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 .
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-13, & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newman CA 2311265 C (hereinafter Newman) in view of Sachs et al. US 20150165950 A1 (hereinafter Sachs).
Figure for Newman
PNG
media_image1.png
871
638
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure for Sachs
PNG
media_image2.png
609
658
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re. Cl. 1, Newman discloses a seat assembly (Fig. 1, Ref. 10) with a detachable seat element comprising a seat cushion (Fig. 1, Ref. 14) with at least one substantially rigid structural frame element (Fig. 1, Ref. 20) operably configured to couple with a cockpit framework frame assembly (Pg. 3, Ln. 17-22), with an upper surface configured to support a user (See Fig. 2), a bottom surface opposing the upper surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2), a seat thickness separating the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2), with a rear surface (Fig. 2, Ref. 28) interposed between the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion, and with a front surface interposed between the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2), opposing the rear surface of the seat cushion, and defining a cutout channel (See Fig. 2) spanning the seat thickness and spanning rearwardly toward the rear surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2); a seat element (Fig. 2, Ref. 36) selectively removably coupled to the seat cushion and disposed within the cutout channel (See Figs. 1-2); and a back cushion (Fig. 1, Ref. 22) coupled to the seat cushion in an erect orientation relative to the upper surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 1).
Re. Cl. 1, Newman fails to disclose at least one fastener, a seat cushion formed with a deformably resilient material, and a seat element formed with a deformably resilient material. Sachs teaches a seat assembly (Fig. 10, Ref. 20) with a detachable seat element comprising a seat cushion (Fig. 10, Ref. 30), formed with a deformably resilient material (Para. 0029), with an upper surface configured to support a user (See Fig. 8), a bottom surface opposing the upper surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 8), a seat thickness separating the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion (See Fig. 8), with a rear surface interposed between the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion (See Fig. 8), and with a front surface interposed between the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion (See Fig. 8), opposing the rear surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 8), and defining a cutout channel spanning the seat thickness and spanning rearwardly toward the rear surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 8); a seat element (Fig. 8, Ref. 34) selectively removably coupled to the seat cushion (Para. 0027) with at least one fastener (Fig. 8, Ref. 32), formed with a deformably resilient material (Para. 0029), and disposed within the cutout channel (See Fig. 8); and a back cushion (Fig. 10, Ref. 136, 138) coupled to the seat cushion in an erect orientation relative to the upper surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Newman with Sachs's teaching of at least one fastener, a seat cushion formed with a deformably resilient material and a seat element formed with a deformably resilient material. Doing so would more securely attach the seat element to the seat cushion with the fastener compared to the present press-fit method, and provide a comfortable cushion that contours to a user’s body when the seat is in use and returns to its original shape when not in use.
Re. Cl. 2, Newman fails to disclose that the seat element, the seat cushion, and back cushion are formed with a foam body. Sachs teaches that the seat element, the seat cushion, and back cushion are formed with a foam body (Para. 0029). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Newman with Sachs's teaching of a seat element, seat cushion, and back cushion formed with a foam body. Doing so provides a comfortable user experience by padding the seat assembly with cushioning that conforms to the user’s profile and supports the user when in the seat.
Re. Cl. 3, Newman discloses the front surface defining the cutout channel further comprising two cutout sidewalls opposing one another (See Fig. 2).
Re. Cl. 4, Newman discloses the front surface defining the cutout channel further comprising a rear cutout wall interposed between the two cutout sidewalls (See Fig. 2).
Re. Cl. 5, Newman fails to disclose that the seat element is selectively removably coupled to the rear cutout wall with a hook-and-loop fastener coupled to both the seat element and the rear cutout wall. Sachs teaches that the seat element (Fig. 8, Ref. 34) is selectively removably coupled to seat assembly with a hook-and-loop fastener (Fig. 8, Ref. 32; Para. 0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Newman with Sachs's teaching of a hook-and-loop fastener by applying the fastener on the rear cutout wall. Doing so creates a singular rearward coupling point between the seat element and the seat cushion, rather than a plurality of supports along the frame assembly, which allows the user to easily attach and quickly remove the seat element from the front rather than aligning multiple coupling points from above.
Re. Cl. 6, Newman fails to disclose a hook-and-loop fastener that substantially spans the seat thickness. Sachs teaches a hook-and-loop fastener (Fig. 8, Ref. 32; Para. 0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Newman with Sachs's teaching of a hook-and-loop fastener along the seat thickness of Newman. Doing so results in a broadened fastener contact surface area for a more secure attachment between the seat element and seat cushion.
Re. Cl. 7, Newman fails to disclose that the seat element is selectively removably coupled to the rear cutout wall with a hook-and-loop fastener coupled to both the seat element and the rear cutout wall. Sachs teaches that the seat element (Fig. 8, Ref. 34) is selectively removably coupled to seat assembly with a hook-and-loop fastener (Fig. 8, Ref. 32; Para. 0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Newman with Sachs's teaching of a hook-and-loop fastener by applying the fastener on the rear cutout wall. Doing so allows a user to detachably attach the seat element to the seat cushion at a coupling point that is secure enough to keep the seat element in the desired position when attached and easily remove the seat element as desired.
Re. Cl. 8, Newman fails to disclose a hook-and-loop fastener that substantially spans the seat thickness. Sachs teaches a hook-and-loop fastener (Fig. 8, Ref. 32; Para. 0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Newman with Sachs's teaching of a hook-and-loop fastener along the seat thickness of Newman. Doing so creates a more secure attachment between the seat element and seat cushion by broadening the fastener contact surface area.
Re. Cl. 9, Newman discloses the seat element substantially spans the seat thickness (See Fig. 3).
Re. Cl. 10, Newman discloses the seat element is of a shape and a size conforming to a shape and a size of the cutout channel (See Fig. 2).
Re. Cl. 11, Newman discloses the seat element substantially spans the seat thickness (See Fig. 3).
Re. Cl. 12, Newman discloses the seat element is of a shape and a size conforming to a shape and a size of the cutout channel (See Fig. 2).
Re. Cl. 13, Newman discloses the cutout channel is formed in a U-shape or V-shape (See Fig. 2).
Re. Cl. 20, Newman discloses a seat assembly (Fig. 1, Ref. 10) with a detachable seat element comprising a seat cushion (Fig. 1, Ref. 14) with at least one substantially rigid structural frame element (Fig. 1, Ref. 20) operably configured to couple with a cockpit framework frame assembly (Pg. 3, Ln. 17-22), with an upper surface configured to support a user (See Fig. 2), a bottom surface opposing the upper surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2), a seat thickness separating the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2), with a rear surface (Fig. 2, Ref. 28) interposed between the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion, and with a front surface interposed between the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2), opposing the rear surface of the seat cushion, and defining a cutout channel centrally defined on the seat cushion (See Fig. 2), spanning the seat thickness and spanning rearwardly toward the rear surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2); a seat element (Fig. 2, Ref. 36) selectively removably coupled to the seat cushion and disposed within the cutout channel (See Fig. 2), substantially spanning the seat thickness, of a shape conforming to a shape of the cutout channel, of a size slightly greater than a size of the cutout channel, thereby retaining the seat element within the cutout channel (See Fig. 1), and a back cushion (Fig. 1, Ref. 22) coupled to the seat cushion in an erect orientation relative to the upper surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 1).
Re. Cl. 20, Newman fails to disclose at least one fastener, a seat cushion formed with a deformably resilient material and a seat element formed with a deformably resilient material. Sachs teaches a fastening means configured to selectively removably couple the seat element with the seat cushion (Fig. 8, Ref. 32), a seat cushion formed with a deformably resilient material (Para. 0029), and a seat element formed with a deformably resilient material (Para. 0029). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Newman with Sachs's teaching of at least one fastener, a seat cushion formed with a deformably resilient material, and a seat element formed with a deformably resilient material. Doing so
Doing so would more securely attach the seat element to the seat cushion with the fastener compared to the friction-fit method used in Newman, and provide a comfortable cushion that conforms to a user’s body when in use.
Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newman in view of Sachs as applied to claims 1-13, & 20 above, and in further view of Schrey US 20190023163 A1 (hereinafter Schrey).
Re. Cl. 14, Newman fails to disclose a foam body or cover. Sachs discloses a foam seat element body (Fig. 3, Ref. 60) and a cover encapsulating the foam seat element body (Fig. 3, Ref. 66).
Re. Cl. 14, Newman as modified by Sachs fails to disclose the cover operably configured to be selectively opened and closed with at least one fastener. Schrey teaches a cover encapsulating the seat (Fig. 1, Ref. 1), where the cover is operably configured to be selectively opened and closed with at least one fastener (Fig. 4b, Ref. 11; Para. 0064). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Sachs's invention with Schrey's teachings of a cover operably configured to be selectively opened and closed with at least one fastener. Doing so creates a seat cover that “can be removed as quickly as possible, with no major technological effort, and then conveyed to the subsequent procedures,” such as cleaning or customization (Para. 0063).
Re. Cl. 15, Newman fails to disclose that the foam seat element body is of a monolithic configuration and formed without any structural frame or support elements. Sachs teaches the foam seat element body is of a monolithic configuration and formed without any structural frame or support elements (Para. 0029). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Newman with Sach’s teachings of a monolithic foam seat element configuration formed without any structural frame or support elements. Doing so simplifies the manufacturing process by limiting fabrication to only one material.
Re. Cl. 16, Newman discloses that the cutout channel is centrally defined on the seat cushion (See Fig. 2).
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Newman in view of Sachs as applied to claims 1-13, & 20 above, and in further view of Oswald US 7662042 B2 (hereinafter Oswald).
Re. Cl. 17, Newman discloses an assembly for a seat (Fig. 1, Ref. 10) with a detachable seat element comprising a seat cushion (Fig. 1, Ref. 14) with at least one structural frame element (Fig. 1, Ref. 20) operably configured to couple with a cockpit framework frame assembly (Pg. 3, Ln. 17-22), with an upper surface configured to support a user (See Fig. 2), a bottom surface opposing the upper surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2), a seat thickness separating the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2), with a rear surface (Fig. 2, Ref. 28) interposed between the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion, and with a front surface interposed between the upper and bottom surfaces of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2), opposing the rear surface of the seat cushion, and defining a cutout channel centrally defined on the seat cushion (See Fig. 2), spanning the seat thickness and spanning rearwardly toward the rear surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 2); a seat element (Fig. 2, Ref. 36) disposed within the cutout channel (See Fig. 2), and a back cushion (Fig. 1, Ref. 22) coupled to the seat cushion in an erect orientation relative to the upper surface of the seat cushion (See Fig. 1).
Re. Cl. 17, Newman fails to disclose at least one fastener, a seat cushion formed with a deformably resilient material, and a seat element formed with a deformably resilient material. Sachs teaches a fastening means configured to selectively removably couple the seat element with the seat cushion (Fig. 8, Ref. 32), a seat cushion formed with a deformably resilient material (Para. 0029), and a seat element formed with a deformably resilient material (Para. 0029). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Newman with Sachs's teaching of at least one fastener, a seat cushion formed with a deformably resilient material, and a seat element formed with a deformably resilient material. Doing so would securely attach the seat element to the seat cushion with a fastener, as opposed to the current interference-fit method, and pads the seat assembly with cushioning that that contours to a user’s body when in use and returns to its original shape when not in use.
Re. Cl. 17, Newman as modified by Sachs fails to disclose at least one structural frame element operably configured to couple with a gaming frame cockpit framework assembly. Oswald teaches a simulation seat assembly (Fig. 6, Ref. 100) comprising a seat (Fig. 6, Ref. 102) and a gaming frame cockpit framework assembly (Fig. 6, Ref. 104), the seat further comprising at least one structural frame element (Fig. 6, Ref. 132 & 134) operably configured to couple with the framework assembly (Col. 3, Ln. 34-37). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sachs’s invention with Oswald's teaching of at least one structural frame element operably configured to couple with a gaming frame cockpit framework assembly. Doing so would allow a user to attach the modified seating assembly to a simulation cockpit in user-customizable simulation environments that closely mimic the experience of driving or flying in the modified seat assembly.
Re. Cl. 18, Newman fails to disclose a deformably resilient material. Sachs teaches that the seat element is formed with a deformably resilient material (Para. 0029). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Newman with Sachs's teaching of a seat element formed with a deformably resilient material. Doing so provides a comfortable cushion that contours to a user’s body when the seat is in use and returns to its original shape when not in use.
Re. Cl. 19, Newman fails to disclose that the seat element body is formed without any structural frame or support elements. Sachs teaches the seat element body is formed without any structural frame or support elements (Para. 0029). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Newman with Sachs's teaching of a seat element body formed without any structural frame or support elements. Doing so simplifies the manufacturing process with less material use and streamlined fabrication.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. del Puerto et al. US 10196002 B1, Berno US 9896010 B2, Jaziri US 8899169 B1, Minke US 7857311 B2, Severinski et al. US 6386629 B1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GELILA S KEBEDE whose telephone number is (571)270-0369. The examiner can normally be reached 6:00AM - 2:00PM, Mon - Thurs.
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.
/GELILA KEBEDE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3632
/TERRELL L MCKINNON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights