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 § 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.
Claims 2-5 are 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.
Claims 2-5 are dependent from independent claim 1 and positively recite the change of the air duct section. However, claim 1 does not positively recite the air duct sections. Claims 1 recites “air ducts and/or air duct section”. Therefore, the examiner is unsure whether or not the air duct sections are part of the claims.
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kikuchi et al. (7,857,395).
Regarding claim 1, Kikuchi et al. disclose a module support arrangement for attachment to the seat structure 1 of a motor vehicle seat and for fixing pneumatic components or non-pneumatic components 25, comprising a module support with a front side and a rear side opposite the front side and optionally at least one further component 23/33, wherein i) air ducts 26 and/or ii) air duct sections 22a-22c are integrated into the module support and/or into the at least one further component 23, wherein at least one of the air ducts or air duct sections has, at least locally, a change in the cross-sectional area.
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.
Claim(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi et al. in view of Ikuta et al. (12,077,074).
Regarding claim 2, Ikuta et al. disclose the change 13, 14d (fig. 8) in the cross-sectional area comprises at least a local and/or continuous reduction or widening and/or shape change of the cross-sectional area.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Ikuta et al. and use the widening area in the invention of Kikuchi et al. for the purpose of providing air in wider area with low effort.
Regarding claim 3, Ikuta et al. disclose the cross-sectional change 13, 14d (fig. 8) is realized by a changed width and/or height and/or cross-sectional geometry of an air duct or air duct section.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Ikuta et al. and use the widening area in the invention of Kikuchi et al. for the purpose of providing air in wider area with low effort.
Regarding claim 4, Kikuchi et al. disclose in the case of alternative the air duct sections 22a-22c are integrated, preferably recessed, in such a way that each of the air duct sections comprises open long sides, wherein the module support or the at least one further component 23 is used as a cover which closes the open long sides of the air duct sections in such a way that air ducts are thereby created.
Regarding claim 5, Kikuchi et al. disclose the module support has a recess 22d in which the integrated air duct sections are arranged 22a-22c and wherein the at least one further component 23 is inserted into the recess.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi et al. in view of Lofy et al. (7,114,771).
Regarding claim 6, Lofy et al. disclose the module support and/or the at least one further component 34 is an injection-molded part or a part formed by thermoforming (col. 11, lines 5-20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Lofy et al. and use injection molding process in the invention of Kikuchi et al. because it is simple and inexpensive.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi et al. in view of Bajic et al. (7,425,034).
Regarding claim 7, Bajic et al. disclose a vehicle seat comprising a seat frame 174 structure and a module support arrangement according to claim 1, which is suspended from the seat frame structure via a suspension 170.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Bajic et al. and use suspension to attach the module to the frame in the invention of Kikuchi et al. because it is simple and inexpensive.
Conclusion
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