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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse on Invention I Claims 9-20, drawn to a mechanical transmission including a housing, and Embodiment I, Figures 3A-7C. is acknowledged. Non-elected claims 1-8 have been withdrawn from further consideration.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information referred to in the IDS filed June 28, 2024 has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings filed June 28, 2024 are approved.
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 9-20 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.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “clevis-like" in line 2 and throughout. This terminology renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "like"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. Similarly note this terminology throughout the claims.
The claims are replete with apparent spelling errors or vague spelling. These errors are so extensive that the claims have been rendered indefinite. Examples are as follows:
In line 2 of claim 9, note “pluraity”.
In line 8 of claim 9, note “leat”.
In line 10 of claim 9, note “extendiing”.
In line 11 of claim 9, note “throught”.
In line 1 of claim 13, note “wehrein”.
In line 2 of claim 17, note “defnining”.
In line 2 of claim 17, note “plurlaity”.
In line 2 of claim 17, note “hokes”.
In line 3 of claim 17, note “comprsiing”.
In line 3 of claim 18, note “comprsing”.
Clarification and/or correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 9, 10 and 16, as best understood with the above cited indefiniteness, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu (US20230172358).
Note a mechanical transmission, comprising: a housing (11) defining a plurality of clevis-like yokes and an internally facing wall corresponding to each clevis-like yoke (see Figures 8 and 9); an elongate axle (22) extending longitudinally from a first end to a second end and across each clevis-like yoke (see Figures 3-5), wherein each respective axle defines a longitudinally extending axis-of-rotation, and wherein at least one of the first end and the second end of each axle is positioned in opposed relation to the internally facing wall, inhibiting longitudinal movement of the axle in at least one longitudinal direction; and a plurality of linkage arms (2), each linkage arm corresponding (see Figures 3-5) to one of the plurality of clevis-like yokes and extending from a proximal geared distal end, wherein each respective axle extends through the proximal geared end of the corresponding linkage arm, pivotably coupling to the proximal geared end within the respective clevis-like yoke, wherein the proximal geared end of each linkage arm matingly engages the proximal geared end of the at least one other of the plurality of linkage arms. Note the marked-up drawings below.
Regarding claim 10, note the housing comprises a unitary body defining the plurality of clevis-like yokes, each clevis-like yoke having a pair of legs with a gap therebetween, each leg in the pair of legs defining a bore, wherein each respective axle extends across the gap from the bore in one of the pair of legs to the bore in the other of the pair of legs. See Figures 3, and 8-9.
Regarding claim 16, note rotation of one of the proximal geared ends urges the matingly engaged proximal geared end of each at least one other of the plurality of linkage arms to rotate. Note as described in ¶ 0043.
PNG
media_image1.png
700
552
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-15 and 17-20 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. A folding seating assembly having a mechanical transmission with a housing and geared arms is shown by each of Chen (US12059079), Garcia (US11986099), and Wang (US11700943).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MILTON NELSON JR whose telephone number is (571)272-6861. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30am-1:30pm.
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.
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.
mn /MILTON NELSON JR/May 1, 2026 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights