Need help identifying sofa - Adrian Pearsall?  

I heard back from Craft Associates and they advised me it was not an Adrian Pearsall / Craft Associates piece since their registration number is not 120. That gave me the idea of emailing the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Bedding & Upholstery dept who, i hope, keeps records of all registration numbers and may be able to shed light on who the manufacturer may be.
To be honest i really think this is a prototype sofa that was never commercially produced. I mean, why would it not have manufacturer stamped on the label? Given that Adrian Pearsall, Mel Smilow, Knoll and all of these famous designers produced pieces in PA, and given the very familiar lines/stance of the sofa i really think it can be a piece that never got put into production. Who knows - i am pretty stumped on this and hope someone can share their thoughts on what this thing may be...

the desperation for branding is sort of chilling
file under "mid-century" and chill out!
and don't lose context...

@objectworship
I purchased this mystery sofa because i truly liked how it looks, which is why i was interested in finding out who designed/manufactured it. I figured by posting this in the "Identification" section of this forum someone may have come across this design before - I'm confused as to why you think it is chilling or desperate to ask this question on the exact section meant to help identify pieces, in a design forum; perhaps your are the one losing context?

I agree it is a prototype.
International prototype law requires that furniture designers put a printed tag on their prototypes that states it contains all new material.
Nice find. Enjoy it.

I know it's just a camera trick, but the closest seat cushion appears to be part of the armrest cushion, and I really wish that it was all just one cushion. That said, it is pretty common to find tags that don't have any identification. It looks much newer than the 50s, to me... are you sure it is Walnut?

I've reupholstered a lot of vintage furniture and have seen plenty of those so-called "law labels" with no manufacturer's name on them so that's not really an indicator of anything---other than that the manufacturer's label was somewhere else on the piece. They do fall off. The piece may also have been reupholstered long ago. Most upholsterers do not save the original label and glue it back on when they're done. In fact, I'd say almost no one does this.
Read more about law labels here - http://www.americanlawlabel.com/law-label-learning-center/
Why does it matter who made it? Chances are pretty good that it was a small company that sold to stores in the region---not a big name like Flex-Steel or Kroehler or one of those. There were plenty of small furniture manufacturers back in the day---or at least way more than there are nowadays, thanks to free trade with China.
Here's a quote from a site that sells vintage furniture:
What If It Has No Name?
As not all manufacturers labeled every piece made in the first half of the 20th Century, what can one tell of the vast amount of unmarked furniture available on the market today?
It's very unlikely that you have a prototype. You should also breathe a little sigh of relief that it's not Pearsall. The parts of their furniture that are covered with upholstery are not well made at all.
I also doubt that it's 50s, given that the label says it has urethane foam. Urethane foam first came on the market in 1957 but it took awhile for furniture manufacturers to start using it. Ditto with polyester fabric---the fiber was invented in 1953 but I'm pretty sure it wasn't in common use in upholstery fabric until at least the 60s. Nylon and rayon were popular synthetics before polyester took over.

Thanks everyone, appreciate the input on this.
@cdsilva - thank you for the advice and info regarding prototypes, i will have to research further
@mgee76 - the cushions are not attached, though i agree it looks like that in the photo (unfortunately the photo is not such high quality). I'm not 100% sure if it is walnut. I can tell wood pretty well and the grain/color doesn't strike me as real walnut to be honest but that is how it was advertised (though that means nothing really). I am not sure if it is from the 50's though i would say if it is not, then it most definitely is from the 60's. This thing is old - trust me it has the accumulated dirt and wear+tear of 5 decades+. It is in overall god shape but i don't doubt it is many decades old.
@spanky - many thanks for all the info, very informative! I don't rule out reupholstery though if that had been done the bottom liner would have been replaced as well and that is definitely not the case as it is covered in dirt and has tears whereas the rest of the sofa is in decent shape. The construction is good but it is not that solid - it has some creaks that could use tightening. The info on the materials is very useful to date this piece - perhaps not the 50s (as the seller stated) but I wouldn't question it being from the 60s.As far as it being unmarked, it only bothers me because i like to be able to trace lineage and am puzzled as to why the maker would leave no mark (unless it is covered in fabric). I think whoever made it was inspired by the likes of Pearsall and Smilow - perhaps it is a custom piece made to order or by one of the many craftsman from PA since furniture making was a large industry in PA back then.

mj, my comment was not intended to be serious. There have been many previous posts on this site where people think they have protoypes because an unmarked and undocumented piece looks similar to a documented piece. Rather than accept that it is simply a production piece that is less well known, the conclusion ends up being the much less likely scenario of a "prototype". Prototypes are early studies by designers and manufacturers to determine optimal design and fine tune construction details. They would not have manufacturing tags on them.
spanky gave the best answer to your question. Chances of your sofa being a prototype are less than 1%.
The last part of my first post was intended to be serious. Nice find and enjoy it.

I don't know if you're aware, but a lot of Pearsall's designs are derivative of others' work. Vladimir Kagan was just one. This article from his blog points out the glass-topped tables that Pearsall copied.
http://vladimirkagan.typepad.com/vladimir-kagans-blog/2015/09/vintage-vs...
You can view Pearsall catalog pages here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20140318183726/http://adrianpearsall.com/140...
I just looked through it again and was struck by the number of derivative designs. If I had a free week, I'd do a side-by-side comparison of all of them. But I don't, so I just did a few. You can really see here how Craft Associates cut out the more time-consuming details that are so essential to beauty the originals. The Japan Chair especially gets me--he turned it into a wood frame slipper chair, nothing more.
[/pearsallrant]