DETAILED ACTION
Claims 2, 3, 10-14, 19, and 25 have been canceled.
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.
Claims 24 and 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamanaka et al. ‘905 (PGPub 2006/0117905) in view of Yamanaka et al. ‘041(USPN 7,258,041) and Hermansen et al. (PGPub 2004/0200314).
Regarding claim 24 and 26, Yamanaka ‘905 teaches a crank arm attachment structure for a human-powered vehicle 10 (see title: “Bicycle crank arm fixing structure”) comprising: a crankshaft 54 having a rotational center axis and a first coupling portion 54b; a crank arm 52 having a second coupling portion 52a, 52b (Figure 3, para [0045] including a through hole 52a and a slit 52b; and a restriction member 58 (see Figures 3-7) configured to be arranged in the slit, the restriction member including a restriction 58c configured to protrude in a radially inward direction of the through hole when the restriction member is arranged in the slit (best seen in Figures 3 and 4), the crankshaft 54 including a hole 57 formed in the first coupling portion, the hole being configured to receive the restriction (see para 45-49). Yamanaka ‘905 teaches that the first coupling portion includes a plurality of first projections (serrations 52b, 54b) and a first positioning portion, the first positioning portion including at least one positioning recess and/or at least one positioning projection 52f (Figure 4) configured and arranged to engage with at least one projection and/or at least one recess, respectively, of the second coupling portion of the crank arm 52, each of the at least one positioning recess and/or at least one positioning projection having a larger width in a circumferential direction of the crankshaft than each of the plurality of first projections (see Figure 4 and para [0045], lines 23-33) and is aligned with the hole (retaining hole 57).
Yamanaka ‘905 is silent regarding the hole being positioned on one of the at least one positioning recess and/or at least one positioning projection of the first positioning portion. It also shows a second crankarm mounted to the crankshaft by a different means than the first crankarm.
Yamanaka ‘041 teaches a crank arm attachment structure including a crankshaft 50 having a rotational center axis and first coupling portion (Figure 4a) and a crank arm 51 (Figure 5) having a second coupling portion. The first coupling portion includes a plurality of first projections (serrations 56a; figure 4b; col. 8, lines 11-20) and a first positioning portion, the first positioning portion including at least one positioning recess and/or at least one positioning projection 55d, 56d, configured and arranged to engage with at least one projection and/or at least one recess (recess in crank arm 51), respectively, of the second coupling portion of the crank arm 51, each of the at least one positioning recess and/or at least one positioning projection having a larger width in a circumferential direction of the crankshaft than each of the plurality of first projections (col. 8, lines 11-20, 45-53). Yamanaka teaches providing two positioning recesses and two positioning projections that are circumferentially spaced 180 degrees from each other to balance the crank during cold forging such that the dies have a longer useful life (col. 4, lines 35-45).
Hermansen teaches a bicycle crank arrangement having two crank arms 10, 110, mounted to a crankshaft using the same attachment mechanism (the non-drive side crank arm 110 is identical to the drive side crank arm 10 except for the chain ring attachments, para [0064], lase four lines; each crank arm is connected to the crankshaft/spindle 190 by the same elements 70, 100, 140, 160, 170).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide two diametrically opposite positioning projections/recesses between the crank arm and crankshaft, in view of Yamanaka ‘041, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to balance the crank during manufacturing such that the life of the forging die is extended. Since Yamanaka ‘905 teaches aligning the positioning projection with the retaining member, the combination having two diametrically opposite positioning projections will include one of the projections being at the restriction member that is aligned with the crank arm. It would further have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to mount both crank arms to the crankshaft using the same structure, as is well known and taught by Hermansen, in order to remove both crank arms for maintenance and replacement.
Regarding claims 27, the first coupling portion 54b has a first positioning portion including at least one first recess and/or at least one first projection configured and arranged to engage with at least one projection and/or at least one, respectively, of the second coupling portion of the crank arm recess (serrations in the crank axle and crank arm are formed by teeth separated by recesses), and the hole 57 is positioned on a recess/projection of first positioning portion (see Figure 4), as broadly recited.
Regarding claim 28, the crank arm 52 further includes at least one bolt hole 52e, 52g arranged to pass through the slit 52f (see Figure 4), the at least one bolt hole being configured to receive a bolt 67a such that the slit narrows as the bolt is tightened, and the restriction member is configured to pivot as the bolt is tightened such that the restriction is inserted into the hole (para [0052], particularly the last two lines, “the retaining member 58 can be swung by rotation of the mounting bolt 67a”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4-9, 15-18, and 20-23 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 22 and 26-28 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding claims 24 and 26-28, applicant argues that the prior art fails to teach a restriction member and positioning projection/hole at both ends of the crankshaft for connecting respective crank arms. However, it is well known to provide couplings for both crank arms on a crankshaft and Hermansen explicitly teaches two crank arms identically mounted to ends of a crankshaft. Therefore, providing the claimed crank axle couplers at both ends of the crankshaft, for the respective crank arms, is not believed to patentably distinguish over the prior art of record, as set forth above.
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anne Marie M. Boehler whose telephone number is (571)272-6641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Valentin Neacsu can be reached on 571-272-6265. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANNE MARIE M BOEHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights