DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after May 19, 2022, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 08/18/25 (hereinafter Response) including claim amendments have been entered. Examiner notes that claims 1-3 and 5 have been amended and claim 7 is cancelled. Applicant’s amendment necessitated a new ground(s) of rejections under 35 USC § 103 (details below) are made and claims 1-6 and 8 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/18/2025 (‘Remark’, page 1-12), regarding all claim objections and claim rejections under 35 USC § 112(b), 102 and 103 have been fully considered, but in light of amendment, all the limitations from the arguments are moot because a new ground of rejection (under 35 USC § 103) over Anzai in view of Kitagawa Shigeto (details below) does not rely on the references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anzai (US Pub. 20060055147 A1) in view of Kitagawa Shigeto (JPS63297182 A; hereinafter ‘Shigeto’).
Regarding claim 1, Anzai discloses: A chain tensioner device (11, figs.1 to 5, [0026]) that, applicable to be dually incorporated [‘abstract’] on both sides of a wheel shaft of a rear wheel (7) of a motorcycle or vehicle (body frame 1) on which it is installed, comprises:
- a threaded bolt (30, [0033]) for adjusting tension on a chain (10), that remains inserted in a first part (21, fig. 5) integral with the wheel shaft (shown in fig. 4, axle 6 is being interpreted as ‘wheel shaft 6’), arranged in horizonal position (front-rear direction of the vehicle, fig. 4 and [0033]), so that a tip (31) of the threaded bolt (30, fig. 5) presses on a second part (25) integral at an opposite end of a gear (claim 17, line 1-11, page 5), so that tightening or loosening the threaded bolt (30) determines a gap (20, fig. 4) between both the first part (21 or 25) to regulate the tension of the chain [ see claim 9 where Anzai discloses “tension-adjusting bolt comprises head and a shank”], and
- a discretization mechanism of the gap (20, fig. 4) between the first part (21) and the second part (25) comprises at least a retractable element ( 36, fig. 5) either in the threaded bolt (30) or in the first part (21) that contacts and is fitted (fig. 5) in one of the series of slots (33, figs. 4-5) provided either in the threaded bolt (30) or in the first part (21) so that it is possible to know the applicable tightening or loosening [0046] of the threaded bolt (30);
Anzai as disclosed above differs from the claimed invention such that a threaded bolt for adjusting tension on a chain, that remains inserted in a first part integral with the wheel shaft, wherein a base of the threaded bolt is accessible from the rear part of the shaft, through a hole pierced in the first part; however,
Shigeto (referring to fig. 2) in another rear wheel supporter for motorcycle similar to Anzai discloses that a threaded bolt (39, fig. 2) for adjusting tension on a chain (15) [ para. 0001 teaches: “adjusting the tension of the chain 15. When the tightening bolt 39 is then tightened, the hub 22 is fastened and fixed at the rear wheel axle mounting portion 19, and the chain 15 is adjusted”], that remains inserted in a first part integral (fig. 2) with the wheel shaft (12) [ para. 0001 teaches:“ fastening bolt 39 is inserted into the rear portion 19a of the rear wheel axle mounting portion 19 perpendicular to the axle direction (note that: ‘first part integral”) and engages with this annular groove 38, and this fastening bolt 39 secures the hub 22 to the rear wheel axle mounting portion 19 of the rear arm 9”], wherein a base (rear portion 19a) of the threaded bolt (39) is accessible from the rear part (see fig. 2 for rear part) of the shaft (axle shaft 12), through a hole (where 39 is inserted) pierced in the first part (see annotated fig. 2 below).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Anzai to incorporate the teaching of Shigeto and provide the threaded bolt inserted integrally in a first part with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to advantageously optimize the known mechanical design and integrate a threaded bolt for adjusting tension that remains inserted in a first part formed integrally with the support member, as taught by Shigeto.
The reference already discloses an integrated tensioning structure using a tightening bolt engaging an axle hub groove or hole to adjust chain tension. Using a threaded bolt retained withing the integral part is a predictable design choice of alternative design configuration and mere substitution of equivalent elements performing the same function in the same manner to achieve the same result. In doing so, the hub is tightened and fixed by a bolt through the slit or hole in the rear wheel axle mounting portion [0001 of Shigeto].
PNG
media_image1.png
802
821
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 2 of Shigeto.
Regarding claim 2, Anzai as modified above further discloses that the chain tensioner device (11) is characterized in that the discretization mechanism of the gap (20) between the first part (21) and the second part (25) comprises:
- in the first part (21), a retractable ball (36) inserted in an end of a plunger (39, fig. 5) with an internal spring (38, [0020]) that tends to push ([0038]) the retractable ball (36) outwards the plunger (39, fig. 5); and
- in the threaded bolt (30) one of the series of slots (33, fig. 5) in which the retractable ball (36) contacts and is fitted [ 0035, line 1-5].
Regarding claim 5, Anzai as modified above further teaches that the chain tensioner device (11 of Anzai), characterized in that the threaded bolt (39, fig. 2 of
Shigeto) remains fully inserted (fig. 2 of Shigeto) in the part integral (“integral part”, annotated fig. 2 above) with the wheel shaft (axle part 12, fig. 2 of Shigeto).
Regarding claim 6, depending on claim 1, Anzai as modified above further teaches that the chain tensioner device (11 of Anzai), characterized in that the tip (31, fig. 4-5 of Anzai) of the bolt (30 of Anzai) is flat [ shown in fig. 4, the tip end portion of the bolt 30 is flat, also see fig. 5 of Anzai].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anzai in view of Shigeto and further in view of Clayton (US 20040214671 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Anzai as modified above further teaches that the chain tensioner device (11), characterized in that the discretization mechanism of the gap (20, fig. 5) between the first part (21) and the second part (25) comprises:
in the threaded bolt (30), inserted in the ends of a plunger (plug 39) with an internal spring (38) that tends to push the said balls outwards the plunger (39), and
in the first part (21) one of the series of slots (33) are fitted.
Anzai teaches the first part and the second part that comprises the threaded bolt where plunger is inserted in ends of plunger with an internal spring that tends to push the plunger but fails to teach ‘two retractable balls’ inserted in the ends of the spring.
Clayton in another chain tensioner devices, similar to Anzai teaches a first ball and a second ball 22 [fig. 4 and para. 0025 and 0026] are housed and spring 21 is placed between the first and the second ball. Clayton further teaches that the first ball is under the action of spring connects valves of the tensioner 10.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the two balls inserted at the ends of the spring, as this is essential for allowing the internal spring to apply sufficient force to push the plunger as taught by Clayton into the invention of the modified Anzai with a reasonable expectation of success in order to advantageously maintain a controlled and stable push to the chain tensioner device through the plunger, preventing unwanted shifting or misalignment that could affect performance, thus reducing manufacturing costs [para. 0012 of Clayton].
Claims 4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anzai in view of Shigeto and further in view of Veer et al. (US20200325967 A1; hereinafter “Veer”).
Regarding claim 4, depending on claim 1, Anzai as modified above further teaches that the chain tensioner device (11) characterized in that the threaded bolt (30) is a headless bolt and provided at its base [shown in fig. 3 and 4 of Anzai, ‘tip end’ is positioned at the base on the opposite side of end 31 and is headless], but Anzai fails to teach that a machined recess and the recess is for inserting a tool, however,
Veer in another chain tensioning devices similar to Anzai teaches that a tensioning bar assembly for a tensioning assembly includes a longitudinal bar [equivalent to threaded bolt] having a top end, a bottom end, and a threaded portion and the proximate bottom end of the threaded bolt for engagement with a tool [‘abstract’]. See para. 0012, line 15-20 and fig. 3 where 102h end of the threaded bolt is headless and formed with recess to insert a tool.
Veer further discloses: “the engagement head at or proximate the bottom end of the bar (equivalent to ‘threaded bolt’ of claim invention) may be any one or more of: a triangle, square, pentagon or hex head or socket; a posidrive head or socket; a torx head or socket; a slotted or Phillips screwdriver receiving socket” [0021].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate threaded bolt or bar which has a recess at its open end with respect to the through hole where a tool (hex tool) can be inserted as taught by Veer into the invention of the modified Anzai with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to advantageously configure a chain tensioning device where an open end of the threaded bolt can be engaged with a variety of tools for applying tension to the chain. This allows the longitudinal bar or a threaded bolt to rotate freely and permit free axial rotation [‘abstract’ of Veer].
Regarding claim 8, the modified Anzai in view of Veer further teaches that the tool is a hex tool [ see claim rejection 4 above and para, 0021 of Veer where hex type tool is used].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20080194364 A1 to John discloses: a low-profile tension adjuster for use with a chain or belt driven power transmission system which has a slidable bar that sits inside of a yoke and over an axle and a base plate and set screw arrangement that abuts the slidable bar.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NABIN KUMAR SHARMA whose telephone number is (703)756-4619. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Friday: 8:00am - 5 PM EST.
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, Neacsu Valentin can be reached on (571) 272-6265. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
NABIN KUMAR SHARMA/
Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611