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 § 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) 1-5, 7, 13, 14-15, 138, 139, 141 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bodeen (3,974,827).
Regarding claim 1, Bodeen discloses a support member comprising: cushioning material providing a seat support surface F sized to support an occupant with a weakened region (col. 2, lines 60-56 teaches a U-shaped cut and fold line); and the weakened region providing a movable portion 4 translatable relative to the seat support surface from a local pressure effect imparted upon a rear surface of the movable portion from a local pressure device C provided on the rear surface of the cushioning material, which is spaced apart from the seat support surface.
Regarding claim 2, Bodeen discloses the weakened region (U-shaped cut and fold line) extends around a majority of a perimeter of the movable portion 4.
Regarding claim 3, Bodeen discloses the weakened region (U-shaped cut and fold line) extends around a perimeter of the movable portion 4.
Regarding claim 4, Bodeen discloses the weakened region is further defined as a recess (U-shaped cut and fold line) formed into the support member to partially separate the movable portion from the seat support surface.
Regarding claim 5, Bodeen discloses the recess (U-shaped cut and fold line) is formed through the support member.
Regarding claim 7, Bodeen discloses the weakened region is further defined as a plurality of recesses (U-shaped cut) formed in the support member to partially separate the movable portion 4 from a remainder of the support member.
Regarding claim 13, Bodeen discloses a local pressure assembly E, D, C comprising: a local pressure device C; and the support member according to claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Bodeen discloses the local pressure device further comprises an inflatable air bladder C.
Regarding claim 15, Bodeen discloses a seat assembly (figures 1 and 2) comprising: a seat frame; the support member according to claim 1; local pressure device being provided on the seat frame H; and wherein the support member is installed upon the seat frame with the local pressure device aligned with the movable portion.
Regarding claim 138, Bodeen discloses the movable portion 4 comprises a portion of cushioning material that is translatable due to the weakened region being formed between the movable portion and a remainder of the cushioning material.
Regarding claim 139, Bodeen discloses the weakened region (the U-shaped cut) partially separates the movable portion relative to the remainder of the cushioning material allowing translation of the movable portion while maintaining a connection of the movable portion to the cushioning material.
Regarding claim 141, Bodeen discloses the weakened region comprises a plurality of slots (U-shaped cut) formed through the seat support surface and extending around a majority of a perimeter of the movable portion, and wherein the plurality of slots define a plurality of tethers between the movable portion and a remainder of the seat support surface.
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 (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 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) 6, 8, 9, 142 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bodeen in view of Mauffrey et al. (12,544,297).
Regarding claim 6, Mauffrey discloses the recess 11 is formed to a blind depth with a tether in the weakened region.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Mauffrey et al. and use the recess with blind depth for the fold line in the invention of Bodeen because it is simple, strong and cost effective.
Regarding claim 8, Mauffrey et al. disclose at least one tether (the recess 11 creates a tether) connecting the movable portion and the seat support surface.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Mauffrey et al. and use the recess with blind depth for the fold line in the invention of Bodeen because it is simple, strong and cost effective.
Regarding claim 9, Mauffrey et al. disclose the seat support surface has a first thickness, and the at least one tether has a second thickness that is less than the first thickness (see figures 3 and 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Mauffrey et al. and use the recess with blind depth for the fold line in the invention of Bodeen because it is simple, strong and cost effective.
Regarding claim 142, Mauffrey et al. disclose the weakened region comprises a plurality of recesses formed in the rear surface of the cushioning material, wherein each recess is formed to a blind depth so that an associated tether has a reduced thickness relative to the movable portion (see figures 3 and 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Mauffrey et al. and use the recess with blind depth for the fold line in the invention of Bodeen because it is simple, strong and cost effective.
Claim(s) 11, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bodeen in view of Palacio (US 2022/0378651).
Regarding claim 11, Palacio discloses the movable portion 115 is strengthened relative to the seat support surface to distribute the local pressure effect imparted upon the strengthened portion from the local pressure device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Palacio and use stronger material for the moveable portion in the invention of Bodeen in order to prevent any damages.
Regarding claim 12, Palacio discloses the support member 113 is formed with a first firmness and the movable portion 115 is formed with a second firmness that is greater than the first firmness.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Palacio and use stronger material for the moveable portion in the invention of Bodeen in order to prevent any damages.
Regarding claim 140, Palacio discloses the movable portion 115 is comprised of a material that is different from the cushioning material 113.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Palacio and use stronger material for the moveable portion in the invention of Bodeen in order to prevent any damages.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is 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.
Regarding claim 10, Bodeen fails to disclose the at least one tether is sized to tear during initial operation to permit untethered translation of the movable portion. No other prior art references in the record whether taken alone or in combination can solve these dissimilarities.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED A ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-7768. The examiner can normally be reached 10am-10pm.
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, David Dunn can be reached at 5712726670. 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.
/SYED A ISLAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights