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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shohei Funaki et al. U.S. Patent 9,409,499 B2 (Funaki) in view of Brian Bober U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0351843 A1 (Bober).
Regarding claim 1, Funaki discloses a padding element for a vehicle seat, comprising a block of foam (Figure 2 Element 4P), said block comprising an outer surface and a groove, said groove comprising a bottom and side walls opening onto said outer surface (Figure 3A and 3B); the padding element further comprising an attachment support (Element 32), arranged at the bottom of the groove. Funaki does not directly disclose details about the attachment support. Bober discloses a groove with attachment support; wherein the attachment support comprises: a contact surface, integral with the bottom of the groove; and a rib, arranged opposite the contact surface, in the direction of the outer surface of the foam block (Figure 31-33, attachment Element 22 with contact and ribs).
Therefore it would have been an obvious modification well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Funaki as taught by Bober to include Bober’s attachment support. Such a modification would provide a means to secure a cover to the seat support.
Regarding claim 2, Funaki in view Bober discloses the padding element wherein the attachment support is formed from an unexpanded plastic material ([0082], Bober).
Regarding claim 3, Funaki in view Bober discloses the padding element wherein each one of the foam of the block and the unexpanded plastic material of the attachment support comprises plastic ([0082]). Funaki in view of Bober does not directly disclose the material to comprise polyurethane. Material medication is common and well known in the art. It would be obvious to provide alternative materials with similar properties. Such a modification would provide alternative resilient material to function for the attachment properties.
Regarding claim 4, Funaki in view Bober discloses the padding element wherein the contact surface and the rib of the attachment support extend continuously over a length of the groove of the foam block ([0063-0065], Bober).
Regarding claim 9, Funaki in view Bober discloses the padding element comprising a flexible covering, in contact with the outer surface of said padding element; and a plurality of attachment elements, attached to said flexible covering and to the rib of the attachment support of the padding element (Element 4S).
Regarding claim 10, Funaki in view Bober discloses the padding element wherein the plurality of attachment elements comprises at least one metal staple extending between two ends, said ends being inserted into the rib of the attachment support (Element 34, Funaki).
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shohei Funaki et al. U.S. Patent 9,409,499 B2 (Funaki) in view of Brian Bober U.S. Patent Publication 2019/0351843 A1 (Bober) in view of Andrew W. Santin et al U.S. Patent Publication 2013/0247338 A1 (Santin).
Regarding claims 5 and 8, Funaki in view Bober discloses a method for manufacturing the padding element comprising: manufacturing the attachment support by molding the unexpanded plastic material ([0082]). Funaki in view of Bober does not directly disclose the overmolding of the attachment support with foam. Santin discloses a method wherein manufacturing the foam block via overmolding over said attachment support, so as to secure the contact surface of said attachment support to the bottom of the groove of the foam block ([0006, 0043]). Funaki in view Bober in view of Santin discloses the padding element wherein the padding element is made by a manufacturing method comprising: manufacturing the attachment support by molding the unexpanded plastic material; and manufacturing the foam block via overmolding over said attachment support, so as to secure the contact surface of said attachment support to the bottom of the groove of the foam block.
Therefore it would have been an obvious modification well know in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Funaki in view of Bober as taught by Santin to include Santin’s method. Such a modification would provide a means to make the attachment and cushion support integral with a process.
Regarding claim 6, Funaki in view of Bober in view of Santin discloses the method wherein the step of manufacturing the attachment support comprises: providing a molding element comprising a channel complementary in shape to the rib of the attachment support; and pouring the plastic material in a fluid state into said channel, so that an upper surface of said plastic material forms the contact surface of the attachment support (molding process as taught in [0049], [0060], Santin in the part manufacturing as taught in Bober).
Regarding claim 7, Funaki in view of Bober in view of Santin discloses the method wherein: the molding element comprises flanks arranged on either side of the channel, said flanks having a shape complementary to the side walls of the groove of the foam block; and the step of manufacturing the foam block comprises overmolding over said molding element accommodating the attachment support, so as to form the groove, the bottom of said groove being integral with the contact surface of said attachment support (molding process as taught in [0049], [0060], Santin in the part manufacturing as taught in Bober).
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 SHIN H KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-7788. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM.
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.
/SHIN H KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights