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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant filed remarks and amendments on 03/27/2026. Claims 1-5 and 9 were amended, claim 6 was cancelled. Claims 1-5 and 7-9 are presently pending examination.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the claim interpretation under 35 USC 112(f): applicant’s amendments filed 03/27/2026 (hereinafter referred to as the “Remarks”) have been fully considered and they are persuasive. The previously given claim interpretations under 35 USC 112(f) are withdrawn.
Regarding the claim rejections under 35 USC 102 and 103: Applicant's arguments filed 03/27/2026 with respect to Sone et al. (US20090039812A1) in view of Nathan et al. (US7145263B2) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, which has been amended, applicant argues that, “Sone does not disclose or teach at least the control circuit configured ‘to perform a rotation inverting control in response to the control circuit having continuously detected the movable portion in its movement interrupted state for a first preset time period,’ as recited in claim 1 in the claimed combination.”
“Sone also discloses, in the Abstract, ‘Jamming by a backrest is detected by judging whether the value of a period of one pulse P1 and a period of the next pulse P2 (P2/P1) integrated for 150 times (integrated value: 150) exceed a specified threshold (160) or not.’ … However, Sone does not disclose or teach that the stop and inverse rotation of the motor is performed after the jamming is continuously detected for a certain period of time. As noted above, Sone only discloses that when jamming is detected, the motor 46c is stopped immediately and rotation is inverted.”.
However, this argument is not persuasive, Sone teaches detection of a movement-interrupted (jamming) state of the movable portion (backrest) based on a condition that continues over a measured period, followed by inversion of motor rotation in response to that continuous detection.
Sone discloses (“Jamming by a backrest is detected by judging whether the value of a period of one pulse P1 and a period of the next pulse P2 (P2 / P1) integrated for 150 times (integrated value: 150) exceeds a specified threshold (160) or not.”[Abstract]
Sone further discloses the continuous nature of the detection:
“the ratio (change amount) of one pulse period and the next pulse period is integrated for 150 pulses (150 if there is no change in period) is compared with an intermediate value (threshold 160) between the maximum value of causing warp and the value of causing jamming, and when the integrated value exceeds the threshold, it is regarded as occurrence of jamming, and … raising of the backrest is stopped, and the motor is rotated reversely, and the backrest is inclined to the tilting side, and jamming is cleared.”[0066]
And:
“the change amount of 150 pulse periods are integrated according to formula 1. A = P2 / P1 + P3 / P2 + . . . Pn+1 / Pn … the integrated value of change amounts of 150 pulses from P1 to P150, the integrated value of change amounts of 150 pulses from P2 to P151, the integrated value of change amounts of 150 pulses from P3 to P152, and so forth are judged to exceed a specified threshold (for example, 160) or not, and jamming is detected.”[0063-0064]
The flowchart description (FIG. 6) confirms the response to the continuous detection:
“When the switch SW1 is turned on (Yes at S12), the motor 46c is rotated normally, and the backrest is raised (S14). The motor speed is monitored by a pulse signal from the rotation detector 64 … and jamming is detected (S16).” [0060] and “if jamming occurs while raising the backrest (Yes at S16), the motor 46c is stopped immediately (S18), and rotation is inverted (S22), and the backrest is tilted again.”[0061]).
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.
Claim 1, 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sone et al. (US20090039812A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sone discloses a vehicle seat configured to be mounted to a vehicle, the vehicle seat comprising:
an electric motor configured to generate a driving force (“The motor unit 46 includes a motor gear 46b and a motor 46c” [0045]);
a movable portion including at least one of a seat body or a seatback, the movable portion being configured to receive the driving force from the electric motor to thereby move in a direction corresponding to a rotation direction of the electric motor (“the backrest 12” [0035]; “When the sector gear 44 rotates, the bump 26 of the backrest side bracket contacting with the notch 44a of the sector gear also rotates, and the backrest side bracket 21 (backrest 12) rotates (returns) to a backward tilting direction.” [0053]);
an operation switch configured (i) to be manually operated by a user and (ii) to output an ON signal in response to the operation switch being manually operated (“A switch SW1 is for operating the rotating device 4. The switch SW1 is installed near the driver’s seat apart from the vehicle seat 1, and is means for remote control of the rotating device 4.” [0055]; “When the switch SW1 is turned on (Yes at S12)” [0060]);
a control circuit configured: to rotate the electric motor in a first rotation direction in response to the operation switch outputting the ON signal (“the motor 46c is rotated normally, and the backrest is raised (S14).” [0060]);
to detect the movable portion in its movement interrupted state at least based on a condition continuing for a preset detected period in which (i) the operation switch outputting the ON signal and (ii) a rotation of the electric motor being stopped (“When the switch SW1 is turned on (Yes at S12), the motor 46 c is rotated normally, and the backrest is raised (S14). The motor speed is monitored by a pulse signal from the rotation detector 64 shown in FIG. 5, and the change rate of a pulse period is judged to be under a specified value or not described specifically below, and jamming is detected (S16).” [0060];
“the ratio (change amount) of one pulse period and the next pulse period is integrated for 150 pulses (150 if there is no change in period) is compared with an intermediate value (threshold 160) between the maximum value of causing warp and the value of causing jamming, and when the integrated value exceeds the threshold, it is regarded as occurrence of jamming, and … raising of the backrest is stopped, and the motor is rotated reversely, and the backrest is inclined to the tilting side, and jamming is cleared.”[0066];
“the change amount of 150 pulse periods are integrated according to formula 1. A = P2 / P1 + P3 / P2 + . . . Pn+1 / Pn … the integrated value of change amounts of 150 pulses from P1 to P150, the integrated value of change amounts of 150 pulses from P2 to P151, the integrated value of change amounts of 150 pulses from P3 to P152, and so forth are judged to exceed a specified threshold (for example, 160) or not, and jamming is detected.”[0063-0064]).
“When jamming occurs, the load becomes higher gradually, and the pulse period becomes longer gradually.” [0014]);
and to perform a rotation inverting control in response to the control circuit having continuously detected the movable portion in its movement interrupted state for a first preset time period, the movable portion in its movement interrupted state being unable to move in the direction corresponding to the first rotation direction of the electric motor, the rotation inverting control being configured for the control circuit to rotate the electric motor in a second rotation direction opposite to the first rotation direction (“During normal rotation of the motor 46c, if jamming occurs while raising the backrest (Yes at S16), the motor 46c is stopped immediately (S18), and rotation is inverted (S22), and the backrest is tilted again.” [0061];
“jamming by the movable part by judging whether the value of a period of one pulse P1 and a period of the next pulse P2 (P2/P1) integrated for 150 times (integrated value: 150) exceeds a specified threshold (160) or not.” [Abstract];
“the ratio (change amount) of one pulse period and the next pulse period is integrated for 150 pulses (150 if there is no change in period) is compared with an intermediate value (threshold 160) between the maximum value of causing warp and the value of causing jamming, and when the integrated value exceeds the threshold, it is regarded as occurrence of jamming, and … raising of the backrest is stopped, and the motor is rotated reversely, and the backrest is inclined to the tilting side, and jamming is cleared.”[0066];
“the change amount of 150 pulse periods are integrated according to formula 1. A = P2 / P1 + P3 / P2 + . . . Pn+1 / Pn … the integrated value of change amounts of 150 pulses from P1 to P150, the integrated value of change amounts of 150 pulses from P2 to P151, the integrated value of change amounts of 150 pulses from P3 to P152, and so forth are judged to exceed a specified threshold (for example, 160) or not, and jamming is detected.”[0063-0064]).
Regarding claim 4, Sone discloses the vehicle seat according to claim 1, wherein: the movable portion is a seatback configured (i) to support an occupant’s back and (ii) to tilt with respect to a front-rear axis of the vehicle seat corresponding to the rotation direction of the electric motor; and the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the seatback tilts backward of the vehicle seat (“the movable part is a backrest of a vehicle seat disposed so as to contact with other members” [0023]; “the backrest side bracket 21 (backrest 12) rotates (returns) to a backward tilting direction.” [0053]).
Regarding claim 7, Sone discloses the vehicle seat according to claim 1, further comprising a rotation sensor configured to output a pulse signal in association with the rotation of the electric motor, wherein the movable portion in its movement interrupted state causes the rotation sensor not to output the pulse signal while the operation switch is outputting the ON signal (“a rotation detector for detecting rotation of the motor and outputting a pulse corresponding to the motor speed” [0019]; “When the switch SW1 is turned on (Yes at S12), the motor 46 c is rotated normally, and the backrest is raised (S14). The motor speed is monitored by a pulse signal from the rotation detector 64 shown in FIG. 5, and the change rate of a pulse period is judged to be under a specified value or not described specifically below, and jamming is detected (S16). “ [0060]; “When jamming occurs, the load becomes higher gradually, and the pulse period becomes longer gradually.” [0014]).
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.
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 2, 3, 5, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sone in view of Nathan et al. (US7145263B2), hereinafter referred to as Sone and Nathan respectively.
Regarding claim 2,
Sone does not explicitly disclose wherein the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the vehicle is stationary.
However, Nathan in teaches wherein the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the vehicle is stationary. Nathan, analogous field of vehicle seat adjustment with anti-pinch features, teaches enabling automatic motorized adjustments (including pinch response actions) based on vehicle state sensors indicating conditions consistent with the vehicle being stationary, such as ignition activated and doors closed (“Control module 42 is operatively connected to an ignition sensor 70 and one or more door open sensors 72.” [Col. 5, lines 29-30]; “When ignition sensor 70 is activated and door open sensor 72 detects a closed door condition, control module 42 will activate drive motor 32 to position the headrest 30 to a predefined raised position.” [Col. 5, lines 58-61]; “An ignition sensor is in communication with the control module and monitors 82 the ignition condition of the vehicle.” [Col. 6, lines 54-56]; “At least one door open sensor is provided which is in communication with the control module. The at least one door open sensor monitors 76 the position or condition of the vehicle door to determine if the door is open or closed and transmits an output signal to the control module 84.” [Col. 6, lines 34-39]).
Both Sone and Nathan teach methods for vehicle seat control. However, Nathan explicitly teaches wherein the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the vehicle is stationary.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sone’s control circuit to enable rotation inverting control at least when the vehicle is stationary, as taught by Nathan with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves the safety of vehicle seat control (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Nathan, Col. 6-7]).
Both Olander and Hall teach methods for agricultural apparatus control. However, only Hall explicitly teaches wherein the deposit strategy may comprise executing one or more of a linear deposit mode and a quarter turn deposit mode. Page 6 Application/Control Number: 18/158,538 Art Unit: 3668
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the agricultural apparatus control method of Olander to also include that the deposit strategy may comprise executing one or more of a linear deposit mode and a quarter turn deposit mode, as taught by Hall, with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves operating the agricultural apparatus (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Hall, 0056, 0082]).
Regarding claim 3,
Sone does not explicitly disclose wherein: the movable portion is a seat body configured to move along a front-rear axis of the vehicle seat corresponding to the rotation direction of the electric motor; and the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the seat body moves rearward of the vehicle seat.
However, Nathan teaches wherein: the movable portion is a seat body configured to move along a front-rear axis of the vehicle seat corresponding to the rotation direction of the electric motor; and the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the seat body moves rearward of the vehicle seat (“Load sensor 74 detects fluctuations in drive motor output to detect an obstruction or blockage in the path of the moving headrest 30. Load sensor 74 may include a current, voltage or PWM sensor, which is coupled to the drive motor 32 to prevent passenger injury resulting from a blocking or pinching condition. If a pinch condition is detected by load sensor 74, the control module 42 instructs drive motor 32 to stop positioning of the headrest 30 and may reverse the direction of drive motor 32 to prevent the blocking or pinching conditions. Alternatively, drive motor 32 may include a limit mechanism which will stop the automatic positioning of headrest 30 if a force exerted by the motor exceeds a maximum force tolerance. “ [Col.6 ln 6-16 ]; “Control module 42 transmits a signal to drive motor 32 to adjust the position of headrest 30 proximate to the passenger’s head 48 to prevent injury in case of a vehicle collision.” [Col. 4, lines 49-52]).
Both Sone and Nathan teach methods for vehicle seat control. However, Nathan explicitly teaches the movable portion is a seat body configured to move along a front-rear axis of the vehicle seat corresponding to the rotation direction of the electric motor; and the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the seat body moves rearward of the vehicle seat.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the movable portion is a seat body configured to move along a front-rear axis of the vehicle seat corresponding to the rotation direction of the electric motor; and the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the seat body moves rearward of the vehicle seat, as modified by Nathan with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves the safety of vehicle seat control (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Nathan, Col. 4 & 6]).
Regarding claim 5,
Sone does not explicitly disclose wherein: the movable portion is a seat body configured to move along an up-down axis of the vehicle seat corresponding to the rotation direction of the electric motor; and the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the seat body moves downward of the vehicle seat.
However, Nathan explicitly teaches wherein: the movable portion is a seat body configured to move along an up-down axis of the vehicle seat corresponding to the rotation direction of the electric motor; and the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the seat body moves downward of the vehicle seat. (“control module 42 will activate drive motor 32 to position the headrest 30 to a predefined raised position.” [Col. 5, lines 59-61]; “The control logic of control module 84 monitors the feedback from all connected sensors and generates 86 a control signal instructing the at least one drive motor to adjust 88 the position the headrest based on detected passenger conditions described above between at least one predefined headrest position in proximity to the passenger’s head and a stored position adjacent the upper portion of the seat back” [Col. 6, lines 57-65]). Examiner note: Nathan teaches motorized adjustment with anti-pinch reversal for a headrest (part of the seat body) moving along an up-down axis, such as raising to a predefined position or adjusting vertically proximate to the head.
Both Sone and Nathan teach methods for vehicle seat control. However, Nathan explicitly the movable portion is a seat body configured to move along an up-down axis of the vehicle seat corresponding to the rotation direction of the electric motor; and the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the seat body moves downward of the vehicle seat.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the movable portion is a seat body configured to move along an up-down axis of the vehicle seat corresponding to the rotation direction of the electric motor; and the control circuit is configured to be enabled to perform the rotation inverting control at least when the seat body moves downward of the vehicle seat, as modified by Nathan with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves the safety of vehicle seat control (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Nathan, Col. 5 & 6]).
Regarding claim 8,
Sone does not explicitly disclose wherein the movable portion in its movement interrupted state keeps increasing a conduction current flowing through the electric motor while the operation switch is outputting the ON signal.
However, Nathan teaches wherein the movable portion in its movement interrupted state keeps increasing a conduction current flowing through the electric motor while the operation switch is outputting the ON signal. (“Load sensor 74 detects fluctuations in drive motor output to detect an obstruction or blockage in the path of the moving headrest 30. Load sensor 74 may include a current, voltage or PWM sensor, which is coupled to the drive motor 32 to prevent passenger injury resulting from a blocking or pinching condition.” [Col. 6, lines 7-16]).
Both Sone and Nathan teach methods for vehicle seat control. However, Nathan explicitly teaches wherein the movable portion in its movement interrupted state keeps increasing a conduction current flowing through the electric motor while the operation switch is outputting the ON signal.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sone’s detection to include wherein the movable portion in its movement interrupted state keeps increasing a conduction current flowing through the electric motor while the operation switch is outputting the ON signal, as taught by Nathan with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves the safety of vehicle seat control (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Nathan, Col. 5 & 6]).
Regarding claim 9, Sone discloses the vehicle seat according to claim 1, wherein: the control circuit is configured: to output, to the electric motor, a supply voltage having a first magnitude in response to (i) the operation switch outputting the ON signal and (ii) the control circuit not detecting the movable portion in its movement interrupted state (“the motor 46c is rotated normally” [0060]);
and stopping the motor before inversion upon jamming (“the motor 46c is stopped immediately (S18), and rotation is inverted (S22)” [0061]),
Sone does not explicitly disclose performing a motor load reducing control before performing the rotation inverting control in response to the control circuit detecting the movable portion in its movement interrupted state, the motor load reducing control being configured for the control circuit to output, to the electric motor, the supply voltage having a second magnitude smaller than the first magnitude.
However, Nathan teaches performing a motor load reducing control before performing the rotation inverting control in response to the control circuit detecting the movable portion in its movement interrupted state, the motor load reducing control being configured for the control circuit to output, to the electric motor, the supply voltage having a second magnitude smaller than the first magnitude (“The control module 42 monitors drive motor 32 with a pinch or load sensor 74. Load sensor 74 detects fluctuations in drive motor output to detect an obstruction or blockage in the path of the moving headrest 30. Load sensor 74 may include a current, voltage or PWM sensor, which is coupled to the drive motor 32 to prevent passenger injury resulting from a blocking or pinching condition. If a pinch condition is detected by load sensor 74, the control module 42 instructs drive motor 32 to stop positioning of the headrest 30 and may reverse the direction of drive motor 32 to prevent the blocking or pinching conditions. Alternatively, drive motor 32 may include a limit mechanism which will stop the automatic positioning of headrest 30 if a force exerted by the motor exceeds a maximum force tolerance.” [Col. 6, lines 6-19];
“The control module will instruct the at least one drive motor to stop or reverse the positioning of the headrest if the load/pinch sensor detects a pinch condition.” [Col. 7, lines 2-4];
“At least one load or pinch sensor is in communication with the control module and monitors 90 the activity of the at least one drive motor to detect a pinch condition during the positioning of the headrest. The control module will instruct the at least one drive motor to stop or reverse the positioning of the headrest if the load/pinch sensor detects a pinch condition.” [Col. 6-7, lines 65-67 & 1-4).
Both Sone and Nathan teach methods for vehicle seat control. However, Nathan explicitly teaches performing a motor load reducing control before performing the rotation inverting control in response to the control circuit detecting the movable portion in its movement interrupted state, the motor load reducing control being configured for the control circuit to output, to the electric motor, the supply voltage having a second magnitude smaller than the first magnitude.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sone’s control circuit to perform a motor load reducing control before performing the rotation inverting control in response to the control circuit detecting the movable portion in its movement interrupted state, the motor load reducing control being configured for the control circuit to output, to the electric motor, the supply voltage having a second magnitude smaller than the first magnitude, as taught by Nathan with a reasonable expectation of success. Doing so improves the safety of vehicle seat control (With regard to this reasoning, see at least [Nathan, Col. 6-7]).
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 extension fee 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 AHMED ALKIRSH whose telephone number is (703) 756-4503. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am-5:00 pm EST.
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, FADEY JABR can be reached on (571) 272-1516. 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.
/A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/MOHAMED ABDO ALGEHAIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights