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 .
35 USC 112(b) rejections
Claims 1-10 are 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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected because the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be ascertained because of the following reasons.
In independent claim 1, the term “in particular” on lines 1-2 is vague/indefinite, and should be avoided in claim language.
In claim 1, line 7, the term “one piece” appears incorrect because figures 2B, 3 clearly show that the brackets 3 are integral with the holding ring 2, not one-piece.
For examination purposes the offending limitations above will be interpreted to be:
The limitations right after said phrase “in particular” is not considered parts of the claim.
The term “one piece” is treated as integral.
35 USC 102 rejections
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) 1-3, 6-7, 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by US 2005/0058556 (Cremer).
Regarding independent claim 1, Cremer discloses a suspension element 16 for a pneumatic pump element 12 in a pump housing 14, [in particular of an adjustable lumbar support of a vehicle seat] (not treated)], the suspension element 16 comprising: a holding ring 18 into which the pump element 12 is insertable; and at least two fastening elements 24 that protrude radially from the holding ring and that are uniformly distributed over a circumference of the holding ring 18, and that are designed in one piece with the holding ring and are elastically deformable, at least in areas, in order to support the pump element 12 in the pump housing in a floating and vibration-damping manner.
As noted above, figures 2B and 3 in this application show the holding ring 2 being integral with brackets 3. Figures 1-2 of Cremer below clearly shows the holding ring 18 being integral with the brackets 24.
PNG
media_image1.png
825
402
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Cremer clearly discloses wherein the fastening elements 24 each have a fastening section with a C-shaped cross section (note figures 3-4), and with their ends are each situated at the holding ring so that a cavity is formed between the fastening element and the holding ring.
Regarding claim 3, Cremer discloses wherein a fastener 21-22 for a housing opening in the pump housing is provided at a surface of the fastening section facing away from the holding ring.
Regarding claim 6, Cremer discloses that wherein at least one of the fastener 21-22 has a rear engagement element (figures 3-4).
Regarding claim 7, Cremer discloses that a pump arrangement comprising: a pump element; and a pump housing for an adjustable lumbar support of a vehicle seat, wherein the pump element is supported in the pump housing by the suspension element according to claim 1 (note figure 1).
35 USC 103 rejections
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 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over US 2005/0058556 (Cremer) in view of DE 10 2019 109928. Cremer teaches all the claimed subject matter as set forth above in the rejection of claim 1, but still does not teach that a motor vehicle comprising at least one vehicle seat, the pump arrangement being situated in or at a seat frame of the vehicle seat or at a backrest. DE 10 2019 109928 teaches it is well known for a pump assembly with suspension pump to be used in a vehicle seat with lumbar support or backrest (figures 2A, 3). It would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to use the pump assembly of Cremer in the vehicle seat as taught by DE 10 2019 109928 for the purpose of having and controlling the pump suspension.
Allowable Subject Matter and Reasons for Allowance
Claims 4-5, 8 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
In claim 4, the recitation of “wherein axially following the holding ring, a mounting bracket is provided, at which at least one axially protruding, further elastically deformable fastening element is provided, substantially perpendicular to the fastening elements,”; in claim 8, the recitations of “wherein the pump housing has at least two housing parts, and wherein at least one fastening element of the suspension element is partially supported in each case in a housing opening in each of the two housing parts” as within the context of the claimed invention as disclosed and within the context of the other limitations present in claims 4, 8, are neither disclosed by a single prior art reference nor rendered obvious by a combination of prior art references. Thus, claims 4, 8 and their dependent claims are allowable.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wykman, Herrick, Hoffman, Wadhwa, and Okazono disclose pump having suspension systems and mounting brackets.
Conclusions
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Examiner Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-4861. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday--Thursday from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark Laurenzi, can be reached on (571) 270-7878.
The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/HOANG M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
HOANG NGUYEN
PRIMARY EXAMINER
ART UNIT 3746
Hoang Minh Nguyen
7/16/2026
Prosecution Insights