DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
This action is in response to the application 19/119,632 filed 04/09/2025 which is a 371 of PCT/JP2023/037010 10/12/2023, and claims priority to JP 2022-166733 10/18/2022.
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 lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 7, ln 2: “wherein the bolt is inserted into”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-8 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. For purposes of examination on the merits, the claims, as best understood, are examined in the Action below.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "each side frame” and the limitation “each frame fastening portion.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the tool engaging portion.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claims 2-8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for being dependent on a rejected base claim.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 1-2 and 4-8, as best understood, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2020033005 hereinafter Yasuo in view of Line et al. (US 9315131 B2)(hereinafter Line).
RE Claim 1: Yasuo discloses a seat comprising:
a seat frame (12); and
a cushion body (Fig 1) configured to be supported by the seat frame from a back side and the cushion body configured to elastically support a seater (Fig 1),
wherein the cushion body includes three separate elements divided into
a main top panel (21b) that forms a center portion in a seat width direction and
two side top panels (21d, e) that form two side portions in the seat width direction,
wherein each of the side top panels has a side top panel pad and a support member disposed on a back side of the side top panel pad and fixed to the seat frame (Fig 1, 10),
wherein the seat frame has each side frame configured to support each of the side top panels from a back side of the seat, and each frame fastening portion integrally formed with each of the side frames (Fig 10),
wherein each of the support members is overlaid on each of the frame fastening portions each of the support members being fastened to each of the frame fastening portions via a plug-in type fastening structure (Fig 10), and
wherein an opening (upper part of 12a), which serves as an installation space for the main top panel (21b), is created in a main top panel removed state with the main top panel being removed from the seat frame, and a tool engaging portion of each of the plug-in type fastening structures is exposed through the opening (21b is mounted to 12a by stud 21fa and nut 21fb).
Yasuo teaches the main top panel is removably attached to the seat frame (21b mounted to 12a by stud 21fa and nut 21fb), but does not explicitly teach wherein the main top panel is removably attached to the seat frame by snap-fitting.
However, Line teaches a seat cushion and frame (analogous art) and further teaches snap fitting a cushion to a frame (col 4, ln 56 end).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Yasuo in view of Line such that the main top panel is removably attached to the seat frame by snap-fitting as taught by Line for the advantages of secure attachment.
RE Claim 2: Yasuo as modified discloses the seat according to claim 1, Yasuo further discloses wherein:
each of the frame fastening portions extends backward from each of the corresponding side frames to an inner side in the seat width direction (Fig 10),
each of the frame fastening portions has an overlapping surface on which each of the corresponding support members is laid (Fig 10), and
a direction perpendicular to the overlapping surface is oriented towards the opening (the perpendicular direction of the superimposed surface faces the opening).
RE: “each of the frame fastening portions extends diagonally backward (emphasis added to diagonally) from each of the corresponding side frames to an inner side in the seat width direction” - It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Yasuo such that the frame fastening portions extend diagonally backward from each of the corresponding side frames to an inner side in the seat width direction, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04 (VI) (C) citing In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). This would be done for the advantages of structural stability.
RE Claim 4: Yasuo as modified discloses the seat according to claim 1, Yasuo further discloses wherein:
the tool engaging portion has a head of bolt (Fig 10), and
the head of bolt is located on a side of each plug-in type fastening structure closest to the opening (Fig 10).
RE Claim 5: Yasuo as modified discloses the seat according to claim 1, wherein:
a base portion (12a) is provided to be integral with the seat frame (Fig 10).
Line discloses the main top panel has a fitting claw (tabs 22), and
the fitting claw is removably snap-fitted to the base portion upon being pressed from a front side of the seat.
Line teaches the snap-fit (col 4, ln 56 end).
Concerning method claims 6-8 in view of the structure disclosed by Yasuo as modified by Line, the method of assembling the device would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, since it is the normal and logical manner in which the pieces connect together via the mechanical fastening devices disclosed by the prior art.
RE Claim 6: Yasuo as modified discloses an assembly method for assembling the seat according claim 1 (previously discussed), the method comprising:
assembling the side top panels (Figs 1, 10)(also see claim 1), comprising:
placing each of the support members of each of the side top panels to each of corresponding frame fastening portions (Figs 1, 10)(also see claim 1); and
fastening each of the support members to the seat frame using plug-in type fastening structures (Fig 10); and
assembling the main top panel to the seat frame (Fig 10).
RE Claim 7: Yasuo as modified discloses the assembly method of claim 6, wherein
the plug-in type fastening structure includes a bolt and a weld nut (21b mounted to 12a by stud 21fa and nut 21fb),
wherein the bolt is inserted into a fastening portion of the support member and the overlapping one of the frame fastening portions and fastened to the weld nut using a fastening tool (21b mounted to 12a by stud 21fa and nut 21fb).
RE Claim 8: Yasuo as modified discloses the assembly method of claim 6 further comprising
assembling the side top panel to the side frame by inserting an engagement claw of the side top panel into an engagement hole of the side frame, and the engagement claw is slidably moved to hook onto the side frame (Figs 1, 10).
RE Claim 9: Yasuo discloses a seat comprising
a seat frame (12); and
a cushion body (Fig 1) having a main top panel (21b).
Yasuo teaches the main top panel is removably attached to the seat frame (21b mounted to 12a by stud 21fa and nut 21fb), but does not explicitly teach wherein the main top panel is removably attached to the seat frame by snap-fitting.
However, Line teaches a seat cushion and frame (analogous art) and further teaches snap fitting a cushion to a frame (col 4, ln 56 end).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Yasuo in view of Line such that the main top panel is removably attached to the seat frame by snap-fitting as taught by Line for the advantages of secure attachment.
Yasuo further teaches wherein each of the side top panels has a side top panel pad and a support member disposed on a back side of the side top panel pad and fixed to the seat frame (Fig 1, 10),
RE Claim 10: Yasuo as modified discloses the seat of claim 9,
Yasuo further discloses wherein the main top panel has a main top panel pad (21b), a main top panel cover (para 0022), and a main top panel resin member (para 0022).
RE Claim 11: Yasuo as modified discloses the seat of clam 9,
wherein the main top panel is positioned on the cushion body from above the seat (Figs 1, 10).
RE Claim 12: Yasuo as modified discloses the seat of clam 9,
wherein the seat frame has a side frame configured to support each of the side top panels from the back side of the seat and a frame fastening portion configured to integrate with the side frame (Figs 1, 10).
RE Claim 13: Yasuo as modified discloses the seat of clam 12,
wherein the support member is overlaid on the frame fastening portion and fastened to the frame fastening portion via a plug-in type fastening structure (Figs 1, 10).
RE Claim 14: Yasuo as modified discloses the seat of clam 13,
wherein the plug-in type fastening structure includes a bolt and a weld nut (21b mounted to 12a by stud 21fa and nut 21fb),
wherein the bolt is inserted into a fastening portion of the support member and the bolt is inserted into the frame fastening portion overlapping the fastening portion for fastening the weld nut (21b mounted to 12a by stud 21fa and nut 21fb).
RE Claim 15: Yasuo as modified discloses the seat of clam 9.
Line discloses wherein the main top panel is configured to be removably attached to the seat frame by a snap-fitting mechanism (col 4, ln 56 end).
RE Clam 16: Yasuo as modified discloses the seat of clam 9.
Line discloses wherein the main top panel further has a fitting claw that is removably snap-fitted to a base portion integral with the seat frame when being pressed from a front side of the seat (col 4, ln 56 end)..
RE Claim 17: Yasuo as modified discloses the seat of clam 16,
wherein the fitting claw is located on a main top panel resin member of the main top panel (Figs 1, 10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 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 and rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not disclose, either alone or in combination, the details of an engagement hole is formed in each of the side frames, each of the support members further includes an engagement claw, and the engagement claw is inserted into the engagement hole and slidably moved so as to be hooked to the side frame, along with the remaining limitations of the claim.
This statement is not intended to necessarily state all the reasons for allowance or all the details why the claims are allowed and has not been written to specifically or impliedly state that all the reasons for allowance are set forth (MPEP 1302.14).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
These documents present alternative designs similar in scope which illustrate relevant features in comparison to the Applicant’s submission. The cited prior art include various seat assemblies including frames and cushion bodies.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA E GRABER whose telephone number is (571)272-4640. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5.
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, Timothy D Collins can be reached on 571-272-6886. 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.
/MARIA E GRABER/Examiner, Art Unit 3644
Prosecution Insights