August 1, 2026
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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments filed 07/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
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.
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,091,064 B2) in view of Takeuchi et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,132,761 B2).
PNG
media_image1.png
212
284
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim et al. teaches the structure substantially as claimed including a seat frame for a vehicle, the seat frame comprising: a pair of side arms 34 of a bottom frame that supports buttocks and thighs of an occupant from below; a pair of cross members 36, 40 that connect front sections and rear sections of the side arms, respectively; at least two S-springs 50 that are stretched between the cross members or between the side arms; a retention member 54 that is attached to the S-springs between the S-springs (show in in Fig. 2 but not labeled) but does not teach a tensible wire that is suspended between the retention member and one of the cross members or between the retention member and one of the side arms.
PNG
media_image2.png
292
474
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Takeuchi et al. teach the concept of including a tensible wire that is capable of being suspended between the retention member and one of the cross members or between the retention member and one of the side arms to be old; wherein the tensible wire is capable of being swingably attached at an attachment position of one end of the tensible wire to the retention member, and wherein the tensible wire is capable of being swingably attached at an attachment position of another end of the tensible wire to the one of the cross members or the one of the side arms, as defined in claim 6. It would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art to modify the seat frame, as taught by Kim et al., to include a tensible wire suspended between the retention member and one of the cross members or between the retention member and one of the side arms, as taught by Takeuchi et al., since it would partially restrict an extensional deformation of the S springs so that when a large load is applied to the S spring s and the S springs are largely bent, the S springs do not drop out from the rear cross member.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that “…..Takeuchi merely discloses a restriction member 13 that partially restricts extensional deformation of the rear end portion of each S- spring 6 in the vehicle front-back direction (see the abstract, column 1, lines 63-67, and column 3, lines 30-38 of Takeuchi), thereby preventing the S-spring 6 from becoming detached even when it undergoes significant deformation due to an excessive load (see column S, lines 15-18 and lines 38-40 of Takeuchi). The restriction member 13 of Takeuchi is attached to each individual S-spring. Takeuchi neither discloses nor suggests attaching a retention member between adjacent S- springs or suspending a tensible wire between the retention member and the cross member (or the side arm), as required by claim 1, to suppress deformation that would otherwise cause adjacent S-springs to move away from one another. Accordingly, Takeuchi fails to provide for the deficiency of Kim regarding the features of the tensible wire recited in claim 1. The Office Action does not identify, and Applicant is unaware of, any teaching, suggestion, or reason that would have motivated a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kim in view of Takeuchi to arrive at the claimed invention. Therefore, claim 1 is not obvious over the prior art of record.”
However, in the specification of the present invention, Applicant explains that “…..the excessive downward displacement of the S-springs 7 in the case of the above-mentioned load concentration made by one knee should be restricted. For this reason, an excessive downward displacement restriction mechanism is provided in the present embodiment. The excessive downward displacement restriction mechanism is realized by tensible wires 10 suspended between the retention member 8 and the rear member 3 or the front pan 5 (as the cross member).”
The Abstract of Takeuchi et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,132,761 B2) reads “Disclosed is a vehicle seat that is capable of changing a property of S springs with a simple configuration and therefore improves a seating property by changing the property of the S spring in response to a physique of a passenger. In regard to a vehicle seat 1 in which S springs 6 are stretched in a seat cushion frame that supports a seat cushion on which the passenger sits, a restriction member 13 that is detachably attached to each of the S springs 6 and partially restricts an extensional deformation of the S springs 6 is provided.”. The “S springs 6”, provided with its respective “restriction member 13” serve as a “tensible wire” and function in the same manner as the “tensible wire”, as described in the specification of the present invention. As shown in Fig. 1, each “S spring 6”, i.e. the tensible wire, is suspended between the “restriction member 13”, i.e. the retention member, and one of the cross members, the “back-side shaft 5”
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rodney B. White whose telephone number is (571)272-6863. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
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 R. Dunn can be reached at (571) 272-6670. 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.
/Rodney B White/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights