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, 2, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carabalona (US Pat No 10,323,680).
Regarding claim1, Carabalona discloses a seat cable module for operating a seat by transmitting a tensile force with respect to a first cable to a second cable, the seat cable module comprising:
a joint piece (140) that fixes an end portion of the first cable and an end portion of the second cable, pulls the second cable by moving by the tensile force, and transmits the tensile force to the second cable; and
a module plate (110) in which a housing portion (112) is formed, the housing portion movably housing the joint piece in a direction in which the tensile force acts, wherein
the housing portion opens so as to be capable of housing the joint piece in a direction perpendicular to a surface of the module plate (as shown in figures 2A and 5).
*note: the preamble relating to the seat and operation thereof is considered intended use.
Regarding claim 2, Carabalona discloses a cover (134) that covers the joint piece housed in the housing portion, wherein the cover includes a claw portion that engages with the module plate (via at least 136).
Regarding claim 5, Carabalona discloses a first cable (50a) and second cable (50b).
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) 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carabalona.
Regarding claim 3, it is noted that Carabalona discloses holes being position on the cover and not the module plate. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the module plate to includes the disclosed hole from the cover and the cover to include the protrusion, such that the the claw portion engages with a side surface of the hole since a simple rearrangement of parts (e.g. reversing the claw/hole of Carabalona). Such a rearrangement is requires routine skill in the art and would function the same as the current practice.
Regarding claim 4, Carabalona fails to disclose the claw portion is formed on two side surfaces of the cover, the two side surfaces facing each other. However, as noted by Carabalona, the cover could be hinged as disclosed or provided separate (see column 4, lines 60-67). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the device taught by Carabalona such that a separate cover is provide with attachment means on both sides of the cover. Such a modification would be obvious in view of the disclosure such that the attachment means is provided on both sides (since making it separate would require a means to attach on the currently taught hinged side.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cited art discloses features related to the applicant’s claimed invention and is believed to be relevant to the prosecution of this application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patrick Cicchino whose telephone number is (571)270-1954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM to 5PM.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at (571)270-3614. 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.
/Patrick Cicchino/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights