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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 have been examined.
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.
Claim 14 is 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.
Claim 14 recites “wherein in the adjustor, the second backrest and the headrest are arranged in parallel along the front-rear direction.” It is unclear how the second backrest, headrest and adjustor may be arranged in “parallel” when the headrest and second backrest comprise/form the adjustor.
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, 14, 15 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schobert et al. (WO 2008031583) (“Schobert”). Schobert discloses a child safety seat comprising a first backrest (fig. 6: 16), a second backrest, a headrest (fig. 3: 18 is a headrest with a second backrest portion below it moving up with the headrest), and side wings (fig. 3: 20), the first backrest and the second backrest being slidably connected to each other along a height direction of the child safety seat (shown in fig. 3), the headrest being assembled on the second backrest and, together with the second backrest, forming an adjustor for performing a height adjustment with respect to the first backrest, the side wings being located on sides of the first backrest, wherein the side wings are embedded in the adjustor such that movement of the side wings along a front-rear direction of the child safety seat is limited by the adjustor (fig. 9 shows that side wings 50 have portions embedded/extending within the headrest/backrest portion 18).
As concerns claim 14, as best understood, Schobert discloses wherein in the adjustor, the second backrest and the headrest are arranged in parallel along the front-rear direction, and the side wings are positioned between the second backrest and the headrest in the front-rear direction of the child safety seat (figs. 6 and 8 show that the side wings extend behind/between the front and rear portions of the backrest/headrest).
As concerns claim 15, Schobert discloses wherein the first backrest is provided with height guiding tracks (fig. 3: 24, 26, 32), and the second backrest is provided with fitting guide structures which are in sliding fit with the height guiding tracks (fig. 3: 28, 30, 34).
As concerns claim 19, Schobert discloses wherein, during the height adjustment of the headrest, the height and width of the side wings are synchronously adjusted (fig. 3: shown).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-13, 16-18 and 20 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art reference of Schobert fails to teach
an adjustment mechanism, wherein the adjustment mechanism comprises a first guide rail extending in a width direction of the child safety seat, a second guide rail extending in the height direction of the child safety seat, a first fitting guide member in sliding-fit with the first guide rail, and a second fitting guide member in sliding-fit with the second guide rail, wherein the side wings are translated and rotated to open outwardly or contract inwardly with respect to the first backrest under an action of sliding the first fitting guide member along the first guide rail and sliding the second fitting guide member along the second guide rail simultaneously;
side wing reset members constantly driving the side wings to open outwardly or contract inwardly with respect to the first backrest, and each of the side wing reset members is arranged between one of the side wings and the adjustor, respectively;
an unlocking operating member and a locking member linked with the unlocking operating member, the locking member is movably assembled on one of the first backrest and the adjustor, the other one of the first backrest and the adjustor is provided with at least two segment locking parts that are spaced apart from each other along the height direction of the child safety seat, the locking member locks the height adjustment of the adjustor with respect to the first backrest when it is locked with any one of the segment locking parts, the adjustor is able to perform the height adjustment with respect to the first backrest when the locking member is unlocked with any one of the segment locking parts.
wherein the adjustor is embedded in the first backrest, and the second backrest is provided with avoidance spaces for the fitting guide structures to pass through; or
wherein the side wings are translated and rotated to open outwardly or contract inwardly with respect to the first backrest.
Further, there is no teaching, suggestion or motivation to modify the prior art absent hindsight.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY J BRINDLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7231. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9am-5pm.
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 5712726670. 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.
/TIMOTHY J BRINDLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights