August 27, 2026
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I invention in the reply filed on 08/17/2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
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 “mesh member” in Claims 1, 21, and 26 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). In Claim 1, Applicant defines “a mesh member comprising a set of filaments of a second thermoplastic material….. the mesh member surrounding the plurality of strands.” In claim 21, Applicant defines “a mesh member formed of filaments of a first thermoplastic material, each filament being looped and bonded to at least one other of the filaments, the mesh member defining a central portion and a first bolster and a second bolster on opposite sides of the central portion”. In Claim 26, Applicant defines “ a mesh member comprising filaments of a first thermoplastic material that are randomly looped and bonded to one another”. However, Figures 1-2, never labels the “mesh member”. There is no reference number in the specification that identifies the :mesh member” No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 § 103
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.
Claims 1, 3-7, 9, 21, 23-24, 26, 28, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishino et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0060493 A1) in view of Lem et al.(U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0361897 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
240
300
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
122
380
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Lem et al. teach the structure substantially as claimed including an apparatus comprising:
a plurality of strands 130 of a first thermoplastic material, extending from a first surface of the apparatus to a second surface of the apparatus opposite the first surface; and
a mesh member 110,120 comprising a set of filaments of a second thermoplastic material, the mesh member 110,120 surrounding the plurality of strands 130 but does not specify if each member of the set of filaments is looped and bonded to at least one other member of the set of filaments.
PNG
media_image3.png
154
302
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, Lem et al. teach the concept of forming a mesh layer from a set of filaments looped and bonded to at least one other member of the set of filaments (see paragraph [0036] where it reads “In various examples backing layer 154 can be of or can include a bonded filament, a mesh,…..). It would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art to form the mesh member, as taught by Nishino et al., from a set of filaments looped and bonded to at least one other member of the set of filaments, as taught by Lem et al. since it would the mesh member would possess high porosity allowing maximum fluid, air, and gas passage. It also makes the mesh member easier to bond to the first thermoplastic material, as required in Claim 3.
As for Claims 4-5 and 24, Nishino et al. teach that the first thermoplastic material is the same as the second thermoplastic material; wherein the first thermoplastic material and the second thermoplastic material comprise linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) (see paragraph [0085] where it reads “As a material to compose the front mesh layer 110, the back mesh layer 120 or the pile 130, a thermoplastic resin is preferable. The following resins can be used, for example, thermoplastic polyester resins such as polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polybutylene terephthalate (PBT), polyamide resins such as nylon 6 and nylon 66, polyolefin resins such as polyethylene and polypropylene, or a mixed resin containing two or more kinds of these resins.”).
As for Claims 6-7, 9, and 21, Nishino et al. teach a vehicle seat including a frame(see Fig. 6) and a seat cushion comp[rising the apparatus wherein the strands of the plurality of strands are oriented in a longitudinal or lateral direction; Nishino et al. teach that the seat cushion that comprises two bolsters on either side of a central portion, wherein the plurality of strands are only located in the two bolsters; and Fig. 3 shows that the plurality of strands can be located in the first bolster and the second bolster and absent from the central portion such that the first bolster and the second bolster have a greater crush resistance than the central portion. .
As for Claim 23, Nishino et al. teach that strands of the plurality of strands extend from a front surface of the seat cushion to a rear surface of the seat cushion opposite the front surface.
As for Claim 28, Nishino et al. teach that strand segments of the plurality of discrete strand segments are substantially straight and are mutually parallel within the mesh member.
As for Claim 30, Nishino et al. teach that the cushion is a seat back cushion and strand segments of the plurality of discrete strand segments extend from a bottom surface of the seat back cushion to a top surface of the seat back cushion.
Claims 8 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishino et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0060493 A1) in view of Lem et al.(U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0361897 A1), as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Townley et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,247,593 B2).
Nishino et al. in view of Lem et al teaches the structure substantially as claimed but is silent as to whether or not a trim cover adhered to a surface of the mesh member. However, Townley et al. teach a trim cover 20 that can be adhered to a surface of the mesh member. It would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art for the vehicle seat, as taught by Nishino et al., to include a trim cover adhered to a surface of the mesh member, as taught by Townley et al., since trim covers are added to vehicle seats for aesthetic purposes.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 22, 27, and 29 are 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rodney B. White whose telephone number is (571)272-6863. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
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 R. Dunn can be reached at (571) 272-6670. 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.
/Rodney B White/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights