Office Action Predictor
Application No. 17/667,598

ALL-TERRAIN VEHICLE

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Feb 09, 2022
Examiner
WEHRLY, CHRISTOPHER B
Art Unit
3611
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Segway Technology Co., LTD.
OA Round
4 (Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
66%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

52%
Career Allow Rate
100 granted / 194 resolved
Without
With
+14.3%
Interview Lift
avg trend
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
30 pending
224
Total Applications
career history

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.1%
-27.9% vs TC avg
§103
35.6%
-4.4% vs TC avg
§102
19.4%
-20.6% vs TC avg
§112
31.0%
-9.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Status of the Claims Applicant's submission filed on 7/31/25 (hereinafter Response) including the claim, and drawing amendments have been entered. Examiner notes that claims 1, 12, 14, and 17 have been amended and claims 5, 11, and 16 have been cancelled. Claims 1-4, 8-10, 12-15, 17, and 19-20 remain pending in the application. Drawings Based on the amendments to the drawings, the drawing objection raised in the non-final office action mailed 5/14/25 (hereinafter Office Action) is withdrawn. 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 1-4, 8-10, 12-15, 17, and 19-20 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 claims 1 and 14, the phrase “a weight of the air filter is configured to be lighter than a weight of the fuel tank” renders the claims indefinite because it is unclear how an air filter could be “configured to be lighter than a weight of a fuel tank.” Said another way, it is unclear how it being “configured to be lighter” could be any different than “a weight of the air filter is [[configured to be]] lighter than a weight of the fuel tank. Because the difference in scope between the two phrases cannot be determined, the use of “configured to be” renders the claim indefinite. Any claim not specifically addressed under 112(b) is rejected as being dependent on a claim rejected under 112(b). 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 (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 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. Claims 1-4, 10, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0250704 A1 to Li et al (hereinafter Li) in view of US 2007/0170714 A1 to Kubota and further in view of EP2476606A1 to Roqueta (hereinafter Roqueta). Regarding claim 1, Li discloses an all-terrain vehicle (100) (Fig. 1 & Abstract), comprising: a frame (20) comprising a seat cushion (80) and a steering handle (generally indicated by number 601 Fig. 1) (Fig. 1 & [0161]); PNG media_image1.png 438 1002 media_image1.png Greyscale an engine (10) arranged on the frame (20) (Figs 3-4 and [0162] examiner notes that a crankcase is the portion of the engine that houses the crankshaft which one of ordinary skill in the art of ATVs would understand to be the pictured main body 14 below the piston head 11); an air filter (411) arranged on the frame (20) and coupled to the engine (10) through an engine intake pipe (413) (Figs. 9-11 and [0166] disclose the air filter 411 is connected to the engine 10 via pipe 413); and a fuel tank (701) arranged on the frame (20) (Fig. 1 & 10 and [0165]), wherein a projection of the fuel tank (701) at least partially overlaps with a projection of the engine (10) in a plane perpendicular to a longitudinal central symmetry plane of the all-terrain vehicle (100) (Annotated Fig. 9 depicts a plane running into the page that is perpendicular to a vertical plane along the longitudinal centerline of the ATV 100. The space indicated by A is the projected overlap of the fuel tank 701 and crankcase 14, generally indicated by 10 in Annotated Fig. 9, onto the plane X. See also Fig. 2.); and the all-terrain vehicle further comprising a shield plate (421) arranged above and in rear of the engine (10) (Fig. 16 depicts that the plate 421 is above and behind the engine 10. Plate 421 is interpreted as being a shield plate because it prevents exhaust from pipe 422 from directly exiting the engine. It instead forces air through the resonance cavity 4212), wherein the shield plate (421) has an air inlet (4216), and the air inlet (4216) is a grille (4216) arranged on the shield plate (421) and allows air to enter for cooling (Figs. 16-18 and [0167]-[0169] disclose that the plate 421 includes a passage from 4214 into 4212 where air flows, i.e., an air inlet. Further, the air moving from 4214 to 4212 would cool because when the engine is on exhaust air is much hotter than ambient air surrounding the plate 421/air in the cavity 4212, therefore the air would cool. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that an exhaust system including the muffler serves the purpose of cooling air exhausted from the engine.). Li does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the frame further comprises a left shield and a right shield arranged on left and right sides of the fuel tank, respectively; and the left shield and the right shield are each smoothly transitioned to a decorative cover; and the left shield and the right shield are configured to shield the fuel tank on both sides of the fuel tank so as to prevent the fuel tank from being exposed to the sun; a weight of the air filter is configured to be lighter than a weight of the fuel tank; the decorative cover is arranged on a top of the air filter and covers the air filter, and the decorative cover is smoothly transitioned to be connected to the seat cushion; adjacent edges of the decorative cover and the seat cushion are at a same height. Kubota teaches that it was old and well known in the art of ATVs, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for an ATV frame to include a left shield (L) and a right shield (R) arranged on left and right sides of the fuel tank (50), respectively; and the left shield (L) and the right shield (R) are each smoothly transitioned to a decorative cover (38); and the left shield (L) and the right shield (R) are configured to shield the fuel tank (50) on both sides of the fuel tank (50) so as to prevent the fuel tank (50) from being exposed to the sun (Kubota Annotated Figs. 1 & 2, Fig. 3, and [0028]-[0030] & [0046]-[0047] disclose/depict the panels L, 38, and R smoothing forming a body around the main components of the ATV including around fuel tank 50. Because these panels wrap around the fuel tank no sun would be able to penetrate from the top/sides thus protecting the fuel tank from the sun.); PNG media_image2.png 625 982 media_image2.png Greyscale the decorative cover (38) is arranged on a top of the air filter (18) and covers the air filter (18), and the decorative cover (38) is smoothly transitioned to be connected to the seat cushion (16) (Kubota Annotated Figs. 1-2, Figs. 1-3, and [0028]-[0030] & [0046]-[0047]); adjacent edges of the decorative cover (38) and the seat cushion (16) are at a same height (Kubota Annotated Fig. 1 depicts the seat 16 and the cover 38 are at the same height at least at location PNG media_image3.png 584 1001 media_image3.png Greyscale X). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of ATVs before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ATV disclosed by Li which as noted makes no mention of a body and therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would be highly motivated to add a body to the vehicle to incorporate a decorative cover is arranged on a top of the air filter and covers the air filter and fuel tank of Li from an aerial perspective, and the decorative cover is smoothly transitioned to the seat cushion; the decorative cover is arranged on a top of the air filter and covers the air filter, and the decorative cover is smoothly transitioned to be connected to the seat cushion; adjacent edges of the decorative cover and the seat cushion are at a same height as taught by Kubota in order to protect the inner components of the ATV from the elements like mud, e.g., see [0029], and/or the sun, and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results. Roqueta teaches that it was old and well known a weight of the air filter (30) is configured to be lighter than a weight of the fuel tank (10) ([0002] & [0004] teaches the importance of achieving the lowest center of gravity possible; [0005]-[0006] teaches moving the heaviest component to the rear wheel for a low center of gravity. [0008] goes on to discuss criticality of component layout, including the air filter and fuel tank; [0012]-[0013] teaches specifically shifting the location of the fuel tank to modify the center of gravity of the motorcycle; [0018]-[0019] teaches placing the air filter above the fuel tank. All of these sections together are relied upon to teach that the air filter is lighter than the fuel tank, because if it were not, then the air filter would be arranged lower on the frame.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of motorcycles before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motorcycle including an air filter and fuel tank disclosed by the modified combination of Li/Kubota to incorporate for the weight of the air filter to be configured to be lighter than a weight of the fuel tank as taught by Roqueta in order to lower the center of gravity of the motorcycle, e.g., see Roqueta [0002] & [0004], and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results. Furthermore, examiner asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious for the weight of the air filter to be lighter than a weight of the fuel tank because a fuel tank is filled with a liquid fuel which inherently has a higher density than air and thus because the size of the fuel tank of Li is larger in volume than the volume of the air filter of Li, the fuel tank when full would also be heavier than the air filter. Regarding claim 2, depending on claim 1, Li further discloses wherein the air filter (411) is located between the seat cushion (80) and the steering handle (generally indicated by number 601 Fig. 1) (Figs. 1,2,9), and the air filter (411) at least partially shields an upper surface of the fuel tank (701) (Figs. 9-11 & [0165]-[0166] disclose that the fuel tank is above the fuel tank and therefore it is interpreted as shielding it). Regarding claim 3, depending on claim 2, Li further discloses wherein the fuel tank (701) is located in front of and below the air filter (411), and a position of the seat cushion (80) is higher than a position of the fuel tank (701) (Fig. 2). Regarding claim 4, depending on claim 1, Li further discloses wherein the fuel tank (701) is located between a front wheel (31) and the engine (10) (Fig. 2), and a center of gravity of the fuel tank (701) is above a center of the front wheel (31) (Fig. 2 – depicts that the lower most point of the fuel tank 701 is above the center of the front wheel, therefore the center of gravity of the fuel tank is above the center of the front wheel.). Regarding claim 10, depending on claim 1, Li further discloses wherein a horizontal cross-section of the fuel tank (701) decreases from top to bottom (Fig. 9). Regarding claim 12, depending on claim 1, the modified combination of Li/Kubota further disclose wherein: left and right sides of the decorative cover (Kubota- 38) extend downward (Kubota – Figs. 1&2 best depict the cover 38 wrapping downwardly around the components of the vehicle, e.g., the air filter. In viewing the teachings of Kubota the PHOSITA would thus wrap the cover around the air filter 411). It would have been obvious to have modified Li in view of the teachings of Kubota for at least the same reasons discussed above in claim 5 and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results. Regarding claim 13, depending on claim 1, Li further discloses wherein the fuel tank (701) in a mounted state has an inverted triangular cross-section (Fig. 9 depicts the fuel tank is mounted in an approximately inverted triangular cross-section which is in line with Applicant’s definition of an inverted triangle see Fig. 4 and p.4 ¶ 5 of Applicant’s originally filed drawings and specification). Regarding claim 14, Li discloses an all-terrain vehicle (100), comprising: a frame (20) comprising a seat cushion (80) and a steering handle (generally indicated by number 601 Fig. 1) (Fig. 1 & [0161]); an engine (10) arranged on the frame (20) (Figs 3-4 and [0162] examiner notes that a crankcase is the portion of the engine that houses the crankshaft which one of ordinary skill in the art of ATVs would understand to be the pictured main body 14 below the piston head 11); an air filter (411) arranged on the frame (20) and coupled to the engine (10) through an engine intake pipe (413) (Figs. 9-11 and [0166] disclose the air filter 411 is connected to the engine 10 via pipe 413); and a fuel tank (701) arranged on the frame (20), and located between the engine (10) and the air filter (411) and in front of the engine (10) and the air filter (411) (Fig. 9 & [0166]); and the all-terrain vehicle further comprising a shield plate (421) arranged above and in rear of the engine (10) (Fig. 16 depicts that the plate 421 is above and behind the engine 10. Plate 421 is interpreted as being a shield plate because it prevents exhaust from pipe 422 from directly exiting the engine. It instead forces air through the resonance cavity 4212), wherein the shield plate (421) has an air inlet (4216), and the air inlet (4216) is a grille (4216) arranged on the shield plate (421) and allows air to enter for cooling (Figs. 16-18 and [0167]-[0169] disclose that the plate 421 includes a passage from 4214 into 4212 where air flows, i.e., an air inlet. Further, the air moving from 4214 to 4212 would cool because when the engine is on exhaust air is much hotter than ambient air surrounding the plate 421/air in the cavity 4212, therefore the air would cool. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that an exhaust system including the muffler serves the purpose of cooling air exhausted from the engine.). Li does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the frame further comprises a left shield and a right shield arranged on left and right sides of the fuel tank, respectively; and the left shield and the right shield are each smoothly transitioned to a decorative cover; and the left shield and the right shield are configured to shield the fuel tank on both sides of the fuel tank so as to prevent the fuel tank from being exposed to the sun; a weight of the air filter is configured to be lighter than a weight of the fuel tank; the decorative cover is arranged on a top of the air filter and covers the air filter, and the decorative cover is smoothly transitioned to be connected to the seat cushion; adjacent edges of the decorative cover and the seat cushion are at a same height. Kubota teaches that it was old and well known in the art of ATVs, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for an ATV frame to include a left shield (L) and a right shield (R) arranged on left and right sides of the fuel tank (50), respectively; and the left shield (L) and the right shield (R) are each smoothly transitioned to a decorative cover (38); and the left shield (L) and the right shield (R) are configured to shield the fuel tank (50) on both sides of the fuel tank (50) so as to prevent the fuel tank (50) from being exposed to the sun (Kubota Annotated Figs. 1 & 2, Fig. 3, and [0028]-[0030] & [0046]-[0047] disclose/depict the panels L, 38, and R smoothing forming a body around the main components of the ATV including around fuel tank 50. Because these panels wrap around the fuel tank no sun would be able to penetrate from the top/sides thus protecting the fuel tank from the sun.); the decorative cover (38) is arranged on a top of the air filter (18) and covers the air filter (18), and the decorative cover (38) is smoothly transitioned to be connected to the seat cushion (16) (Kubota Annotated Figs. 1-2, Figs. 1-3, and [0028]-[0030] & [0046]-[0047]); adjacent edges of the decorative cover (38) and the seat cushion (16) are at a same height (Kubota Annotated Fig. 1 depicts the seat 16 and the cover 38 are at the same height at least at location X). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of ATVs before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ATV disclosed by Li which as noted makes no mention of a body and therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would be highly motivated to add a body to the vehicle to incorporate a decorative cover is arranged on a top of the air filter and covers the air filter and fuel tank of Li from an aerial perspective, and the decorative cover is smoothly transitioned to the seat cushion; the decorative cover is arranged on a top of the air filter and covers the air filter, and the decorative cover is smoothly transitioned to be connected to the seat cushion; adjacent edges of the decorative cover and the seat cushion are at a same height as taught by Kubota in order to protect the inner components of the ATV from the elements like mud, e.g., see [0029], and/or the sun, and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results. Roqueta teaches that it was old and well known a weight of the air filter (30) is configured to be lighter than a weight of the fuel tank (10) ([0002] & [0004] teaches the importance of achieving the lowest center of gravity possible; [0005]-[0006] teaches moving the heaviest component to the rear wheel for a low center of gravity. [0008] goes on to discuss criticality of component layout, including the air filter and fuel tank; [0012]-[0013] teaches specifically shifting the location of the fuel tank to modify the center of gravity of the motorcycle; [0018]-[0019] teaches placing the air filter above the fuel tank. All of these sections together are relied upon to teach that the air filter is lighter than the fuel tank, because if it were not, then the air filter would be arranged lower on the frame.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of motorcycles before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motorcycle including an air filter and fuel tank disclosed by the modified combination of Li/Kubota to incorporate for the weight of the air filter to be configured to be lighter than a weight of the fuel tank as taught by Roqueta in order to lower the center of gravity of the motorcycle, e.g., see Roqueta [0002] & [0004], and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results. Furthermore, examiner asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious for the weight of the air filter to be lighter than a weight of the fuel tank because a fuel tank is filled with a liquid fuel which inherently has a higher density than air and thus because the size of the fuel tank of Li is larger in volume than the volume of the air filter of Li, the fuel tank when full would also be heavier than the air filter. Regarding claim 15, depending on claim 14, Li further discloses wherein the air filter (411) is located between the seat cushion (80) and the steering handle (generally indicated by number 601 Fig. 1) (Figs. 1,2,&9), and the air filter (411) at least partially shields an upper surface of the fuel tank (701) (Figs. 9-11 & [0165]-[0166] disclose that the fuel tank is above the fuel tank and therefore it is interpreted as shielding it). Claims 8, 9, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Kubota and further in view of Roqueta and further in view of US 6,920,949 B2 to Matsuura. Regarding claim 8, depending on claim 1, the modified combination of Li/Kubota/Roqueta does not explicitly disclose wherein a shock-absorbing rubber pad is arranged on a lower surface of the fuel tank. PNG media_image4.png 744 930 media_image4.png Greyscale Matsuura teaches that it was old and well known in the art of ATVs, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for a shock-absorbing rubber pad (186) to be arranged on a lower surface of the fuel tank (52) (Fig. 6 & col 6 ln 61-col7 ln 9). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of ATVs before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ATV including a fuel tank 701 mounted to the frame via bolts disclosed by the modified combination of Li/Kubota/Roqueta to incorporate for a shock-absorbing rubber pad is arranged on a lower surface of the fuel tank as taught by Matsuura in order to reduce the transfer vibrations from the frame to the fuel tank, e.g., see Matsuura col 7 ln 7-9, and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results. PNG media_image5.png 790 880 media_image5.png Greyscale Regarding claim 9, depending on claim 1, Li further discloses wherein: the fuel tank (701) and the frame (20) at least have a first connection point (1), a second connection point (Annotated Figs. 9 – 11 depicts connection points 1 & 2 which one of ordinary skill in the art would understand to be bolts); and the first connection point (1) and the second connection point (2) are located on an upper part of the fuel tank (701) (Annotated Figs. 9 – 11). The modified combination of Li/Kubota/Roqueta does not appear to explicitly disclose a third connection point that is located on a lower part of the fuel tank. Matsuura teaches that it was old and well known in the art of ATVs, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for the fuel tank to include a connection point that is located on a lower part of the fuel tank (Fig. 6 & col 6 ln 61-col7 ln 9 teaches the fuel tank is connected to the frame via rubber pad to dampen vibrations). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of ATVs before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ATV including a fuel tank 701 mounted to the frame via bolts at least connection points 1&2 disclosed by the modified combination of Li/Kubota/Roqueta to incorporate for the fuel tank to include a connection point that is located on a lower part of the fuel tank as taught by Matsuura in order to reduce the transfer vibrations from the frame to the fuel tank, e.g., see Matsuura col 7 ln 7-9, and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results. Claim 19 recites substantially similar limitations as those already addressed in claim 8, and, as such, is rejected for substantially the same reasons as given above. Claim 20 recites substantially similar limitations as those already addressed in claim 9, and, as such, is rejected for substantially the same reasons as given above. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Kubota and further in view of Roqueta and further in view of US 2019/0299773 A1 to Kobayashi et al (hereinafter Kobayashi). Regarding claim 17, depending on claim 14, the modified combination of Li/Kubota/Roqueta does not explicitly disclose wherein a refueling port of the fuel tank (Li-701) is located on a left or right side of the decorative cover (Kubota - 38) (Li – Figs. 1 and 15 clearly depict a refueling port of the fuel tank 701 disposed on the left side of the vehicle but does not disclose a decorative cover.). Kobayashi teaches that it was old and well known in the art of ATVs, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for a refueling port (29) of the fuel tank (11) is located on a left or right side of the decorative cover (19) (Figs. 2, 4, & 6 depict that the fuel cap 29 is disposed on the side of the decorative cover, i.e., not in the center, and is integrated into a hole of the cover). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of ATVs before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ATV including the fuel tank of Li which is disposed on the side of the vehicle to lower the center of gravity (Li- [0165]) disclosed by the modified combination of Li/Kubota/Roqueta to incorporate for a refueling port of the fuel tank to be located on a left or right side of the decorative cover as taught by Kobayashi in order to suppress as much dust/mud as possible, e.g., see Kobayashi [0021], and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed in the Response directed toward the 35 USC §103 rejection of claims 1 and 14 have been fully considered and they are persuasive. See Response pp. 7-10. Therefore the rejection of claims 1 and 14 in view of Li/Kubota are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Li/Kubota/Roqueta. On p. 8 of the Response Applicant submits that none of the prior art references mention the newly amended feature of “a weight of the air filter is configured to be lighter than a weight of the fuel tank”. Examiner agrees and thus the prior rejection is withdrawn, however, based on the teachings of Roqueta and/or that which is known in the art/inherent, this limitation does not distinguish the claims from the current art of record as discussed at length above. Applicant takes the position on p. 8 of the response that “the cowling cover 38 is … connected to the opening and closing cover 70 above the fuel inlet, and is not transitioned to and connected to the seat cushion 16.” Examiner disagrees. While Applicant is correct that the cover 38 is connected to cover 70, this connection does not thereby mean that the cowling 38 is not able to smoothly transition to be connected to the seat cushion, as presently amended. As can be seen in Kubota Annotated Figs. 1 & 2 above, the cowling 38 smoothly transitions to the seat 16 in a variety of locations, one of which is generally indicated by the letter X. Applicant also takes the position on p. 8 of the response that “the cowling cover 38 is not adjacent to cushion seat 16, and the edge of the cowling cover 38 close to the cushion seat 16 is not flush with the edge the cushion seat 16 close to the cowling cover 38 as shown in the red lines marked below.” Examiner disagrees. Initially, it is hard to fully understand Applicant’s argument because the file is not in color and thus it is unclear what line was intended to be red. For at least this reason alone Applicant’s argument is not persuasive. However, as best can be understood, Applicant is attempting to draw lines to the edge of the cover 38 and the cover 70, and the edge of the cover 70 and the seat 16. This argument is not persuasive for at least the same reasons as laid out in the previous argument. Fig. 3 is a cross-section of the vehicle of Kubota and thus illustrates merely one vertical section, viewing Kubota Annotated Figs. 1 & 2 it is clear that the decorative cover 38 wraps around the cover 70 and has “adjacent edges of the decorative cover and the seat cushion are at the same height.” Notably, only the edge between the seat and the cover need to share the same height and further there is no claimed specificity of what “smoothly transitioned” means. Therefore, any contact of the seat and the decorative cover is interpreted to be a smooth transition at the same height. On p. 10 of the Response Applicant takes the position that “has failed to articulate a rationale as to why a person having ordinary skill in the art would have modified the teachings of the combined art of record to include the above-noted limitations. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that the combined art of record fails to render present claim 1 obvious in accordance with MPEP 2143, and respectfully requests that the rejection be withdrawn.” Examiner disagrees. As stated in the Office Action and repeated above, a PHOSITA would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Kubota into the vehicle of Li in order to protect the inner components of the ATV from the elements like mud, e.g., see [0029], and/or the sun, and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results. Further, a PHOSITA would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Roquet into the modified combination of Li/Kubota in order to lower the center of gravity of the motorcycle, e.g., see Roqueta [0002] & [0004]. For at least these reasons Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive. 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 CHRISTOPHER B WEHRLY whose telephone number is (303)297-4433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 - 4:30 MT. 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 at (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. /CHRISTOPHER B WEHRLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 09, 2022
Application Filed
Sep 24, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 19, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
May 01, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
May 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jul 31, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 31, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology. Study what changed to get past this examiner.

Patent 12583551
CARGO BICYCLE CONVERSION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12570115
OFFSET MULTI-POINT UNDER BED HITCH MOUNTING SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559197
ELECTRIC BICYCLE DRIVE UNIT FASTENING ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12553500
LINEAR ACTUATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12545354
A CARGO-CARRYING WHEELED VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026

AI Strategy Recommendation

Click below to generate an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
66%
With Interview (+14.3%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 194 resolved cases by this examiner