DETAILED ACTION
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 1.114
A 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/16/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/16/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim 1 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Hilk (US 6,435,523) in view of Nakatani (US 4761092) in view of Pao (US 6142699 A) regarding claim 1.
Additionally, the Applicant argues that the “combinations of Pao Hilk and D1 does not teach or suggest an end cap structure of Fig 4… a stationary dust-preventing and strength-reinforcing cap connected to the second connection end.” of claim 3 (See Remarks pg 12 paras 1 and 2). The Examiner disagrees. The Specification of the instant applications states “An end cap 311 is connected to the second connection end 31 to prevent dust from entering into the second tube 30 and to reinforce the structural strength as shown in Fig. 4.” (See Specification pg. 6 lines 6-8). There is no mention of the end cap being “a stationary element”, rather, the end cap would have to move with the second tube as “the second tube 30 is movably relative to the first tube 20 to adjust the length of the cross bar adaptor.” (See Specification pg 8 lines 4-5), and the second connection end 31 is merely a descriptor of a surface or end of the second tube. Therefore, while a new rejection of claim 1 is in view of Hilk, Nakatani and Pao, the rejection of claim 3 can continue to include the modification of claim 1 in view of D1 as described above.
Further, Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/16/2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 5 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Hilk , Nakatani, Pao in further view of Benner et al, regarding claim 5.
Additionally, Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/16/2025, with respect to the rejection of claim 6 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Hilk , Nakatani, Pao in further view of Bukovitz et al, regarding claim 6.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilk (US 6,435,523) in view of Nakatani (US 4761092) in view of Pao (US 6142699 A).
Regarding claim 1, Hilk teaches a retractable bicycle cross bar adaptor 10 (Fig 1), comprising:
a bar having a first tube 44 (Fig 1) , a second tube 42 (Fig 1), the first tube 44 (Fig 1) having [a first end and a second end] (Fig 1 shows the first tube having a first end and second end), the second tube 42 (Fig 4) [having a first end and a second end] (Fig 1 shows the second tube 42 having a first and second end, wherein the first end interacts with the first end of the first tube 42), [a first hook 26 (Fig 2) connected to the second end of the first tube 44 (Fig 1)] (“Tube 10 includes bicycle-gripping mechanisms 24, 26 disposed at each end.” Col 2 lines 49-51 ) , a second hook 24 (Fig 2) [connected to the second end of the second tube 42 (Fig 1) ] (“Tube 10 includes bicycle-gripping mechanisms 24, 26 disposed at each end.” Col 2 lines 49-51 );
the first tube 44 (Fig 3) including a ridge 50 (Fig 3) [extending axially and inward from an inner periphery of a first connection end] (“…a corresponding depression 50 formed at the end of section 44.” Col 1 lines 63-65) , the first connection end formed to the first end of the first tube 44 (Fig 3 shows a first connection end of the first tube 44 having a ridge), [the ridge 50 (Fig 3) located corresponding to a groove 48 (Fig 3)], (Fig 3 shows an exploded view of the first and second tube members wherein the first connection end ridge interacts with the groove of the second tube, “…a groove 48 formed in the otherwise circular wall of section 42 that interfits with a corresponding depression 50 formed at the end of section 44.” Col 1 lines 63-65), [a second connection end formed to the first end of the second tube] (Fig 3 shows an exploded view of the first and second tube members wherein the second connection end is formed in the second tube 42 having a groove 48) [the second connection end slidably inserted into the first connection end] (“Section 42 is sized to fit telescopically into section 44 to allow the length of the support structure to be adjusted to accommodate different size bicycles” Col 1 lines 58-60), the second tube including the groove 48 (Fig 3) [defined axially in an outside of the second tube 42 (Fig 3)] (“…a groove 48 formed in the otherwise circular wall of section 42 that interfits with a corresponding depression 50 formed at the end of section 44” Col 1 lines 63-65)
Hilk does not explicitly teach the first tube having a non-circular cross section, nor a control unit, wherein the control unit including a collar, a lever and a block, the collar having a passage defined axially therethrough, an inner diameter of the passage being larger than that of the first tube, the first connection end inserted into a first end of the passage, the second connection end inserted into a second end of the passage and slidably inserted into the first connection end, the collar including a first flange extending inward from the second end of the passage, a protrusion extending from an inner periphery of the first flange and located corresponding to the groove so as to guide the second tube to move linearly, a space formed in the collar and located between an outside of the second connection end and an inner periphery of the passage, a hole defined through a wall of the collar and communicating with the space, two lugs extending from an outer surface of the collar, the hole located between the two lugs; and
the lever including an eccentric end formed to one end thereof, a pin extending through the two lugs and pivotably connecting the eccentric end between the two lugs, the eccentric end including a cam portion so as to perform as a quick release lever, the block located in the space and including a convex engaging face which is removably engaged with the groove, the block including a push face that is located opposite to the convex engaging face, wherein when the lever is pivoted in one direction, a long-axis of the cam portion is located away from the groove and a gap is formed between the convex engaging face and the groove such that the second tube is movable relative to the first tube to adjust a length of the cross bar adaptor, and when the lever is pivoted in an opposite direction, the cam portion pushes the push face of the block to engage the convex engaging face with the groove such that the second tube cannot be moved relative to the first tube and the length of the cross bar adaptor is set.
Nakatani (US 4,761,092) teaches an equivalent first tube 1,11 (Fig 1) [having a non-circular cross section] (“The cross section of each leg section 1 and 11 is generally U-shaped defining a longitudinally extending channel” Col 3 lines 15-16), and a control unit 12,16,18 and 20 (Figs 1-5) including a collar 12 (Fig 5), a lever 20,18 (Fig 1) and a block 19 (Fig 1) , the collar 12 (Fig 5), [having a passage defined axially therethrough, an inner diameter of the passage being larger than that of the first tube] (“The bracket 12 is dimensioned to fit around the outer leg section 1 and is held against detachment from the leg by the camming lever 20 which closes the gap between the bracket arms 13.” Col 3 lines 11-14 ), [the first connection end inserted into a first end of the passage] (Figs 1 and 2 show the first tube 1 inserted into the left side of the bracket and is wholly contained within the bracket) , [the second connection end inserted into a second end of the passage and slidably inserted into the first connection end] (Figs 1 and 2 show the second end of the second tube 11, being positioned wholly within the bracket 12 and is axially supported by the first connection end of the first tube and the entire length of the tube) , the lever 20,18 (Fig 5) including an eccentric end 20 (Fig 5) formed to one end thereof, a pin 16 (Fig 5) extending through the two lugs 13 (Fig 5) [and pivotably connecting the eccentric end between the two lugs] (“A lever 20 provided with a cam portion 18 is pivotably mounted by means of shaft 16 between the parallel arms 13 of a U-shaped mounting bracket 12.” Col 3 lines 8-11 ), the eccentric end including a cam portion 18, 18a,18b(Fig 5) [so as to perform as a quick release lever] (“The camming lever 20 is mounted between the arms 13 of the bracket 12 by inserting a shaft 16 through aligned holes in the lever 20 and the arms 13…thus enabling the camming lever 20 to pivot between a down or locking position shown in FIG. 1 and an up or release position shown in FIG. 4” Col 3 lines 33-38, see also “The lock is released to allow telescoping sliding movement of the two leg sections by pivoting the lever 20 approximately 90 degrees to a generally erect position so that the cam portion 18b of large radius is rotated away from the plate 19, and the smaller radius portion 18a of the cam 18 overlies the plate 19, but does not press against the same.”, Col 3 lines 56-63), the block 19 (Fig 5) located in the space 17 (Fig 5) , [the block including a push face] (“In the locked position the cam 18 has a portion of greater radius 18b, shown in FIG. 3, which presses against the plate 19” Col 3 lines 46-49), [wherein when the lever 20 (Figs 1 and 4) is pivoted in one direction, a long-axis of the cam portion is located away from the groove and a gap is formed between the convex engaging face and the groove such that the second tube is movable relative to the first tube to adjust a length of the cross bar adaptor] (“The lock is released to allow telescoping sliding movement of the two leg sections by pivoting the lever 20 approximately 90 degrees to a generally erect position so that the cam portion 18b of large radius is rotated away from the plate 19, and the smaller radius portion 18a of the cam 18 overlies the plate 19, but does not press against the same.”, Col 3 lines 56-63), [and when the lever is pivoted in an opposite direction, the cam portion pushes the push face of the block to engage the convex engaging face with the groove such that the second tube cannot be moved relative to the first tube and the length of the cross bar adaptor is set] (“In the locked position the cam 18 has a portion of greater radius 18b, shown in FIG. 3, which presses against the plate 19, which in turn presses against the inner leg section 11, creating a friction lock between the inner section 11 and the outer section 1 to prevent telescoping movement between the two sections…” Col 3 lines 46-52).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the noncircular tube shape and locking mechanism of Nakatani with the adjustable bicycle crossbar of Hilk with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for axial support along the entire length of the crossbar when the first and second tubes are non-circular and have complementing cross sections. Additionally, the non-circular cross sections prevent axial rotation of the crossbar. The locking mechanism of Nakatani would provide additional success by simplifying the locking mechanism to include a cam design that acts as a quick release lever and acts as a friction lock between the first and second tubes. By including the square shaped tubes of Nakatani and the locking mechanism of Nakatani with the crossbar of Hilk, the crossbar is axially supported along the entire length and the locking mechanism is a simplified cam design that friction locks the two tubes together.
Additionally, Hilk and Nakatani do not teach the collar including a first flange extending inward from the second end of the passage, a protrusion extending from an inner periphery of the first flange so as to guide the second tube to move linearly, and that the block includes a convex face opposite the push face.
Pao teaches an equivalent collar 1 (Fig 1) including a first flange (stopper flange 111, Fig 1, “a stopper flange 111 being formed on inner edge of one end of the fitting hole 11,” Col 2 lines 27-31 ) extending inward from the second end of the passage (“a stopper flange 111 being formed on inner edge of one end of the fitting hole 11,” Col 2 lines 27-31 ), a protrusion extending from an inner periphery of the first flange (protrusion 112, Fig 1, “…a locating block 112 projecting from inner wall of the fitting hole 11” Col 2 Lines 29-30) so as to guide the second tube to move linearly (“The locating block 112 is inserted into the open side of the collar 3 and the recess 22 of the outer tube 2…” Col 2 lines 51-53, Fig 2 shows the interaction between 112 and inner tube 4 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additional use the flange on the inside of the collar of Pao with a reasonable expectation of success because it would provide additionally axial support of the tube to ensure that the second tube is fully supported within the first tube. By including a flange of Pao with a protrusion that interacts with the groove and second tube of Hilk and Nakatani, the second tube is less likely to shift inside the first tube and provide additional means to prevent axial movement of the second tube within the first tube.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilk and Nakatani and Pao in further view of D1 (DE 202014102320) Machine Translation of description provided in present OA.
Regarding claim 3, Hilk Nakatani and Pao teach the retractable bicycle crossbar adaptor of claim 1.
Hilk, Nakatani and Pao do not teach an end cap being connected to the second connection end to prevent dust from entering into the second tube and reinforce structural strength.
D1 teaches an end cap (guide, 26, Figs 2 and 3, “a guide 26 which is connected to the end of the first element 2.” , pg. 18 para 0087 ) being connected to the second connection end (D1, first tube element 2, Fig 2, “The bicycle frame adapter 1 has two mutually telescopic elements, namely a first element 2 and a second element 3 . Furthermore, the two elements 2, 3 are arranged coaxially to each other, with the first element 2 being positioned largely within the second element 3.” Pg. 15 para 0077) to prevent dust from entering into the second tube and to reinforce structural strength (guide 26 is a solid component shown in Figure 2 that is connected to a second end component of the first tube which is identical to the second tube 3, this solid block guides the tube along the interior of the outer tube and due to its sealing capabilities, prevents dust from entering the inner tube. “the guide 26 moves along and provides stability to the first element 2 within the second element 3, so that relative play between the two elements 2, 3 can be prevented as best as possible. Of course, the guide 26 and the inner dimension of the second element 3 have a suitable fit that allows easy movement of the first element 2 relative to the second element 3.” (emphasis added) Pg 18 para 0087).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the end cap of D1 with the crossbar assembly of Hilk, Nakatani and Pao with a reasonable expectation of success because it would strengthen the crossbar assembly along the axial direction (emphasis added), and add additional support to the inner tube as it interacts within the outer tube. Additionally, by sealing off the tube with a solid endcap, dust is prevented from entering the tubes. A stronger crossbar would be less likely to fail due to overloading the unit in an axial direction.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilk and Nakatani and Pao in further view of Benner et al (US 8,336,835).
Regarding claim 5, Hilk, Nakatani and Pao teach the cross bar adaptor of claim 1 having a push block Nakatani-19 (Fig 5), and wherein [the block Nakatani-19 (Fig 5), is located in the space Nakatani-17 (Fig 5) and the cam portion 18,18a,18b (Fig 3) pushes the push face to tightly engage the plate with the second tube when the lever is pivoted in the opposite direction] (“In the locked position the cam 18 has a portion of greater radius 18b, shown in FIG. 3, which presses against the plate 19, which in turn presses against the inner leg section 11, creating a friction lock between the inner section 11 and the outer section 1 to prevent telescoping movement between the two sections.” Col 3 lines 46-52 ).
Hilk, Nakatani and Pao do not teach the block is a convex block made of rubber, the convex engaging face is shaped to be matched with a shape of the groove, the push face is a flat face, wherein the block is located in the space and the cam portion pushes the push face to tightly engage the convex engaging face with the groove when the lever is pivoted in the opposite direction.
Benner teaches an equivalent block that is a convex block 108 (Fig 6) [made of rubber] (“Further, footer 108 may be made of any material that is preferably light, strong and durable… polymer or other material having such characteristics.” Col 4 lines 2-5 ), the [convex engaging face is shaped to be matched with a shape of the groove] (“Footer 108 may be any three-dimensional shape or size and preferably has at least a rounded portion for contacting second inner circumference 44” Col 3 lines 60-64), [the push face is a flat face] (“For example, footer 108 may have a general cross-sectional, two-dimensional shape of a circle or crescent or a rectangle with one edge or side arced.” (Emphasis added) Col 3 lines 65-67 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the convex block of Benner with the pressure plate of Hilk, Nakatani and Pao with a reasonable expectation of success because it would provide a more secure means to secure the second tube within the first tube. By using an elastomeric convex block to secure the telescopic cross member the lever will not directly contact the tube and will have increase longevity of the lever by preventing direct contact with the tube and causing wear onto the lever cam surface. Additionally, the rubber material would conform around the second tube and more firmly secure the tube in place.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilk and Nakatani and Pao as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Bukovitz et al. (US 2015/0139717).
Regarding Claim 6, Hilk, Nakatani and Pao teach the retractable bicycle cross bar adaptor in claim 1 above.
Hilk, Nakatani and Pao do not teach a second flange extends inward from the inner periphery of the passage, the first connection end of the first tube contacts the second flange, the space is located between the first and second flanges.
Bukovitz teaches an equivalent locking mechanism having a second flange (88, Fig 4, “…one or more circumferentially spaced ribs 86 may be provided on the outer surface of the inner telescoping member adjacent the axial inner end thereof which make contact with an inner flange 88” para 0034 ) extends inward from the inner periphery of the passage (flange 88 protrudes inwardly from the exterior component 32 as shown in Fig 4), the first connection end of the first tube (tube 14 terminates at the flange connection 88 as shown in Fig 4) contacts the second flange (element 88, Fig 4), the space is located between the first and second flanges (protrusion of element 46, Figure 4, behaves as the first flange and interacts with the external surface of tube 14 (outer surface 34), wherein a space exists between the two flanges as shown in annotated Bukovitz Fig 4 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
671
263
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Bukovitz Figure 4, showing the two flanges with a space between the two flanges.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the second flange of Bukovitz with the crossbar assembly of Hilk, Nakatani and Pao with a reasonable expectation of success because it would provide additional axial support to both the inner and outer tubes. By providing an additional flange, the exterior tube would be supported axially and would be less likely to bend or flex out of alignment--due to axial forces-- with the inner tube which would increase the longevity and overall axial strength of the crossbar.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MORGAN M KNAUF whose telephone number is (703)756-4532. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM -4:30 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, 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.
/M.M.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611