Office Action 2: Final Rejection (2024-04-03)
Rejection types: 102 - Lack of Novelty, 103 - Obviousness, 112 - Written Description/Enablement

CLAIMS:
AMENDMENTS TO THE CLAIMS

This listing of claims will replace all prior versions, and listings of claims in the application.

Listing of Claims:

1\. (Currently amended) An aircraft passenger seat unit, configured for use adjacent an aisle of an aircraft cabin, wherein the seat unit comprises\_\[\[:\]\] a seat,a footrest, and
a movable panel;\[\[,\]\] the seat comprises a seat pan and backrest, the seat having an upright sitting configuration in which the backrest is substantially upright;
the seat is movable in the upright sitting configuration from a first position in which the seat pan is spaced apart from the footrest to a second position in which the seat pan arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a surface;
the movable panel is movable with respect to the footrest between a closed position in which the movable panel at least partially encloses a side of the footrest and an open position in which the movable panel at least partially exposes the side of the footrest such that, in use, when the seat is in the second position and the panel is in the open position, a passenger can access the \[\[seat \]\]surface formed by the footrest and seat pan from an aisle through the partially exposed side of the footrest.

2\. (Cancelled)

3\. (Cancelled)

4\. (Currently amended) The\[\[An\]\] aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim \[\[2\]\]1,wherein the seat faces in a direction defining a seat axis, and wherein the seat is movable along the seat axis towards or away from the footrest when the seat is moved between the first and second positions.

5\. (Currently Amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to wherein the seat unit has an aisle side that is configured to be adjacent an aisle in use, and
wherein the movable panel is positioned along the aisle side of the seat unit when in the closed position such that movable panel at least partially encloses the side of the footrest to block access to the side of the footrest from the aisle, and such that when the panel is in the open position a passenger can access the at least partially exposed side of the footrest from the aisle.

6\. (Currently amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1 further comprising a wall, wherein the wall at least partially encloses a side of the seat when the seat is in the first position, the wall thereby blocking access to the seat from an aisle when the seat is in the first position, and wherein the wall does not enclose the side of the seat when the seat is in the second position so that a passenger can access the seat from an aisle when the seat is in the second position.

7\. (Currently Amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to wherein the movable panel and wall are spaced apart along a first side of the seat unit and the space between the movable panel and wall defines an access path that provides passenger access into the seat unit from the first side of the seat unit, and wherein the seat is adjacent to the access path when in the second position so that a passenger can access the seat from a first side of the seat unit via the access path when the seat is in the second position.

8\. (Currently Amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to wherein the seat unit comprises a console comprising a table surface for use by a passenger of the seat unit and wherein the console is at least partially formed by the wall.

9\. (Currently Amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to wherein the aircraft passenger seat unit is configured to be positioned directly adjacent to and in front of a further, substantially identical aircraft seat unit, and wherein the console is at least partially formed by the movable panel of the further seat unit.

10\. (Currently Amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 9 further comprising a shell, wherein the shell forms the console of the seat unit and the movable panel of the further seat unit.

11\. (Currently Amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to wherein the movable panel is movably mounted via a hinge.

12\. (Currently Amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to wherein the movable panel is mounted via a hinge and configured to be moved between the closed position and open position about a horizontal axis located towards a bottom of the panel.

13\. (Currently Amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to wherein the movable panel is mounted via a hinge and configured to be moved between the closed position and open position about a vertical axis located towards a side of the panel.

14\. (Currently Amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to wherein the seat unit comprises a locking system configured to lock the movable panel in the closed position, the lock system comprising:
\- a plurality of latches positioned on the movable panel and configured to engage with a structure of the seat unit to lock the movable panel in the closed position, or - a plurality of latches positioned on the structure of the seat unit and configured to engage with the movable panel to lock the movable panel in the closed position.

15\. (Currently Amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to wherein the lock system comprises an actuatable member operable to disengage the latches so that the movable panel can be moved from the closed position to the open position.

16\. (Currently Amended) The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to The\[\[An\]\]aircraft passenger seat unit according to wherein the actuatable member is positioned on a surface of the movable panel that is adjacent the footrest when the panel is in the closed position.

17\. (Cancelled)

18\. (Cancelled)

OFFICE ACTION:
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a).  The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims.  Therefore, the “a wall, wherein the wall at least partially encloses a side of the seat when the seat is in the first position, the wall thereby blocking access to the seat from an aisle when in the first position, and wherein the wall does not enclose the side of the seat when the seat is in the second position so that a passenger can access the seat from an aisle when the seat is in the second position” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).  No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 6-10 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.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation “wherein the wall at least partially encloses a side of the seat when the seat is in the first position, the wall thereby blocking access to the seat from an aisle when in the first position, and wherein the wall does not enclose the side of the seat when the seat is in the second position so that a passenger can access the seat from an aisle when the seat is in the second position” is indefinite because it is unclear how the wall can block access to the seat when the seat is an forward (first) position, but not when the seat is in a lie rearward (second) position. Applicant is encouraged to amend and provide arguments so as to explain or clarify the scope of this claim. This claim can not be understood as written.
Claims 7-10 are rejected for being dependent on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
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(s) 1 , 4-5, 6 (as best understood), and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Wallace (US 20130241247 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) discloses an aircraft passenger seat unit (Nicholas, figures 7a-d, item 709), configured for use adjacent an aisle of an aircraft cabin (Nicholas, figures 1e and 7a-d, item 111, seat units adjacent aircraft aisle), wherein the seat unit comprises:
- a seat (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 709),
- a footrest (Nicholas, figure 7b, item 726), and
- a movable panel (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 725, end wall made of a panel moves),
the seat comprises a seat pan and backrest (Nicholas, figure 7c, items 715a and 715b, backrest and seat pan), the seat having an upright sitting configuration in which the backrest is substantially upright (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 715a, backrest is upright);
the seat is movable in the upright sitting configuration from a first position in which the seat pan is spaced apart from the footrest to a second position in which the seat pan arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a surface (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, items 715a-c and 726, lest rest bridges gap between the seat pan and the footrest to form a contiguous surface when extended);
the moveable panel being movable with respect to the footrest between a closed position in which the movable panel at least partially encloses a side of the footrest (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 725, panel in closed configuration enclosing a side of the footrest) and an open position in which the movable panel at least partially exposes the side of the footrest such that, in use, when the panel is in the open position, a passenger can access the seat from an aisle through the partially exposed side of the footrest (Nicholas, figure 7c, item 725, panel in open configuration exposing a side of the footrest and thereby allowing passenger access to the footrest from the aisle).
In arguendo, should applicant argue that Nicholas fails to teach the amended parts above, Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) teaches a seat comprising a seat pan and backrest (Wallace, figure 2, item 16, seat including seat pan and backrest), the seat having an upright sitting configuration in which the backrest is substantially upright (Wallace, figure 2, item 16, backrest is upright);
the seat is movable in the upright sitting configuration from a first position in which the seat pan is spaced apart from a footrest (Wallace, figure 2, item 18, seat pan spaced apart from footrest) to a second position in which the seat pan arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a surface (Wallace, figure 3, items 14 and 18, seat pan forms a contiguous surface with the footrest).
Nicholas and Wallace are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft seating. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the seat of Nicholas with the seat forming a contiguous surface between the seat pan and the footrest of Wallace with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent occupant discomfort from having feet becoming wedged in a gap between the seat pan and footrest.
Regarding claim 4, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 2, wherein the seat faces in a direction defining a seat axis, and wherein the seat is movable along the seat axis towards or away from the footrest when the seat is moved between the first and second positions (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 709, col 13 lines 10-22, forwards and aftwards seats move along an axis between a first and second position).
Regarding claim 5, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1, wherein the seat unit has an aisle side that is configured to be adjacent an aisle in use (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 733, side of seat unit has an opening designed to be adjacent to aisle for allowing passengers access to the seat unit), and
wherein the movable panel is positioned along the aisle side of the seat unit when in the closed position such that movable panel at least partially encloses the side of the footrest to block access to the side of the footrest from the aisle, and such that when the panel is in the open position a passenger can access the at least partially exposed side of the footrest from the aisle (Nicholas, figures 7a and 7c, item 725, panel positioned along the aisle side of the seat unit blocks or allows access to the footwell directly from the aisle, depending upon whether closed or opened).
Regarding claim 6 (as best understood), Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1 further comprising a wall (Nicholas, figure 7a-b, item 727, side wall),
wherein the wall at least partially encloses a side of the seat when the seat is in the first position (Nicholas, figure 7a-b, item 727, wall partially encloses seat unit when seat is in the upright position),
Regarding claim 7, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 6, wherein the movable panel and wall are spaced apart along a first side of the seat unit and the space between the movable panel and wall defines an access path that provides passenger access into the seat unit from the first side of the seat unit (Nicholas, figures 7b and 7d, item 733, access path between the wall and the panel), and wherein the seat is adjacent to the access path when in the second position so that a passenger can access the seat from a first side of the seat unit via the access path when the seat is in the second position (Nicholas, figures 7b and 7d, items 715 and 733, access path between the wall and the panel allows access to the seat when the seat is in upright position).
Regarding claim 8, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 6, wherein the seat unit comprises a console (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 737, base forming part of the console) comprising a table surface for use by a passenger of the seat unit (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 729, table surface) and wherein the console is at least partially formed by the wall (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 727, side wall forming part of console).
Regarding claim 9, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 8, wherein the aircraft passenger seat unit is configured to be positioned directly adjacent to and in front of a further, substantially identical aircraft seat unit (Nicholas, figure 7c, item 709, seat units positioned on in front of the other), and wherein the console is at least partially formed by the movable panel of the further seat unit (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 725, movable panel of one seat unit forms part of the console of the forward seat unit).
Regarding claim 10, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 9. further comprising a shell, wherein the shell forms the console of the seat unit and the movable panel of the further seat unit (Nicholas, figure 7a, items 725, 727, and 737, console forms a shell structure around the seat unit).
Claim(s) 11 and 13 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) or alternatively over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pethier (US 11794902 B2).
Regarding claim 11, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1, except:
wherein the movable panel is movably mounted via a hinge.
Pethier (US 11794902 B2) teaches a movable panel which is movably mounted via a hinge (Pethier, figure 3, item 86, hinge which mounts movable panel).
Nicholas and Pethier are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft personnel accommodations. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the movable panel of Nicholas with the panel and hinge allowing horizontal movement of Pethier with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce the disruption to other the access opening of other seats.
Regarding claim 13, Nicholas as modified by Pethier/ Nicholas as modified by Wallace and Pethier teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 11, wherein the movable panel is mounted via a hinge and configured to be moved between the closed position and open position about a vertical axis located towards a side of the panel (Pethier, figure 3, item 86, hinge which mounts movable panel allows the panel to move a bout a vertical axis between an opened and closed position).
Claim(s) 11 and 12 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Pethier (US 11794902 B2) or alternatively Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) and Pethier (US 11794902 B2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Guering (US 20130126671 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1, except:
wherein the movable panel is movably mounted via a hinge.
Guering (US 20130126671 A1) teaches a movable panel which is movably mounted via a hinge (Guering, figures 5-8, items 20 and 38, movable panel mounted via hinge).
Nicholas and Guering are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft personnel accommodations. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the movable panel of Nicholas with the panel and hinge allowing vertical movement of Guering with a reasonable expectation of success in order to in order to reduce the disruption to other the access opening of other seats.
Regarding claim 12, Nicholas as modified by Guering/ Nicholas as modified by Wallace and Guering teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 11,
wherein the movable panel is mounted via a hinge and configured to be moved between the closed position and open position about a horizontal axis located towards a bottom of the panel (Guering, figures 5-8, items 20 and 38, hinge allowing movable panel to be moved between the open and closed position about a horizontal axis which is located at the panel bottom).
Claim(s) 14-16 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) or alternatively over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Robinson (US 20170283064 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1, wherein the seat unit comprises a locking system configured to lock the movable panel in the closed position (Nicholas, col 13 lines 28-35, panel releasably locked in place), the lock system comprising:
- a latch positioned configured to engage to lock the movable panel in the closed position (Nicholas, col 13 lines 28-35, latch locks the movable panel in the closed position), except:
wherein the locking system comprises a plurality of latches positioned on the movable panel and configured to engage with a structure of the seat unit or vice verse to lock the movable panel in the closed position.
Robinson (US 20170283064 A1) teaches a movable panel locking system;
wherein the locking system comprises a plurality of latches (Robinson, figure 6, item 56 and 72, latches) positioned on the movable panel and configured to engage with a structure of the seat unit or vice verse to lock the movable panel in the closed position (Robinson, figure 3, items 34a and 32, latches attached to movable panel engage with seat unit structure locks the movable panel closed).
Nicholas and Robinson are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft passenger accommodations. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Nicholas with the locking system including multiple latches of Robinson with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide redundancy to prevent panels from moving to the open position when undesired.
Regarding claim 15, Nicholas as modified by Robinson/ Nicholas as modified by Wallace and Robinson teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 14, wherein the lock system comprises an actuatable member operable to disengage the latches so that the movable panel can be moved from the closed position to the open position (Robinson, figures 6 and 7a, item 58, 60, 74, latch controls disengage latches).
Regarding claim 16, Nicholas as modified by Robinson/ Nicholas as modified by Wallace and Robinson teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 15, wherein the actuatable member is positioned on a surface of the movable panel that is adjacent the footrest when the panel is in the closed position (Robinson, figures 6 and 7a, latch controls are positioned on the panel; Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 725, wall panel is adjacent to the footrest).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8 of applicant’s reply, filed 03/20/2024, with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 112(b) to claims 6 (for antecedent basis), 7, 17, and 18 have been fully considered and are persuasive.  These rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 03/20/2024 with respect to drawing objections and the rejection of claim 6 under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant attempts to clarify that the terms first and second position refer to forward and rearward positioning of the seat rather than upright and lie-flat positioning of the seat. While this does clarify the intended operation of the seat, the language of claim 6 rather requires that the seat be effectively inaccessible from the aisle when in the first position (through the limitation “the wall thereby blocking access to the seat from an aisle”), however the seat would still be accessible from the aisle in both positions. Hence it is unclear how the seat can be blocked in one position but not the other. Thus the drawing objection and rejection to claim 6 under 35 USC 112(b) are being maintained.
Applicant's arguments filed 03/20/2024 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Nicholas fails to meet new claim limitations requiring that the seat be moveable such that seat pan and foot rest be capable of forming a contiguous surface together.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., moving seats which move to from a contiguous surface between a seat pan and footrest) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The broader language used in the claim still appears to read on Nicholas (see the rejection of claim 1 above. Nevertheless, an alternative rejection has also been put forth in view of Wallace above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Davis (US 11299274 B1) teaches a movable panel but for the seat rather than the footrest
Dowty (US 11345476 B2) teaches a movable panel between seats that seems to obstruct footrest when closed
Katakura (US 11731764 B2) teaches a movable armrest for the seat
Wallace (US 20130241258 A1) teaches a moveable door panel
Henshaw (US 9469405 B2) teaches a seat with a movable panel
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.  Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL.  See MPEP § 706.07(a).  Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.  In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action.  In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: REMARKS
I.
Introduction
The undersigned thanks Examiner Yankey for review and consideration of the present Application. In response to the Office Action of December 22, 2023 ("Office Action"), the undersigned submits the present amendment and remarks ("Response").
Upon entry of the present amendment, claims 1 and 4-16 will be pending in this application. Claims 1 and 4-16 have been amended, claims 2, 3, 17, and 18 have been canceled. No new have been added.
No new matter is added.
Applicant has also amended the
specification to fix minor typographical errors in reference numbering of footrest from 109 to 209.
Based on the following remarks, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration and allowance of the pending claims.
II.
Drawing Ob
j
ections
The drawings are objected to as the wall of claim 6 is allegedly not shown. Applicant clarifies that upper and lower walls 225, 227 of console 203 are shown in Fig. 4. In Figs. 1 to 3, a seat 210 is shown in second position in which seat pan 219 is arranged contiguously with footrest 209, as per amended claim 1 and in which walls 225 and 227 do not enclose the side of the seat 210 so that a passenger can access the seat 210 from the aisle when the seat is in the second position. Hence, a person of ordinary skill in the art can readily find support in the drawings. Accordingly, Applicant requests withdrawal of drawing objections.
III.
Claim Re
j
ections under 35 U.S.C.
&
Claims 6-10 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as allegedly being indefinite. Applicant has amended the claims to address the 112(b) issues and further clarify the 112(b) issues as follows:
Objection to claim 6
Claim 1 now recites that the seat is movable from a first position to a second position. Therefore, there is antecedent basis for these terms recited by claim 6.
The Examiner has understood the "first position" to refer to an upright position of the seat and the "second position" to be a lie flat position of the seat. This understanding is incorrect. Applicant clarifies that claim 1 does not recite a lie flat position of the seat.
Amended claim 1 recites that
"the seat is movable in the upri
g
ht
s
itti
ng
con
fig
uration from a first position in which the seat pan is spaced apart from the footrest to a second position in which the seat pan arran
g
ed conti
g
uously with the footrest".
This statement is believed to be clear.
For example, in the embodiment shown in Figs 1 to 3 the seat 110 is in the first position and the seat 210 is in the second position. In the first position a wall formed by the console 103 blocks access to the seat 110 from the aisle 600. In the second position the wall formed by the console does not block the seat 210 (see also page 8, lines 19 to 26 of the application as filed).
Objection to claim 7
Claim 1 now recites a second position so there is antecedent basis for this term in claim 7.
Objection to claim 17
Applicant has rewritten claim 17 in independent form rendering the objection moot.
Objection to claim 18
Claim 18 is cancelled rendering the objection moot.
For the aforementioned reasons, Applicant requests reconsideration and withdrawal of Section 112(b) rejections.
IV.
Claim Re
j
ections under 35 U.S.C.
"
Claims 1-2, 4-10, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as allegedly being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 10,501,188 B2 to Nicholas et al. ("Nicholas"). Claims 3 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over Nicholas, as applied to claim 1 above. Claims 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over Nicholas, as applied to claim 1 above in view of U.S. Patent No. 11,794,902 B2 to Pothier ("Pothier"). Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over Nicholas in view of Pothier, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0126671 Al to Guering ("Guering"). Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over Nicholas, as applied to
claim 1 above, in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2017/0283064 Al to Robinson ("Robinson"). Applicant respectfully traverses these rejections and submits that all the pending claims are patentable.
Independent claim 1 has been amended solely to expedite prosecution of this case. Claim 1, as amended, recites inter alia that the seat is movable to a (second) position which
the seat pan is arran
g
ed conti
g
uously with the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan to
g
ether form a sur
f
ace.
This arrangement permits a passenger with reduced mobility (e.g. a wheelchair user) to access the seat from an aisle through the partially exposed side of the footrest by sitting
directly upon the seat pan
and by then moving their legs into the seat unit via the exposed side of the footrest. This feature is not disclosed by Nicholas.
Instead, Nicholas discloses an arrangement wherein the seat is translated forward and then the leg rest is deployed to be coplanar with the seat pan and with a foot-supporting surface (see col. 12, lines 27 to 31 and Fig. 7c of Nicholas). In other words, the seat pan is spaced apart from the footrest/foot-supporting surface by at least the distance of the leg rest, and a person with reduced mobility has to sit
on the le
g
rest
before being able to move onto the seat pan - see Fig. 7c in particular.
Nicholas does not teach or suggest an arrangement in which the seat is movable to a position in which the seat pan is arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a surface, as required by present claim 1.
Furthermore, the arrangement of claim 1 is advantageous over Nicholas because claim 1 does not require a leg rest. Nicholas not only requires the seat to have a leg rest, but also requires that the leg rest be capable of bearing the full weight of a person sitting on the leg rest. The invention of claim 1 functions without a leg rest or with a stowable leg rest that is not able to support the full weight of a person. The invention of claim 1 therefore enables a simpler and lighter solution to the problem of providing persons having reduced mobility with access to a business class-type aircraft seat unit.
Nicholas, separately or in combination with any other cited reference, fails to anticipate or render obvious the subject matter of independent claims 1. Claims 1 is therefore allowable. As dependent claims depend directly or indirectly from the independent claim 1, they are also allowable at least based upon their dependency from allowable base claims, as well as features
they recite individually. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103 rejections be withdrawn and that these claims be allowed.
CONCLUSION

NEXT OFFICE ACTION: 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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figure 4 includes an erroneous line pointing towards the footrest.  Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 4-5, 8-16, and 19-22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “the footrest and seat pan together form a continuous surface” does not have support in the disclosure as originally filed.
Regarding claim 21, the limitation “a front edge of the seat pan touches the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a continuous surface” does not have support in the disclosure as originally filed.
Regarding claim 22, the limitation the seat pan is arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a continuous surface” does not have support in the disclosure as originally filed.
Claims 4-5, 8-16, and 19-20 are rejected for being dependent on a rejected claim.
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, 4-5, 8-16, and 19-22 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.
Regarding claim 1, the term “continuous” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “continuous” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. As such it is not clear what degree of continuity is being required (i.e. would a small transition bump be permitted?).
Regarding claim 21, the term “continuous” in claim 21 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “continuous” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. As such it is not clear what degree of continuity is being required (i.e. would a small transition bump be permitted?).
Regarding claim 22, the term “continuous” in claim 22 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “continuous” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. As such it is not clear what degree of continuity is being required (i.e. would a small transition bump be permitted?).
Claims 4-5, 8-16, and 19-20 are rejected for being dependent on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
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(s) 1, 4-5, 8-10, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as anticipated by Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) and/or O’Neil (US 11312494 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) discloses an aircraft passenger seat unit (Nicholas, figures 7a-d, item 709), configured for use adjacent an aisle of an aircraft cabin (Nicholas, figures 1e and 7a-d, item 111, seat units adjacent aircraft aisle), wherein the seat unit comprises:
- a console (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 729)
- a seat (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 709),
- a footrest (Nicholas, figure 7b, item 726), and
- a movable panel (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 725, end wall made of a panel moves),
the console is positioned on an aisle side of the seat unit and is spaced apart from the footrest along a longitudinal axis of the aircraft cabin to define an access path between the console and the footrest, the access path providing passenger access into the seat unit from the aisle (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 733, access path between console and footrest);
the seat comprises a seat pan and backrest (Nicholas, figure 7c, items 715a and 715b, backrest and seat pan), the seat having an upright sitting configuration in which the backrest is substantially upright (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 715a, backrest is upright);
the seat is movable in the upright sitting configuration from a first position to a second position;
in the first position of the seat a front edge of the seat pan is spaced apart from the footrest such that the console is positioned between a lateral edge of the seat pan and the aisle and such that the lateral edge of the seat pan is spaced apart from the access path (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, items 715a-c, 726, and 729, seat spaced apart from the footrest in a first position; console between seat pan and aisle),
in the second position of the seat the front edge of the seat pan is arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a continuous surface and such that the lateral edge of the seat pan is positioned in the access path, between the console and the footrest (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, items 715a-c and 726, leg rest bridges gap of the access path between the seat pan and the footrest arranged contiguously to form a continuous surface when extended); and
the moveable panel being movable with respect to the footrest between a closed position in which the movable panel at least partially encloses a side of the footrest (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 725, panel in closed configuration enclosing a side of the footrest) and an open position in which the movable panel at least partially exposes the side of the footrest such that, in use, when the panel is in the open position, a passenger can access the continuous surface formed by the footrest and seat pan from the aisle through the partially exposed side of the footrest and across the lateral edge of the seat pan (Nicholas, figure 7c, item 725, panel in open configuration exposing a side of the footrest and thereby allowing passenger access to surface including the footrest from the lateral edge towards the aisle).
In arguendo, should applicant argue that Nicholas fails to teach the contiguous and continuous surface formed by the seat pan and footrest, Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) teaches a seat comprising a seat pan and backrest (Wallace, figure 2, item 16, seat including seat pan and backrest), the seat having an upright sitting configuration in which the backrest is substantially upright (Wallace, figure 2, item 16, backrest is upright);
the seat is movable in the upright sitting configuration from a first position in which the seat pan is spaced apart from a footrest (Wallace, figure 2, item 18, seat pan spaced apart from footrest) to a second position in which the seat pan arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a surface (Wallace, figure 3, items 14 and 18, seat pan is contiguous with the footrest and forms a continuous surface with the footrest).
Nicholas and Wallace are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft seating. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the seat of Nicholas with the seat forming a contiguous and continuous surface between the seat pan and the footrest of Wallace with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent occupant discomfort from having feet becoming wedged in a gap between the seat pan and footrest.
Alternatively, should applicant argue that Nicholas as modified by Wallace fails to teach the contiguous, continuous surface claimed above, O’Neil (US 11312494 B2) teaches a seat with a seat pan and legrest, wherein a front edge of the seat pan is arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the legrest and seat pan together form a continuous surface (O’Neil, claim 11).
Nicholas as modified by Wallace and O’Neil are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft seating. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the arrangement of the seat pan and footrest of Nicholas with the seat forming a contiguous and continuous surface between the seat pan and a forward surface of Wallace with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent occupant discomfort from having feet becoming wedged in a gap between the seat pan and footrest.
Regarding claim 4, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 2, wherein the seat faces in a direction defining a seat axis, and wherein the seat is movable along the seat axis towards or away from the footrest when the seat is moved between the first and second positions (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 709, col 13 lines 10-22, forwards and aftwards seats move along an axis between a first and second position).
Regarding claim 5, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1, wherein the seat unit has an aisle side that is configured to be adjacent an aisle in use (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 733, side of seat unit has an opening designed to be adjacent to aisle for allowing passengers access to the seat unit), and
wherein the movable panel is positioned along the aisle side of the seat unit when in the closed position such that movable panel at least partially encloses the side of the footrest to block access to the side of the footrest from the aisle, and such that when the panel is in the open position a passenger can access the at least partially exposed side of the footrest from the aisle (Nicholas, figures 7a and 7c, item 725, panel positioned along the aisle side of the seat unit blocks or allows access to the footwell directly from the aisle, depending upon whether closed or opened).
Regarding claim 8, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 6, wherein the seat unit comprises a console (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 737, base forming part of the console) comprising a table surface for use by a passenger of the seat unit (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 729, table surface) and wherein the console is at least partially formed by the wall (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 727, side wall forming part of console).
Regarding claim 9, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 8, wherein the aircraft passenger seat unit is configured to be positioned directly adjacent to and in front of a further, substantially identical aircraft seat unit (Nicholas, figure 7c, item 709, seat units positioned on in front of the other), and wherein the console is at least partially formed by the movable panel of the further seat unit (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 725, movable panel of one seat unit forms part of the console of the forward seat unit).
Regarding claim 10, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 9. further comprising a shell, wherein the shell forms the console of the seat unit and the movable panel of the further seat unit (Nicholas, figure 7a, items 725, 727, and 737, console forms a shell structure around the seat unit).
Regarding claim 21, Nicholas discloses an aircraft passenger seat unit, configured for use adjacent an aisle of an aircraft cabin, wherein: the seat unit comprises:
a seat (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 709),
a footrest (Nicholas, figure 7b, item 726), and
a movable panel (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 725, end wall made of a panel moves);
the seat comprises a seat pan and backrest (Nicholas, figure 7c, items 715a and 715b, backrest and seat pan), the seat having an upright sitting configuration in which the backrest is substantially upright (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 715a, backrest is upright);
the seat is movable in the upright sitting configuration from a first position in which the seat pan is spaced apart from the footrest to a second position in which the seat including the seat pan is translated forwards (Nicholas, figures 1a-b, item 115b, seat may be translated forward/backward); and
the movable panel is movable with respect to the footrest (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 725, end wall made of a panel moves) between a closed position in which the movable panel at least partially encloses a side of the footrest (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 725, panel in closed configuration enclosing a side of the footrest) and an open position in which the movable panel at least partially exposes the side of the footrest such that, in use, when the seat is in the second position and the panel is in the open position, a passenger can access the surface formed by the footrest and seat pan from an aisle through the partially exposed side of the footrest (Nicholas, figure 7c, item 725, panel in open configuration exposing a side of the footrest and thereby allowing passenger access to surface including the footrest from the lateral edge towards the aisle), except:
wherein the second position is in which a front edge of the seat pan touches the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a continuous surface.
Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) teaches a seat comprising a seat pan and backrest (Wallace, figure 2, item 16, seat including seat pan and backrest), the seat having an upright sitting configuration in which the backrest is substantially upright (Wallace, figure 2, item 16, backrest is upright);
the seat is movable in the upright sitting configuration from a first position in which the seat pan is spaced apart from a footrest (Wallace, figure 2, item 18, seat pan spaced apart from footrest) to a second position in which a front edge of the seat pan touches the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a continuous surface (Wallace, figure 3, items 14 and 18, seat pan is contiguous with the footrest and forms a continuous surface with the footrest).
Nicholas and Wallace are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft seating. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the seat of Nicholas with the seat forming a contiguous and continuous surface between the seat pan and the footrest of Wallace with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent occupant discomfort from having feet becoming wedged in a gap between the seat pan and footrest.
Alternatively, should applicant argue that Nicholas as modified by Wallace fails to teach the contiguous, continuous surface claimed above, O’Neil (US 11312494 B2) teaches a seat with a seat pan and legrest, wherein a front edge of the seat pan is arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the legrest and seat pan together form a continuous surface (O’Neil, claim 11).
Nicholas as modified by Wallace and O’Neil are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft seating. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the arrangement of the seat pan and footrest of Nicholas with the seat forming a contiguous and continuous surface between the seat pan and a forward surface of Wallace with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent occupant discomfort from having feet becoming wedged in a gap between the seat pan and footrest.
Claim(s) 11 and 13 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) or alternatively over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) and/or O’Neil (US 11312494 B2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pethier (US 11794902 B2).
Regarding claim 11, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1, except:
wherein the movable panel is movably mounted via a hinge.
Pethier (US 11794902 B2) teaches a movable panel which is movably mounted via a hinge (Pethier, figure 5, item 86, hinge which mounts movable panel).
Nicholas and Pethier are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft personnel accommodations. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the movable panel of Nicholas with the panel and hinge allowing horizontal movement of Pethier with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce the disruption to other the access opening of other seats.
Regarding claim 13, Nicholas as modified by Pethier/ Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil and Pethier teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 11, wherein the movable panel is mounted via a hinge and configured to be moved between the closed position and open position about a vertical axis located towards a side of the panel (Pethier, figure 3, item 86, hinge which mounts movable panel allows the panel to move a bout a vertical axis between an opened and closed position).
Claim(s) 11 and 12 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Pethier (US 11794902 B2) or alternatively Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) and/or O’Neil (US 11312494 B2) and Pethier (US 11794902 B2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Guering (US 20130126671 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1, except:
wherein the movable panel is movably mounted via a hinge.
Guering (US 20130126671 A1) teaches a movable panel which is movably mounted via a hinge (Guering, figures 5-8, items 20 and 38, movable panel mounted via hinge).
Nicholas and Guering are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft personnel accommodations. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the movable panel of Nicholas with the panel and hinge allowing vertical movement of Guering with a reasonable expectation of success in order to in order to reduce the disruption to other the access opening of other seats.
Regarding claim 12, Nicholas as modified by Guering/ Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil and Guering teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 11,
wherein the movable panel is mounted via a hinge and configured to be moved between the closed position and open position about a horizontal axis located towards a bottom of the panel (Guering, figures 5-8, items 20 and 38, hinge allowing movable panel to be moved between the open and closed position about a horizontal axis which is located at the panel bottom).
Claim(s) 14-16 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) or alternatively over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) and/or O’Neil (US 11312494 B2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Robinson (US 20170283064 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Nicholas discloses/Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1, wherein the seat unit comprises a locking system configured to lock the movable panel in the closed position (Nicholas, col 13 lines 28-35, panel releasably locked in place), the lock system comprising:
- a latch positioned configured to engage to lock the movable panel in the closed position (Nicholas, col 13 lines 28-35, latch locks the movable panel in the closed position), except:
wherein the locking system comprises a plurality of latches positioned on the movable panel and configured to engage with a structure of the seat unit or vice verse to lock the movable panel in the closed position.
Robinson (US 20170283064 A1) teaches a movable panel locking system;
wherein the locking system comprises a plurality of latches (Robinson, figure 6, item 56 and 72, latches) positioned on the movable panel and configured to engage with a structure of the seat unit or vice verse to lock the movable panel in the closed position (Robinson, figure 3, items 34a and 32, latches attached to movable panel engage with seat unit structure locks the movable panel closed).
Nicholas and Robinson are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft passenger accommodations. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Nicholas with the locking system including multiple latches of Robinson with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide redundancy to prevent panels from moving to the open position when undesired.
Regarding claim 15, Nicholas as modified by Robinson/ Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil and Robinson teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 14, wherein the lock system comprises an actuatable member operable to disengage the latches so that the movable panel can be moved from the closed position to the open position (Robinson, figures 6 and 7a, item 58, 60, 74, latch controls disengage latches).
Regarding claim 16, Nicholas as modified by Robinson/ Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil and Robinson teaches an aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 15, wherein the actuatable member is positioned on a surface of the movable panel that is adjacent the footrest when the panel is in the closed position (Robinson, figures 6 and 7a, latch controls are positioned on the panel; Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 725, wall panel is adjacent to the footrest).
Regarding claim 19, Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil teaches the aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1, wherein the front edge of the seat pan touches the footrest when the seat is in the second position (Wallace, figure 3, items 16 and 18, seat pan touching footrest when seat is in a forward position).
Claim(s) 20 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) or alternatively over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) and/or O’Neil (US 11312494 B2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pothier (US 11794902 B2).
Regarding claim 20, Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil teaches the aircraft passenger seat unit according to claim 1, wherein the movable panel is movably mounted with respect to the footrest and the movable panel is movable between the closed position and the open position (Nicholas, figures 7a-c, item 725), except:
wherein the movable panel is rotatably mounted with respect to the footrest and the movable panel is rotatable between the closed position and the open position.
Pothier (US 11794902 B2) teaches a movable panel rotatable with respect to the unit and the movable panel is rotatable between the closed position and the open position (Pothier, figure 5, item 118 and 86, movable panel rotatable along hinge between open and closed positions).
Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil and Pothier are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft cabin design. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the movable panel of Nicholas as modified by Wallace with the rotating movable panel of Pothier with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent the movable panel from encroaching on the entry into a forward seat.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Nicholas (US 10501188 B2) in view of Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) and Davis (US 11299274 B1) or alternatively in view of  Wallace (US 20130241247 A1), Pothier (US 11794902 B2), and O’Neil (US 11312494 B2).
Regarding claim 22, Nicholas discloses an aircraft passenger seat unit, configured for use adjacent an aisle of an aircraft cabin, wherein:
the seat unit comprises a seat (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 709),
a footrest (Nicholas, figure 7b, item 726), and
a movable panel (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 725, end wall made of a panel moves);
the seat comprises a seat pan and backrest (Nicholas, figure 7c, items 715a and 715b, backrest and seat pan), the seat having an upright sitting configuration in which the backrest is substantially upright (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 715a, backrest is upright);
the seat is movable in the upright sitting configuration from a first position in which the seat pan is spaced apart from the footrest to a second position in which the seat including the seat pan is translated forwards (Nicholas, figures 1a-b, item 115b, seat may be translated forward/backward);
the movable panel is movable mounted with respect to the footrest (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, item 725, end wall made of a panel moves);
and the movable panel is movable between a closed position in which the movable panel at least partially encloses a side of the footrest (Nicholas, figure 7a, item 725, panel in closed configuration enclosing a side of the footrest) and an open position in which the movable panel at least partially exposes the side of the footrest such that, in use, when the seat is in the second position and the panel is in the open position, a passenger can access the surface formed by the footrest and seat pan from an aisle through the partially exposed side of the footrest (Nicholas, figure 7c, item 725, panel in open configuration exposing a side of the footrest and thereby allowing passenger access to surface including the footrest from the lateral edge towards the aisle), except:
wherein in the second position, the seat pan is arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a continuous surface;
wherein the movable panel is rotatably mounted with respect to the footrest via a hinge and rotates between the closed and opened positions.
Wallace (US 20130241247 A1) teaches a seat comprising a seat pan and backrest (Wallace, figure 2, item 16, seat including seat pan and backrest), the seat having an upright sitting configuration in which the backrest is substantially upright (Wallace, figure 2, item 16, backrest is upright);
the seat is movable in the upright sitting configuration from a first position in which the seat pan is spaced apart from a footrest (Wallace, figure 2, item 18, seat pan spaced apart from footrest) to a second position in which the seat pan arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the footrest and seat pan together form a surface (Wallace, figure 3, items 14 and 18, seat pan is contiguous with the footrest and forms a continuous surface with the footrest).
Nicholas and Wallace are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft seating. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the seat of Nicholas with the seat forming a contiguous and continuous surface between the seat pan and the footrest of Wallace with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent occupant discomfort from having feet becoming wedged in a gap between the seat pan and footrest.
Pothier (US 11794902 B2) teaches a movable panel rotatable with respect to the unit and the movable panel is rotatable between the closed position and the open position (Pothier, figure 5, item 118 and 86, movable panel rotatable along hinge between open and closed positions).
Nicholas as modified by Wallace and/or O’Neil and Pothier are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft cabin design. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the movable panel of Nicholas as modified by Wallace with the rotating movable panel of Pothier with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent the movable panel from encroaching on the entry into a forward seat.
Alternatively, should applicant argue that Nicholas as modified by Wallace fails to teach the contiguous, continuous surface claimed above, O’Neil (US 11312494 B2) teaches a seat with a seat pan and legrest, wherein a front edge of the seat pan is arranged contiguously with the footrest such that the legrest and seat pan together form a continuous surface (O’Neil, claim 11).
Nicholas as modified by Wallace and O’Neil are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft seating. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the arrangement of the seat pan and footrest of Nicholas with the seat forming a contiguous and continuous surface between the seat pan and a forward surface of Wallace with a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent occupant discomfort from having feet becoming wedged in a gap between the seat pan and footrest.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8 of applicant’s reply, filed 06/03/2024, with respect to the rejection under 35 USC 112(b) to claims 6 and drawing objections have been fully considered and are persuasive.  These rejections/objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 06/03/2024 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that:
Nicholas fails to meet new claim limitations requiring spacing between the table surface spaced from the footrest along a longitudinal axis.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Per the claim mapping in the rejections above, the seat pan is longitudinally spaced from the footrest as required by the claim.
Nicholas fails to meet new claim limitations requiring that, in the second position, the front edge of the seat pan be arranged contiguously with the footrest so that the footrest and seatpan require a continuous surface
This argument is moot because current rejection relies on Wallace to teach this aspect of the claim.
Nicholas fails to teach or suggest new claim limitations requiring that a passenger can access the continuous surface … across a lateral edge of the seat pan.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. This limitation is met by Nicholas as required. See the above citation regarding claim 1 (Nicholas, figure 7a-d, items 715a-c and 726, leg rest bridges gap of the access path between the seat pan and the footrest arranged contiguously to form a continuous surface when extended). Furthermore, this limitation amounts to functional language, and thus Nicholas merely needs to be capable of meeting the function.
One of ordinary skill in the art could not combine Nicholas and Wallace because of differences in the sizing of the Ottoman in Wallace and because Wallace shows a sit up and a lie down configuration
In response to applicant's argument that the ottoman of Wallace could not be co, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references.  Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art.  See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In this case Wallace is used to teach the arrangement of the seat pan and footrest, not the upright or lie flat positions of the seat or the size of the ottoman. As such, this argument is not persuasive and the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Davis (US 11299274 B1) teaches a movable panel but for the seat rather than the footrest
Dowty (US 11345476 B2) teaches a movable panel between seats that seems to obstruct footrest when closed
Katakura (US 11731764 B2) teaches a movable armrest for the seat
Wallace (US 20130241258 A1) teaches a moveable door panel
Henshaw (US 9469405 B2) teaches a seat with a movable panel
O’Neil (US 11312494 B2) teaches a seat with a legrest and seatpan which together form a continuous surface.
Davis (US 11299274 B1) teaches a movable panel rotatable with respect to the seat unit and the movable panel is rotatable between the closed position and the open position (Davis, figure 1, item 200, rotation assembly allows panel to rotate with respect to seat).

CITED REFERENCE SUMMARIES: Ref US20130241247A1: Claims:
An aircraft passenger suite, comprising: a seat including a seat back and a seat bottom configured for movement between an upright seating position and a horizontal bed position; an ottoman positioned apart from the passenger seat that serves as a foot rest when the seat is in the seating position and a bed surface when the seat is in the horizontal bed position; and a first armrest assembly positioned alongside the seat, the first armrest assembly including an armrest and an armrest housing in which the armrest is mounted for movement between an upper horizontal armrest position and a lower horizontal bed position; wherein the seat back, the seat bottom, the ottoman and the first armrest assembly reside in horizontal alignment to form a bed when the seat is in the horizontal bed position and the first armrest assembly is in the lower horizontal bed position.
a seat including a seat back and a seat bottom configured for movement between an upright seating position and a horizontal bed position;
an ottoman positioned apart from the passenger seat that serves as a foot rest when the seat is in the seating position and a bed surface when the seat is in the horizontal bed position; and
a first armrest assembly positioned alongside the seat, the first armrest assembly including an armrest and an armrest housing in which the armrest is mounted for movement between an upper horizontal armrest position and a lower horizontal bed position;
wherein the seat back, the seat bottom, the ottoman and the first armrest assembly reside in horizontal alignment to form a bed when the seat is in the horizontal bed position and the first armrest assembly is in the lower horizontal bed position.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 1 , further comprising a second armrest assembly positioned alongside the seat, the second armrest assembly comprising: an armrest and an armrest housing in which the armrest is mounted for movement between an upper horizontal armrest position and a lower horizontal bed position; and a planar bed extension having an upper bed surface, and mounted in the armrest housing for movement between a stowed position wherein the bed extension is contained in a vertical position in the armrest housing and a deployed position wherein the bed extension is positioned exterior to the armrest housing in a raised, horizontal position with the bed surface in horizontal alignment with the upper horizontal surface of the armrest; wherein the armrest and the planar bed extension of the second armrest assembly reside in horizontal alignment with the seat back, the seat bottom, the ottoman and the armrest of the first armrest assembly when the armrest of each of the first and second armrests assemblies is in the lower horizontal bed position and the bed extension is raised.
an armrest and an armrest housing in which the armrest is mounted for movement between an upper horizontal armrest position and a lower horizontal bed position; and
a planar bed extension having an upper bed surface, and mounted in the armrest housing for movement between a stowed position wherein the bed extension is contained in a vertical position in the armrest housing and a deployed position wherein the bed extension is positioned exterior to the armrest housing in a raised, horizontal position with the bed surface in horizontal alignment with the upper horizontal surface of the armrest;
wherein the armrest and the planar bed extension of the second armrest assembly reside in horizontal alignment with the seat back, the seat bottom, the ottoman and the armrest of the first armrest assembly when the armrest of each of the first and second armrests assemblies is in the lower horizontal bed position and the bed extension is raised.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 1 , further comprising partition walls defining a passenger living area, wherein the seat back, seat bottom, ottoman, armrests and bed extension cooperatively form a bed that occupies substantially the entirety of the passenger living area when the seat back, seat bottom, armrests and bed extension are in horizontal bed positions.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 1 , further comprising a closet positioned alongside the second armrest assembly.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 1 , further comprising a video monitor positioned in a partition wall forward of the seat.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 1 , wherein the bed extension is mounted for movement on a horizontal linear slide by which the bed extension is ejected out of a front opening of the armrest for deployment.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 1 , wherein an interconnection between the armrest and the bed extension first deploys the bed extension from the armrest housing, and thereafter moves the armrest from the vertical position to the raised, horizontal position.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 1 , wherein each of the first and second armrests move vertically relative to their respective housings along linear slides.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 1 , further comprising a privacy screen slidable between an open and closed position to open and close an opening to the suite.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 9 , wherein the privacy screen includes lighting elements controllable to provide a desired degree of illumination and color to the privacy screen.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 10 , wherein the privacy screen is translucent.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 1 , wherein two or more like aircraft passenger suites are arranged in a nested arrangement to form a column.
An aircraft passenger suite including a combination bed, comprising: a seat including a seat back and a seat bottom that are movable between an upright seating position and a horizontal bed position; an ottoman positioned apart from the seat back for expanding a surface area of the horizontal bed position of the seat when the seat is in the horizontal bed position; a first armrest assembly positioned alongside the seat, the first armrest assembly including an armrest mounted for vertical movement relative to a housing, the armrest residing in horizontal alignment with the seat back and the seat bottom when the armrest is fully lowered and the seat is in the horizontal bed position; and a second armrest assembly positioned alongside the seat, the second armrest assembly including an armrest mounted for vertical movement relative to a housing, the armrest residing in horizontal alignment with the seat back and the seat bottom when the armrest is fully lowered and the seat is in the horizontal bed position, the second armrest assembly further including a bed extension deployable therefrom that resides in horizontal alignment with the seat back and seat bottom when the seat is in the horizontal bed position; wherein the seat back, seat bottom, ottoman, armrests and bed extension form a substantially continuous planar bed surface in the horizontal bed position.
a seat including a seat back and a seat bottom that are movable between an upright seating position and a horizontal bed position;
an ottoman positioned apart from the seat back for expanding a surface area of the horizontal bed position of the seat when the seat is in the horizontal bed position;
a first armrest assembly positioned alongside the seat, the first armrest assembly including an armrest mounted for vertical movement relative to a housing, the armrest residing in horizontal alignment with the seat back and the seat bottom when the armrest is fully lowered and the seat is in the horizontal bed position; and
a second armrest assembly positioned alongside the seat, the second armrest assembly including an armrest mounted for vertical movement relative to a housing, the armrest residing in horizontal alignment with the seat back and the seat bottom when the armrest is fully lowered and the seat is in the horizontal bed position, the second armrest assembly further including a bed extension deployable therefrom that resides in horizontal alignment with the seat back and seat bottom when the seat is in the horizontal bed position;
wherein the seat back, seat bottom, ottoman, armrests and bed extension form a substantially continuous planar bed surface in the horizontal bed position.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 13 , wherein the bed extension has an upper bed surface and mounts in the armrest housing for movement between a stowed position wherein the bed extension is contained in a vertical position in the armrest housing and a deployed position wherein the bed extension is positioned exterior to the armrest housing in a raised, horizontal position.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 13 , further comprising a privacy screen positioned along an aisle side of the suite configured to slide between open and closed positions to provide privacy to the suite.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 15 , wherein the privacy screen is translucent and includes lighting elements controllable to provide a desired degree of illumination and color to the privacy screen.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 13 , wherein the suite is defined by a plurality of walls defining a suite living area, and wherein the seat back, seat bottom, ottoman, armrests and bed extension cooperatively form a substantially continuous, horizontal bed in a horizontal bed seating position.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 13 , wherein two or more like aircraft passenger suites are arranged in a nested arrangement to form a column.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 13 , wherein the bed extension, when deployed, fills a gap between the ottoman, seat bottom and armrest of the second armrest assembly.
The aircraft passenger suite of claim 13 , wherein the bed extension is supported by a cantilever positioned in a coplanar position with the upper bed surface of the bed extension when stowed, and is positioned at an oblique angle in a support position under the bed extension when deployed.
Ref FR3137662A1: Claims:
Seat unit (10) for a vehicle cabin comprising: - a seat (11) comprising a seat (12) and a backrest (13), said seat (11) being movable between a seated position and a reclined position, and - a privacy shell (15) extending at least partly around the seat (11), - the privacy shell (15) comprising a rear panel (26) and a side panel (25) extending along one side of the seat (11), characterized in that said side panel (25) comprises a fixed part (25.1) and a movable part (25.2), - said movable part (25.2) of the side panel (25) being movable relative to the fixed part (25.1) between: - a retracted position in which the movable part (25.2) delimits with the fixed part (25.1) and the rear panel (26) a semi-enclosed space around the seat (11) to provide privacy to the passenger, and - a deployed position in which the movable part (25.2) of the privacy shell (15) is moved away from the seat (11) so as to provide access space to said seat (11).
Seat unit according to claim 1, characterized in that a sliding connection (31) is arranged between the movable part (25.2) and the fixed part (25.1) of the side panel (25), so that the movable part (25.2) is movable relative to the fixed part (25.1) in a translational movement only.
Seat unit according to claim 2, characterized in that when the movable part (25.2) is in the deployed position, a rear edge (30) of the movable part (25.2) is located rearwardly beyond the rear panel (26) of the privacy shell (15).
Seat unit according to claim 2 or 3, characterized in that the sliding connection (31) is arranged on an upper face of the fixed part (25.1) of the side panel (25), the sliding connection (31) forming a non-zero angle with respect to a horizontal plane.
Seat unit according to claim 1, characterized in that a pivot connection (41) having a vertical axis (X3) is arranged between the movable part (25.2) of the side panel (25) and the rear panel (26) located behind the backrest (13), so as to allow movement of the movable part (25.2) relative to the fixed part (25.1) following a rotational movement only around the vertical axis (X3) of the pivot connection (41).
Seat unit according to claim 1, characterized in that the movable part (25.2) is movable from the retracted position to an intermediate position following a translational movement only and is then movable from the intermediate position to the deployed position following a rotational movement only.
Seat unit according to any one of claims 1 to 6, characterized in that it comprises a device (37) for locking and unlocking the movable part (25.2) relative to the fixed part (25.1) of the side panel (25) of the privacy shell (15).
Seat unit according to claim 7, characterized in that the locking and unlocking device (37) is chosen from a handle or a push button.
Seat unit according to claim 7 or 8, characterized in that the locking device (37) is arranged in an upper part of the seat unit (10) in an area between the backrest (13) and the rear panel (26) of the privacy shell (15).
Vehicle cabin, in particular aircraft cabin, comprising a plurality of seat units (11) according to any one of the preceding claims.
Ref US20130126671A1: Claims:
A flight deck of an aircraft comprising control and/or viewing devices, at least one seat, an access door and a corridor for access to said seat which is closed at its opposite end to said seat by the access door, characterized in that a folding seat, comprising a frame which pivots about a vertical axis and on which are mounted a seat-rest and a back-rest, is mounted in the corridor such that it can pivot and adopt a first position in which it is closes the corridor so forming a lock enclosure with the access door and a second position in which it enables the access to said seat from the corridor.
An aircraft flight deck according to claim 1 , characterized in that the folding seat is, in its second position, folded back against a member delimiting the corridor and can also adopt a third position pivoted through at least 135° relative to the second position.
An aircraft flight deck according to one of claim 1 , characterized in that the access corridor comprises a floor in which is located a hatch door for access to a lower equipment zone, and in that the access hatch door is located just behind the folding seat when the folding seat is in its first position.
An aircraft flight deck according to claim 1 , characterized in that the access corridor comprises a ceiling in which is located a hatch door for rescue and emergency evacuation, and in that said hatch door is disposed such that it is located above the seat-rest when the folding seat is folded back against a member delimiting the corridor.
An aircraft flight deck according to claim 1 , characterized in that the corridor is delimited laterally by furniture.
An aircraft flight deck according to claim 5 , characterized in that at least one item of furniture comprises a structural upright, and in that the folding seat is pivotally mounted relative to said structural upright.
An aircraft flight deck according to claim 1 , characterized in that the folding seat comprises in its lower portion and in its upper portion respectively an armored sliding plate.
An aircraft flight deck according to claim 7 , characterized in that the folding seat in its first position thus closes the lock enclosure using the sliding plates.
An aircraft flight deck according to claim 1 , characterized in that the back face of the folding seat, that is to say the face not adapted to come into contact with a user of the folding seat, is reinforced so as to be resistant to the impact of projectiles from a firearm.
An aircraft flight deck according to claim 1 , characterized in that the folding seat bears on its rear face, that is to say the opposite face to that adapted to receive a user, a ladder mounted via at least one four-bar linkage parallelogram ( 36 ; 68 ).
An aircraft flight deck according to claim 1 , characterized in that the folding seat is adjustable in height.
An aircraft flight deck according to claim 11 , characterized in that the folding seat is mounted on structural components of the flight deck via at least one intermediate member of profiled cross-section able to slide on a structural component bearing the folding seat.
An aircraft flight deck according to claim 1 , characterized in that the back-rest of the folding seat can be tilted.
An aircraft, characterized in that it comprises a flight deck according to one of claim 1 .
Ref US20170283064A1: Claims:
Passenger seating comprising at least one seat and at least one respective door assembly located at a side of a respective seat, the respective door assembly comprising a base portion and a door that, in a primary mode of operation, is movable with respect to the base portion between an open state and a closed state, and wherein said door is configured to support a second mode of opening out of said closed state that is different from said primary mode.
The passenger seating of claim 1 , wherein said door is slidable with respect to said base portion in a fore-and-aft direction between said open state and said closed state in said primary mode.
The passenger seating of claim 1 , wherein said door is configured to support said second mode by being formed in first and second parts that are coupled together at a joint that is exposed from said base portion when said door is in said closed state, said first part of the door being movable with respect to, or separable from, said second part at said joint.
The passenger seating of claim 3 wherein said first and second parts are pivotable with respect to each other at said joint, said joint typically extending substantially vertically in use, preferably along the entire height of the door.
The passenger seating of claim 1 , comprising a plurality of rows of at least one seat, the rows being spaced apart to define a gap between adjacent rows, wherein the respective door of the or each respective door assembly of at least one of said rows, when in said closed state, closes the gap between the respective row and the row in front, and wherein, optionally, said at least one seat of each row is located within a respective shell structure, and wherein the respective door of the or each respective door assembly of at least one of said rows, when in said closed state, closes the gap between its shell structure and the shell structure of the row in front.
The passenger seating of claim 1 , wherein said base portion is panel-like in shape and provides a wall at said side of the respective seat.
The passenger seating of claim 1 , wherein said base portion includes a compartment for housing said door when in said open state.
The passenger seating of claim 1 , wherein the, or each, door assembly further includes a first user-operable latch operable to selectively prevent the respective door opening in said second mode.
The passenger seating of claim 8 , wherein said first user-operable latch is configured not to prevent operation of said door in said primary mode.
The passenger seating of claim 8 , wherein said first latch is operable into and out of a latched state in which it prevents said first part of the door being movable with respect to, or being separable from, said second part at a joint.
The passenger seating of claim 10 wherein said first latch comprises a first latch formation provided on said first part of said door and a corresponding second latching formation provided in a shell structure of the row in front, said first and second latching formations being engagable when said door is in the closed state to prevent operation of said door in said secondary mode, said first latch formation typically comprising a projection projecting forwardly from said door and said second latch formation comprises a corresponding socket for receiving said projection.
The passenger seating of claim 8 , wherein t
[Truncated to input limit]