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 18/752,323, HEADREST FOR VEHICLE SEAT WITH AIR CELL, filed on 6/24/24.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication # 2017/0253153 to Kapusky et al. in view of US Patent # 6,203,105 to Rhodes, Jr.
Kapusky et al. teaches a head rest for a seat of a vehicle, comprising a body portion (50) and a support portion (36) operably connected to the body portion. Wherein the support portion is configured to be slidably movable along the body portion (through a height adjustment mechanism, 40). The support portion is disposed in front of the body portion. The head rest comprises a driving unit (62, 70, 72,78) coupled to the body portion. The driving unit is configured to slidably move the support portion with respect to the body portion. The body portion is disposed above a backrest portion (24) of the seat and is configured to be raised and lowered relative to the backrest portion. The support portion comprises a center portion (112), a first wing out (114) and a second wing out (the other 114) respectively disposed on opposite side of the center portion. The first wing out is hingedly (128 or 129) coupled to one side of the center portion and the second wing out is hingedly (128 or 129) coupled to another side of the center portion. The headrest comprising an accommodation space between the center portion, the first wing out and the second wing out. Wherein a size of the accommodation space varies by rotation of the first wing out and the second wing out. The headrest comprises a vehicle seat (22) and vehicle (20). A seat for a vehicle comprising a seating portion (26), a backrest portion (24) disposed on one side of the seating portion and a headrest (30) disposed above the backrest portion. The seat comprises a stay (46) connecting the headrest and the backrest portion. Wherein the support portion is configured to slide in a diagonal direction downward and forward simultaneously to be positioned at a neck of an occupant (see figures 28A-28D, 0112, since Kapusky teaches the height adjustment, 40, and the tilt adjustment mechanism, 230, the support portion has the ability of slide in the diagonal direction downward and forward simultaneously to be positioned at a neck of an occupant).
Kapusky et al. teaches the support portion but fails to teach the support portion comprises an air cell and the flow pipe. Rhodes, Jr. teaches the air cell (10) with a flow pipe for supplying air to the air cell (figure 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the air cell with the flow pipe in Kapusky et al.’s support portion as taught by Rhodes, Jr. to provide “strategic to the comfort of the user” (see abstract in Rhodes, Jr’s invention).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 16-18 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding claim 6, the prior arts fail to teach all of the limitations from claims 1 and 5-6, especially with “wherein the headrest further comprises a driving unit disposed within the body portion.” Regarding claim 16, the prior arts fail to teach all of the limitations especially with “wherein a flow pipe supplying air to the air cell is disposed inside the stay.”
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/30/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues Kapusky in view of Rhodes fails to teach the limitation with “the support portion is configured to slide in a diagonal direction downward and forward simultaneously to be positioned at a neck of an occupant.” The examiner disagrees with the applicant because Kapusky teaches two different mechanisms, one with height adjusting mechanism (40) and the other with tilt adjusting mechanism (230) and they have the ability of sliding down in the diagonal direction and forward simultaneously to be positioned at a neck of an occupant (section 0112 in Kapusky’s invention).
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 5/4/26
Prosecution Insights