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 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-13 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.
In claim 1, last two lines, applicant claims “the attachment foot is rotatably joined to said support element at an intermediate position between a rotatably connection of the first oscillating arm to the steering bar and a rotatably connection of the second oscillating arm to the steering bar”. It appears that “rotatably connection”, both instances, should be -rotatable connection- or -rotational connection-. Also, applicant claims that the attachment foot is rotatably joined to the support element (applicant’s element 12) between connections to the steering bar (applicant’s element 11). That is not consistent with applicant’s detailed disclosure and drawings, and does not appear to be applicant’s intent. It appears that applicant means to claim that the attachment foot of the shock absorber assembly is connected to the support element between the rotatable connections of the first and second arms to the support element. Correction or explanation is required.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FR 451,743 (cited on 08/08/2025, translation provided herewith) in view of JP2008080882 to Honda (cited by applicant).
Regarding claim 1, FR’743 teaches an oscillating arm front suspension for a saddle riding vehicle (bicycle or motorcycle; para [0012], line 1) comprising a steering bar 1, 14, mechanically connected, or adapted to be connected, to a steering handlebar of the saddle riding vehicle; a first oscillating arm 7 having a first end portion and a second end portion opposite to the first end portion, wherein the first end portion of the first oscillating arm is rotatably joined to the steering bar (at the right end of arm 7, as seen in Figure 1) and wherein the first oscillating arm directly carries a rotation pin of an associable front wheel of the saddle riding vehicle (the left end of arm 7, as seen in Figure 1, has a notch 8 for a front wheel axle; see para [0017], lines 5-6); a shock absorber (elements 11, 12, 15, form a shock absorber assembly; see Figure 1 and see [0019]) which extends between an attachment head at 13 and an attachment foot 11; a support element 6 adapted and configured to support said shock absorber assembly 10, 12, 15, said attachment foot being rotatably joined to said support element at axis 5; a second oscillating arm 4 operatively interposed between the steering bar at axis 3 and said support element at axis 5, wherein said second oscillating arm is rotatably joined to the steering bar and to said support element; wherein the rotation pin wheel axle attached to first arm at 8) defines a first rotation axis at 8 and the attachment foot 11 is rotatably joined to the support element 6 for rotating about a second rotation axis 10 different from the first rotation axis (all axes are shown in Figure 1, which clearly shows the wheel axis is spaced from the attachment for axis of the shock absorber assembly).
FR’743 is silent regarding a braking member supported on the supporting member, although bicycles and motorcycles typically include front wheel brakes.
Honda teaches an oscillating arm front suspension (Figure 2) for a saddle riding vehicle (motorcycle) comprising: a steering bar 31, mechanically connected, or adapted to be connected, to a steering handlebar 13 (see Figure 1) of the saddle riding vehicle; a first oscillating arm 42 having a first end portion and a second end portion opposite to the first end portion, wherein the first end portion (42a) of the first oscillating arm 42 is rotatably joined to the steering bar; a shock absorber assembly 50 which extends between an attachment head (top end at 54 connected to steering bar) and an attachment foot (bottom end); a support element 60 adapted and configured to support said shock absorber assembly and a braking member 28, said attachment foot being rotatably joined to said support element; a second oscillating arm 41 operatively interposed between the steering bar 31 and said support element 60, wherein said second oscillating arm 41 is rotatably joined to the steering bar 31 and to said support element 60 (see Figure 8). The shock absorber foot is joined to the support element 60 at an intermediate position between rotation connections of the first arm and a rotatable connection to the second arm to the support element (Figure 2 of Honda).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to support a braking member on the support element of FR’743, in view of Honda, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide effective braking for the vehicle. It would also have been obvious to position the foot end of the shock absorber between the rotatable connections of the first and second arms, in view of Honda, in order to allow more space for a longer extension of the shock absorber.
Regarding claim 2, FR’743 teaches the first end portion of the first oscillating arm 7 is rotatably joined to the steering bar 1 at an end portion of the steering bar (lowermost end of the steering bar 1, seen in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, FR’743 shows the second oscillating arm 4 has a first end portion rotatably joined to the steering bar 1 at axis 3, and a second end portion rotatably joined to the support element at axis 5 (see Figure 1 and para [0017], line 3, “connecting rods k” are connecting rods 4 in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 4, FR’743 teaches the second oscillating arm 4 is rotatably joined to the support element 6 so as to rotate about a third rotation axis 5, and wherein said first, said second, and said third rotation axes are mutually aligned along a same plane (aligned along the support element 6).
Regarding claim 5, in FR’743, the steering bar 1,14, the first oscillating arm 7, the support element 6, and the second oscillating arm 4 are operatively connected to one another so as to form a four-bar linkage (see Figure 1 and para [0026]).
Regarding claim 6, in said four-bar linkage, the first oscillating arm and the second oscillating arm form a first pair of mutually opposite elements of the four-bar linkage, and the steering bar and the support element form a second pair of mutually opposite elements of the four-bar linkage (as seen in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, FR’743 does not show the radius of the front wheel, however, the first oscillating arm, the second oscillating arm, and the support element of Honda are arranged and shaped so as not to exceed the radial occupancy of the associable front wheel (see Figure 2; the elements 41, 42, and 60 are contained within the radius of the front wheel). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the four bar linkage of FR’743 within the radius of the front wheel, in view of Honda, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide a compact front wheel suspension having a low weight while maintaining adequate strength.
Regarding claim 11, Honda teaches that the braking member comprises a caliper for a disk brake 28.
Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FR451,743 and Honda as applied to claims 1-6 and 10-12 above, and further in view of Wallace (PGPub 2020/0062333).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, the combination lacks an adjustment means adapted and configured to vary the shape of the four-bar linkage wherein the second oscillating arm is an arm with a varying length and wherein said adjustment means comprise said second oscillating arm.
Wallace teaches a four-bar suspension linkage 16, 56, 58, 74, for a bicycle including an adjustment means (extendable frame 56) adapted and configured to vary the shape of the four-bar linkage wherein an oscillating arm 56 has a varying length (see Figure 3, para [0036]). It teaches that adjusting the length of the arm adapts the bicycle frame to different terrain for customizing it to different users, or to the same user to accommodate for changes in size or changes in biomechanics (see Wallace, para [0006]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide means for adjusting the four-bar linkage suspension of the combination by adjusting the length of one of the oscillating arms, in view of Wallace, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to customize the frame to different terrain and/or different users.
Claim(s) 7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FR451,743 and Honda as applied to claims 1-6 and 10-12 above, and further in view of Koppelberg (USPN 5,931,487).
Regarding claims 7 and 9, the combination lacks an adjustment means adapted and configured to vary the shape of the four-bar linkage wherein said adjustment means comprise means adapted to vary the position of an articulation point between the steering bar and the second oscillating arm.
Koppelberg teaches a four-bar suspension linkage (steering bar 12, first oscillating arm 4, support element 1, and second oscillating arm 2) for a bicycle/single-track vehicle including an adjustment means (movable connection between second oscillation arm 2 and steering bar 12; see Figure 1) to vary the shape of the four-bar linkage. The adjustment means comprises means adapted to vary the position of an articulation point 10 between the steering bar 12 and the second oscillating arm 2 (alternate joint locations 10, seen in Figure 1, col.3, lines 39-47) to compensate for different static centers of gravity.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide means for adjusting the four-bar linkage suspension of the combination by adjusting the articulation point between the second oscillating arm and the steering bar, in view of Koppelberg, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to compensate for different static centers of gravity and customize the frame to different terrain and/or different users.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FR451,743 and Honda as applied to claims 1-6 and 10-12 above, and further in view of Offenstadt (FR3001434).
Regarding claim 13, FR’743 teaches the claimed front suspension on a bicycle or motorcycle (para [0012], line 1), but fails to specify that the motorcycle is a scooter.
Offenstadt teaches that a front suspension having a four-bar linkage 6, 14, 2, 9 (see Figures 5 and 6) is suitable for a bicycle, motorcycle, or scooter (see page 1, “Description” section, lines -15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide the four-bar linkage suspension of the combination on a scooter or motorcycle, in view of Offenstadt, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide effective vibration damping on a motorcycle or scooter type of vehicle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
JP2008080882 to Honda is now relied upon to teach positioning the rotatable connection between the shock absorber attachment foot and the support member between connections of the first and second oscillating arms to the support member.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anne Marie M. Boehler whose telephone number is (571)272-6641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8-5pm.
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.
/ANNE MARIE M BOEHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/ab/
Prosecution Insights