June 4, 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 .
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 19-20 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.
IN claim 19, lines 2-3, the phrase “and can upper end of the second spring is connected thereto” is unclear and confusing. Should the word “can” be - - an - - instead?
The aforementioned problem renders the claims vague and indefinite. Clarification and/or correction is required
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)(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.
Claims 1, 3, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kondo e al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0396190 A1, now U.S. Patent No. 12,233,768 B2).
PNG
media_image1.png
326
436
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As for claim 1, Kondo et al teach a vehicle seatback locking device comprising:
a seatback frame 31B;
a base bracket 7 mounted on the seatback frame 31B;
an upper latch 10 having a sub-locking groove 105 in a rear portion thereof, the upper latch rotatably mounted on the base bracket by a first rotation shaft 8;
a first spring 15 connecting the base bracket to the upper latch 10 in a tensile manner;
a lower latch 12 having a main locking groove 123 in a rear portion thereof, the lower latch rotatably mounted on the upper latch by a second rotation shaft 11;
a cam 9 rotatably mounted on the first rotation shaft 8;
a cable 14 connected to an upper portion of the cam 9 in a pullable manner;
a second spring 17 connecting the lower latch 12 to the cam in a tensile manner; and
a striker 5 fixedly mounted on a body panel, the striker detachably locked and inserted into the sub-locking groove of the upper latch and the main locking groove of the lower latch.
As for claim 3, Kondo et al teach that the upper latch 10 has a first rotation shaft coupling hole in a front end thereof (see the hole in upper latch 10 that receives first rotation shaft 8 in Fig. 2), wherein the cam 9 has another first rotation shaft coupling hole in a rear end thereof (see the hole in upper cam 9 that receives first rotation shaft 8 in Fig. 2), and wherein the first rotation shaft is inserted into and coupled to the respective first rotation shaft coupling hole and other first rotation shaft coupling hole.
As for claim 9, Kondo et al teach that the lower latch has a hook portion 121 protruding upward from a rear end thereof and located at a rear side of the main locking groove, and wherein the hook portion is configured to prevent the striker from being separated from the lower latch.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4-8, and 10-18 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.
Claims 19-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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 because it teaches structures and concepts similar to those of the present invention.
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