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 filed 11/21/2025 has been considered by the examiner; see attached signed PTO-1449.
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) 61-62, 65-69 and 73 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fleischer (US patent No. 4,160,553).
As to claim 61, Fleischer A playground spinner (figure 1) configured to provide a spinning and rotating movement (col. 4, lines 37-43), comprising: a seat (162 in fig. 17 or carrier 12 in fig. 1); and a mounting assembly (fig. 1) comprising: a drive shaft (28) having a longitudinal axis; a swivel (54 in fig. 4, 5 and 6) bearing that allows the drive shaft to spin about its longitudinal axis (col. 4, lines 37-51); and a drive wheel (22) that provides for rotation of the drive shaft about a vertical axis, wherein the drive wheel contacts an angled surface of a race, placing the longitudinal axis of the drive shaft at an angle with respect to vertical (fig. 10, col. 6, lines 51-65).
As to claim 62, The playground spinner of claim 61, the mounting assembly further comprising: a tensioning mechanism (torsion bar 144 and lock arm 145 and stem 130) configured to ensure that the longitudinal axis of the drive shaft is maintained at a substantially constant angle (col. 7, lines 45-51).
As to claim 65-66, The playground spinner of claim 61, wherein the longitudinal axis of the drive shaft is at an angle between about 5 degrees and about 10 degrees with respect to vertical (col. 8, lines 42-54 where it mentioned that the angle can be se to any degree).
Ads to claim 67, The playground spinner of claim 61, the mounting assembly further comprising a housing (figure 2 to hold the play surface 12) wherein the top surface of the housing is substantially flush with a play surface (as can be seen the top of the housing 40 is substantially flushed with the play surface).
As to claim 68, The playground spinner of claim 61, wherein the seat is a bowl seat having a wall that curves outward as it increases in height (figure 1).
As to claim 69, The playground spinner of claim 68, wherein the seat comprises an extended mounting feature having at least one protrusion that extends up the wall (as seen in fig 1, the seat carrier 10 is secured to the base 40 which inherently will have a hole to connect them).
As to claim 73, the claim is substantially similar to the limitation of independent claim 62 and will be rejected similarly.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 70-72 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleischer.
As to claim 72, Fleischer does not expressly teach that the seat can hold an adult and a child simultaneously. However, the size of the seat is completely a design choice based on the utility of the spinner and if it can be played jointly or separately based on the location and the need. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to design the size of the seat to accommodate both adult and a child so it will be conveniently used by a parent and you child who can’t use it alone and that will make it a user friendly.
As to claims 70-71, similar to claim 72 above, have the back of the seat higher than the front of the seat. This is also a pure design choice to design the claim with back support (note that in some of Fleischer’s embodiments, regular chair with long back is taught); or having holes to support the back are with the capability of one of ordinary skill in the art as a design choice and to yield predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 63-64 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Houvener et al. (US 2012/0139727) teaches physical interaction device for personal electronics and method of use.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMR A AWAD whose telephone number is (571)272-7764. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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.
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.
/AMR A AWAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights