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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: ‘528’.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the track positioned between the base support and the seat in claim 8 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 8 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.
Claim 8 recites “wherein the track is positioned between the base support and the seat” which is indefinite, because according to Para. [0068] of the instant specification, the tracks are positioned on the floorboard 550 (not shown), therefore, it is unclear how the tracks are positioned between the base support and the seat. According to fig. 14A of the instant specification, the rails 604 are positioned between the base support 618 and the seat, and therefore the examiner is interpreting the rails to read on claim 8.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erspamer (US 2014/0265285 A1), in view of Hozumi et al. (US 2015/0130240 A1), hereinafter Hozumi, and Oleszko et al. (US 5,290,089 A).
Regarding claim 1, Erspamer discloses a golf cart (Para. [0070, “[w]hile the present disclosure is primarily directed to a utility vehicle, it should be understood that the features disclosed herein may have application to other types of vehicles such as all-terrain vehicles, motorcycles, watercraft, snowmobiles, people movers, and golf carts”; as shown in fig. 1) comprising:
a chassis (figs. 1-4);
a prime mover (powertrain assembly 470, fig. 37);
a plurality of tractive elements (drive front wheels 4 and drive rear wheels 6, fig. 1), at least one of the plurality of tractive elements driven by the prime mover (Para. [0121], “[a]s shown in FIGS. 37 and 38, powertrain assembly 470 further includes a rear differential assembly 480. Rear differential assembly 480 is enclosed within a casing 482 supported on rear frame portion 54 and includes an input shaft 484 and an output shaft 486. Input shaft 484 is operably coupled to transmission 474 and output shaft 486 is operably coupled to driveshaft 490 in order to drive front wheels 4 of vehicle 2. Rear differential assembly 480 also includes a splined bearing 488 for coupling with the half shafts of rear wheels 6 in order to drive rear wheels 6”); and
a seating assembly supported by the chassis (seat bottoms 332, 338; fig. 25).
Erspamer does not appear to specifically disclose a pedestal coupled to the chassis; a
base support coupled to the pedestal; a seat coupled to the base support; a track positioned to facilitate translationally repositioning at least one of the seat or the base support; a back support pivotably coupled to the base support or the pedestal; a back rest coupled to the back support; a first actuator configured to translate the at least one of the seat or the base support; and a second actuator configured to pivot the back support.
Hozumi is in the field of a seat apparatus for vehicle (Abstract) and teaches:
a pedestal (Pair of lower rails 5, fig. 1) coupled to the chassis (the pedestal is coupled to the frame of the vehicle);
a base support (as shown in annotated fig. 1 below) coupled to the pedestal (as shown in annotated fig. 1 below, the base support is coupled to the lower rials 5);
a seat (seat 1, fig. 1) coupled to the base support (as shown in annotated fig. 1 below);
a track (upper rail 6, fig. 1) positioned to facilitate translationally repositioning at least one of the seat or the base support (as shown in figs. 1 & 2);
a back rest (seat backs 334, 340 and seat backs 346, 352, and 358; as shown in fig. 25);
a first actuator (actuator 15, fig. 1) configured to translate the at least one of the seat or the base support (Para. [0018], “the seat slide apparatus 11 of the present embodiment is configured as a power seat slide apparatus at which the upper rails 6 are moved in the front/rear direction by an actuator 15 provided at an inside (at a lower portion) of the seat cushion 2”; as shown in fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify the seat assembly of Erspamer such that there was a pedestal and a base support as taught by Hozumi in order to lift the seat off the ground to make it easier to clean debris buildup underneath. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the seat assembly of Erspamer such that there was a track positioned to facilitate translationally repositioning the seat and an actuator configured to translate the seat as taught by Hozumi, in order to provide comfort for each user by allowing proper seat positioning to reach the pedals, steering wheel, and controls comfortably.
Oleszko is in the field of a recliner arrangement for a vehicle seat (Abstract) and teaches a back
support (seatback frame 10, fig. 3); a [second] actuator configured to pivot the back support (col.3, lines 17-22, “to allow the backrest 7 to recline, the linear actuator 30 will shorten its length, causing the backrest 7 to pivotally move, rotating in a generally clockwise direction. To extend the seat upward, the linear actuator 30 will extend itself, causing the backrest 7 to rotate in a generally counterclockwise direction”; as shown in figs.3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Erspamer such that the seatback had a back support as taught by Oleszko, in order to maintain back shape, and act as a back protection. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Erspamer such that there was a second actuator configured to pivot the back support as taught by Oleszko, in order to provide accessibility and ease of use. The resulting device renders obvious wherein the back support is pivotably coupled to the base support or the pedestal, and wherein the backrest is coupled to the back support.
PNG
media_image1.png
461
523
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 1: annotated image of Hozumi’s fig. 1
Regarding claim 2, Erspamer in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 1, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the seating assembly includes a third actuator coupled to the pedestal and the base support, the third actuator configured to lift and lower the base support and the seat relative to the pedestal.
However, Hozumi is in the field of a seat apparatus for vehicle (Abstract) and teaches a third actuator (actuator 25, fig. 1) coupled to the pedestal and the base support (as shown in annotated fig. 1, actuator 25 is coupled to the base support and lower rails 5), the third actuator configured to lift and lower the base support and the seat relative to the pedestal (Para. [0022], “the seat lift apparatus 21 of the present embodiment is configured as a power seat lift apparatus at which the link mechanism 22 is actuated by an actuator 25 provided at the inside (the lower portion) of the seat cushion 2”; as shown in figs. 1 & 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 the invention of Erspamer such that there was a third actuator coupled to the seating assembly in order to lift and lower the base support as taught by Hozumi, in order to adjust the seat height with precise and effortless adjustment.
Regarding claim 3, Erspamer in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 1, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein at least one of the first actuator or the second actuator is a manual actuator.
However, in an alternative embodiment, Hozumi teaches wherein at least the second actuator is a manual actuator (Para. [0050], “at least any one of the seat slide apparatus 11, the seat lift apparatus 21 and the seat reclining apparatus 31 may be a manually-operated type”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Erspamer such that the second actuator was a manually-operated as taught by Hozumi, due to its simplicity and ease of use.
Regarding claim 5, Erspamer in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 1, and the combined references further disclose wherein the back support is pivotably coupled to the pedestal (as modified in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 6, Erspamer in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 1, and the combined references further disclose wherein the back support is pivotably coupled to the base support (as modified above in claim 1).
Regarding claim 7, Erspamer in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 1, and Erspamer further discloses wherein the track is positioned between the pedestal and the base support (as shown in annotated fig. 1 above, the upper rail 6 is positioned between the pair of lower rails 5 [i.e., the pedestal] and the base support).
Regarding claim 9, Erspamer in view of Hozumi and Oleszko disclose the invention in claim 1, and the combined references further disclose wherein the second actuator is coupled to the base support and the back support (as set forth above in claim 1, modifying the seat assembly of Erspamer in view of the second actuator that’s coupled to the back support of Oleszko would result in the second actuator coupled to the base support of Erspamer) such that operation of the second actuator causes the back support to rotate relative to the base support (Oleszko: Col.3, lines 17-22; Figs. 3-5).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erspamer in view of Hozumi and Oleszko as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Saucier (US 2021/0237636 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Erspamer in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 1, and Hozumi further discloses wherein the second actuator is an electric actuator (Para. [0050], “each of the seat slide apparatus 11, the seat lift apparatus 21 and the seat reclining apparatus 31 (a main body which actuates the recliner 32) is an electrically-operated type”), but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the first or second actuator are powered by a battery of the golf cart.
However, Saucier is in the field of a low-speed vehicle such as a golf cart (Para. [0072]) and teaches wherein the actuator is powered by a battery of the golf cart (Para. [0105], “[p]ower for the actuator 370 is provided by the controller 500 but can be also provided from an electrical circuit of the vehicle 200 or from a remote source, for example such as a battery (not shown)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Erspamer such that the actuator was powered by a battery of the golf cart as taught by Saucier, in order to improve performance, efficiency, and sustainability.
Claim(s) 1, 8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erspamer (US 2014/0265285 A1), in view of Hozumi et al. (US 2015/0130240 A1), hereinafter Hozumi, and Oleszko et al. (US 5,290,089 A).
Regarding claim 1, Erspamer discloses a golf cart (Para. [0070, “[w]hile the present disclosure is primarily directed to a utility vehicle, it should be understood that the features disclosed herein may have application to other types of vehicles such as all-terrain vehicles, motorcycles, watercraft, snowmobiles, people movers, and golf carts”; as shown in fig. 1) comprising:
a chassis (figs. 1-4);
a prime mover (powertrain assembly 470, fig. 37);
a plurality of tractive elements (drive front wheels 4 and drive rear wheels 6, fig. 1), at least one of the plurality of tractive elements driven by the prime mover (Para. [0121], “[a]s shown in FIGS. 37 and 38, powertrain assembly 470 further includes a rear differential assembly 480. Rear differential assembly 480 is enclosed within a casing 482 supported on rear frame portion 54 and includes an input shaft 484 and an output shaft 486. Input shaft 484 is operably coupled to transmission 474 and output shaft 486 is operably coupled to driveshaft 490 in order to drive front wheels 4 of vehicle 2. Rear differential assembly 480 also includes a splined bearing 488 for coupling with the half shafts of rear wheels 6 in order to drive rear wheels 6”); and
a seating assembly supported by the chassis (seat bottoms 332, 338; fig. 25).
Erspamer does not appear to specifically disclose a pedestal coupled to the chassis; a
base support coupled to the pedestal; a seat coupled to the base support; a track positioned to facilitate translationally repositioning at least one of the seat or the base support; a back support pivotably coupled to the base support or the pedestal; a back rest coupled to the back support; a first actuator configured to translate the at least one of the seat or the base support; and a second actuator configured to pivot the back support.
Hozumi is in the field of a seat apparatus for vehicle (Abstract) and teaches:
a pedestal (as shown in annotated fig. 1 below) coupled to the chassis (the pedestal is coupled to the frame of the vehicle);
a base support (as shown in annotated fig. 1 below) coupled to the pedestal (as shown in annotated fig. 1 below);
a seat (seat 1, fig. 1) coupled to the base support (as shown in annotated fig. 1 below);
a track (upper rail 6, fig. 1) positioned to facilitate translationally repositioning at least one of the seat or the base support (as shown in figs. 1 & 2);
a back rest (seat backs 334, 340 and seat backs 346, 352, and 358; as shown in fig. 25);
a first actuator (actuator 15, fig. 1) configured to translate the at least one of the seat or the base support (Para. [0018], “the seat slide apparatus 11 of the present embodiment is configured as a power seat slide apparatus at which the upper rails 6 are moved in the front/rear direction by an actuator 15 provided at an inside (at a lower portion) of the seat cushion 2”; as shown in fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to modify the seat assembly of Erspamer such that there was a pedestal and a base support as taught by Hozumi in order to lift the seat off the ground to make it easier to clean debris buildup underneath. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the seat assembly of Erspamer such that there was a track positioned to facilitate translationally repositioning the seat and an actuator configured to translate the seat as taught by Hozumi, in order to provide comfort for each user by allowing proper seat positioning to reach the pedals, steering wheel, and controls comfortably.
Oleszko is in the field of a recliner arrangement for a vehicle seat (Abstract) and teaches a back
support (seatback frame 10, fig. 3); a [second] actuator configured to pivot the back support (col.3, lines 17-22, “to allow the backrest 7 to recline, the linear actuator 30 will shorten its length, causing the backrest 7 to pivotally move, rotating in a generally clockwise direction. To extend the seat upward, the linear actuator 30 will extend itself, causing the backrest 7 to rotate in a generally counterclockwise direction”; as shown in figs.3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Erspamer such that the seatback had a back support as taught by Oleszko, in order to maintain back shape, and act as a back protection. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Erspamer such that there was a second actuator configured to pivot the back support as taught by Oleszko, in order to provide accessibility and ease of use. The resulting device renders obvious wherein the back support is pivotably coupled to the base support or the pedestal, and wherein the backrest is coupled to the back support.
PNG
media_image2.png
476
527
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 2: annotated image of Hozumi’s fig. 1
Regarding claim 8, as best understood in light of the 112b rejection above, Erspamer in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 1, and Hozumi further discloses wherein the track is positioned between the base support and the seat (as shown in annotated fig. 1 above, the upper rail 6 is positioned between the base support and the seat).
Regarding claim 10, Erspamer in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 8, and Hozumi further discloses wherein the first actuator is coupled to the pedestal and the base support (as shown in annotated fig. 1, actuator 15 is coupled to the pedestal and the base support).
Claim(s) 11-14, and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakami et al. (US 2017/0368961 A1), hereinafter Murakami, in view of Hozumi et al. (US 2015/0130240 A1), and Oleszko et al. (US 5290089 A), hereinafter Oleszko.
Regarding claim 11, Murakami discloses an adjustable seating assembly for a golf vehicle (capable of being used for a golf vehicle), the adjustable seating assembly comprising:
a seat (seat 1, fig. 2);
a backrest (seatback 3, fig. 2);
a first actuator (actuator 11, fig. 3) configured to translate the seat relative to the base support (Para. [0027-0028]).
However, Murakami does not appear to specifically disclose a back support, a base support, and
a second actuator configured to pivot the back support relative to the base support.
However, Hozumi is in the field of a seat apparatus for a vehicle (Abstract) and teaches a power seat slide apparatus which comprises upper and lower rails coupled to a base support and a pedestal (as shown in annotated fig. 3 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Murakami such that the seat was coupled to a base support and the upper and lower rails were mounted on a pedestal/leg (as shown in annotated fig. 3 below) as taught by Hozumi, in order to lift the seat sliding device off the ground in order to make it easier to clean debris buildup underneath.
Oleszko is in the field of a recliner arrangement for a vehicle seat (Abstract) and teaches a back
support (seatback frame 10, fig. 3); and a [second] actuator configured to pivot the back support (col.3, lines 17-22, “to allow the backrest 7 to recline, the linear actuator 30 will shorten its length, causing the backrest 7 to pivotally move, rotating in a generally clockwise direction. To extend the seat upward, the linear actuator 30 will extend itself, causing the backrest 7 to rotate in a generally counterclockwise direction”; as shown in figs.3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Murakami such that the seatback had a back support as taught by Oleszko, in order to maintain back shape, and act as a back protection. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Murakami such that there was a second actuator configured to pivot the back support as taught by Oleszko, in order to provide accessibility and ease of use. The resulting device renders obvious wherein the backrest of Murakami is coupled to the back support.
PNG
media_image3.png
476
527
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 3: annotated image of Hozumi’s fig. 1
Regarding claim 12, Murakami in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 11, and Murakami further comprising a plurality of tracks (see lower rails 5, in figs. 3 & 4) having a plurality of sliders (Para. [0020], “the upper rail 6 relatively moves with respect to the lower rail 5”, figs. 3 & 4), the plurality of tracks coupled to the base support (as modified above, modifying the base support of Hozumi in light of the seat of Murakami would result in the base support coupled to the tracks via intermediary linkages) and the plurality of sliders coupled to the seat (as shown in figs. 3 & 4, the upper rail 6 is coupled to the seat), wherein the first actuator is configured to translate the seat along the plurality of tracks via the plurality of sliders (Paras. [0027-0028]).
Regarding claim 13, Murakami in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 11, and further discloses a pedestal coupled to the base support (as modified above in claim 11).
Regarding claim 14, Murakami in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 13, but does not appear to specifically disclose a third actuator coupled to the pedestal and the base support, the third actuator configured to lift and lower the base support and the seat thereon relative to the pedestal.
However, Hozumi is in the field of a seat apparatus for vehicle (Abstract) and teaches a third actuator (actuator 25, fig. 1) coupled to the pedestal and the base support (as shown in annotated fig. 3 above, actuator 25 is coupled to the base support and pedestal), the third actuator configured to lift and lower the base support and the seat relative to the pedestal (Para. [0022], “the seat lift apparatus 21 of the present embodiment is configured as a power seat lift apparatus at which the link mechanism 22 is actuated by an actuator 25 provided at the inside (the lower portion) of the seat cushion 2”; as shown in figs. 1 & 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 the invention of Erspamer such that there was a third actuator coupled to the seating assembly in order to lift and lower the base support as taught by Hozumi, in order to adjust the seat height with precise and effortless adjustment.
Regarding claim 16, Murakami in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 11, and the combined references further disclose a base support (as modified above in claim 11). Furthermore, Murakami further discloses a pair of telescoping rails (see lower rails 5, and upper rail 6, fig. 3) and a crossbar (bracket 10, fig. 3), wherein each of the telescoping rails is coupled to the crossbar (as shown in fig. 3), and wherein the seat is coupled to the pair of telescoping rails (as shown in fig. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Murakami in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 16, and the combined references further disclose wherein the second actuator is coupled to the crossbar (as set forth in claim 11, modifying the second actuator of Oleszko with the seat assembly of Murakami results in the second actuator of Oleszko coupled to the crossbar [i.e., the bracket of Murakami] via intermediary linkages) and the back support (Oleszko: as shown in fig. 3, the linear actuator 30 is coupled to the seatback frame 10) such that operation of the second actuator causes the back support to rotate relative to the base support (Oleszko: Col.3, lines 17-22, “to allow the backrest 7 to recline, the linear actuator 30 will shorten its length, causing the backrest 7 to pivotally move, rotating in a generally clockwise direction. To extend the seat upward, the linear actuator 30 will extend itself, causing the backrest 7 to rotate in a generally counterclockwise direction”; as shown in figs. 3-5).
Regarding claim 18, Murakami in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 17, and Murakami further discloses wherein the first actuator (actuator 11, fig. 3) is coupled to the crossbar (as shown in fig. 3, actuator 11 is coupled to the bracket [i.e., the crossbar]) and the seat (as shown in fig. 2) such that operation of the first actuator causes translation between the telescoping rails (Paras. [0027-0028], “the seat sliding device 8 of the embodiment includes a bracket 10 that straddles both of the seat sliding rails 7, an actuator 11 supported by the bracket 10, and a transmission shaft 12 that is rotated by the actuator 11. In the seat sliding device 8 of the embodiment, the actuator 11 is suspended on a lower side of the bracket 10. In addition, the transmission shaft 12 extends in a longitudinal direction of the bracket 10 having a substantially elongated plate shape in a substantially orthogonal state to the seat sliding rails 7. Further, the actuator 11 of the embodiment rotates the transmission shaft 12 with the motor 13 as the drive source. The seat sliding device 8 of the embodiment has a configuration in which drive force of the motor 13 is transmitted via the transmission shaft 12 to a rail drive mechanism 14 interposed between the lower rails 5 and the upper rails 6 which configure the seat sliding rails 7”).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakami in view of Hozumi and Oleszko as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Konrad et al. (US 11,772,517 B2).
Regarding claim 15, Murakami in view of Hozumi and Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 13, and modified Murakami further discloses wherein the pedestal is configured to couple to a floorboard of the [golf] vehicle (as modified above in claim 11, and as shown in annotated fig. 3 above). However, modified Murakami does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the floorboard has one or more tracks, further comprising a third actuator configured to translate the pedestal along the one or more tracks.
However, Konrad is in the field of a transportation system (Abstract) and discloses tracks in the floorboard of the vehicle (tracks 324, fig. 8), further comprising a third actuator (translation actuator 184, fig. 8) configured to translate the seat base along the one or more tracks (Col. 14, 52-60, “[t]he translation actuator 184 may be coupled to the lower portion of the swivel assembly 260 (e.g., the swivel platform 272) in a manner that allows the translation actuator 184 to be engaged with the rail system 316 (e.g., by one or more anchors 334 extending into the tracks 324). Activation of the translation assembly by the controller 104 enables adjustment of a position of a corresponding one of the seating assemblies 124 along the rail system 316”; as shown in figs. 6-12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the seat assembly and pedestal of modified Murakami such that there were tracks in the floorboard and an actuator configured to translate the seat base along the one or more tracks as taught by Konrad, in order to provide additional spacing between the vehicle seats such that each occupant can relax, and rest by either reclining their seat back while also being able to stretch their legs without interfering with another occupant (Konrad: see relaxation arrangement in Col 15, lines 23-56). Furthermore, as modified above in claim 11, since the seat base of Murakami was modified with the pedestal/leg of Hozumi, then the pedestal of modified Murakami would translate along the one or more tracks.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hozumi et al. (US 2015/0130240 A1), hereinafter Hozumi, in view of Oleszko et al. (US 5,290,089 A), hereinafter Oleszko.
Regarding claim 19, Hozumi discloses an adjustable seating assembly for a golf vehicle (capable of being used for a golf vehicle), the adjustable seating assembly comprising:
a pedestal (Pair of lower rails 5, fig. 1);
a base support (as shown in annotated fig. 1 above) coupled to the pedestal (as shown in annotated fig. 1 above);
a seat cushion coupled to the base support (as shown in fig. 1 above, the seat cushion 2 is coupled to the base support);
a backrest (seatback 3, fig. 1); and
an actuator (actuator 15, fig. 1) configured to translate at least one of the seat cushion or the base support relative to the pedestal (Para. [0018], “the seat slide apparatus 11 of the present embodiment is configured as a power seat slide apparatus at which the upper rails 6 are moved in the front/rear direction by an actuator 15 provided at an inside (at a lower portion) of the seat cushion 2”; as shown in fig. 1).
Hozumi does not appear to specifically disclose a back support.
However, Oleszko is in the field of a recliner arrangement for a vehicle seat (Abstract) and
teaches a back support (seatback frame 10, fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hozumi such that the seatback had a back support as taught by Oleszko, in order to maintain back shape, and act as a back protection. The resulting device renders obvious wherein the back support is coupled to the base support or the pedestal and the backrest is coupled to the back support.
Regarding claim 20, Hozumi in view of Oleszko discloses the invention in claim 19, and Hozumi further discloses wherein the actuator is a first actuator (as set forth above in claim 19), but does not appear to specifically disclose a second actuator configured to pivot the back support relative to at least one of the base support or the pedestal.
Oleszko is in the field of a recliner arrangement for a vehicle seat (Abstract) and teaches a [second] actuator configured to pivot the back support (col.3, lines 17-22, “to allow the backrest 7 to recline, the linear actuator 30 will shorten its length, causing the backrest 7 to pivotally move, rotating in a generally clockwise direction. To extend the seat upward, the linear actuator 30 will extend itself, causing the backrest 7 to rotate in a generally counterclockwise direction”; as shown in figs.3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Hozumi such that there was a second actuator configured to pivot the back support as taught by Oleszko, in order to provide accessibility and ease of use.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: See PTO 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEVENA ALEKSIC whose telephone number is (571)272-1659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30am-5:30pm ET.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at (571)272-6909. 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.
/N.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3647 /JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights