July 9, 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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 1 of the specification, in paragraph [0001], under “CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS”, Applicant needs to insert - - now U.S. Patent No. 12,226,031 B2 - - after “This patent application is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 18/099,815, filed on January 20, 2023,”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5, 8, and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Onopa (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0319444 A1) in view of Robbins, III et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,445,681 B2) and MARIOTH (EP 1932451 A1) and MARIOTH (EP 1932451 A1)..
PNG
media_image1.png
202
132
media_image1.png
Greyscale
`
PNG
media_image2.png
203
122
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Onopa teaches the structure substantially as claimed including a deployable anti-fatigue mat for a stool, the deployable anti-fatigue mat comprising: a portion 30 being configured to be movably attached to a base of the stool but does not teach a first portion flexibly joined to that portion along a common edge, the first portion comprising a footrest secured thereto.
PNG
media_image3.png
250
286
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
186
260
media_image4.png
Greyscale
However, Robbins, III et al. teach a mat having a first portion 20 flexibly joined to a second portion 22 along a common edge.
PNG
media_image5.png
311
206
media_image5.png
Greyscale
MARIOTH teaches a footrest FP that is configured to be secured to the first portion. It would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art to modify the deployable anti-fatigue mat, as taught by Onopa, to include a first portion flexibly joined to a second portion along a common edge, such as the one taught by Robbins, III et al., because the cushion can provide a compressible yet resilient portion that facilitates a comfortable standing working position for prolonged periods of time. It would have been obvious and well within the level of ordinary skill in the art to modify the deployable anti-fatigue mat, as taught by Fortnam, to include a footrest, such as the one taught by MARIOTH, so it would provide support to a user’s feet when sitting on the stool.
As for Claim 2, Robbins, III et al. teach that the deployable anti-fatigue mat is configured to be moved between a first position in which a user can stand upon the deployable anti-fatigue mat and a second position in which the user does not stand upon the deployable anti- fatigue mat.
As for Claim 3, Robbins, III et al. teach that a bottom of the first portion can be configured as a footrest when the deployable anti-fatigue mat is not deployed.
As for Claim 4, Onopa teaches that the deployable anti-fatigue mat is configured to be pivotably attached to the base of the stool via a hinged connection between the second portion and the base of the stool.
As for Claims 5 and 8, Robbins, III et al. teach that a bottom surface of the deployable anti- fatigue mat comprises a low-friction material selected from the group consisting of polypropylene, delrin, ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, ceramic, and polytetrafluoroethylene, as defined in claim 5, and that a top surface of the deployable anti- fatigue mat is a padded mat comprising one of rubber, vinyl, variable durometer urethane, or a gel. (see the specification where it reads “The base can be formed for example from any convenient semi-rigid or rigid plastic, such as PVC, polypropylene and other thermoplastics.” And “The cushion 24 can be formed, for example, from a foam polymer selected from TPU, EVA, PE, PP, PVC, and natural or synthetic rubber, with or without a protective and/or decorative skin coating; or from a molded plastic article mechanically designed to give anti-fatigue properties and produced from a material comprising PVC, EVA, Olefin, TPU, and natural or synthetic rubber, or alloys of the same.”.)
As for Claim 11, Onopa teaches that when the deployable anti-fatigue mat is configured for use for a user that is sitting, the second portion is oriented generally vertical (see Fig. 2 above).
As for Claim 12, Robbins, III et al. teach that when the deployable anti-fatigue mat is configured for use for a user that is standing, the first and second portions are oriented generally horizontal to act as a mat for the user to stand on.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 and 9 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 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 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.
/Rodney B White/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights