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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed 15-Jan-2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609; accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner. Nevertheless, it is noted that a legible copy of the foreign non-patent literature cited was not provided. Therefore, the information referred to therein has not been considered.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li (CN 212036846).
Claim 1- Li shows a seat frame (figs. 1-4), comprising:
a base (1), a driving member (including elements 5-9 shown in figs. 2, 4 & 7) and a stretching member, the driving member and the stretching member being disposed on the base (figs. 1, 3 & 6), and the stretching member comprising backrest assemblies (2), cushion support assemblies (3) and leg rest plate assemblies (4) which are positioned on left and right sides of the base and set in pairs;
a front end and a rear end of each of the cushion support assemblies are hinged with one end of one of the backrest assemblies (the rear end of the cushion support is hinged to the backrest) and one end of one of the leg rest plate assemblies (the front end of the cushion support is hinged to the leg rest) respectively;
wherein each of the cushion support assemblies comprises a first support connector (10), a second support connector (13), a third support connector (14) and a fourth support connector (15), wherein one end of the third support connector is hinged at a middle of the fourth support connector (see fig. 1), one end of the second support connector (13) is hinged with the other end of the third support connector (14), and the first support connector (10) is hinged with one of the backrest assemblies;
and wherein each of the leg rest plate assemblies (4) comprises a first leg rest plate connector (28), a second leg rest plate connector (29), a third leg rest plate connector (30) and a leg rest plate frame (31), wherein one end of the first leg rest plate connector (28) is hinged with one end of the fourth support connector (15) as shown in figure 2, one end of the second leg rest plate connector (29) is hinged with one end of the first support connector (10), the other end of the second leg rest plate connector is hinged with one end of the third leg rest plate connector (30) as shown in figure 1, the other end of the first leg rest plate connector (28) and the other end of the third leg rest plate connector (30) are hinged with the leg rest plate frame (fig. 2).
In both a television (TV) posture (fig. 1) and a lying posture (fig. 3) of the seat frame, the leg rest plate frame (31) is inclined upward with respect to a horizontal plane (which is shown by the bottom plane of the base in fig. 1). With reference to figures 1, 3 and 6, the leg rest plate frame (31) in the TV posture of the seat frame has a slight incline upward relative to a horizontal plane and relative to the posture of the seat frame in a television upright posture (fig. 6); and the leg frame (31) in the lying posture (fig. 3) has a greater incline upward relative to both television postures of the seat frame (fig. 1, 6).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (CN 212036846) in view of Li (US 11,452,378), hereinafter Li-A.
Claim 2- Li shows a seat frame of claim 1, wherein the TV posture (of fig. 1) of the seat frame includes the upward inclination comprising a first included angle from the leg rest plate frame (31) to the horizontal plane. The difference between Li and the instant claim is Li does not teach the specific value of the first included angle.
Li-A shows a seat frame comprising: a base (12) and a stretching member (1, 2, 3), the stretching member comprising leg rest plate assemblies (3); wherein each of the leg rest plate assemblies (fig. 3) comprises a leg rest plate frame (35); wherein the leg rest plate frame (35) is inclined upward at an included angle (angle alpha) with respect to a horizontal plane (fig. 5-6), in both a television (TV) posture (fig. 5) and a lying posture (fig. 6) of the seat frame; and wherein a first included angle in the TV posture is in a range between 8 and 20 degrees (col. 6: 38-42), and specifically between 14 and 15 degrees, which is in the claimed range of 5 to 15 degrees. Li-A teaches that the first included angle range is suitable for achieving the TV posture of the seating frame.
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the leg rest plate frame angle of Li, as taught by Li-A, in order to achieve a posture suitable for TV viewing by an occupant.
Claims 3-4 - Li and Li-A teach the seat frame of claim 2, wherein the TV posture of the seat frame comprises the first included angle in the range 8 to 11 degrees, and specifically 10 degrees (col. 6: 38-40).
Claim 5- Li shows a seat frame of claim 1, wherein the lying posture (of fig. 3) of the seat frame includes the upward inclination comprising a second included angle from the leg rest plate frame (31) to the horizontal plane. The difference between Li and the instant claim is Li does not teach the specific value of the second included angle.
Li-A shows a seat frame comprising: a base (12) and a stretching member (1, 2, 3), the stretching member comprising leg rest plate assemblies (3); wherein each of the leg rest plate assemblies (fig. 3) comprises a leg rest plate frame (35); wherein the leg rest plate frame (35) is inclined upward at an included angle (angle alpha) with respect to a horizontal plane (fig. 5-6), in both a television (TV) posture (fig. 5) and a lying posture (fig. 6) of the seat frame; and wherein a second included angle in the lying posture is in a range between 9 and 23 degrees (col. 6: 42-45), which includes the claimed range of 12 to 20 degrees. Li-A teaches that the second included angle range is suitable for achieving the lying posture of the seating frame.
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the leg rest plate frame angle of Li, as taught by Li-A, in order to achieve a posture suitable for laying by an occupant.
Claims 6-7 - Li and Li-A teach the seat frame of claim 5, wherein the lying posture of the seat frame comprises the second included angle in a range that includes the claimed angles of 12 to 15 degrees, and 14 degrees.
Claim(s) 11-15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (CN 212036846) in view of Murphy (US 2016/0088942).
Claims 11 and 20- Li shows the seat frame of claim 1, the seat frame (as shown in figs. 4-5) further comprises the first support connector (10) is hinged with a first connector (17), the first connector is hinged with a second connector (20) at one end (fig. 5), the other end of the second connector (20) is hinged with the one of the backrest assemblies (backrest assembly link 26, fig. 4); wherein each of the backrest assemblies (2) comprises a first backrest connector (24), a second backrest connector (25), a third backrest connector (26) and a fourth backrest connector (27), one end (rearward end) of a lower part of the first backrest connector (24) and one end of the second backrest connector (25) are hinged at a first hinge point (not designated, fig. 6), the other end (forward end) of the lower part of the first backrest connector (24) and an extension part (not designated) of the first support connector (10) are hinged at a second hinge point (not designated, shown fig. 6), and a distance L (shown clearly in fig. 6) between the first hinge point and the second hinge point of the first backrest connector (24); the third backrest connector (26) is V- shaped, two ends of the third backrest connector are respectively provided with a first leg (connected to a lower end of second backrest connector 25, shown best in fig. 4) and a second leg (connected to an upper end of fourth backrest connector 27), and a middle (upper end) of the third backrest connector (26) is protruded with a third leg (connected to an end of the second connector 20, fig. 4); and the first leg of the third backrest connector (26) is hinged with the other end of the second backrest connector (25), the third leg is hinged with one end of the second connector (20), the second leg is hinged with one end of the fourth backrest connector (27), and the other end of the fourth backrest connector (27) is hinged with the base (fig. 3).
The difference between Li and the instant claim is Li does not teach that the value of the distance L between the first hinge point and the second hinge point is 60-85 mm or 70-85 mm. However, the specific dimensions of the assembly links (defined by the distance between their hinge points) is considered a matter of design choice since the dimension as claimed do not yield a patentably distinct structure and/or function from the dimensions suggested or taught by the prior art; i.e., the prior art and the claimed structure both yield a seat frame that can be positioned in TV and lying postures that include pivotable links and adjustable inclinations of the stretching member.
Murphy shows a seat frame comprising: a base, a driving member, and a stretching member (fig. 1-3, 15-17); wherein the stretching member comprises backrest, cushion support, and leg rest plate assemblies that are interconnected by a plurality of links such that the seat frame can be adjusted between television (TV) and lying postures (fig. 2-3, 16-17), and the leg rest plate frame is inclined in both postures. Murphy teaches that the distance between hinge points (212 & 222, 216 & 224) of a pivot link (210, 214) can be 6-10 inches (¶ [0032]) in order to yield an effective positioning of the seat frame. According to this teaching, of dimensioning pivot links of a stretching member to yield a desired adjustment thereof, it follows that routine experimentation and customization would allow for the claimed “distance L” of the first backrest connector. The specific distance value (as previously noted) is considered a matter of design choice and would be covered by the routine experimentation necessary to provide the desired pivot movement(s) of the backrest assembly.
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the backrest assembly of Li with suitable distances between hinge points, as evidenced by Murphy, in order to yield the predictable result of effectively adjusting the backrest assembly, especially in cooperation with the other assemblies of the stretching member.
Claims 12-13 –Li shows the seat frame of claim 1, wherein the lying posture (fig. 3) of the seat frame defines an included angle between the first support connector (via mounting pieces 37 of connector 10) and the horizontal plane that is 13-23 degrees (pg. 2- last paragraph, pg. 6- last four lines), which includes values less than or equal to 17 or 16 degrees as claimed. Li teaches that the value of the incline angle is suitable for achieving a zero-gravity effect for the occupant in that posture.
The difference between Li and the instant claim is Li does not teach that the included angle of the seat frame in the TV posture to be less than or equal to 12 degrees. However, the specific angles defined by the assembly links is considered a matter of design choice since the angles as claimed do not yield a patentably distinct structure and/or function from those suggested or taught by the prior art; i.e., the prior art and the claimed structure both yield a seat frame that can be positioned in TV and lying postures that include angles defined by support connector(s) relative to a horizontal plane.
Murphy shows a seat frame comprising: a base, a driving member, and a stretching member (fig. 1-3, 15-17); wherein the stretching member comprises backrest, cushion support, and leg rest plate assemblies that are interconnected by a plurality of links such that the seat frame can be adjusted between television (TV) and lying postures (fig. 2-3, 16-17), and the leg rest plate frame is inclined in both postures; and wherein the upright posture (fig. 1, 15) of the seat frame defines an included angle between a first support connector (816a) and the horizontal plane (fig. 15) that is about 5-8 degrees (¶ 81). Murphy teaches that the included angle in the TV (fig. 16) and lying (fig. 17) postures is greater than in the upright posture.
Li and Murphy do not disclose the specific value of the included angle in the TV posture; however, based on the above teachings, the specific value is a matter of design choice since the teachings set forth that routine experimentation and customization for would allow for the claimed included angle in the TV posture, wherein the routine experimentation is an obvious expedient for yielding the predictable result of inclining the first support connector to a position where the value of the included angle in the TV Posture is between the values in the upright and lying postures.
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to define the included angle of the seat frame in the TV posture to be less than or equal to 12 degrees.
Claims 14-15 – Li and Murphy teach the seat frame of claim 11, wherein Murphy teaches that the upright and TV postures of the seat frame includes an upright backrest (28) with an angle of 55-80 degrees (which is also 125-100 degrees) from the horizontal plane (¶ 35-36), and a third included angle between the backrest (818) and the seat (816) in the upright posture (fig. 15) that ranges from 100 degrees to 110 degrees and includes 109 degrees (¶ 81). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to configure the third included angle of Li between the first backrest connector (24) and the first support connector (10) in the TV posture (fig. 1) to range from 100 to 110 degrees or to be 109 degrees. Murphy also teaches that the lying posture of the seat frame is reclined relative to the upright backrest (28/928) in the upright and TV postures (¶ 36, 38), and a fourth included angle between the backrest (28/928) and the seat (817) defined by reclined backrest (fig. 17, ¶ 77). Murphy does not explicitly teach the value of the fourth included angle; however, based on Murphy’s teaching, it would have been obvious to configure the fourth included angle of Li between the first backrest connector (24) and the first support connector (10) in the lying posture (fig. 3) of the seat frame ranges from 140 to 150 degrees or to be 149 degrees.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-10 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record did not show or suggest, either singly or combined, a recliner chair comprising a pair of mirrored lazy-tong assemblies configured to adjust the chair between an upright position, a reclined position (TV posture), and a supine position (lying posture); where each lazy-tong assembly comprises a plurality of leg rest plate connectors arranged to yield a particular leg rest angle in the reclined position and in the supine position, with each leg rest plate connector comprising a specific distance or length range as claimed.
While the reference to Murphy’s teaches the distance/length of hinged links (214, 210), the links are directed to the distance suitable for yielding a pair of seat glide links. Accordingly, Murphy fails to teach the structural limitation of each leg rest plate connector having the claimed dimension ranges, or the limitation “a distance between the hinge point X and the hinge point Y is 180 to 200 mm”.
Conclusion
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 TANIA ABRAHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-2635. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am - 5:30 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 DUNN can be reached on 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.
/T.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3636
/DAVID R DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights