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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on (7 – 28 – 2025) has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments and remarks filed (7 – 28 – 2025) have been fully considered but they are not persuasiveApplicant argues…
Neither Nelson nor Wang teaches “A method for manufacturing a handrail assembly of a support frame structure” as claimed.
Nelson discusses the left and right handlebars 40 and 42. However, the left and right handlebars 40 and 42 do not constitute a handrail assembly for a child to hold.
Neither Wang nor Nelson teaches the newly amended feature of Seventh, detachably connecting the handrail tube of the handrail assembly to a connecting assembly of the support frame structure; eighth, providing a front support frame assembly, a rear support frame assembly, a handle assembly; and ninth, connecting the connecting assembly to the front support frame assembly and the rear support frame assembly, and the handle assembly
Applicant further argues that none of the other applied references make up for the deficiency of Nelson / Nelson as modified.
This is not found to be persuasive because…
As detailed in the previous office action of (4 – 29 – 2025) the combination of Nelson as modified by Wang provides for a jogging stroller includes a tricycle wheeled frame adapted for the installation of an existing vehicle child safety seat, (Nelson, Abstract), the jogging stroller comprising a set of handle grips. With Wang teaching a means for fabricating a grip tape. As such, Nelson as modified by Wang is understood to provide for a jogging stroller with handle grips fabricated in the manner of Wang, that is, in other words the manufacturing of a handrail assembly of a support frame structure used in a stroller structure.
It should be noted that applicant’s arguments are based on intended use of the handle. While applicant’s claims directed towards a method of manufacturing a handrail. As such, the case law for relevance of structure in method claims may be recited. Where, to be entitled to weight in method claims, the recited structural limitations therein must affect the method in a manipulative sense, and not amount to the mere claiming of a use of a particular structure, Ex parte Pfeiffer, 135 USPQ 31. Furthermore, in response to applicant's argument that a handrail assembly for a child to hold, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Moreso, applicant’s arguments rely on verbiage and limitation that is found in claims, i.e., a handrail assembly for a child to hold. Accordingly, 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., a handrail assembly for a child to hold) 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).
As detailed below and illustrated in (Figs. 1, 3 & 8) , Nelson is found to disclose that the jogging stroller assembly comprise left and right pair 38 a/b of plates are illustrated as detachably connected to both longitudinal members 30 / 32, both lateral members 18 / 20 and the two bolts 44. Noting, (Fig. 8) shows the left and right pair 38 a/b of plates connected in another arrangement. Highlighting, (Col. 5, lines 4-7) states that parallel left and right longitudinal members 30 / 32 extend across the two lateral members 18 / 20 at right angles thereto and are permanently affixed thereto (e. g., bolts, welding, etc.). As such, the left and right pair 38 a/b of plates are found to be detachably connect to the longitudinal members 30 / 32, the two lateral members 18 / 20 and the two bolts 44.
This is unpersuasive because as explained above there was not found to be deficiency in Nelson / Nelson as modified.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 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.
A.) Claim(s) 1 – 2, 4, 6 – 7 & 14 – 15, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richard Nelson (US 5562300 A, hereinafter Nelson) and in further view of Yung-Han Wang (US 20160287958 A1, hereinafter Wang I)Regarding claim 1,
A method of manufacturing a handrail, assembly of a support frame structure, the method comprising steps of:
first, providing a first material layer and
a second material layer,
wherein the second material layer is a hot melt material;
second, stacking the second material layer on the first material layer to form a substrate layer with an integrated structure;
third, curling the substrate layer to form a handrail cover matching a handrail tube,
wherein the handrail cover is a sleeve structure and
the second material layer is located at an inner side of the handrail cover;
fourth, inserting the handrail tube matching the handrail cover into the handrail cover to form a handrail assembly semi-finished product;
fifth, baking the handrail assembly semi-finished product until an entirety of the second material layer is completely melted;
sixth, cooling the handrail assembly semi-finished product after baking to form the handrail assembly;
seventh, detachably connecting the handrail tube of the handrail assembly to a connecting assembly of a support the support frame structure;
eighth, providing a front support frame assembly,
a rear support frame assembly,
a handle assembly; and
ninth, connecting the connecting assembly to the front support frame assembly and the rear support frame assembly, and the handle assembly.
Wherein the support frame structure is a stroller structure, a crib structure or a baby seat structure.
Nelson teaches the following:
& 14a.) (Col. 5, lines 26 – 30) teaches that the handle attachment for a jogging stroller may comprise a left pair 38a and a right pair 38b of plates, with each longitudinal member rearward end portion 30b/32b being sandwiched between two of the plates comprising a pair 38a/38b. Highlighting, that the handle attachment means via plates 38 a/b, acts as a connecting assembly of a support frame structure providing for connecting the handrail tube / handlebar portion of the handrail assembly.
(Col. 5, lines 7 – 12) teaches that the two longitudinal members 30 and 32 include an axle 34 for the front wheel 12 disposed therebetween at the forward ends thereof. Where the two longitudinal members 30 and 32 acts as a front support assembly.
(Col. 4, lines 61 – 34) teaches that the frame includes a first or forward lateral member 18 and a second or rearward lateral member 20 parallel thereto. Where the two lateral members 18 / 20 acts as applicants rear support members.
(Col. 5, lines 30 – 34) teaches that each pair of plates 38a/38b respectively includes a left and a right handlebar 40 and 42 extending outwardly therefrom and affixed thereto by means of at least two bolts 44. Where the two bolts act as applicants handle assembly.
Highlighting, as illustrated in (Figs. 1, 3 & 8), the left and right pair 38 a/b of plates are illustrated as detachably connected to both longitudinal members 30 / 32, both lateral members 18 / 20 and the two bolts 44. Noting, (Fig. 8) shows the left and right pair 38 a/b of plates connected in another arrangement. Highlighting, (Col. 5, lines 4-7) states that parallel left and right longitudinal members 30 / 32 extend across the two lateral members 18 / 20 at right angles thereto and are permanently affixed thereto (e. g., bolts, welding, etc.). As such, the left and right pair 38 a/b of plates are found to be detachably connect to the longitudinal members 30 / 32, the two lateral members 18 / 20 and the two bolts 44. Highlighting, while Nelson is understood to disclose detachably connecting the connecting assembly of a support frame structure. However, if it is determined that Nelson does not disclose the detachably connecting feature. The case law for making separable may be recited. Where, the court held that if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to the end of (the prior art's) holder to which the cap is applied, it would be obvious to make the cap removable for that purpose. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961), MPEP 2144.
Regarding Claim(s) 1 & 14, Nelson is silent on details regarding the construction of the handle grip portions. In analogous art for ergonomic comfort of a tubular object comprising a portion that is held, Wang I suggests details regarding forming a grip / gripping portions on the portion of the tubular object that is held, and in this regard, Wang I teaches the following:
& g.) ([0021]) teaches a grip tape comprises a base layer 21 that has one side thereof covered by a first adhesive layer 23 that is partially covered by a second adhesive layer 25. Where the second adhesive layer 25 acts as applicant’s first layer. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Figs. 3-4) the second adhesive layer 25 is found on the interior / inner side of the handrail cover, thus providing for the second material layer to be located at an inner side of the handrail cover in direct contact with the handrail tube and defines an entirety of an innermost surface of the handrail cover.
([0021]) teaches a grip tape comprises a base layer 21 that has one side thereof covered by a first adhesive layer 23 that is partially covered by a second adhesive layer 25. Where the base layer 21 acts as applicant’s second layer.
([0027]) teaches the material used for making the first adhesive layer 23 may be, but is not limited to, solvent-type adhesive tape, lotion-type adhesive tape, hot-glue tape, rolled adhesive tape, and reactive adhesive tape. Where hot-glue tape which is also known as hot melt tape, is understood to be a tape that employs a hot melt adhesive / hot melt material.
(Abstract) teaches that a grip tape includes a base layer covered by a first adhesive layer. The first adhesive layer is partially covered by a second adhesive layer. With (Fig. 3) showing the grip tape 20, comprising a stack with a base layer 21, first adhesive layer 23 and second adhesive layer 25.
& h.) ([0029]) teaches that as illustrated in (Fig. 4). First, the first adhesive layer 23, after being attached to the grip tape 20, is adhesive and used to wrap a grip portion 1 of a baseball bat or the like in a predetermined angle. By applying pressing, the first adhesive layer 23 is tightly affixed to a peripheral wall of the base layer 21. Second, the second adhesive layer 25 includes hot glue and is wound together with the grip tape 20 around the baseball bat 1 in a predetermined angle so that the second adhesive layer 25 overlaps the felt outer wall of the base layer 21. As such, curling the layered grip tape to form a handrail cover is understood to transpire while the insertion of a tubular object transpires.Highlighting, while it is understood that Wang discloses curling the first material layer and second material and inserting a tubular object simultaneously. However, if it is determined that Wang does not discloses curling the first material layer and second material then sequentially inserting a tubular object. The case law for sequential vs. simultaneous steps may be recited. Where, in general, the transposition of process steps or the splitting of one step into two, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes. Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. Pat. App. 1959), MPEP 2144.
As shown in (Fig. 1) a grip tape 20 for wrapping a grip portion of a baseball bat 1 comprises a base layer 21. As such, the grip tape 20 is understood to acts as a pliable tubular or rectangular protecting cover / sleeve.
([0029]) teaches after wrapping the tubular object a process of thermocompression bond or thermal reaction, the both can be tightly bound with each other.
A step of cooling the grip tape after thermocompression is not directly spoken to. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that to implement the grip tape on a tubular object one would need to cool the grip tape from the thermocompression and wait until cooling was complete in order to have a deployable product.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Nelson. By modifying the two ergonomic comfort grips found on the proximal end of the two handles to include a multilayer handrail structure that utilizes a first layer and second layer that are stacked on each and curled around the tubular, as taught by Wang I. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement the multilayer handrail structure in a stroller as handle grips as it provides for grip tape that is really convenient to manufacture and it allows the relevant components to be bound firmly, ([0032]). Accordingly, the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way and/or the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results provides for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143. Additionally, the use of a known material in a known environment provides for the recitation of known material in the art. Where, the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 2 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the step of stacking the second material layer on the first material layer further comprises steps of:
adhering a side of a double-sided adhesive layer to the first material layer; and
then adhering another side of the double-sided adhesive layer to the second material layer,
wherein the second material layer and the first material layer form the substrate layer with the integrated structure by the double-sided adhesive layer.
Regarding Claim 2, Nelson is silent on details regarding the construction of the handle grip portions. In analogous art as applied above, Wang I suggests details regarding forming a grip / gripping portions on the portion of the tubular object that is held, and in this regard, Wang I teaches the following:
& b.) ([0021]) teaches that the base layer 21 has one side thereof covered by a first adhesive layer 23 that is partially covered by a second adhesive layer 25. Where the base layer 21 acts as applicant’s double-sided adhesive layer found between the first material layer and the second material layer.
As shown in (Figs. 3-4) the first and second material layers form the substrate layer with the integrated structure via the base layer 21 acting as applicants double-sided adhesive layer.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 4 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the first material layer is a flexible structure.
Regarding Claim 4, Nelson is silent on details regarding the construction of the handle grip portions. In analogous art as applied above, Wang I suggests details regarding the first material layer of the handle grip portions, and in this regard, Wang I teaches the following:
(Fig. 3-4) shows the grip tape before and after wrapping a tubular object. As illustrated, the grip tape is found to change shape from a flat object to a curved object without breaking. As such, the grip tape including the first material layer are understood to be a flexible structure.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 6 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the second material layer is a film structure.
Regarding Claim 6, Nelson is silent on details regarding the construction of the handle grip portions. In analogous art as applied above, Wang I suggests details regarding the second material layer having a film structure, and in this regard, Wang I teaches the following:
(Fig. 3-4) shows the grip tape before and after wrapping a tubular object. As illustrated the second adhesive layer is provided as a planar film.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 7 as applied to claim 6,
Wherein the second material layer is selected from one of polyurethane hot melt adhesive film, thermoplastic polyurethanes hot melt adhesive film, polystyrene hot melt adhesive film, or polyamide hot melt adhesive film.
Regarding Claim 7, Nelson is silent on details regarding the construction of the handle grip portions. In analogous art as applied above, Wang I suggests details regarding the second material layer having a film structure, and in this regard, Wang I teaches the following:
([0028]) teaches that the material used for making the second adhesive layer 25 may be, but is not limited to, ethylene-vinyl-acetate-based hot glue, polyimide hot glue, thermoplastic-rubber-based hot-melt pressure-sensitive adhesive, polyolefin-based hot glue, and polyurethane-reactive hot glue. As such, the second adhesive layer 25 is understood to be a polyurethanes hot melt adhesive film.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.Regarding claim 15 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein two bent ends of the handrail tube are exposed from the handrail cover.
Nelson teaches the following:
As illustrated in (Fig. 1), the handle grip portions are found to be on two bent ends of the handrail tube.
Regarding Claim 15, Nelson is silent on details regarding the placement of the handrail cover in regard to the handrail tube. In analogous art as applied above, Wang I suggests details regarding the placement of the handrail cover in regard to the handrail tube, and in this regard, Wang I teaches the following:
As illustrated in (Fig. 1), the grip tape 10 is placed centrally such that both ends of the handrail tube are exposed from the handrail cover.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well. Additionally, the case law for the rearrangement of parts may be recited regarding the placement of the grip tape on the two bent ends of the handrail tube. Where, it has generally been recognized by the courts that to shift location of parts when the operation of the device is not otherwise changed is within the level of ordinary skill in the art, In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70; In re Gazda, 104 USPQ 400, MPEP 2144.B.) Claim(s) 3, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson in view of Wang I in view of in view of Yung Han Wang (US 20090232587 A1, hereinafter Wang II)
Regarding claim 3 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the step of curling the substrate layer further comprises step of: curling and stitching the substrate layer to form the handrail cover matching the handrail tube.
Regarding Claim 3, Nelson as modified by Wang I is silent on details regarding stitching the layer to form the handgrip cover. In analogous art for the production of a handgrip cover and covering method for tubular objects, Wang II suggests details regarding the stitching the layer to form the handrail grip, and in this regard, Wang II teaches the following:
([0032]) teaches that the handgrip 30 can a one-piece member formed by means of a molding technique. Alternatively, the tubular handgrip 30 can be made by means of a stitching technique or draw string technique. According to this embodiment, stitching a piece material into shape forms the tubular handgrip 30. As such, stitching as a means for forming the curved handgrip is understood to be disclosed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Nelson as modified by Wang I. By further augmenting the method to include a step of stitching the handgrip, as taught by Wang II. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement a step of stitching the handgrip as it provides forming the tubular handgrip, ([0032]). Accordingly, the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way and/or the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results provides for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143.C.) Claim(s) 5, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson in view of Wang I in further view of Yung Han Wang (US 20160287956 A1, hereinafter Wang III)Regarding claim 5 as applied to claim 4,
Wherein the first material layer is selected from one of leather layer, rubber layer, or foam layer.
Regarding Claim 5, Nelson as modified by Wang I is silent on details regarding first material layer being a leather, rubber or foam. In analogous art for the production of a handgrip cover and covering method for tubular objects, Wang III suggests details regarding the first material layer being a leather, rubber or foam, and in this regard, Wang III teaches the following:
([0016]) teaches that a rubber layer (20) covers an outer periphery of the foam tube (10) for a user to grip. The rubber layer (20) is formed by wrapping a rubber sheet outside the foam tube. As such, the outside / exterior materials of the grip is found to be a rubber.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Nelson as modified by Wang I. By further augmenting the exterior layer to be a rubber materials, as taught by Wang III. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement a rubber materials on the outside / exterior materials as it provides a surface for the user to grip and may have its outer periphery printed with patterns, ([0016]). Accordingly, the use of a known material, i.e., rubber for its intended use, i.e., provided a griping surface on a handle printed with patterns allows for the recitation of the case law for known material in the art. Where, the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), MPEP 2144.07.D.) Claim(s) 8, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson in view of Wang I in further view of Yung-Han Wang (US 20160346656 A1, hereinafter Wang IV)
Regarding claim 8 as applied to claim ,
Wherein in the step of baking the handrail assembly semi-finished product, a baking temperature is between 100 °C and 150 °C.
Regarding Claim 8, Nelson as modified by Wang I is silent on details regarding the thermocompression temperature. In analogous art for the production of a handgrip cover and covering method for tubular objects, Wang IV suggests details regarding the thermocompression temperature, and in this regard, Wang IV teaches the following:
([0025]) teaches that the hot-melt adhesive of the first adhesive layer 51 of the bonding portion 50 is composed of, for example, ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA)-based hot-melt adhesive, polyamide-based hot-melt adhesive, thermoplastic rubber (TPR)-based hot-melt pressure-sensitive adhesive, polyolefin-based hot-melt adhesive, or moisture-cured polyurethane (PUR)-based hot-melt adhesive. The first adhesive layer 51 can be bonded to the grip G through a heating reaction or hot-pressing operation of a predetermined temperature ranging generally from 60° C. to 300° C. Highlighting, this range is found to overlap the range claimed by applicant.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Nelson as modified by Wang I. By further augmenting the method to include a thermocompression temperature in the range of 60 °C to 300 °C, as taught by Wang IV. Highlighting, one would be motivated to utilize a thermocompression temperature in the range of 60 °C to 300 °C as it provides for bonding the adhesive layer to the tubular article. Additionally, overlapping ranges are prima facie evidence of obviousness. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have selected the portion of Wang IV temperature that corresponds to the claimed range. In re Malagari, 184 USPQ 549 (CCPA 1974), MPEP 21433.E.) Claim(s) 8 – 9, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson in view of Wang I in view of Oseroff et al. (US 3848480 A, hereinafter Oseroff)
Regarding claim(s) 8 – 9 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein in the step of baking the handrail assembly semi-finished product, a baking temperature is between 100 °C and 150 °C.
Wherein in the step of baking the handrail assembly semi-finished product, a baking time is between 2 minutes and 6 minutes.
Regarding Claim(s) 8 – 9, Nelson as modified by Wang I is silent on details regarding the thermocompression time and temperature. In analogous art for the production of a handgrip cover and covering method for tubular objects, Oseroff suggests details regarding the thermocompression time and temperature, and in this regard, Oseroff teaches the following:
& 9a.) (Col. 5, lines 14-18) teaches that the grip is formed by spiral winding under tension, the strain may result in less over-all strength in usage. We have discovered that strains and orientation effects can be overcome effectively by heat treating the grip at a temperature of about 50 °C to 100 °C for about 2 to 10 minutes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Nelson as modified by Wang I. By further augmenting the method to include heat treating the grip after in the temperature range of 50 °C to 100 °C and time in the range of 2 to 10 minutes, as taught by Oseroff. Highlighting, one would be motivated to heat treat the grip at a temperature of about 50 °C to 100 °C for about 2 to 10 minutes as it provides a means for reduce the strains and orientation effects that may have developed within the grips, (Col. 5, lines 14-18). Additionally, overlapping ranges are prima facie evidence of obviousness. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have selected the portion of Oseroff temperature and time for heat treating that corresponds to the claimed range. In re Malagari, 184 USPQ 549 (CCPA 1974), MPEP 21433.F.) Claim(s) 15 – 17, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson in view of Wang I in view of Barber et al. (US 583781 A, hereinafter Barber)
Regarding claim 15 – 17 as applied to claim 1 and 15 respectively,
Wherein two bent ends of the handrail tube are exposed from the handrail cover.
Wherein the two bent ends are symmetrical to each other with respect to the handrail cover.
Wherein a diameter of a portion of the handrail tube covered by the handrail cover is substantially equal to a diameter of each of the two bent ends exposed from the handrail cover.
Nelson teaches the following:
As illustrated in (Fig. 1), the handle grip portions are found to be on two bent ends of the handrail tube.
Regarding Claim(s) 15 – 16, Nelson as modified by Wang I is silent on details regarding the placement of the handrail cover in regard to the handrail tube. In analogous art for a handrail tube with grip tape, (Abstract), Barber suggests details regarding the placement of the handrail cover in regard to the handrail tube, and in this regard, Barber teaches the following:
, 16a.) & 17a.) (Col. 2, lines 59 – 65) teaches that the helix may be unwound to increase its diameter and allow it to pass over the curves in the handle-bar, so that it may be adjusted at any suitable point between the end of the handle-bar and the steering-post. As illustrated in (Fig. 1), it is shown that the grips may be placed at various portions along the handlebar include such that they a centralized and the two bent ends of the handrail tube are exposed from the handrail cover. Additionally, as illustrated in (Fig. 1), it is shown that the two bent ends are symmetrical to each other with respect to the handrail cover.Furthermore, as illustrated in (Fig. 1), it is shown that the two bent ends are found to have a diameter that is equal to the diameter of a portion of the handrail tube covered by the handrail cover. Highlighting, while it is understood that Barber teaches that the diameter of the two bent ends are found to have a diameter that is equal to the diameter of a portion of the handrail tube covered by the handrail cover. However, if there are any perceived discrepancies the case law for the change of size may be recited. Where, the mere scaling up or down of a prior art process capable of being scaled up or down would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled, In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976), MPEP 2144.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Nelson as modified by Wang I. By further augmenting the method to include a handlebar cover that is position that two bent ends of the handrail tube are exposed from the handrail cover, as taught by Barber. Highlighting, one would be motivated to provide grips that are positioned such that the two bent ends of the handrail tube are exposed from the handrail cover as it provides for position a grip such that it can be adjusted at different points on the handlebar to suit the comfort and convenience of the rider / person gripping the bar, (Col. 1, lines 11 – 16).G.) Claim(s) 1 – 2, 4, 6 – 7 & 14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh et al. (US 20150123381 A1, hereinafter Singh) and in further view of Wang IRegarding claim 1,
A method of manufacturing a handrail, assembly of a support frame structure, the method comprising steps of:
first, providing a first material layer and
a second material layer,
wherein the second material layer is a hot melt material;
second, stacking the second material layer on the first material layer to form a substrate layer with an integrated structure;
third, curling the substrate layer to form a handrail cover matching a handrail tube,
wherein the handrail cover is a sleeve structure and
the second material layer is located at an inner side of the handrail cover;
fourth, inserting the handrail tube matching the handrail cover into the handrail cover to form a handrail assembly semi-finished product;
fifth, baking the handrail assembly semi-finished product until an entirety of the second material layer is completely melted;
sixth, cooling the handrail assembly semi-finished product after baking to form the handrail assembly;
seventh, detachably connecting the handrail tube of the handrail assembly to a connecting assembly of a support the support frame structure;
eighth, providing a front support frame assembly,
a rear support frame assembly,
a handle assembly; and
ninth, connecting the connecting assembly to the front support frame assembly and the rear support frame assembly, and the handle assembly.
Wherein the support frame structure is a stroller structure, a crib structure or a baby seat structure.
wherein the method further comprises:
detachably connecting the handrail tube of the handrail assembly to a connecting assembly of a support frame structure;
providing a front support frame assembly,
a rear support frame assembly,
a handle assembly; and
connecting the connecting assembly to the front support frame assembly and the rear support frame assembly, and the handle assembly.
Wherein the support frame structure is a stroller structure, a crib structure or a baby seat structure.
Singh teaches the following:
PNG
media_image1.png
358
730
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As illustrated in (Fig. 1) (and provided within), a handrail tube is found to be detachably connected to a connecting assembly of a support frame structure 2.
PNG
media_image2.png
416
766
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As illustrated in (Fig. 1) ) (and provided within), a front support frame assembly 10’’ is provided.
PNG
media_image3.png
416
766
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As illustrated in (Fig. 1) ) (and provided within), a rear support frame assembly is provided.
PNG
media_image4.png
507
418
media_image4.png
Greyscale
& 14a.) ([0032]) teaches that as illustrated in (Fig. 1) a carriage 1, in this case a stroller for a child. The carriage 1 comprises a handle 3 assembly. As illustrated in (Fig. 1) ) (and provided within).
As illustrated in (Fig. 1) connecting the connecting assembly to the front support frame assembly and the rear support frame assembly, and the handle assembly is provided for forming a carriage 1, in this case a stroller for a child.
Regarding Claim(s) 1 & 14, Singh is silent on details regarding the construction of the handle grip portions. In analogous art for ergonomic comfort of a tubular object comprising a portion that is held, Wang I suggests details regarding forming a grip / gripping portions on the portion of the tubular object that is held, and in this regard, Wang I teaches the following:
& g.) ([0021]) teaches a grip tape comprises a base layer 21 that has one side thereof covered by a first adhesive layer 23 that is partially covered by a second adhesive layer 25. Where the second adhesive layer 25 acts as applicant’s first layer. Highlighting, as illustrated in (Figs. 3-4) the second adhesive layer 25 is found on the interior / inner side of the handrail cover, thus providing for the second material layer to be located at an inner side of the handrail cover in direct contact with the handrail tube and defines an entirety of an innermost surface of the handrail cover.
([0021]) teaches a grip tape comprises a base layer 21 that has one side thereof covered by a first adhesive layer 23 that is partially covered by a second adhesive layer 25. Where the base layer 21 acts as applicant’s second layer.
([0027]) teaches the material used for making the first adhesive layer 23 may be, but is not limited to, solvent-type adhesive tape, lotion-type adhesive tape, hot-glue tape, rolled adhesive tape, and reactive adhesive tape. Where hot-glue tape which is also known as hot melt tape, is understood to be a tape that employs a hot melt adhesive / hot melt material.
(Abstract) teaches that a grip tape includes a base layer covered by a first adhesive layer. The first adhesive layer is partially covered by a second adhesive layer. With (Fig. 3) showing the grip tape 20, comprising a stack with a base layer 21, first adhesive layer 23 and second adhesive layer 25.
& h.) ([0029]) teaches that as illustrated in (Fig. 4). First, the first adhesive layer 23, after being attached to the grip tape 20, is adhesive and used to wrap a grip portion 1 of a baseball bat or the like in a predetermined angle. By applying pressing, the first adhesive layer 23 is tightly affixed to a peripheral wall of the base layer 21. Second, the second adhesive layer 25 includes hot glue and is wound together with the grip tape 20 around the baseball bat 1 in a predetermined angle so that the second adhesive layer 25 overlaps the felt outer wall of the base layer 21. As such, curling the layered grip tape to form a handrail cover is understood to transpire while the insertion of a tubular object transpires.Highlighting, while it is understood that Wang discloses curling the first material layer and second material and inserting a tubular object simultaneously. However, if it is determined that Wang does not discloses curling the first material layer and second material then sequentially inserting a tubular object. The case law for sequential vs. simultaneous steps may be recited. Where, in general, the transposition of process steps or the splitting of one step into two, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes. Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. Pat. App. 1959), MPEP 2144.
As shown in (Fig. 1) a grip tape 20 for wrapping a grip portion of a baseball bat 1 comprises a base layer 21. As such, the grip tape 20 is understood to acts as a pliable tubular or rectangular protecting cover / sleeve.
([0029]) teaches after wrapping the tubular object a process of thermocompression bond or thermal reaction, the both can be tightly bound with each other.
A step of cooling the grip tape after thermocompression is not directly spoken to. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that to implement the grip tape on a tubular object one would need to cool the grip tape from the thermocompression and wait until cooling was complete in order to have a deployable product.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Singh. By modifying the two ergonomic comfort grips found on the proximal end of the two handles to include a multilayer handrail structure that utilizes a first layer and second layer that are stacked on each and curled around the tubular, as taught by Wang I. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement the multilayer handrail structure in a stroller as handle grips as it provides for grip tape that is really convenient to manufacture and it allows the relevant components to be bound firmly, ([0032]). Accordingly, the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way and/or the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results provides for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143. Additionally, the use of a known material in a known environment provides for the recitation of known material in the art. Where, the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 2 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the step of stacking the second material layer on the first material layer further comprises steps of:
adhering a side of a double-sided adhesive layer to the first material layer; and
then adhering another side of the double-sided adhesive layer to the second material layer,
wherein the second material layer and the first material layer form the substrate layer with the integrated structure by the double-sided adhesive layer.
Regarding Claim 2, Singh is silent on details regarding the construction of the handle grip portions. In analogous art as applied above, Wang I suggests details regarding forming a grip / gripping portions on the portion of the tubular object that is held, and in this regard, Wang I teaches the following:
& b.) ([0021]) teaches that the base layer 21 has one side thereof covered by a first adhesive layer 23 that is partially covered by a second adhesive layer 25. Where the base layer 21 acts as applicant’s double-sided adhesive layer found between the first material layer and the second material layer.
As shown in (Figs. 3-4) the first and second material layers form the substrate layer with the integrated structure via the base layer 21 acting as applicants double-sided adhesive layer.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 4 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the first material layer is a flexible structure.
Regarding Claim 4, Singh is silent on details regarding the construction of the handle grip portions. In analogous art as applied above, Wang I suggests details regarding the first material layer of the handle grip portions, and in this regard, Wang I teaches the following:
(Fig. 3-4) shows the grip tape before and after wrapping a tubular object. As illustrated, the grip tape is found to change shape from a flat object to a curved object without breaking. As such, the grip tape including the first material layer are understood to be a flexible structure.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well. Regarding claim 6 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the second material layer is a film structure.
Regarding Claim 6, Singh is silent on details regarding the construction of the handle grip portions. In analogous art as applied above, Wang I suggests details regarding the second material layer having a film structure, and in this regard, Wang I teaches the following:
(Fig. 3-4) shows the grip tape before and after wrapping a tubular object. As illustrated the second adhesive layer is provided as a planar film.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.
Regarding claim 7 as applied to claim 6,
Wherein the second material layer is selected from one of polyurethane hot melt adhesive film, thermoplastic polyurethanes hot melt adhesive film, polystyrene hot melt adhesive film, or polyamide hot melt adhesive film.
Regarding Claim 7, Singh is silent on details regarding the construction of the handle grip portions. In analogous art as applied above, Wang I suggests details regarding the second material layer having a film structure, and in this regard, Wang I teaches the following:
([0028]) teaches that the material used for making the second adhesive layer 25 may be, but is not limited to, ethylene-vinyl-acetate-based hot glue, polyimide hot glue, thermoplastic-rubber-based hot-melt pressure-sensitive adhesive, polyolefin-based hot glue, and polyurethane-reactive hot glue. As such, the second adhesive layer 25 is understood to be a polyurethanes hot melt adhesive film.
The same rejection rationale, case law(s) and analysis that was used previously for claim 1, can be applied here and should be referred to for this claim as well.H.) Claim(s) 3, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh in view of Wang I in view of in view of Wang II
Regarding claim 3 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein the step of curling the substrate layer further comprises step of: curling and stitching the substrate layer to form the handrail cover matching the handrail tube.
Regarding Claim 3, Singh as modified by Wang I is silent on details regarding stitching the layer to form the handgrip cover. In analogous art for the production of a handgrip cover and covering method for tubular objects, Wang II suggests details regarding the stitching the layer to form the handrail grip, and in this regard, Wang II teaches the following:
([0032]) teaches that the handgrip 30 can a one-piece member formed by means of a molding technique. Alternatively, the tubular handgrip 30 can be made by means of a stitching technique or draw string technique. According to this embodiment, stitching a piece material into shape forms the tubular handgrip 30. As such, stitching as a means for forming the curved handgrip is understood to be disclosed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Singh as modified by Wang I. By further augmenting the method to include a step of stitching the handgrip, as taught by Wang II. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement a step of stitching the handgrip as it provides forming the tubular handgrip, ([0032]). Accordingly, the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way and/or the application of a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results provides for the recitation of KSR case law. Where, "The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143.I.) Claim(s) 5, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh in view of Wang I in view of Wang IIIRegarding claim 5 as applied to claim 4,
Wherein the first material layer is selected from one of leather layer, rubber layer, or foam layer.
Regarding Claim 5, Singh as modified by Wang I is silent on details regarding first material layer being a leather, rubber or foam. In analogous art for the production of a handgrip cover and covering method for tubular objects, Wang III suggests details regarding the first material layer being a leather, rubber or foam, and in this regard, Wang III teaches the following:
([0016]) teaches that a rubber layer (20) covers an outer periphery of the foam tube (10) for a user to grip. The rubber layer (20) is formed by wrapping a rubber sheet outside the foam tube. As such, the outside / exterior materials of the grip is found to be a rubber.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Singh as modified by Wang I. By further augmenting the exterior layer to be a rubber materials, as taught by Wang III. Highlighting, one would be motivated to implement a rubber materials on the outside / exterior materials as it provides a surface for the user to grip and may have its outer periphery printed with patterns, ([0016]). Accordingly, the use of a known material, i.e., rubber for its intended use, i.e., provided a griping surface on a handle printed with patterns allows for the recitation of the case law for known material in the art. Where, the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination. Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945), MPEP 2144.07.J.) Claim(s) 8, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh in view of Wang I in view of Wang IV
Regarding claim 8 as applied to claim 1,
Wherein in the step of baking the handrail assembly semi-finished product, a baking temperature is between 100 °C and 150 °C.
Regarding Claim 8, Singh as modified by Wang I is silent on details regarding the thermocompression temperature. In analogous art for the production of a handgrip cover and covering method for tubular objects, Wang IV suggests details regarding the thermocompression temperature, and in this regard, Wang IV teaches the following:
([0025]) teaches that the hot-melt adhesive of the first adhesive layer 51 of the bonding portion 50 is composed of, for example, ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA)-based hot-melt adhesive, polyamide-based hot-melt adhesive, thermoplastic rubber (TPR)-based hot-melt pressure-sensitive adhesive, polyolefin-based hot-melt adhesive, or moisture-cured polyurethane (PUR)-based hot-melt adhesive. The first adhesive layer 51 can be bonded to the grip G through a heating reaction or hot-pressing operation of a predetermined temperature ranging generally from 60° C. to 300° C. Highlighting, this range is found to overlap the range claimed by applicant.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Singh as modified by Wang I. By further augmenting the method to include a thermocompression temperature in the range of 60 °C to 300 °C, as taught by Wang IV. Highlighting, one would be motivated to utilize a thermocompression temperature in the range of 60 °C to 300 °C as it provides for bonding the adhesive layer to the tubular article. Additionally, overlapping ranges are prima facie evidence of obviousness. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have selected the portion of Wang IV temperature that corresponds to the claimed range. In re Malagari, 184 USPQ 549 (CCPA 1974), MPEP 21433.K.) Claim(s) 8 – 9, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh in view of Wang I in view of Oseroff
Regarding claim(s) 8 – 9 as applied to claim 1 respectively,
Wherein in the step of baking the handrail assembly semi-finished product, a baking temperature is between 100 °C and 150 °C.
Wherein in the step of baking the handrail assembly semi-finished product, a baking time is between 2 minutes and 6 minutes.
Regarding Claim(s) 8 – 9, Singh as modified by Wang I is silent on details regarding the thermocompression time and temperature. In analogous art for the production of a handgrip cover and covering method for tubular objects, Oseroff suggests details regarding the thermocompression time and temperature, and in this regard, Oseroff teaches the following:
& 9a.) (Col. 5, lines 14-18) teaches that the grip is formed by spiral winding under tension, the strain may result in less over-all strength in usage. We have discovered that strains and orientation effects can be overcome effectively by heat treating the grip at a temperature of about 50 °C to 100 °C for about 2 to 10 minutes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Singh as modified by Wang I. By further augmenting the method to include heat treating the grip after in the temperature range of 50 °C to 100 °C and time in the range of 2 to 10 minutes, as taught by Oseroff. Highlighting, one would be motivated to heat treat the grip at a temperature of about 50 °C to 100 °C for about 2 to 10 minutes as it provides a means for reduce the strains and orientation effects that may have developed within the grips, (Col. 5, lines 14-18). Additionally, overlapping ranges are prima facie evidence of obviousness. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have selected the portion of Oseroff temperature and time for heat treating that corresponds to the claimed range. In re Malagari, 184 USPQ 549 (CCPA 1974), MPEP 21433.
L.) Claim(s) 15 – 17, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh in view of Wang I in view of Barber
Regarding claim 15 – 17 as applied to claim 1 and 15 respectively,
Wherein two bent ends of the handrail tube are exposed from the handrail cover.
Wherein the two bent ends are symmetrical to each other with respect to the handrail cover.
Wherein a diameter of a portion of the handrail tube covered by the handrail cover is substantially equal to a diameter of each of the two bent ends exposed from the handrail cover.
Singh teaches the following:
As illustrated in (Fig. 1), the handle grip portions are found to be on two bent ends of the handrail tube.
Regarding Claim(s) 15 – 16, Nelson as modified by Wang I is silent on details regarding the placement of the handrail cover in regard to the handrail tube. In analogous art for a handrail tube with grip tape, (Abstract), Barber suggests details regarding the placement of the handrail cover in regard to the handrail tube, and in this regard, Barber teaches the following:
, 16a.) & 17a.) (Col. 2, lines 59 – 65) teaches that the helix may be unwound to increase its diameter and allow it to pass over the curves in the handle-bar, so that it may be adjusted at any suitable point between the end of the handle-bar and the steering-post. As illustrated in (Fig. 1), it is shown that the grips may be placed at various portions along the handlebar include such that they a centralized and the two bent ends of the handrail tube are exposed from the handrail cover. Additionally, as illustrated in (Fig. 1), it is shown that the two bent ends are symmetrical to each other with respect to the handrail cover.Furthermore, as illustrated in (Fig. 1), it is shown that the two bent ends are found to have a diameter that is equal to the diameter of a portion of the handrail tube covered by the handrail cover. Highlighting, while it is understood that Barber teaches that the diameter of the two bent ends are found to have a diameter that is equal to the diameter of a portion of the handrail tube covered by the handrail cover. However, if there are any perceived discrepancies the case law for the change of size may be recited. Where, the mere scaling up or down of a prior art process capable of being scaled up or down would not establish patentability in a claim to an old process so scaled, In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976), MPEP 2144.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the production method and apparatus for manufacturing a stroller comprising handle means including handlebars having a proximal end that has two handle grips extending from said distal end of said handlebars with proper ergonomic comfort is provided for a person pushing said stroller and undue wrist strain is precluded of Nelson as modified by Wang I. By further augmenting the method to include a handlebar cover that is position that two bent ends of the handrail tube are exposed from the handrail cover, as taught by Barber. Highlighting, one would be motivated to provide grips that are positioned such that the two bent ends of the handrail tube are exposed from the handrail cover as it provides for position a grip such that it can be adjusted at different points on the handlebar to suit the comfort and convenience of the rider / person gripping the bar, (Col. 1, lines 11 – 16). Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lois Mitchell (US 3072955 A) – teaches in the (Abstract) a hand grip constructed that it not only protects the hand from the above mentioned painful cutting sensation or from the aforementioned hot handles but also provides a universal positive gripping action that prevents any slippage of the article grasped thereby whether it be a cord as in a shopping bag, a handle on a cooking pot, or the grooved handle of a household screwdriver. In addition to this, the structure of my hand grip is such that it may be easily carried in one’s pocket or purse and may be manufactured at a very low cost.
Mortimer et al. (US 580336 A) – teaches in the (Abstract) that this invention has relation to improvements in bicycles; and it consists in the novel construction of an independent grasping-handle designed to be used in combination with the usual handles of a bicycle; and the invention consists in providing a divided grasping-handle adapted to be clamped to the bar of a bicycle between the usual handles thereof and the post of the same, all as will be hereinafter fully described.
Szabo et al. (US 3813729 A) – teaches in the (Abstract) a removable handle as an article of manufacture, this handle being entirely independent of any bicycle and being complete in itself for adjustment to any usual wheel and being capable of production in any style and in any material.
J.C Blanchard (US 605626 A) – teaches in the (Abstract) that the present invention to provide a removable handle as an article of manufacture, this handle being entirely independent of any bicycle and being complete in itself for adjustment to any usual wheel and being capable of production in any style and in any material.
Marks et al. (US 3656594 A) – teaches in the (Abstract) a composite luggage handle formed of a bail-shaped reenforcing core of rigid material having a central portion and two lateral legs diverging from the ends thereof which terminate in mounting pintles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrés E. Behrens Jr. whose telephone number is (571)-272-9096. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7:30 AM-5:30 PM.
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, Alison Hindenlang can be reached on (571)-270-7001. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866)-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800)-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571)-272-1000.
/Andrés E. Behrens Jr./Examiner, Art Unit 1741
/JaMel M Nelson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1743