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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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) 1-3 and 11-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sanojca et al (DE 102005036624).
Sanojca discloses in figures 1 – 4 a controller (1) comprising: a body provided in an internal space, in which a seat is provided, and configured to be travelable by a drive module; a convenience provision portion (11) movably provided in the internal space and configured to provide convenience functions including an air conditioning function; and a control unit (1) rotatably provided at a position, at which an occupant manipulates the control unit, and including a plurality of manipulation surfaces (11 – 14) configured to be exposed to the occupant seated in the seat in accordance with a rotation position of the control unit, the control unit including operators provided on the manipulation surfaces and configured to control traveling or the convenience provision portion, wherein the control unit is provided at a front portion of an armrest, and the front portion of the armrest is configured to be rotatable with respect to a remaining rear portion of the armrest (claim 1). the control unit is rotatably provided on the front portion of an armrest (2) of the seat, on which the occupant's arm is mounted (claim 2). the control unit includes a steering manipulation means configured to control the drive module (of the seat), and the steering manipulation means is configured as a lever, a dial, or a button and is configured to control a traveling direction of the drive module (figures 3 and 4) (claim 3). the convenience provision portion further includes a lighting function and a sound function, the control unit includes a convenience function manipulation means configured to control the convenience provision portion, and the convenience function manipulation means is configured as a button and configured to select the lighting function and the sound function of the convenience provision portion (figures 8, 9) (claim 11). the convenience function manipulation means includes: a button configured to control a movement position of the convenience provision portion; a button configured to control lighting brightness of the convenience provision portion; a button configured to control sound volume of the convenience provision portion; and a button configured to control the air conditioning function (claim 12). the seat or the control unit includes a position manipulation means (25) configured to fix or release the rotation position of the control unit (claim 13). in response that a locking state is released by manipulation of the position manipulation means, the rotation position of the control unit is automatically changed so that a predetermined manipulation surface among the plurality of manipulation surfaces is exposed to the occupant (claim 14). the seat is configured to adjust positions and angles of a seatback and a seat cushion, and the seat includes a seat manipulation means configured to adjust the positions and the angles of the seatback and the seat cushion (claim 15). the convenience provision portion is formed to extend along an internal peripheral surface of the internal space, and the convenience functions including the air conditioning function are implemented toward the occupant in the internal space (claim 16).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanojca et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chesne et al. (FR 309429).
Sanojca discloses the claimed invention having dials, buttons, lever to control different modules, but does not disclose steering manipulation means configured to select a gear shifting position in response to operation of the dial. However, Chesne discloses in figures 2 – 8 the control unit (103) includes a mode manipulation means (110) configured to adjust the rotation position of the control unit, and the mode manipulation means is configured to determine a manual traveling mode or an autonomous driving mode based on whether the mode manipulation means is manipulated (disclosure) (claim 10).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 - 2 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The control unit is at the front of the armrest, rotatable with respect to a remaining rear portion.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-9 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Haller et al (US 2022/0001782), Klieber (DE 102016106030).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Nicole Verley whose telephone number is (571)270-3542. The examiner can normally be reached 10AM-6PM.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571) 270-5985. 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.
/NICOLE T VERLEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights