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 .
This is the final Office Action for the serial number 18/723,399, CHAIR, filed on 6/21/24.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication # 2015/0201758 to Serber.
Serber teaches a chair comprising a seatback (23), a seat (22), a rocking mechanism (36) and a chair base (26-27). The seatback comprising a frame and a seatback base (71). The chair base comprising a central support (29). The rocking mechanism comprising a supporting base (31) and being arranged on the central support. The seat is being affixed to the rocking mechanism. The seatback is being connected to the rocking mechanism through the seatback base. The seat back frame comprising an intermediate transverse plate (45) to which a vertical plate is fastened with one end thereof. The vertical plate is being fastened to the seatback base with an opposite end thereof. The seatback base is being connected to the supporting base of the rocking mechanism. The chair further comprises an element of stop and adjustment (97-98) of an initial position of the seatback is attached to the vertical plate.
PNG
media_image1.png
666
882
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Serber in view US Patent Application Publication # 2014/0103688 to Wilson.
Serber teaches the seatback frame further comprising an upper transverse plate (76), the intermediate transverse plate and a spring (51-52) connecting the upper transverse plate and intermediate transverse plate but fails to teach a gas strut installed between the upper transverse plate and the intermediate transverse plate. Wilson teaches the gas strut (280). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Serber’s spring with gas strut as taught by Wilson to provide the same result “to return stroke from reclined back to upright” (section 0100 in Wilson’s invention).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/31/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With the amendment to claim 1 regarding “the vertical plate being located centrally relative to the frame”, the examiner changed the reference number for the intermediate tranverse plate to (#45) and the vertical plate is located in central of the frame, see diagram above in this office action.
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 ALFRED J WUJCIAK whose telephone number is (571)272-6827. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3:30pm.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
ALFRED J. WUJCIAK
Examiner
Art Unit 3632
/ALFRED J WUJCIAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636 5/5/26
Prosecution Insights