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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/11/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 03/11/26 (hereinafter Response) including claim amendments have been entered. Examiner notes that claims 1, 3-4, 12 and 14-15 have been amended and claims 2, 8 and 13 have been cancelled. In view of amendment, a new ground (s) of rejection is made under 35 USC § 103 over Hayashi in view of Takemura (details below) and claims 1, 3-7, 9-12 and 14-16 remain pending in the application.
Response to Argument
Applicant argument (02/10/2026) with respect to claim 1 (‘Remarks’, pages 3-4) to introduce a new limitation that the” connection members are inserted into the front pipe and corresponding one of the side pipes, and each of the connection members includes a front-side fixing part inserted into the front pipe and a side pipe and side part side-fixing part inserted into the side pipe” has been fully considered, but are not persuasive. In view of amendment, a new ground of rejection is made under 35 USC §103 over Hayashi in view of Takemura (details below).
Applicant argument with respect to claim 12 (‘Remarks’, page 3-4) to introduce a new limitation: “the first auxiliary lamp connects to the guard member via a first lamp stay that is fixed to the front pipe and a first side pipe of the pair of pipes across the first junction and the second auxiliary lamp connects to the guard member via a second lamp stay and the remaining limitations…..” have been fully considered but are moot. In view of the amendment, a new ground of rejection is made under 35 USC §102 (details below).
Claim Interpretation
In Claim 12, the phrase “a first auxiliary lamp and a second auxiliary lamp” in line 6 is being interpretated as “a left side auxiliary lamp and a right-side auxiliary lamp.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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.
8. 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.
Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hayashi et al. (US Pub. 20200164942 A1, hereinafter, “Hayashi”).
Regarding claim 12, Hayashi discloses: a saddled vehicle [saddle riding vehicle, 0008, fig. 1-11] comprising:
a vehicle body frame (10); and
a guard member (50) fixed on the vehicle body (10) frame for protecting the saddled vehicle, the guard member (50) including a front pipe (56, [0089]) and a right and left pair of side pipes (components 55L, 55R, fig. 4) and the pair of side pipes (55L, 55R) being separate members (as predicted in fig. 6, 55L and 55R are positioned being separate members);
a first auxiliary lamp (left 45, fig. 3) and a second auxiliary lamp (right 45, fig. 3) connected to the guard member (50),
wherein the front pipe (56) detachably connects (fig. 7 shows detachable configuration) to the pair of side pipes (55L and 55R, fig. 4), at a first junction (at 259c, fig. 3) and a second junction (at 59c, fig. 3), respectively,
wherein the first auxiliary lamp (left 45, fig. 3) connects to the guard member (50) via a first lamp stay (A', annotated fig. 3 below) that is fixed to the front pipe (56) and a first side pipe of the pair of side pipes (55L and 55R) across the first junction (at 59c) and that extends across the first junction (at 259f location, fig. 3).
wherein the second auxiliary lamp (right 45, fig. 3) connects to the guard member (50) via a second lamp stay (‘A’, annotated fig. 3 below) that is fixed to the front pipe (56) and a second side pipe (55R) of the pair of side pipes (55L, 55R) across the second junction (59f location.
Regarding claim 14, Hayashi further teaches that each of the first lamp stay (A', annotated fig. 3 below), and the second lamp stay (A, annotated fig. 3 of Hayashi below) has a guard connection part (56b, fig. 4; “inserted and passed” [0100]) extending across the first junction (259c of Hayashi).
PNG
media_image1.png
791
754
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 3 of Hayashi.
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, 3-7 and 9-11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi in view of Takemura, Hiroo (EP 2599699 A1; hereinafter, “Takemura”).
Regarding claim 1, Hayashi discloses: a saddled vehicle [saddle riding vehicle, 0008, fig. 1-11] comprising:
a vehicle body frame (10); and
a guard member (50) fixed on the vehicle body (10) frame for protecting the saddled vehicle, the guard member (50) including a front pipe (56, [0089]); and
an auxiliary lamp (45, fig. 3) held on the guard member (50),
wherein the front pipe (56) has its middle portion held (via 57b, fig. 4) on the vehicle body frame (10) and both ends held (left-side middle portion end and right-side middle portion end as depicted in fig. 4) and on the side pipes (55L and 55R, fig. 4),
wherein the saddled vehicle further comprises connection members (59f, 259f, fig. 3) that connect between the front pipe (56) and the side pipes (55L and 5R),
wherein the auxiliary lamp (45, fig. 3) is held to the guard member via a lamp stay (A' or A, annotated fig. 3 above).
Hayashi differs from the claimed invention is that Hayashi does not appear to explicitly teach that the connection members inserted into the front pipe and corresponding one of the side pipes, and the remaining limitations as required by claim 1; however,
Takemura in another two-wheeled motor vehicle similar to Hayashi teaches that the connection members (113 as depicted in fig. 11 and as taught by [0080]) inserted (“monolithically continuous” and “extend obliquely inward”; fig. 11 and [0080]) into the front pipe (front end 113a of main pipe 37) and corresponding one of the side pipes (112; [ see fig. 11]),
wherein each of the connection members includes: a front pipe-side fixing part (left 113b as depicted in fig. 11) inserted into the front pipe (113a, fig. 11 and [0081]); and
a side pipe-side fixing part (right 113b) inserted into the side pipe (112),
wherein the front pipe-side fixing part (left 113b) and the side pipe-side fixing part (right 113b) each have a female screw hole (hole at 114),
wherein the front pipe (113a) and the side pipes (112, 112) each have a through hole (female screw holes where bolts 78 are inserted, fig. 6 and [0056]),
wherein the auxiliary lamp (lamp 45 of Hayashi) is held to the guard member via a lamp stay (‘A’ or ‘A ‘’of Hayashi; see annotated fig. A above and fig. 7) that is held across the front pipe-side fixing part (113b of Takemura) and the side pipe-side fixing part (right 113b of Takemura), and
wherein the lamp stay (‘A’ of Hayashi) is fixed to the front pipe-side fixing part (left 113b of Takemura) and the side pipe-side fixing part (right 113b of Takemura) by fixing components (113) each screwed (115 of Takemura, fig. 11) with the female screw holes (holes at 114) via the through holes (holes at 78 of Hayashi).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art of saddle type vehicle before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a front pipe-side fixing part inserted into the front pipe of the side pipes, and a side pipe-side fixing part inserted into the side pipe, wherein the front pipe-side fixing part and the side pipe-side fixing part each have a female screw hole as taught by Takemura and transform the configuration into the connection members, lamp stay and the lamp of Hayashi, such that the lamp stay is fixed to the front pipe-side fixing part and the side pipe-side fixing part by fixing components each screwed with the female screw holes via the through holes.
Such a rearrangement of the configuration of Takemura into the connection members, lamp stay of Hayashi is a predicted design variation that clearly suggest the use of a known fastening means comprising a front pipe and side pipes, connection members spanning between them, and an auxiliary lamp mounted via a lamp stay across the fixing parts with a reasonable expectation of success in order to advantageously optimize structural design, particularly the dual anchoring of the lamps stay across distinct fixing parts and provides enhanced rigidity and vibration resistance. The structural re-arrangement represents predictable uses of prior art elements according to their established functions that facilitate secure, releasable connections. The claimed configuration doesn’t yield unexpected results and reflects routing engineering design choices based on the known principles of mechanical design configuration and, standing alone, does not establish patentability.
Regarding claim 3, depending on claim 2, Hayashi as modified above further teaches that the through holes (holes at 78 and 78; fig. 3) are provided at a rear surface (fig. 3 shows at a rear surface) of the guard member (38, fig. 3).
Regarding claims 4 and 7, (similar limitations, but different dependency), Hayashi as modified above further teaches that the lamp stay (A, A', annotated fig. 3 of Hayashi above) includes a lamp holding part [lamp cover on fig. 3 that holds the auxiliary lamp (45)], across the front pipe-side fixing part (260, [0096]) and the side pipe-side fixing part (259c, fig. 3 and 4 of Hayashi).
Hayashi as modified above doesn’t appear to explicitly teach that a guard connection part provided and a base part that connects between the lamp holding part and the guard connection part, and the auxiliary lamp is disposed inner than the guard member.
Takemura, teaches that a guard connection part (80L; fig. 8 and 9, [0057]) provided and a base part (plates 83, 84) that connects between the lamp holding part (94) and the guard connection part (79L, fig. 10), and the auxiliary lamp (fig. 1 to 3) is disposed inner (fig. 1 of Takemura shows ‘inner’) than the guard member.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art of saddle type vehicle before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a guard connection part and a base part that connects the lamp holding part to the guard connection part, along with an auxiliary lamp secured to the guard member as taught by Takemura into the invention of Hayashi in order to advantageously optimize a frame design that secures a pair of lamps to the guard member with fasteners, such as bolts, ensuring the optical axis of the lamp can be adjusted in a lateral direction [ para. 0059 of Takemura].
Regarding claim 5, Hayashi as modified above fails to expressly teach that the base plate extends rearward along an inclination of the side pipes; however,
Takemura, referring to para. 0056, line 50-55 teaches: the base plate (side plates 83 and 84) extends rare ward [“extending at positions at an interval in the vehicle width direction”; note that vehicle width direction is being interpreted as rearward] along an inclination of side pipes [shown in fig. 6 of Takemura, pipe 40 is inclined and the lamp is connected to it].
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a base plate that extends rearward along an inclination of the side pipes as taught by Takemura into the invention of Hayashi in order to advantageously optimize a frame design that secures a pair of lamps along an inclination of the side pipes, ensuring the optical axis of the lamp can be adjusted in a lateral direction [ para. 0059 of Takemura].
Regarding claims 6 and 9-11 (similar limitations, but different dependency), Hayashi as modified above teaches the front pipe (56 of Hayashi) and the side pipes (55L and 55R) but fails to teach that each include a seat part that projects rearward.
Takemura teaches that the front pipe and the side pipes each include a seat part (side plates 83 and 84, fig 8; and [0056]) that projects rearward [ fig. 8 shows 84 that projects rearward.]
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the modified Hayashi to incorporate the teaching of Takemura and provide a seat component with a surface that directly contacts the body frame, allowing it to absorb the load applied to the detachable frame portion, thereby providing the lamp support [para. 0056 of Takemura].
Regarding claim 15, Hayashi further discloses that a first fastener (260, fig. 4) extending through the first lamp stay (A', annotated fig. 3 of Hayashi above via 259e) and the front pipe (56); Hayashi doesn’t appear to explicitly teach that a second fastener extending through the first lamp stay and the first side pipe; however,
Takemura in another two-wheeled motor vehicle similar to Hayashi teaches a second fastener (second 78, fig. 11) extending through the first lamp stay (79L, [0056]) and the first side pipe (38); [38 of pair of left and right 38 as depicted in fig. 11 of Takemura).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art of saddle type vehicle before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a pair of side pipes where a first and second fastener extending through the first lamp stay and the first side pipe as taught by Takemura into the invention of Hayashi with a reasonable expectation of success in order to advantageously optimize structural design, particularly the dual anchoring of the lamps stay across distinct fixing parts and provides enhanced rigidity and vibration resistance. The structural arrangement and functional integration of these components represent a predictable variation of known elements performing known functions.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi in view of Takemura and further in view of Kodaira et al. (US Pat. 6135625; hereinafter, “Kodaira”).
Regarding claim 16, Hayashi as modified above further teaches a pair of connection members (59c and 259c) provided across the front pipe (56, [0089]) and a corresponding one of the pair of side pipes (55L and 55R) but fails to expressly teach wherein the first fastener and the second fastener extend into a first connection member; however,
Takemura teaches that the first fastener and the second fastener (81 and 82, figs. 8-9 and 11) extend into a first connection member (80L).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art of saddle type vehicle before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first fastener and the second fastener extend into a first connection member as explicitly taught by Takemura into the invention of the modified Hayashi with a reasonable expectation of success in order to advantageously optimize structural design, particularly the dual anchoring of the lamps stay across pair of connection members and provides enhanced rigidity and vibration resistance. The structural arrangement and functional integration of these components and their arrangement represent a predictable variation of known elements performing known functions.
Takemura as modified above teaches the pair of connection members (80L and 80R), but doesn’t appear to explicitly teach that the first fastener and the second fastener extend into a first connection member of the pair of connection members; however,
Kodaira in another structure for attaching lighting similar to the modified Hayashi teaches that the first fastener (B1, figs. 4-5) and the second fastener (B2, figs. 4-5) extend into a first connection member (26R, figs. 4-5) of the pair of connection members (26L and 26R).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art of saddle type vehicle before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first fastener and the second fastener extend into a first connection member of the pair of connection members as explicitly taught by Takemura into the invention of the modified Hayashi with a reasonable expectation of success in order to advantageously optimize structural design, particularly the dual anchoring of the lamps stay across pair of connection members and provides enhanced rigidity and vibration resistance. The structural arrangement and functional integration of these components and their arrangement represent a predictable variation of known elements performing known functions.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN 110843978 A to Niu discloses: the invention discloses a motorcycle protection assembly and a motorcycle, comprising two bumper assemblies for being installed on the left and right sides of the motorcycle, at least one of the connecting ends of the bumper assemblies is butted with the end of the frame beam and connected with Coaxial detachable connection. US20090230666 to Kudo discloses: the vehicle frame structure has a sub frame that is attached to the surface of a main frame and provided with a frame component. A joint is arranged along a longitudinally intermediate portion of frame component for connecting main frame and sub frame.
CN 201186701 Y to Luo discloses: the utility model relates to a split-type bumper for a motorcycle. A lower mounting bracket is arranged on a lower transverse tube of the bumper. The split-type bumper is characterized in that a connecting tube (3) is arranged above the lower transverse tube; the middle part of the connecting tube (3) is fastened with a U-shaped anchor ear (4) which is anchored outside a frame main beam tube (7) via bolts.
CN 2679020 Y to Niu discloses: the utility model discloses a combined motorcycle handlebar. The combined motorcycle handlebar is composed of a main bend pipe and two handlebar pipes. The combined motorcycle handlebar also comprises two connecting members.
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, Koppikar, Vivek can be reached on (571) 272-7109. 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 3612
/VIVEK D KOPPIKAR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3612
April 28, 2026
Prosecution Insights