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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 3, and 7-10 are currently pending. In response to the Office Action mailed 4/08/2025 Applicant amended claim 1 and canceled claims 2 and 4-6.
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.
Claims 1, 3 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190225292 A1 to Lee (Lee 292) in view of US 20210101657 A1 to Lee (Lee 657) further in view of US 20110140471 A1 to Suesse.
Regarding Claim 1. Lee 292 discloses a rearview device for being installed on a handle bar of a bicycle, comprising: a mirror support (See Fig. 1 mirror 4) comprising: a C-ring (Fig. 1 ring 2) for looping up the handle bar (See Fig. 1), and having an opening (Fig. 1 holes 21 and 22); an arm (Fig. 1 rod 3), having a base (See Fig. 1 bar 31) and an extended portion connected thereto (See Fig. 1), and fixed to two sides of the opening by a fastener passing the base to make the C-ring tightly loop up the handle bar (See Fig. 1 screw 33), the extended portion extending from the base (See Fig. 1), and an outer end of the arm having a hole channel (Fig. 1 hole 341); a sleeve (Fig. 1 pincher 35), embedded in the hole channel (See Fig. 1 and Fig. 2), and having a ball pit inside (Fig. 1 hemispheric indents 352); and a tightening bolt, passing into the hole channel from an outside of the extended portion (See Fig. 1 screw 36); and a rearview mirror, comprising a frame and a mirror plate mounted on a front side of the frame (See Fig. 1 mirror 4), wherein a back side of the frame being extended with a connecting portion, the connecting portion is formed with a ball plug embedded into the ball pit of the sleeve (See Fig. 1 ball 41); wherein the two sides of the opening of the C-ring is formed with a first wall and a second wall, respectively (See Fig. 1 and Fig. 5), the first wall is formed with a threaded hole, the second wall is formed with a through hole (as shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 5), an outer surface of the second wall, which corresponds to the base, is formed with a positioning trough communicating with the through hole (See Fig. 5), a bottom of the base is formed with a positioning bar which is limitedly rotatably embedded into the positioning trough (See Fig. 1 and Fig. 5), an inside of the base is formed with a passing hole and a connecting hole to allow the fastener to pass the passing hole (See Fig. 1 and Fig. 5), the connecting hole and the through hole to screw in the threaded hole (See Fig. 1 and Fig. 5); wherein a junction of an outer surface of the base and an outer surface of the positioning bar is formed with a positioning wall for abutting against an outer surface of the second wall (as shown in Fig. 5); wherein the base has a first axis line (See Fig. 5), the extended portion has an extended line (See Fig. 5), the C-ring has a second axis line (See Fig. 5), the extended line and the second axis line form a first angle on a horizontal plane when the first axis line is parallel to a vertical plane (See Fig. 5); wherein the extended line and the second axis line form a second angle on a vertical plane when the second axis line is parallel to a horizontal plane (See Fig. 5).
Lee 292 does not specifically disclose that a tightening bolt, passing into the hole channel from an outside of the extended portion for pushing an outer surface of the sleeve to flexibly narrow the sleeve; wherein the first angle is between 10° and 30°; wherein the second angle is between 15° and 45°.
However, Lee 657 discloses a rearview device for being installed on a handle bar of a bicycle with a tightening bolt (Fig. 2 fastener 24), passing into the hole channel from an outside of the extended portion (Fig. 2 hole 231) for pushing an outer surface of the sleeve to flexibly narrow the sleeve (See Fig. 2 and para 11) to firmly connect ball with sleeve.
Further, Suesse discloses a joint to so a rider may optimize the mirror angle for viewing (Fig. 3 joint 34, para 24). The first angle is result-effective variables. In that, the first angle may be optimized to achieve the desired viewing and comfort for riding. In addition, Suesse discloses a joint to so a rider may optimize the mirror angle for viewing (Fig. 3 joint 34, para 24). The second angle is result-effective variables. In that, the second angle may be optimized to achieve the desired viewing and comfort for riding.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to include a tightening bolt, passing into the hole channel from an outside of the extended portion for pushing an outer surface of the sleeve to flexibly narrow the sleeve; wherein the first angle is between 10° and 30°; wherein the second angle is between 15° and 45°, to provide a desired viewing and comfort for riding is based on a result effective variable and would require routine skill in the art. Furthermore, it has been held that that determining the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05 (II (A) and (B)).
Regarding Claim 3. Lee 292 further discloses an outer surface of the positioning bar is disposed with a flange, and an inner surface of the positioning trough is formed with an engaging trough for being embedded by the flange (as shown in Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 7. Lee 657 further discloses the extended portion is formed with a hollow (at least Fig. 2 showing at least a partially hollow portion).
Regarding Claim 8. Lee 657 further discloses the sleeve has a bottom plate and a surrounding wall extending from a periphery of the bottom plate, the ball pit is defined by the bottom plate and the surrounding wall, the surrounding wall is formed with a slot along an axial direction (See Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 9. Lee 657 further discloses the extended portion is disposed with a threaded hole communicating with the hole channel, and the tightening bolt passes through and screws with the threaded hole (See Fig. 2), an inner wall of the hole channel is formed with a hole plane, and the surrounding wall of the sleeve is formed with a restraint plane for engaging with the hole plane (See Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 10. Lee 657 further discloses an inner wall of the hole channel is formed with two hole planes (See Fig. 3), and the surrounding wall of the sleeve is formed with two restraint planes (See Fig. 2 and Fig. 3), the hole planes and the threaded hole are arranged to be perpendicular (as shown in Fig. 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art of record does not disclose the all the limitations of amended claim 1. Specifically, Applicant argues that the prior art of record does not disclose a positioning wall in direct contact with the second surface. Further, Applicant argues that the flexible joint in the prior differs from Applicant’s “fixed angles”
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the narrow definition and/or interpretation of what constitutes a “positioning wall” or narrow definition and/or interpretation of second surface; and fixed angles) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDMOND C LAU whose telephone number is (571)272-5859. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8am-6pm 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, Jennifer Carruth can be reached at (571) 272-9791. 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.
/EDMOND C LAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871