Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1-15 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1, 6 and 13, applicant argues that Zhong does not disclose first and second seat. However, the claim language does not require first and second seats.
Applicant argues that Zhong does not disclose high-chair assembly. However, Zhong discloses a high-chair (see Abstract).
All dependent claims stand rejected.
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 pre-AIA 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 –
(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5-8, 10-12 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Zhong (US 2011/0074187).
Regarding claim 1, Zhong discloses a child seat 11 configured to be removably coupled to a high chair seat 20 assembly, comprising: a base portion 12; wherein said child seat is configured to fit securely on top of the high chair seat assembly in a first mode of operation (figure 1); wherein said base portion is configured to rest on a flat support surface without a need for an additional separate support member between the flat support surface and said base portion in a second mode of operation (figure 2); wherein the child seat further comprises at least one strap 17 for securing the child seat to the flat support surface in the second mode of operation; and wherein the base portion comprises at least one compartment for containing a strap within a storage compartment 121, the storage compartment being repositionable between an open configuration and a closed configuration (via door 161, 151).
Regarding claim 2, Zhong discloses the child seat cannot be coupled to the high chair seat assembly unless the storage compartment is in the closed configuration (para 0027 discloses doors 161, 151 needs to close the storage 121 to access the mounting hole 144).
Regarding claim 5, Zhong discloses the strap 17 is retained within the storage compartment 121 when the storage compartment is in the closed configuration.
Regarding claim 6, Zhong discloses a child seat 11 configured to be removably coupled to a high chair seat assembly, comprising: a base portion 12 comprising first and second shoulders 14 extending upwardly from first and second sides of a seating surface; and wherein said child seat is configured to fit securely on top of the high chair seat 20 assembly in a first mode of operation such that at least a portion of the base portion fits securely between upwardly extending shoulders on the high chair seat assembly (figure 1); wherein said base portion is configured to rest on a flat support surface without the need of an additional separate support member between the flat support surface and said base portion in a second mode of operation (figure 2); wherein the child seat further comprises at least one strap 17 for securing the child seat to the flat support surface in the second mode of operation, and wherein the base portion comprises at least one storage compartment 121 for containing a strap within the storage compartment, the storage compartment being repositionable between an open configuration and a closed configuration.
Regarding claim 7, Zhong discloses the base portion 12 comprises recesses 144 below the first and second shoulders, wherein the recesses are configured to receive corresponding shoulders of the high chair seat assembly in the first mode of operation.
Regarding claim 8, Zhong discloses at least a portion of the strap 17 can be withdrawn from the storage compartment when in the open configuration.
Regarding claim 10, Zhong discloses the child seat cannot be coupled to the high chair seat assembly unless the storage compartment is in the closed configuration (para 0027 discloses doors 161, 151 needs to close the storage 121 to access the mounting hole 144).
Regarding claim 11, Zhong discloses the at least one storage compartment forms an obstruction preventing engagement of the child seat with the high chair seat assembly when the storage compartment is in the open configuration (para 0027 discloses doors 161, 151 needs to close the storage 121 to access the mounting hole 144).
Regarding claim 12, Zhong discloses the child seat cannot be coupled to the high chair seat assembly if the strap is not contained within the storage compartment (para 0027 discloses doors 161, 151 needs to close the storage 121 to access the mounting hole 144).
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3, 4, 13-15 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Zhong in view of Tomas et al. (6,832,813).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Tomas et al. disclose a bottom of the base portion comprises non-slip pads 32, wherein a bottom of the base portion comprises protrusions that act as feet 20, and wherein the non-slip pads are positioned on the protrusions for gripping the flat support surface.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use the teaching of Tomas et al. and use feet with gripper in the invention of Zhong for the purpose of preventing any damages.
Regarding claim 13, Zhong discloses a child seat 11 configured to be removably coupled to a high chair seat 20 assembly, comprising: a base portion 12; a seating surface configured to support a child thereon; and first and second shoulders 14 extending upwardly from first and second sides of the seating surface; wherein said child seat is configured to fit securely on top of the high chair seat assembly in a first mode of operation (figure 1); wherein said base portion is configured to rest on a flat support surface without the need of an additional separate support member between the flat support surface and said base portion in a second mode of operation (figure 2); and wherein the base portion comprises recesses 144 below the first and second shoulders, said recesses configured to receive corresponding shoulder portions of the high chair seat assembly in the first mode of operation; wherein the base portion comprises a pair of storage compartments 121 for containing a strap within the storage compartments, each storage compartment being repositionable between an open configuration and a closed configuration.
However, Zhong fails to disclose the base portion comprises non-slip pads for gripping the flat support surface in the second mode of operation.
Instead, Tomas et al. disclose the base portion comprises non-slip pads 32 for gripping the flat support surface in the second mode of operation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use the teaching of Tomas et al. and use feet with gripper in the invention of Zhong for the purpose of preventing any damages.
Regarding claim 14, Zhong discloses a bottom of the base portion 12 is not complimentary to a top of the high chair seat 20 assembly.
Regarding claim 15, Tomas et al. disclose the bottom of the base portion comprises protrusions that act as feet 20, and wherein the non-slip pads 32 are positioned on the protrusions for gripping the flat support surface.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use the teaching of Tomas et al. and use feet with gripper in the invention of Zhong for the purpose of preventing any damages.
Claim 9 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Zhong in view of Merrill (US 2007/0241596).
Regarding claim 9, Merrill discloses Merrill discloses each of the at least one storage compartments 20 hinges 22 outwardly from the closed configuration to the open configuration.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use the teaching of Merrill and use a hinged door in the invention of Zhong because it is simple and inexpensive.
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 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