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
Examiner’s Comments
The Examiner notes that the office action below may reference support found in the cited prior art by indicating element numbers, figures or by pointing out a specific paragraph (PAR) number in which support can be found. The PAR number referenced corresponds to paragraph number beginning in the "Detailed Description" of the disclosure unless otherwise noted. The pending claims are 1-20.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In claims 1 and 10, the terminology “…matching with a mounting position arranged in a vehicle body” is indefinite because it is not clear what applicant is claiming or what limitations are encompassed by the claim. Specifically, the claimed mounting base is not claimed in combination with a vehicle body and it is not clear what structural limits are associated with a “vehicle body”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims dependent upon the claims rejected above are rejected for the above reasons as they do not remedy deficiency.
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 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 of this title, 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 should not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 10, 16, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 204749911 to Sun Dazhi et al.
As discussed above and with regard to claims 1, 10, Sun Dazhi et al disclose the invention substantially as claimed (PAR 11-25 of description, figs. 1-5) including the cushion frame 1 (i.e. the body), the mounting part of the cushion frame 1 and the locking mechanism 2 (the connecting part of the vehicle body), which together form the mounting base; the locking mechanism 2 is matched with the supporting feet (i.e. the installation positions) arranged on the vehicle body; Fig. 2 discloses that the cushion frame 1 is provided with an accommodating cavity; the locking mechanism 2 can be locked with the locking rod of the leg, so the locking mechanism 2 is provided with a connecting structure; the locking mechanism 2 can rotate and fold around the mounting shaft 51, so that the connecting structure is rotatably connected with the cushion frame 1 and can be accommodated in the accommodating cavity. Sun Dazhi et al does not disclose the mounting base includes after-loading product mounting parts arranged at two opposite sides of the body; however, it is common and well-known in the art to install the after-loaded products by arranging the mounting parts on the opposite sides of the mounting base body. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the clamed invention to arrange the mounting parts on opposite sides of the base body. A person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the purpose of ease of installation and better securement of the aftermarket item.
With regard to claims 2, 16, Sun Dazhi et al (Fig. 1) discloses that the connecting structure comprises a locking hook corresponding to the accommodating cavity, and the locking hook is rotatably connected with the seat cushion frame 1 and can be accommodated in the accommodating cavity of vehicle, including mounting base. Additionally, the linkage rod is connected with the lock hook to drive the lock hook to rotate.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-9, 11-15, 17-20, are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but appear to be allowable if rewritten in independent form including 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. Refer to attachment (PTO-892) for notice of references cited and recommended for consideration based on their disclosure of limitations of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brian Nash whose telephone number is 571-272-4465. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nathan Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. The official fax number for this Group is: 571-273-8300; Inventor Assistance Center is 800-786-9199.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system; see www.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/BRIAN D NASH/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734
9/14/2026
Prosecution Insights