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 § 112
Claims 1-24 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. In claims 1-11, applicant has disclosed a method for the claimed invention but has not identified any “steps” with the claimed method, thereby rendering the metes and bounds of the claimed invention unclear as to what “steps” the method entails. Applicant must clarify. In claim 2, applicant has used double inclusion with the limitation of “a footrest adjustment system” as its unclear if it’s the same footrest adjustment system as disclosed in claim 1. In claim 21, applicant has used double inclusion with the limitation of “a footrest system” and a “vehicle seat system” as its unclear if it’s the same footrest adjustment system as disclosed in claim 1.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 20 recites the broad recitation “at least one in the region of the step offset”, and the claim also recites “at least one, in particular slot-like support” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
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) 1-5, 12 and 19 as best understood is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Beyer (DE102009040440A1). Beyer discloses a method (Figures 1 and 2; paragraph [0037]) for operating a comfort system of a motor vehicle, wherein the comfort system has a footrest system (46,48) with a footrest (52,54) for supporting an operator's feet, wherein the motor vehicle has a support structure (26,30) which, along a longitudinal direction forms a stepped offset (Fig. 2) between a lower plate (the vertical/oblique portion of the rail) and upper plate (the horizontal portion of the rail). The footrest is adjusted by a footrest adjustment system (50) from a parking position on the lower support plate below the upper plate and over the step offset to an operating position on and above the upper support plate (as shown in Fig. 2). Regarding claim 5, a foot bearing surface (54) of the footrest is oriented substantially in the longitudinal direction in the parking direction (Fig. 2) and the foot bearing is oriented inclined with respect to the longitudinal direction in the operating direction as shown in Fig. 2. Regarding claim 13, the footrest adjustment comprises a Regarding claim 19, the footrest adjustment is arranged on a lower side of the support structure (Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 1-7,9, 12-17 and 19-24 as best understood is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kitano (JPH 08113066 A). Kitano discloses a method (Figures 1 and 2; paragraph [0037]) for operating a comfort system of a motor vehicle, wherein the comfort system has a footrest system (10) with a footrest (14,16) for supporting an operator's feet, wherein the motor vehicle has a support structure (2) which, along a longitudinal direction forms a stepped offset (Fig. 2) between a lower plate (the vertical wall portion of the support structure) and upper plate (the horizontal portion of the support structure). The footrest is adjusted by a footrest adjustment system (8,9) from a parking position on the lower support plate (Fig. 2) below the upper plate and over the step offset to an operating position on and above the upper support plate (as shown in Fig. 1). Regarding claim 5, a foot bearing surface (14) of the footrest is oriented substantially in the longitudinal direction in the parking direction (Fig. 2) and the foot bearing is oriented inclined with respect to the longitudinal direction in the operating direction as shown in Fig. 1. Regarding claims 6-7, the comfort system comprises a vehicle seat (1) and vehicle seat system (22-24) for adjusting the vehicle seat and that is mechanically coupled to the footrest so that the footrest is “forcibly” adjusted with the vehicle seat (during rotation of the vehicle seat, as shown in Fig. 6). Regarding claims 12-16, the footrest adjustment comprises a footrest a multi-joint lever adjustment kinematic System (6-9). Regarding claim 16, the foot bearing surface is oriented in the longitudinal direction the parking position (as shown in Fig. 1) but is inclined (due to its shape) with respect to the longitudinal direction in the operating position as shown in Fig. 1). The footrest comprises a footrest adjustment drive (6,7,8a,17) in regards to claim 17. Regarding claim 19, the footrest adjustment is arranged on a lower side of the support structure (Fig. 2). The support structure has a slot like support passage (5) and the footrest adjustment kinematic system is coupled thereto in regards to claim 20. Regarding claims 21-24, Kitano shows the use of a support rail system (22-23) for fastening and guiding the vehicle seat system and a vehicle floor (20) that provides the support structure.
Claims 8, 10-11 and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Reference Nos. DE 102010018910A1 and DE 10047740A1 show features of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTHONY D BARFIELD whose telephone number is (571)272-6852. 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. 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.
/ANTHONY D BARFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
adb
June 12, 2026
Prosecution Insights