CTNF 18/906,497 CTNF 102067 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Specification 07-29 AIA The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph 0049 refers to "the deformable part 104", instead of deformable part 114 . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: " , , . Appropriate correction is required. Claim, Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claim 5 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 5 recites the limitation " the groove " in the first line of the claim . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 07-34-01 Claim 9 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 9 recites the limitation " the thickened portion " in the first line of the claim . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim, Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (a) 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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 7-12, & 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a ) as being anticipated by Nasu US 20170066352 A1 (hereinafter Nasu) . Re. Cl. 1, Nasu discloses: a sleeve apparatus for a headrest (Fig. 3, Ref. 30) , comprising a sleeve body (Fig. 3, Ref. 31) for insertion into a frame of a vehicle seat, wherein, during use, the sleeve body is inserted into the frame of the vehicle seat (Para. 0023) and is generally located therein, wherein the sleeve body comprises a tubular wall (See Fig. 3) defining an inner axial passageway (Fig. 3, Ref. 34) having an inner surface (Fig. 3, Ref. 313) configured to receive a rod of a headrest, wherein the tubular wall comprises an outer surface (Fig. 3, Ref. 312) opposite the inner surface of the tubular wall, and wherein the tubular wall comprises at least two recesses (Fig. 3, Ref. 314) extending in a longitudinal direction of the tubular wall between the outer surface and the inner surface, wherein the recesses define a deformable part (Fig. 3, Ref. 315) of the tubular wall of the sleeve apparatus. Re. Cl. 7, Nasu discloses: the sleeve apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the sleeve apparatus is a one-piece injection-molded part (Para. 0024) , and/or wherein the sleeve apparatus does not comprise over-molded parts (Para. 0024) . Re. Cl. 8, Nasu discloses: the sleeve apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the deformable part comprises a thickened portion configured to contact the frame of the vehicle seat (Fig. 3, Ref. 315) . Re. Cl. 9, Nasu discloses: the sleeve apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the thickened portion of the deformable part has dimensions such that the deformable part is pushed towards the inner axial passageway when the sleeve apparatus is inserted into the frame of the vehicle seat (Fig. 3, Ref. 315, Para. 0026) . Re. Cl. 10, Nasu discloses: the sleeve apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the deformable part (Fig. 3, Ref. 315) comprises a projection extending across the outer surface of the tubular wall (Fig. 3, Ref. 316) , wherein the projection defines a latch (Fig. 3, Ref. 316) that is suitable for securing the sleeve apparatus within the frame of the vehicle seat, in particular in a longitudinal direction of the sleeve apparatus (See Fig. 3) . Re. Cl. 11, Nasu discloses: the sleeve apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the projection is substantially ramp-like in form (Fig. 3, Ref. 316) , and its thickness increases gradually from a distal end of the deformable part towards a proximal end of the deformable part, wherein the projection defines a shoulder portion for engagement into a recess of the frame of the vehicle seat when it is in use (Para. 0026) . Re. Cl. 12, Nasu discloses: the sleeve apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the deformable part comprises a protruding portion (Fig. 3, Ref. 316) , preferably [a] lower region of the deformable part (Fig. 3, Ref. 315) , which is preferably configured to extend beyond the outer surface when a rod of a headrest is arranged in the sleeve apparatus and cooperates with a frame of a vehicle seat (Para. 0026) . Re. Cl. 14 , Nasu discloses: the sleeve apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the protruding portion is formed integrally in or on the deformable part (Para. 0024) , and preferably the sleeve apparatus having the deformable part with the protruding portion is a one-piece injection-molded part (Para. 0024) . Claim, Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2-4 & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nasu US 20170066352 A1 (hereinafter Nasu) in view of Ronzi et al. US 9187017 B2 (hereinafter Ronzi) . Re. Cl. 2, Nasu discloses recesses, but the recesses are a generally inverted U-shape, and thus fails to disclose two parallel recesses. Ronzi teaches a sleeve apparatus where the two recesses are configured to be substantially parallel to one another, or wherein the two recesses are configured to lie at an angle to one another and to the longitudinal direction of the sleeve body (Fig. 9, Ref. 40) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nasu with Ronzi’s teaching of a sleeve apparatus where the two recesses are configured to be substantially parallel to one another, or wherein the two recesses are configured to lie at an angle to one another and to the longitudinal direction of the sleeve body. Doing so would reduce manufacturing time and costs as they are simpler than the inverted U-shape of Nasu while maintaining the same functionality by defining a deformable part that fixes the sleeve apparatus to the seat frame. -Re. Cl. 3, Nasu fails to disclose L-shaped recesses. Ronzi teaches a sleeve apparatus where the two recesses are configured to be L-shaped (Fig. 9, Ref. 40) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nasu with Ronzi’s teaching of two recesses are configured to be L-shaped. Doing so would create a fixed end deformable part, as opposed to the cantilevered part of Nasu, where the distribution of force across two restrained points when in use makes the deformable part formed in Ronzi less prone to a weakened fit due to long-term wear and tear. Re. Cl. 4, Nasu fails to disclose a groove between the recesses. Ronzi teaches a tubular wall (Fig. 3, Ref. 44) that comprises at least one groove extending substantially perpendicular to the parallel recesses, wherein the groove connects the recesses to one another (Fig. 9, Ref. 40) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nasu with Ronzi’s teaching of a tubular wall that comprises at least one groove extending substantially perpendicular to the parallel recesses, wherein the groove connects the recesses to one another. Doing so allows for a firmer fit between headrest parts, minimizing tolerance and reducing buzz, squeak, and rattle (BSR). Re. Cl. 6, Nasu discloses that the generally inverted U-shaped recess form a deformable part, but fails to disclose L-shaped recesses. Ronzi teaches two recesses configured to be L-shaped and the L-shaped peaks of the two recesses are preferably conjugate with one another (Fig. 9, Ref. 40) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nasu with Ronzi’s teaching of two recesses configured to be L-shaped and the L-shaped peaks of the two recesses are preferably conjugate with one another by positioning the recesses of Ronzi to align with the orientation of the recess in Nasu. Doing so would result in a deformable part with the same functionality as the deformable part of Nasu, with the improved tolerance, longevity, and stiffness of the deformable part of Ronzi . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nasu US 20170066352 A1 in view of Ronzi et al. US 9187017 B2 as applied to claim 4 above, and in further view of Yokota et al. US 20090200843 A1 (hereinafter Yokota) . Re. Cl. 5, Nasu fails to disclose a groove. Ronzi teaches a groove (Fig. 9, Ref. 40) that is a part of the tubular wall (Fig. 3, Ref. 44) , but fails to teach the dimensioning of the groove. Yokota teaches a groove with a reduced thickness (Fig. 6, Ref. 18) in the context of a vehicle seat headrest. 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 Nasu’s invention with Yokota’s teaching of a groove with a reduced thickness. Doing so would make the deformable portion more prone to deformation under a load, thus ensuring deformation occurs in that particular section (Para. 0062) . This allows for ease of use when inserting the sleeve apparatus to the seat frame and a lower tolerance and tighter fit between the headrest rods, the sleeve apparatus, and the seat frame . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nasu US 20170066352 A1 in view of Aquillue et al. US 20150329021 A1 (hereinafter Aquillue) . Re. Cl. 13, Nasu fails to disclose an inwardly offset protruding portion. Aquillue teaches a protruding portion configured to not extend beyond the outer surface when no rod of a headrest is arranged in the sleeve apparatus, preferably in that the protruding portion is arranged in an inwardly offset manner on the deformable part, preferably in a groove in the deformable part (Fig. 1, Ref. 5; Para. 0012) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nasu with Aquillue’s teaching of a protruding portion configured to not extend beyond the outer surface when no rod of a headrest is arranged in the sleeve apparatus, preferably in that the protruding portion is arranged in an inwardly offset manner on the deformable part, preferably in a groove in the deformable part. Doing so would simplify the assembly process as the insertion of the sleeve apparatus into the seat frame would have no resistance from the deformable part. The protruding portion would not engage with the frame until the headrest rod was inserted, fixing the rod and sleeve in the frame as desired . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nasu US 20170066352 A1 in view of Bivens US 20230071448 A1 (hereinafter Bivens) . Re. Cl. 15, Nasu fails to disclose a stand-away annulus. Bivens teaches a protruding portion configured as a stand-away annulus (Fig. 2, Ref. 214d) having an opening, preferably being configured as a semicircular annular segment or three-quarter annular segment, wherein the opening is preferably configured as a slot in the stand-away annulus or missing annular segment (See Fig. 2) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nasu with Bivens teaching of a stand-away annulus (Fig. 2, Ref. 214d) having an opening, preferably being configured as a semicircular annular segment or three-quarter annular segment, wherein the opening is preferably configured as a slot in the stand-away annulus or missing annular segment (See Fig. 2) . Doing so would result in the annular protruding portion would undergoing radial deformation, rather than the axial deformation in Nasu, which requires less force and would result in easier assembly. Re. Cl. 16, Nasu fails to disclose the form or material of an annulus. Bivens teaches that the opening is formed outwardly and the stand-away annulus is preferably configured to be shape-retaining and elastic, specifically that it is made of an elastomeric material (Fig. 2, Ref. 214d, 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 Nasu with Biven’s teaching of the opening formed outwardly and the stand-away annulus is preferably configured to be shape-retaining and elastic. Doing so would reduce tolerances for a tighter fit between the headrest components to minimize BSR and mitigate any user annoyance and discomfort (Para. 0020) . Re. Cl. 17, Nasu fails to disclose the configuration or direction of an annulus. Bivens teaches that in the transverse direction of the deformable part, the stand-away annulus is configured as an annular cylinder at or in the deformable part, and preferably wherein the annular cylinder is configured in the transverse direction over a portion or over the entire width of the deformable part (Fig. 2, Ref. 214d) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nasu with Biven’s teaching of that in the transverse direction of the deformable part, the stand-away annulus is configured as an annular cylinder at or in the deformable part, and preferably wherein the annular cylinder is configured in the transverse direction over a portion or over the entire width of the deformable part. Doing so would optimize fit between the headrest components with reduced tolerances to optimize user experience by mitigating BSR . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nasu US 20170066352 A1 in view of Hagan et al. US 9446692 B2 (hereinafter Hagan) . Re. Cl. 18, Nasu fails to disclose any ribbing structures. Hagan teaches a protruding portion configured as one or more ribs (Fig. 37, Ref. 614) , wherein the one or more ribs are preferably each cuboidal in shape (See Fig. 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 Nasu with Hagan’s teaching of a protruding portion configured as one or more ribs, wherein the one or more ribs are preferably each cuboidal in shape. Doing so would reduce radial stiffness in the protruding portion, allowing for easer insertion into a frame (Col. 17, Ln. 47-50) . When the ribbing structure is compressed, the apertures between the ribs can at least partially close, thereby enhancing the structural stiffness in an inserted state (Col. 17, Ln. 53-55) . Re. Cl. 19, Nasu fails to disclose any configuration of ribs. Hagan teaches that the one or more ribs are configured in the transverse direction over a portion or over the entire width of the deformable part (Fig. 37, Ref. 614) , and preferably extend outwardly orthogonally to the axis of the axial passageway, or wherein the one or more ribs are configured in the longitudinal direction over a portion or over the entire length of the deformable part and preferably extend parallel to the axis of the axial passageway (See Fig. 37B) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nasu with Hagan’s teaching of one or more ribs are configured in the transverse direction over a portion or over the entire width of the deformable part, and preferably extend outwardly orthogonally to the axis of the axial passageway, or wherein the one or more ribs are configured in the longitudinal direction over a portion or over the entire length of the deformable part and preferably extend parallel to the axis of the axial passageway. Doing so would create various configurations of ribs have different apertures between them, allowing for tailored levels of structural stiffness in each configuration. Re. Cl. 20, Nasu fails to disclose any configuration of ribs. Hagan teaches the plurality of ribs are configured to be offset from one another on the deformable part in the longitudinal direction of the deformable part, and/or wherein the length of the ribs is configured to differ in their transverse direction, and preferably the length of the offset ribs decreases in the lower, or distal, direction of the deformable part (Col. 18, Ln. 27-33) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nasu with Hagan’s teaching of the plurality of ribs are configured to be offset from one another on the deformable part in the longitudinal direction of the deformable part, and/or wherein the length of the ribs is configured to differ in their transverse direction, and preferably the length of the offset ribs decreases in the lower, or distal, direction of the deformable part. Doing so would allow for a non-uniform structural stiffness across the ribs, further ensuring an optimal fit and BSR minimization . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Muto et al. US 8967721 B2, Gans US 20060012225 A1, Ford US 20030205925 A1, and Moreno US 20210300223 A1 . 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 Application/Control Number: 18/906,497 Page 2 Art Unit: 3632 Application/Control Number: 18/906,497 Page 3 Art Unit: 3632 Application/Control Number: 18/906,497 Page 4 Art Unit: 3632 Application/Control Number: 18/906,497 Page 5 Art Unit: 3632 Application/Control Number: 18/906,497 Page 6 Art Unit: 3632 Application/Control Number: 18/906,497 Page 7 Art Unit: 3632 Application/Control Number: 18/906,497 Page 8 Art Unit: 3632 Application/Control Number: 18/906,497 Page 9 Art Unit: 3632 Application/Control Number: 18/906,497 Page 10 Art Unit: 3632 Application/Control Number: 18/906,497 Page 11 Art Unit: 3632
Prosecution Insights