DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 10-11 are objected to for the following informalities:
Claim 1 line 23 should read “outputs” for the purpose of grammatical accuracy.
Claim 10 line 4 should read “a movable range” for the purpose of consistency.
Claim 11 line 1 should read “further comprising” for the purpose of grammatical accuracy.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 8 and 13-15 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.
The term “slightly” in claim 8 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “slightly” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear what kind of fit between the first and second helical teeth would or would not be considered slight.
Claim 13 recites “the magnet moves accordingly” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what is required by the term “accordingly” in regards to the movement of the first gearwheel. For instance does “accordingly” mean before, after, at the same time, in the same direction, in an opposite direction, or otherwise of the movement of the first gearwheel.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-9, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Buckley (US 10,151,650 A1).
In regards to claim 1 Buckley teaches a pedaling sensing device of an electric bicycle (10), which is configured to connect to a motor (140) of the electric bicycle, comprising:
a crank axle (132) extending along an axial direction and comprising an outer surface (shown in Figure 6), wherein the crank axle is formed with a plurality of first helical teeth (134) disposed around the outer surface, the plurality of first helical teeth are connected to each other and arranged continuously (See Figure 6);
a first gearwheel (170) disposed around the crank axle and comprising a first inner annulus surface (inner part of 170 containing helical teeth 172) and a first outer annulus surface (outer surface of 170) opposite to the first inner annulus surface, wherein the first inner annulus surface is formed with a plurality of second helical teeth (172) matching the plurality of first helical teeth, the plurality of second helical teeth are connected to each other and arranged continuously (Paragraph 0039: “Internal splines 172 are configured to mate and engage with a plurality of external splines 134 disposed about input shaft 132 thereby mating and securing transfer ring 170 to input shaft 132.”), the first outer annulus surface is formed with a first transmission structure (176);
a second gearwheel (160) disposed around the first gearwheel and having a second inner annulus surface (inner surface of 160, see Figure 6), wherein the second inner annulus surface is formed with a second transmission structure (164) matching the first transmission structure (Paragraph 41: “pawls 176 are engaged with internal ratchet teeth 164 on ratchet ring 160.”);
an assisting unit (152) disposed around the crank axle and connected with the motor (Paragraph 36: “Accordingly, during operations, rotation of output gear 144 about motor axis 145 drives rotation of input disk 152 about axis 105 (which also drives rotation of chain ring 20 via transmission 130 as described above).”); and
a sensing unit (190, 200, and 210) disposed around the crank axle and located adjacent to the first gearwheel (See Figure 9), wherein the sensing unit is signally connected with the motor (via controller 220, see Paragraph 53),
wherein when a force is applied to rotate the crank axle, the crank axle drives the first gearwheel and the second gearwheel to rotate through the plurality of first helical teeth and the plurality of second helical teeth, and the first gearwheel also moves relative to the crank axle along the axial direction, the sensing unit senses the movement of the first gearwheel along the axial direction (Paragraph 52: “during operations, sensors 212, 214 observe and generate two periodic signals X.sub.1 and X.sub.2, respectively, of the magnetic field surrounding the rings 190, 200, respectively, during the rotation of the input disk 152, ratchet ring 160, transfer ring 170, and input shaft 132 about axis 105.”) and output a sensing signal (to controller 220, see Figure 10) so that the motor drives the electric bicycle forward through the assisting unit according to the sensing signal (Paragraph 53: “controller 220 may both perform the torque determination calculation described above and control some other aspect or component (e.g., torque output of motor 140) of transportation device 10 as a result thereof.”),
wherein each of the plurality of first helical teeth has a first surface and a second surface which are connected to each other, each of the plurality of second helical teeth has a third surface and a fourth surface which are connected to each other, the first surface, the second surface, the third surface and the fourth surface are inclined planes (see zoomed in and annotated Figure 6 below where each of teeth 134 and 172 has two inclined planes, one on each side with a flat top surface connecting the two inclined planes, in other words, each tooth has a trapezoidal cross section).
PNG
media_image1.png
639
430
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 1 is taught by Buckley. Buckley further teaches wherein when the crank axle is subjected to the force to rotate in a first direction (101), the first surface is in contact with the third surface, when the crank axle is subjected to another force to rotate in a second direction (103) opposite to the first direction, the second surface is in contact with the fourth surface (See annotated Figure 6 above as well as Figure 5, examiner notes that regardless of the direction of rotation the first and third surfaces and the second and fourth surfaces are in contact. Never the less, when the shaft 132 rotates in direction 101 the “leading surfaces” are the first and third and when the shaft rotates in direction 103 then the second and fourth surfaces are leading).
In regards to claim 4: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 1 is taught by Buckley. Buckley further teaches wherein during the rotation and movement of the first gearwheel, the plurality of first helical teeth and the plurality of second helical teeth maintain a continuous meshing state (See Figure 5).
In regards to claim 5: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 1 is taught by Buckley. Buckley further teaches wherein the tooth shapes of the plurality of first helical teeth and the plurality of second helical teeth are the same (See annotated Figure 6 above where both the first and second helical teeth have a trapezoidal cross section).
In regards to claim 6: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 1 is taught by Buckley. Buckley further teaches wherein in a direction perpendicular to the axial direction, a projection surface of the first transmission structure (176) at least partially overlaps projection surfaces of the plurality of first helical teeth (134) (seen in Figure 5 where perpendicular to the axial direction 176 overlaps 134).
In regards to claim 7: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 1 is taught by Buckley. Buckley further teaches wherein in a direction perpendicular to the axial direction, the first gearwheel is located at least partially inside the second gearwheel (Refer to figures 5 and 6 where 170 is located inside of 160).
In regards to claim 8: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 1 is taught by Buckley. Buckley further teaches wherein the plurality of second helical teeth fit with the plurality of first helical teeth (Shown in Figure 5).
In regards to claim 9: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 1 is taught by Buckley. Buckley further teaches wherein in a direction perpendicular to the axial direction, a projection surface of the first transmission structure (176), a projection surface of the second transmission structure (164), projection surfaces of the plurality of first helical teeth (134) and projection surfaces of the plurality of second helical teeth (172) overlap at least partially (Shown in Figure 5).
In regards to claim 11: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 1 is taught by Buckley. Buckley further teaches a chain wheel (20) connected with the assisting unit (See Figure 3) wherein the assisting unit comprises an assisting gearwheel (152) and a connecting base (130), the connecting base is disposed around the crank axle and connects to the chain wheel (See Figure 4), the connecting base is located between the crank axle and the assisting gearwheel (See Figure 3).
In regards to claim 12: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 1 is taught by Buckley. Buckley further teaches wherein the sensing unit comprises a magnetic sensing element (212 and 214) and a magnet (Paragraph 46: “In this embodiment, each ring 190, 200 is a single multi-pole ring magnet that includes a plurality of alternating and opposite poles.”), the magnetic sensing element is disposed facing the first gearwheel (see Figure 6), the magnet is disposed around on the first gearwheel (Shown in Figure 5) and correspondingly disposed with the magnetic sensing element (Paragraph 50: “Sensor unit 210 includes a pair of Hall effect sensors, with one Hall effect sensor 212 being axially aligned with the sections 192a, 192b of outer ring 190 and the other Hall effect sensor 214 being axially aligned with the inner ring 200.”).
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.
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 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckley in view of Kao (US 2018/0072376 A1).
In regards to claim 13: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 12 is taught by Buckley. Buckley fails to teach wherein when the first gearwheel moves along the axial direction, the magnet moves accordingly, the magnetic sensing element outputs the sensing signal according to the magnetic flux variation generated by the movement of the magnet. However, Kao teaches a gearwheel (500) that moves along the axial direction (Paragraph 0024), and a magnet (511) that moves accordingly, where a magnetic sensing element (700) outputs a sensing signal according to the magnetic flux variation generated by the movement of the magnet (Paragraph 0028: “In such a configuration, when the first driven plate 500 rotates, the sensor device 700 can continuously or periodically detect a variation of an intensity of the magnetic field caused by the magnetic region 511 moving along the axial direction of the shaft 100.”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art with a reasonable expectation of success before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the magnetic sensing arrangement of Kao with the device of Buckley so as to accurately detect the torque that a user places on the pedals thereby allowing for greater control of the motor and creating a more user friendly bicycle.
In regards to claims 14 and 15: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 13 is taught by Buckley in view of Kao. The combination further teaches wherein the first gearwheel and the magnet move both away from and towards the magnetic sensing element (Paragraph 0024: “Since the propelling plate 300 is fixed on the shaft 100, when the first driven plate 500 moves along X axis relative to the shaft 100, the first driven plate 500 approaches to the propelling plate 300 or leaves away from the propelling plate 300.”, See Figures 5-6B).
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckley in view of Zhong (CN 109131710 A).
In regards to claim 16: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 12 is taught by Buckley. Buckley fails to teach an elastic element disposed around the crank axle and located between the first gearwheel and the second gearwheel, the elastic element pushes the first gearwheel toward the magnetic sensing element. However, Zhong teaches a torque sensor on a bicycle shaft using an elastic element 15 to bias magnetic ring 13 towards sensor 8. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art with a reasonable expectation of success to additionally have an elastic element as in Zhong on the sensing device of Buckley so as to help bias the magnetic ring to the magnetic sensor with a known pressure to allow for more accurate torque measurements thereby creating a more user friendly vehicle by allowing for the motor to be more precisely controlled based upon the input torque of the user.
In regards to claim 17: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 16 is taught by Buckley in view of Zhong. The combination further teaches wherein the elastic element is composed of a plurality of elastic bodies (See multiple disc springs in disc spring group 15 in Figure 3).
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buckley in view of Du (CN 105966539 A).
In regards to claims 18 and 19: The pedaling sensing device according to claim 1 is taught by Buckley. Buckley fails to teach a pressure sensing element disposed around the crank axle, when the first gearwheel rotates, the pressure sensing element senses the applied force and outputs the sensing signal, and a thrust bearing disposed around the crank axle between the first gearwheel and the pressure sensing element. However, Du teaches a pressure sensor (3) with a thrust bearing (5) on a crank axle of a bicycle to allow for the torque applied by a user to be measured (Abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art with a reasonable expectation of success to additionally have a pressure sensor with a thrust bearing as in Du on the crank axle of Buckley so as to allow for the pressure applied by a user to be more accurately sensed and the motor of Buckley to be more precisely controlled providing better tailored motor assist to the user and creating a more comfortable ride.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 3 recites two one-way mechanisms cooperating on the second gearwheel and connecting base of an assisting unit respectively. Buckley teaches a one way mechanism between the first and second gearwheels using pawls 176 and ratchet teeth 164, but does not teach the one way mechanism being between the assisting unit and second gearwheel. There would be no motivation, nor is there any suggestion, to alter the one way ratchet mechanism of Buckley in this way. Additional prior art failed to teach this feature as claimed.
Claim 10 recites wherein the first and second gearwheels have overlapping and non-overlapping portions, the width of the non-overlapping portion along the axial direction is a distance of the movable range of the first gearwheel. This movable relationship between the first and second gearwheel is not taught by Buckley. While the gearwheel of Kao is movable in the axial direction, the distance of the movement being specifically the amount of a non-overlapping portion between the first and second gearwheels is not taught. Additionally, there would be no motivation to modify Buckley in this way in order to allow the specific amount of axial movement between the first and second gearwheels.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL R HYMEL whose telephone number is (571)272-0389. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-F 7:30-4:30.
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.
/A.R.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611