Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/737,350

SEAT WITH MOVEABLE WORKSURFACE

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jun 07, 2024
Examiner
BARFIELD, ANTHONY DERRELL
Art Unit
3636
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Humanscale Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
991 granted / 1237 resolved
+28.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1261
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
42.0%
+2.0% vs TC avg
§102
39.3%
-0.7% vs TC avg
§112
14.9%
-25.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1237 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 § 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) 1-4 and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Simon et al (2017/0208952 A1). Simon et al. shows the use of a seat (6,8) comprising: a chassis having a seating surface (24), a backrest (26), and an armrest (Fig. 1A); and a working attachment (14) fixedly secured to the chassis and the working attachment includes a horizontal tube (62) extending horizontally and laterally outwardly away from the chassis and a vertical tube (68) extending perpendicular to the horizontal tube spacing the vertical tube out of contact with the armrest (Fig. 1A). The working attachment including a worksurface (52), the worksurface having a first position in which the worksurface is positioned at a height above a top surface of the armrest on a first side of the armrest (Figs. 1A-1B) such that the worksurface is positioned over the seating surface, the worksurface having a second position in which the worksurface is positioned on a second side of the armrest opposite of the first side (see Fig. 1A). Regarding claims 2-3, the working attachment includes a horizontal support (154) and a vertical section (84) , the vertical section defining a first axis of rotation (Fig. 5), the horizontal support section extending perpendicular to the vertical section, including a support coupling (102) that is pivotally coupled to the worksurface. The worksurface rotates relative to the support section about a second axis of rotation (122) that extends through the support coupling and is parallel (although they are colinear) to the first axis of rotation (see para[0036]). Regarding claim 4, the chassis includes a mount (34), the mount defining a receiver that selectively receives a first portion of a mounting shaft (42), the working attachment selectively receiving a second portion of the mounting shaft (Fig. 1A), the mounting shaft fixedly securing the working attachment to the chassis. Regarding claims 6-7, the vertical tube (68) defines a central longitudinal axis the first axis of rotation being coaxial with the central longitudinal axis and vertical section is rotatably fixed with the vertical tube and disposed therein ( see para[0036]). 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) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Simon et al in view of Goetz et al (2005/0029849 A1). Simon et al. shows all of the teachings of the claimed invention except the use of a vertical section that can translate in and out of the vertical tube. Goetz et al. has disclosed the at the vertical section (68) of a working attachment that can translate into and out of the vertical tube (56), via a linear actuator i.e. a pneumatic shock absorber or movable within between a first and second position and clamped in position (see para[0045], [0048]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the working attachment of Simon et al. with the teachings of Goetz et al, in order to provide more functional use positions for different size occupants. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4 and 6-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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 September 01, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 1 earlier event
Jun 07, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Jun 05, 2026
Interview Requested
Jun 11, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 11, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 25, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 04, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12728999
PASSENGER SEATING
2y 3m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12722548
BACK SURFACE MEMBER FOR SEAT PAD AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 7m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12721446
SEATING SYSTEM WITH INDEPENDENT SUSPENSION
2y 10m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12708218
MODULAR SEAT BOTTOM CUSHION, AND SEAT ASSEMBLY COMPRISING SUCH A CUSHION
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12709925
AIRCRAFT INTERIOR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+13.9%)
2y 3m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1237 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month