Detailed Office Action
The communication dated 1/6/2026 has been entered and fully considered. Claims 5-10 are withdrawn from examination. Claims 1-10 remain pending.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-4) in the reply filed on 1/6/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 5-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 4 is 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.
Claims 4 recites that the pillow cushion is formed by stacking of a plurality of pillow units in the thickness direction and further recites that each pillow unit includes a first and a second pillow unit. At least, this requires four pillow units in the thickness direction. In the embodiment described in the instant FIG. 15, the stacking of only two pillow units 301 and 302 is illustrated and each pillow unit is not further divided in two individual units. Therefore, this claim in view of the teachings of instant FIG. 15 and its corresponding text is unclear and indefinite.
For the purpose of examination, the Examiner replaces the limitation of “each of the pillow units includes a first pillow unit and a second pillow unit formed with the filament three-dimensional bonded member” with “each of the pillow units formed with the filament three-dimensional bonded member”. Note that the limitation of “the first pillow unit” and “the second pillow unit” in the remainder limitations of claim 4 is also changed to “a first pillow unit” and “a second pillow unit”, respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOJIMA (WO-2017199474-A1 and its English translation), hereinafter KOJIMA, in view of FUNATOGAWA (US-2005/0262637), hereinafter FUNATOGAWA. Note that the italicized text below are the instant claims.
Regarding claims 1-3, KOJIMA discloses A pillow cushion formed with a filament three-dimensional bonded member in which, in a state where a plurality of filaments formed of a thermoplastic resin or a thermoplastic elastomer are three-dimensionally entangled, contact points of the filaments are fused {[0001]-[0002]}.
KOJIMA, however, is silent on the rest of limitations of claim 1 “wherein a density of the filaments in a back head portion support region is higher in both end portions in a direction of left and right shoulders than in a center portion”, claim 2 limitation of “wherein the density of the filaments in the back head portion support region is gradually increased from the center portion toward the both end portions in the direction of left and right shoulders”, and claim 3 limitation of “wherein the density of the filaments in the back head portion support region is gradually increased from the center portion toward both end portions in a height direction”. The Examiner notes that KOJIMA teaches that the density or hardness can be varied in different parts of the pillow {[0084]-[0085]}, thus the pillow of KOJIMA can have a variation in density or hardness in different directions.
In the same field of endeavor that is related to pillow cushion, FUNATOGAWA teaches that the central part of a pillow and the end directions both regarding shoulders and neck to the top of the head (height direction) can have different hardness or density and that the density or hardness in the central portion is lower than the end portions and this increase in density from center to the ends is gradual {[0010], [0013], [0041], [0047]-[0048], [0058]}.
At the effective filing date of the instant invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of FUNATOGAWA in the pillow of KOJIMA and have gradually increased the densities from central portion in both the height and shoulder directions toward the ends. As disclosed by FUNATOGAW, the advantage of such increase in density is to prevent discomfort from being brought to a user {[0008]}.
Regarding claim 4 limitation of “wherein the pillow cushion is formed by stacking a plurality of pillow units in a thickness direction, each of the pillow units formed with the filament three-dimensional bonded member, a density of the filaments in the back head portion support region of a first pillow unit is gradually increased from the center portion toward the both end portions in the direction of left and right shoulders and a density of the filaments in the back head portion support region of a second pillow unit is gradually increased from the center portion toward the both end portions in the height direction”, as discussed above, combination of KOJIMA and FUNATOGAWA teaches the filament three-dimensional bonded member and the gradual increase of the density in both directions.
The combination above, however, is silent on the pillow cushion being divided into two units or plurality of units in the thickness direction.
At the effective filing date of the instant invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have separated the single pillow cushion of the combination of KOJIMA and FUNATOGAWA into two separate units in the thickness direction, since it has been held that constructing formerly integral structure in various elements or splitting a structure into two identical structures involves only routine skill in the art {see MPEP 2144.04 (V)(C)}.
One would have been motived to do so since by stacking thinner pillow units on top of each other, one can arrive at a desired thickness more accurately and generally formation of thinner pieces is more convenient than a thick unit.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to S. BEHROOZ GHORISHI whose telephone number is (571)272-1373. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-(alt Fri) 7:30-5:00.
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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at 571-270-7457. 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.
/S. BEHROOZ GHORISHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights