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 .
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: Claim 1 recites “a frame” which is not disclosed in the specification. Claims 7 and 12 refer to a “cup holder assembly including a removable lid”, that is not disclosed in the specification.
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 “cup holder assembly including a removable lid” (claims 7 and 12), “base assembly having a mounting mechanism” and “frame” (claim 1) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: base assembly [114], the reference number 114 dis not in the drawings.
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. 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.
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 § 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.
Claims 1, 2, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being taught by Smith (US 2023/0086257).
Regarding claim 1, Smith teaches a convertible car seat (juvenile seat, fig. 1) comprising: an outer shell (seat bottom [12], para 19; fig. 1) having a seat portion (child receiving space, para. 19), a back portion (seat back [14], fig. 1; para 20), and a receiving port (central portion [46], para. 24; fig. 4); a base assembly having a mounting mechanism (mount aperture [46] fig. 4; para. 22); a frame (sidewall [72, 56] fig. 4, 6, and 7); and a cup holder assembly including an engagement member (para. 24), the engagement member configured to selectively couple to the outer shell via the receiving port (fig. 4; para. 24).
Regarding claim 2, Smith teaches the invention as discussed in reference to claim 1 and further teaches an insertion peg (insert mount [50], fig. 4, 9, and 10; para 30) connected to a flex portion (cup holder support [18] fig. 9; para 24), a tab portion (retainer tabs [42,44], fig. 5; para. 24) and a releasing portion (lateral portions [49,51], fig. 5; para. 24).
Regarding claim 8, Smith teaches the invention as discussed in reference to claim 1, and further teaches a second cup holder assembly (cup holders [20]: fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, Smith teaches the invention as discussed in reference to claim 1, and further teaches the convertible car seat is configured to be installed in a vehicle (para. 21).
Regarding claim 10, Smith teaches a cup holder assembly configured to be removably coupled to a car seat (para. 20), the cup holder assembly comprising: a receptacle formed by a bottom surface (cup holder support [18], insert floor [58]; fig. 4) and sidewalls (sidewalls [56,72], figs. 4, 6, and 7); and an engagement member (mount ring [40], retainer tabs [42,44] figs. 4, 5, 9 and 10; para. 23), wherein the engagement member includes: an insertion peg (insert mount [50], fig. 4, 9, and 10; para 30), a flex portion attached to the insertion peg at a distal end of the engagement member (cup holder support [18] fig. 9; para 24), a tab portion (retainer tabs [42,44], fig. 5; para. 24), and a releasing portion (lateral portions [49,51], fig.5; para. 24).
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 3-6, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith in view of Asano (US 7,461,436).
Regarding claim 3, Smith teaches the invention as discussed in reference to claim 2, but fails to disclose the tab portion being ramp-shaped. Asano teaches an engagement member with a ramp-shaped tab portion (fig. 2A-3B, 5 [4A, 4B]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to use the alternative conventional method of attaching the cupholders to the outer shell using the engagement member taught by Asano to enable the cupholder to be repeatedly mounted and disengaged through one touch operation (Asano, col. 1, lines 48-50).
Regarding claim 4, Smith teaches the invention as discussed in reference to claim 2, but fails to disclose receiving port includes a ramp press, the ramp press configured to engage the tab portion thereby causing the flex portion to flex towards the insertion peg. Asano discloses a mounting structure for use in a vehicle and further teaches a receiving port (engaging hole [9] fig. 6: col. 4, lines 56-61; col. 6, lines 58-62) including a ramp press, the ram press configured to engage the tab portion thereby causing the flex portion to flex towards the insertion peg (col. 5 line 59-col. 6 line 2; figs. 5 and 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to provide the cupholder of Smith the vehicle mounting structure taught by Asano to enable the cupholder to be repeatedly mounted and disengaged through one touch operation (Asano, col. 1, lines 48-50).
Regarding claim 5, Smith teaches the invention as discussed in reference to claim 3, and further teaches the receiving port (cup holder support [18], fig. 4) including a channel (mount aperture [88], figs. 9 and 10) configured to receive and house the tab portion (insert mount [50], figs. 9 and 10) when the cup holder assembly is coupled to the convertible car seat (para. 30).
Regarding claim 6, Smith teaches the invention as discussed in reference to claim 5, and further teaches the cup holder assembly is removably coupled to the convertible car seat (juvenile seat, fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, Smith teaches the invention as discussed in reference to claim 2, but fails to disclose the tab portion is ramp-shaped. Asano discloses a mounting structure for use in a vehicle and further teaches a ramp-shaped tab portion (fig. 2A-3B, 5 [4A, 4B]) .It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to provide the cupholder of Smith the vehicle mounting structure taught by Asano to enable the cupholder to be repeatedly mounted and disengaged through one touch operation (Asano, col. 1, lines 48-50).
Claims 7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith in view of Herman et al. (US 6,412,861).
Regarding claim 7, Smith teaches the invention as discussed in reference to claim 1, but fails to disclose the cup holder assembly including a removable lid. Herman teaches a cup holder including a removable lid (removable lid is shaped so as to fit on and seal to the upper lip of a cup; Herman col. 3, lines 5-8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to provide the cup holder of Smith with the removable lid taught by Herman to prevent beverage spillage.
Regarding claim 12, Smith teaches the invention as discussed in reference to claim 10, but fails to disclose the cup holder assembly includes a removable lid. Herman teaches a cup holder including a removable lid (removable lid is shaped so as to fit on and seal to the upper lip of a cup; Herman col. 3, lines 5-8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to provide the cup holder of Smith with the removable lid taught by Herman to prevent beverage spillage.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER S MAXIE whose telephone number is (571)270-3217. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm.
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 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.
csm
/DAVID R DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights