teaches the front bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A) and the rear bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77B).
Watanabe does not explicitly teach vertical reinforcing ribs protruding from an outer surface on the rear and front bracket. However, Watanabe does have reinforcing ribs on the upper hook member (fig. 14: 115), therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to include the reinforcing ribs of the upper hook member on the rear and front bracket in order to strength it.
Claims 8-9, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 10183596) in view of Mitsuhashi (DE 102014200905).
As concerns claim 8, Watanabe teaches the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31).
However, Watanabe does not teach an insert panel.
Mitsuhashi teaches an insert panel (Mitsuhashi, fig. 1: 21A4) formed to extend along the first side frame in a up-down direction, and coupled to the first side frame to form a closed cross-section.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the side frame as taught by Watanabe to include an insert panel as taught by Mitsuhashi in order to strength the side frame.
As concerns claim 9, Watanabe teaches a lower region of the front bracket (Watanabe, fig. 19: 77A) is coupled to cover the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33), the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31).
However, Watanabe does not teach an insert panel.
Mitsuhashi teaches an insert panel (Mitsuhashi, fig. 1: 21A4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the front bracket as taught by Watanabe to include covering the insert panel as taught by Mitsuhashi in order to strength it.
As concerns claim 15, Watanabe teaches a second side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 32) coupled to the other side of the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33); a lower frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 34) connecting the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31) and the second side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 32) in a lower portion thereof in a left-right direction; and coupled to a rear belt tightener (Watanabe, fig. 2: 18).
However, Watanabe does not teach a first reinforcing bracket coupled to the rear of the lower frame to form a closed cross-section.
Mitsuhashi teaches a first reinforcing bracket (Mitsuhashi, fig. 2: 21B2) coupled to the rear of the lower frame to form a closed cross-section.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the teachings of Watanabe to include a reinforcing bracket at taught by Mitsuhashi in order to strengthen the side frame.
As concerns claim 16, Watanabe teaches the lower frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 34).
However, Watanabe does not teach a second reinforcing bracket coupled to the front of the lower frame to form a closed cross-section.
Mitsuhashi teaches a second reinforcing bracket (Mitsuhashi, fig. 2: 21B1) coupled to the front of the lower frame to form a closed cross-section.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the lower frame as taught by Watanabe to include a second reinforcing bracket as taught by Mitsuhashi in order to strengthen the side frame.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 10183596) in view of Mitsuhashi (DE 102014200905), and in further view Matsui (US 20170008432).
As concerns claim 11, Watanabe and Mitsuhashi are discussed above.
However, neither Watanabe or Mitsuhashi teach the support wire.
Matsui teaches a support wire a support wire (Matsui, fig. 3: 22) in which at least a portion thereof is disposed in a closed cross-section.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the teachings of Watanabe and Mitsuhashi to include the support wire as taught by Matsui in order to strengthen the support of the side frame and insert panel.
As concerns claim 12, Watanabe teaches a second side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 32) coupled to the other side of the upper frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 33); and a lower frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 34) connecting the first side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 31) and the second side frame (Watanabe, fig. 2: 32) in a lower portion thereof in a left-right direction.
However, Watanabe does not teach a support wire is coupled to the first side frame and the lower frame.
Matsui teaches the support wire (Matsui, fig. 3: 22) is coupled to the first side frame and the lower frame.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to the invention, to modify the seat frame as taught by Watanabe to include a support wire as taught by Matsui in order to better support the frame of the seat.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 14 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA K THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3620. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00 ET.
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 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.
JESSICA K THOMPSON
Examiner
Art Unit 3636
/DAVID R DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights