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 .
Claims 18-20 have been canceled.
Objections to the drawings are withdrawn in view of applicant’s claim amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 4 repeats subject matter that is recited in the last 2 lines of claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10-12, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bender (USPN 11,945,316).
Regarding claim 1, Bender teaches an electric bicycle 600 comprising: a frame 602, wherein the frame includes: a head tube 620 configured to support handlebars (see Figure 6 and 8; col.16, lines 27-33) and a front fork 630; a seat tube 636 configured to support a saddle post (carrying seat 638) that holds a saddle 368 (Figure 6) and is placed at least partially within the seat tube; a top tube (not shown, see 16, lines 41-42) that extends from the head tube to the seat tube (top tube, by definition); and a down tube 624 that extends from the head tube to the seat tube (Figure 8); and an electric battery 606 that is partially disposed within the down tube (see Figures 12 and 14 which show battery enclosure 810 inside the down tube 624 and battery outer wall 812 extends above side walls of the down tube so as to be only partially disposed within the down tube), wherein the electric battery includes: multiple battery cells (col. 17, lines 9-10, see Figure 13)); and a housing (enclosure 810) that contains the multiple battery cells (see Figure 13) and having a lower portion (bottom of enclosure 810) and an upper portion (top of enclosure 810 at outer wall 812) wherein the lower portion of the housing of the electric battery is disposed within an inner area of the down tube of the frame when the electric battery is removably fixed to the frame, and wherein the upper portion of the housing of the electric battery is disposed outside of the down tube of the frame when the electric battery is removably fixed to the frame (see Figures 9, 10, 12, 14, that show the top end of the battery enclosure extending above sides of the down tube; col. 20, lines 31-50 that suggest the battery can be “partially” sunk into the down tube). A width of the lower portion of the housing is smaller than a width of the upper portion of the housing (outer wall 812 at the upper end of the battery 606, as seen in Figure 9 of Bender, is wider than lower portions of the battery).
Regarding claim 2, Bender teaches the upper portion of the housing of the electric battery includes a handle portion 814 (Figures 9, 10) along at least one edge of the housing that facilitates lifting the electric battery out of the down tube of the frame of the electric bicycle.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Bender teaches upper portion of the housing of the electric battery includes a T-shaped edge that facilitates lifting the electric battery out of the down tube of the frame of the electric bicycle (see Figure 10, the upper portion of housing 810 is wider than the lower portion to form a T-shape with the vertical sides of the housing 810).
Regarding claim 5, the down tube includes a ledge (internal ribs forms narrow longitudinal ledges on which the battery sits; see Figure 15 and col. 22, lines 54-64) positioned within the inner area of the down tube upon which the electric battery sits when disposed within the inner area of the down tube of the frame.
Regarding claim 10, the multiple battery cells are positioned in a vertical orientation within the housing of the electric battery (see Bender, Figure 13).
Regarding claims 11 and 16, Bender teaches a battery 606 for an electric bicycle, the battery comprising: multiple battery cells (see Figures 13 and col. 17, lines 9-10) in a vertically spaced configuration (see Figure 13, battery cells extend along the diagonal down tube such that forward battery cells are vertically spaced from rearward cells when the battery pack is mounted within the down tube); and a housing that contains the multiple battery cells in vertical positions, wherein the housing includes: a lower portion (see Figures 8-10, 12) having a shape that fits within an inner area of a tube of a frame of an electric bicycle; and an upper portion 812 having a shape that facilitates lifting of the battery out of the tube of the frame of the electric bicycle. The upper portion 812 of the battery is located outside of the inner area (the inner area being the area occupied by the lower portion of the battery) when the battery is partially disposed within the tube (as also discussed above).
Regarding claim 12, the upper portion 812 has a T-shaped edge (see Figure 9).
Regarding claim 16, the battery shape taught by Bender facilitates placement of the battery partially within the down tube of the frame.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 11, 13, 16, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NL 2025018 to Robert Van der Mik (herein referred to as Mik; cited on 01/02/2026) in view of EP2653371 to Beistegui.
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Mik teaches an electric bicycle (page 1, line 17 of Mik), comprising: a frame 1, wherein the frame includes: a head tube 5 configured to support handlebars and a front fork; a seat tube 2 configured to support a saddle post that holds a saddle and is placed at least partially within the seat tube; a top tube (Mik, page 5, line 31) that extends from the head tube to the seat tube; and a down tube 3 that extends from the head tube to the seat tube (Figure 20, page5, lines 28-32); and an electric battery 50 that is partially disposed within the down tube (Figure 23), wherein the electric battery includes: multiple battery cells (battery pack implies multiple battery cells); and a housing 50 that contains the multiple battery cells and having a lower portion and an upper portion, wherein the lower portion of the housing of the electric battery is disposed within an inner area of the down tube of the frame when the electric battery is removably fixed to the frame (Figures 22 and 23 clearly show the lower portion of the battery pack 50 recessed into the down tube 3, 132 (Mik, page 5, line 34: “the down tube 3 is designed to receive a battery pack”), and wherein the upper portion of the housing of the electric battery is disposed outside of the down tube of the frame when the electric battery is removably fixed to the frame (Figures 22 and 23 clearly show the battery 50 upper portion outside of the frame 132
Mik does not teach that a width of the lower portion of the housing is smaller than a width of the upper portion of the housing and it implies, but does not explicitly discuss, multiple battery cells within the battery pack.
Beistegui teaches an electric bicycle having a down tube 1 that supports a battery pack 5 that on a ledge 2 that extends from one side of the down tube to an opposite side of the down tube within the inner area of the down tube (see Figures 6(c ) and 6(d)) and is configured to support an electric battery pack 5 when disposed within the inner area of the down tube of the frame. The battery pack 5 of Beistegui includes multiple battery cells 8 and has a width of the lower portion of the housing that is smaller than a width of the upper portion of the housing (Figure 6d). Beistegui teaches that the arrangement allows for improved integration between the frame and the battery, increased options for arranging down tube in the frame, and simplification of the manufacturing process that reduces cost (see Beistegui, para [0001]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the battery pack of Mik to contain multiple battery cells, as is well known and taught by Beistegui, and that has a shape where a width of the lower portion of the housing is smaller than a width of the upper portion of the housing, as taught by Beistegui, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve integration of the frame and battery and improving the manufacturing process to reduce cost.
Regarding claim 3, the upper portion of the housing of the combination electric battery includes a T-shaped edge that facilitates lifting the electric battery out of the down tube of the frame of the electric bicycle (Beustegui, Figure 6d).
Regarding claim 4, as discussed above, Beistegui teaches a width of the lower portion of the housing is smaller than a width of the upper portion of the housing.
Regarding claim 5, the down tube of Mik includes a ledge (plate 10) positioned within the inner area of the down tube upon which the electric battery 50 sits when disposed within the inner area of the down tube of the frame (see Mik, Figure 23).
Regarding claim 6, Mikl teaches that the down tube 3 includes a ledge 10 that extends from one side of the down tube to an opposite side of the down tube within the inner area of the down tube and is configured to support the electric battery when disposed within the inner area of the down tube of the frame (See Mik, Figure 23).
Regarding claim 7, Mik teaches the down tube includes a ledge 10 that forms an internal cavity 139 within the inner area of the down tube and is configured to support the electric battery 50 when disposed within the inner area of the down tube of the frame (Mik, Figure 23).
Regarding claim 13, Mik teaches that the lower portion of the battery has a tube engagement portion that matches a shape of a ledge 10 within the inner area of the tube of the frame of the electric bicycle when the battery is disposed partially within the tube of the frame of the electric bicycle.
Regarding claim 16, both Mik and Beistegui teach that the shape of the lower portion of the battery has a geometry that facilitates placement of the battery partially within a down tube of the frame of the electric bicycle.
Regarding claim 17, Mik teaches that the frame includes several frame members including a seat tube, a down tube and a top tube (not shown). It also teaches that the battery pack may be received in the top tube (page 5, lines 36-37), therefore, the battery shape is such that the lower portion of the battery has a geometry that facilitates placement in the top tube of the frame.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mik and Beistegui as applied to claims 1, 3-7, 11, 13, 16, and 17 above, and further in view of WO2022/162891 to Tamura.
Regarding claim 9, Mik teaches that the down tube 3 includes a ledge 10 positioned within the inner area of the down tube upon which the electric battery 50 sits when disposed within the inner area of the down tube of the frame. The combination lacks a controller that controls operations of the electric bicycle and is disposed within the inner area of the down tube of the frame; and a controller carrier that mounts the controller to the ledge positioned within the inner area of the down tube and is formed of a heat transfer material.
Tamura teaches an electric bicycle with a battery 41 located at least partially within the frame 2 and a controller (drive circuit 42 located within the down tube of frame by a controller carrier 44, 445 (see Figure 11, heat dissipating carrier 445 mounts the controller 42 within the frame.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the combination bicycle with a controller for controlling operations of the bicycle on a heat dissipating carrier, as taught by Tamura, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to appropriately control the drive motor of the electric bicycle and protect the controller within the frame while preventing it from overheating.
Claim(s) 6-8 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bender in view of EP2653371 to Beistegui.
Regarding claims 6, Bender lacks the down tube including a ledge that extends from one side of the down tube to an opposite side of the down tube within the inner area of the down tube and is configured to support the electric battery when disposed within the inner area of the down tube of the frame.
Beistegui teaches an electric bicycle having a down tube 1 that includes a ledge 2 that extends from one side of the down tube to an opposite side of the down tube within the inner area of the down tube (see Figures 6© and 6(d) and is configured to support an electric battery 5 when disposed within the inner area of the down tube of the frame. Beistegui teaches that the arrangement allows for improved integration between the frame and the battery, increased options for arranging down tube in the frame, and simplification of the manufacturing process that reduces cost (see Beistegui, para [0001]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the Bender electric bicycle with a ledge that extends from one side to an opposite side of the down tube within the down tube that supports the battery, as taught by Beistegui, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve integration of the frame and battery and improving the manufacturing process to reduce cost.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, the ledge forms an internal cavity within the inner area of the down tube and is configured to support the electric battery when disposed within the inner area of the down tube of the frame (see Figure 6(d)).
Regarding claim 8, Bender teaches guiding cables 890 routed in spaces or grooves 866 formed by side edges in the frame (see col. 23, lines 5-15, and Figure 11).
Regarding claim 13, Beistegui teaches that the lower portion of the battery housing has a tube engagement portion that matches a shape of ledge 2 within the inner area of the tube of the frame of the electric bicycle when the battery is disposed partially within the tube of the frame of the electric bicycle (see Figure 6(d) and para [0023]).
Regarding claim 17,
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bender in view of Goirgini (PGPub 2019/0259982).
Regarding claim 14, Bender teaches multiple battery cells that are part of a cell assembly that is positioned within the housing, but it is silent regarding a potting compound disposed between the multiple battery cells within the cell assembly.
Goirgini teaches a battery module/battery cell assembly having multiple battery cells and a potting compound disposed between the cells in the cell assembly. Goirgini also teaches that, in general, potting is a process of filling or embedding an enclosure with a material for maintaining batteries in special relationship, providing resistance to shock and vibration, and creating a seal against moisture, solvents and corrosive agents (see Goirgini, para [0003]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide potting compound between the battery cells of the combination battery, in view of Goitgini, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to maintain the battery cells in place, resist shock and vibration, and create a seal against contaminants.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bender in view of Buck et al. (PGPub 2024/0128577) and Talavasek (PGPub 2014/0175768).
Regarding claim 15, the Bender lacks a battery management system; and end caps that include one or more connectors, one or more ports, and one or more indicators.
Buck teaches a battery for an electric bicycle having a housing 304 that contains a battery management system, BMS (see para [0094}. The housing 304 also has end caps 344, 348 (para [0095]; Figures 3a, 3b) that include connectors (battery lock 102) and ports (charging port 114).
Talavasek teaches a battery having end caps and an indicator 435 on the end cap (see [0052]; power switch 430 can be attached to end cap 340 and includes a screen 435).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the battery cells with a BMS and with end caps having ports and connector, in view of Buck, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide regulate the charging of the battery pack and provide physical and electrical connections between the battery pack and the bicycle. It would also have been obvious to provide the battery pack with an indicator in one of the end caps, as taught by Talavasek, in order to communicate charge level of the battery to the user.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bender in view of Talavasek (PGPub 2014/0175768).
Bender lacks a teaching to shape the lower portion of the battery for placement into a top tube of the frame.
Talavasek teaches a battery shaped and configured to be placed at least partially in a bicycle top tube (see para [0049]) depending on the desired location of the battery pack.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the battery of Bender for placement in a portion of the top tube, as taught by Talavasek, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to position the battery in a location more accessible to the rider.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1 and 11, applicant argues that a battery “partially disposed within the down tube”, is not taught by the prior art to Bender. The examiner disagrees. Bender, for example in Figures 12 and 14, shows battery enclosure 810 inside the down tube 624 and battery outer wall 812 extending above side walls of the down tube so as to be only partially disposed within the downtube and partially outside of the downtube. Figure 3A also shows a battery 124 that includes a substantial portion that is outside of the frame.
Also, as indicated previously, Bender makes several refences to partial integration of the battery into the frame. In col. 19, lines 19-23, Bender teaches “at least a portion of the battery 606 may be positioned within the recess 800” and “the recess 800 may be shaped to receive the battery 606 or at least a portion of the battery 606 therein”. In col. 20, lines 31-50, Bender describes “at least a portion of the of the battery may sink into the downtube” and “sinking the battery 606 at least partially into downtube 624”. Reference to the battery at least partially extending into the frame appears in the Bender Abstract, the Summary of the Invention, and claim 2.
Applicant argues that Bender fails to teach a portion of the battery outside of the frame because it discloses a battery received within the down tube to establish a continuous surface comprising surfaces of the down tube and surfaces of the battery and Figure 14 shows the upper surface of the battery in line with the upper surface of the frame tube. However, the battery surface forming a continuous surface shape with the frame does not mean that the battery cannot extend above the frame. The battery surface could have a smooth transition to the surface of the frame while also extending substantially outside of the frame. The examiner also maintains that Figure 14 does show the battery extending outside of the frame. As seen in Figure 14 of Bender, the upper portion of down tube 602 is cut out to allow placement of battery 606 within the frame. At the portion of frame where the battery 606 is located, the frame sides are below the upper surface of the battery such that the battery is only partially contained within the frame. Therefore, applicant’s arguments are not convincing.
Applicant argues that Bender lacks a width of the lower portion of the battery housing that is smaller than the width of the upper portion of the battery housing. The examiner disagrees. Bender shows, in Figure 17A, an upper portion (outer wall 812) that is wider than the rest of the battery. It overhangs the sides of the battery body to form the smooth transition between the battery surface and frame outer surface, as discussed above. It also shows a lower end of the battery 950 having an inwardly tapering profile, in Figure 17A, such that the lower end is narrower than most of the battery body. Therefore, the claim language in amended claims 1 and 11 is taught by Bender.
Regarding claim 9, Tamura is now relied on to teach the heat dissipating carrier.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Meyer shows a bicycle having a partially integrated battery.
Choi shows a battery partially recessed into a bicycle down tube.
Lermer, CN112078719, Kwng, Yu, and Slaoui show batteries mounted in bicycle frame tubes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anne Marie M. Boehler whose telephone number is (571)272-6641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Valentin Neacsu can be reached 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.
/ANNE MARIE M BOEHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/ab/
Prosecution Insights