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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 – 20 have been examined.
Double Patenting
Claims 1 – 4, 6 – 16, and 18 – 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 – 7, 9 – 13, and 19 – 21 of U.S. Patent No. 12,576,900. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1 – 4, 6 – 7, 9 – 13, and 19 – 21 of the ‘900 patent contain all of the limitations recited in the listed current claims.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 6 – 8, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Driessen (2010/0001492), cited by Applicant. In regard to claim 1, Driessen discloses a child carrier comprising a frame or body defining an opening that is configured to support a child therein (Fig. 2, item 2), a handle coupled to the frame or body, the handle configured to transition between an extended position and a retracted position relative to the frame or body, and configured to rotate relative to the frame or body between a plurality of rotational positions (Figs. 1 and 4, items 40), a rotation lock configured to move between an unlocked position and a locked position to selectively lock the handle in each of the rotational positions (Fig. 7A, item 68), and a rotation stop configured to block the movement of the rotation lock (Fig. 7a, item 294).
In regard to claim 6, Driessen discloses wherein the rotation lock has a rotation latch that is configured to move along an axis of the handle when the rotation lock moved between the unlocked and locked positions (Fig. 7A, tip/end of item 294).
In regard to claim 7, Driessen discloses wherein the handle rotation lock comprises a locking plate, the rotation latch engages the locking plate to lock the handle in each of the plurality of rotational positions, and the rotation latch disengages from the locking plate to permit the handle to rotate relative to the frame or body (Fig. 7A, item 249).
In regard to claim 8, Driessen discloses wherein the locking plate defines a plurality of grooves or projections, and the rotation latch defines at least one projection or groove that is configured to selectively engage the grooves or projections to selectively lock the handle in each of the different rotational positions (Fig. 7A, items 291, 292, and 293).
In regard to claim 20, Driessen discloses wherein the handle has a first side bar, a second side bar, and a grab bar that extends between the first and second side bars (Fig. 2, right, left, and central portions of item 40), and the child carrier comprises first and second hubs that pivotably couple the first and second side bars, respectively, to first and second sides of the seat frame or body (Fig. 2, right and left instances of item 201).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 – 5 and 9 – 19 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 and if the Double Patenting rejection is overcome.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Driessen (2010/0001492) discloses a child carrier similar to the instant invention; however Driessen, either alone or in combination, neither discloses nor suggests a child carrier wherein (in regard to claim 2) movement of the handle from the extended position towards the retracted position causes the handle rotation stop to move to the released position, (in regard to claim 9) wherein the rotation latch defines a slot that receives the pivot such that the pivot translates within the slot as the rotation latch transitions between the locked position and the unlocked position, and (in regard to claim 12) an extension lock configured to move between a locked position and an unlocked position to selectively lock the handle in the retracted and extended positions and an extension stop that is configured to block movement of the handle. These limitations, in combination with each and every other independent claim limitation, are not shown in the currently cited prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Yoshie et al. (7,090,239) disclose a stroller;
Yoshie et al. (7,513,512) disclose a stroller;
Saville et al. (7,694,996) disclose a foldable and height adjustable stroller;
Yeh et al. (8,491,000) disclose a folding stroller;
Pos (9,725,106) discloses a child push chair frame;
Zhang (9,834,243) discloses a collapsible baby carriage;
Akura et al. (CN1344647) disclose a baby carriage.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN DANIEL WALTERS whose telephone number is (571)272-8269. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am - 5 pm (PT).
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, Allen Shriver can be reached at 303.297.4337. 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.
/JOHN D WALTERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights