November 24, 2025
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
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.
Claims 1-20 are 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 claim 1, lines 7-8, the language “are connected to each other at least one position of the buffer portion other than the support surface” is unclear and confusing language.
The aforementioned problem renders the claims vague and indefinite. Clarification and/or correction is required.
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, 4, 6, 11, 16, and 19-20, so far as understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KAWANO (CN 113492739 A).
PNG
media_image1.png
118
118
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
144
166
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
216
110
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As for claims 1 , KAWANO teaches a support structure, wherein the support structure comprises:
a support body 4; and
at least one buffer portion 40, provided within the support body, wherein the buffer portion comprises a plurality of buffer blocks 40A, 40B provided adjacent to each other;
wherein at least one first slit is provided on a support surface of the buffer portion, the first slit divides the buffer portion into the plurality of the buffer blocks, and the plurality of the buffer blocks are connected to each other at least one position of the buffer portion other than the support surface.
As for claim 4, KAWANO teaches that the adjacent buffer blocks respectively form cross sections facing and in contact with each other through the first slit.
As for claims 6 and 12, KAWANO teaches that the plurality of the first slits extend in in a longitudinal direction of the support surface and are arranged along a lateral direction of the support surface.
As for claim 11, KAWANO teaches that a plurality of the buffer portions are provided in parallel within the support body.
As for claim 13, KAWANO teaches that the support body comprises an accommodating portion for accommodating the buffer portion, the accommodating portion penetrates the support body in a direction orthogonal to the support surface, and the support body is of a frame structure.
As for claim 16, KAWANO teaches that a hardness or density of the buffer portion is less than or equal to a hardness or density of the support body (see the specification where it reads “At least one of the hardness and shape of the first buffer body and the second buffer body is different”). The specific hardness, as defined in claim 17, again is a design choice that is dependent on the on the manufacturer.
As for claim 19, KAWANO teaches a seat cushion structure, wherein the seat cushion structure comprises:
a seat cushion;
the support structure according to claims 1; and
a cover member, wherein the seat cushion is connected to the cover member, and the seat cushion and cover member are located on the support surface of the support structure.
As for claim 20, KAWANO teaches a child safety seat, wherein the child safety seat comprises:
a seat body comprising a sitting portion and a backrest portion; and
the seat cushion structure according to claim 19, mounted in a corner portion formed by the sitting portion and the backrest po
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KAWANO (CN 113492739 A) in view of Maier et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,256,819 B1).
PNG
media_image4.png
168
294
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
192
312
media_image5.png
Greyscale
As for claim 1, Maier et al. teach a support structure, wherein the support structure comprises:
a support body 10,12; and
at least one buffer portion 40, provided within the support body, wherein the buffer portion comprises a plurality of buffer blocks 42 provided adjacent to each other;
wherein at least one first slit is provided on a support surface of the buffer portion, the first slit divides the buffer portion into the plurality of the buffer blocks, and the plurality of the buffer blocks are connected to each other at least one position of the buffer portion other than the support surface.
As for claims 2-3 ,Maier et al. teach a plurality of the buffer blocks are connected to each other at least at a back surface of the buffer portion opposite the support surface; wherein, the first slit penetrates a back surface of the buffer portion opposite the support surface, and the buffer blocks are connected to each other at a top surface, a bottom surface, a side surface or periphery of the buffer portion.
As for claim 4, Maier et al. teach that the adjacent buffer blocks 42 respectively form cross sections facing and in contact with each other through the first slit.
As for claim 5, Maier et al. also teach that the adjacent buffer blocks respectively form cross sections facing and in contact with each other through the first slit; wherein, the adjacent buffer blocks respectively form cross sections facing each other through the first slit, and a gap exists between adjacent cross sections.
As for claim 6, Maier et al. teach that a plurality of the first slits extend in a longitudinal direction of the support surface and are arranged along a lateral direction of the support surface; or the plurality of the first slits extend in the lateral direction of the support surface and are arranged along the longitudinal direction of the support surface.
As for claims 7-8, Maier et al. teach that at least one second slit is provided on the support surface, and the second slit intersects the first slit, wherein, the first slit extends in a longitudinal direction of the support surface, and the second slit extends in a lateral direction of the support surface.
As for claim 9, Maier et al. teach that the first slit extends in an oblique direction of the support surface, and the second slit extends in another oblique direction of the support surface by simply turning the cushion in a certain direction.
As for Claim 10, Maier et al. teach that the support body and the buffer portion are integrally formed as a whole (see column 4, lines 1-3, where it reads “FIG. 3 also represents a preferred embodiment of support element 40, comprising an integral arrangement of adjacent protrusions 42.”).
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KAWANO (CN 113492739 A) in view of Maier et al. BUFF (U.S. Patent No. 3,512,190).
PNG
media_image6.png
150
260
media_image6.png
Greyscale
As for claim 1, Buff teaches a support structure, wherein the support structure comprises:
a support body 1; and
at least one buffer portion, provided within the support body, wherein the buffer portion comprises a plurality of buffer blocks 3 provided adjacent to each other;
wherein at least one first slit is provided on a support surface of the buffer portion, the first slit divides the buffer portion into the plurality of the buffer blocks, and the plurality of the buffer blocks are connected to each other at least one position of the buffer portion other than the support surface.
As for claims 2-3, BUFF teaches a plurality of the buffer blocks are connected to each other at least at a back surface of the buffer portion opposite the support surface; wherein, the first slit penetrates a back surface of the buffer portion opposite the support surface, and the buffer blocks are connected to each other at a top surface, a bottom surface, a side surface or periphery of the buffer portion. BUFF also teaches that the adjacent buffer blocks respectively form cross sections facing and in contact with each other through the first slit; wherein,
at least one second slit is provided on the support surface, and the second slit intersects the first slit, Buff teaches that the first slit extends in an oblique direction of the support surface, and the second slit extends in another oblique direction of the support surface by simply turning the cushion in a certain direction.
As for claim 4, Buff teaches that the adjacent buffer blocks 3 respectively form cross sections facing and in contact with each other through the first slit.
As for claim 6, Buff teaches that a plurality of the first slits extend in a longitudinal direction of the support surface and are arranged along a lateral direction of the support surface; or the plurality of the first slits extend in the lateral direction of the support surface and are arranged along the longitudinal direction of the support surface.
As for Claims 7-8, BUFF teaches that the first slit extends in a longitudinal direction of the support surface, and the second slit extends in a lateral direction of the support surface.
As for claim 9, Buff teaches that the first slit extends in an oblique direction of the support surface, and the second slit extends in another oblique direction of the support surface by simply turning the cushion in a certain direction.
Claims 14-15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KAWANO (CN 113492739 A).
KAWANO teaches the buffer portion substantially as claimed including a thickness of the buffer portion at the top surface is less than a thickness of the buffer portion at the bottom surface (see Figures 3B-3C) , the buffer portion having a shape that is similar to the shape defined in claim 14 but does not teach the specific shape that is defined in Claim 14. The shape of the buffer portion is nothing more than a design choice since it depends on the shape of the support body in which the buffer portion is to be inserted and attached. It would have been obvious to make the buffer portion as taught by KAWANO, in the shape of the support body, as taught by the present invention. The specific hardness, as defined in claim 17, again is a design choice that is dependent on the on the manufacturer (see the specification where it reads ‘In addition, impact absorbing buffer 40 adopts the first, second buffer 40A, 40B more than one of the buffer material, so by changing the shape or hardness of the combined buffer material, can be easily set to the desired hardness.”).
As for claim 18, KAWANO teaches that the he buffer portion is made of foam but is silent as to whether or not the support body is made of memory foam, latex or silicone. Since the support body is made of a different material, the material selected or the support body could be any type of material strong enough to support the buffer portion and support a child.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because it teaches structures and concepts similar to those of the present invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rodney B. White whose telephone number is (571)272-6863. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
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 R. 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.
/Rodney B White/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636