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 § 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.
(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.
Claim(s) 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ricciardi (US 5,484,153 A).
Regarding claim 16, Ricciardi teaches an accessory (10) for attachment to a motorcycle (12) for alleviating a weight of a motorcycle from bearing down on a kickstand (18), the accessory comprising:
a plate (24) having an operative position interposed between a leg (18) and a surface (20, see Figure 6);
a housing (30) configured to store the plate, a spring (28) having an inner end (28A) fixed against movement and presenting an unfixed outer end (28B, see Figure 4), a chain (26) configured to connect the plate and the unfixed outer end of the spring such that the plate can be manually removed against spring urgency and the plate can return to the housing under the spring urgency (Figure 4-5 and Col. 2, lines 37-47), wherein the operative position of the plate holds the plate (Figure 6 and Col. 2, Lines 46-48); and
a mounting element (38) configured to attach the housing to the motorcycle (Figure 4 and Col. 3, Lines 4-7); and
a heat sensitive element (the plate surface will undergo various physical and chemical changes like, expansion and oxidation when heated because the plate is constructed from metal material, Col. 2, Lines 14-17).
Regarding claim 17, Ricciardi teaches that the heat sensitive element covers part or whole of the surface of the plate (Figure 6 and Col. 2, Lines 14-17).
Regarding claim 18, Ricciardi teaches that the heat sensitive element is configured to perform a visual change in reaction to a change in temperature (the size will change due to expansion and the color will change due oxidation).
Regarding claim 19, Ricciardi teaches that the visual change is a change from a first color to a second color (the color will change due oxidation), a change from a first pattern to a second pattern, or a change from no pattern to a first pattern.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ricciardi (US 5,484,153 A) in view of Maranell et al. (US 4,474,387 A) hereinafter, Maranell.
Regarding claim 1, Ricciardi teaches an accessory (10) for attachment to a motorcycle (12) for alleviating a weight of a motorcycle from bearing down on a kickstand (18), the accessory comprising:
a plate (24) having an operative position interposed between a kickstand (18) and a surface (20, see Figure 6);
a housing (30) configured to store the plate, a spring (28) having an inner end (28A) fixed against movement and presenting an unfixed outer end (28B, see Figure 4), a chain (26) configured to connect the plate and the unfixed outer end of the spring such that the plate can be manually removed against spring urgency and the plate can return to the housing under the spring urgency (Figure 4-5 and Col. 2, lines 37-47), wherein the operative position of the plate holds the plate (Figure 6 and Col. 2, Lines 46-48); and
a mounting element (38) configured to attach the housing to the motorcycle (Figure 4 and Col. 3, Lines 4-7).
However, Ricciardi does not teach that an underside of the plate is configured to have a slip-mitigating surface.
Maranell teaches that an underside of the plate is configured to have a slip-mitigating surface, wherein the slip-mitigating surface is a spiked surface (Figure 6 and Col. 3, Lines 24-36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Ricciardi’s accessory, in view of Maranell, with a slip-mitigating surface, to assist in stabilizing the device (Col. 3, Lines 28-36).
Regarding claim 2, modified Ricciardi teaches that the housing in a non-operative position holds the plate such that the spring urgency prevents any rattling of the chain against the motorcycle (Ricciardi. Col. 2, Lines 37-46).
Regarding claim 4, modified Ricciardi teaches that the mounting element is removably attached (by removing nut and bolt means 40) to the motorcycle via a rod (42) on the motorcycle (Ricciardi Figures 2-4).
Regarding claim 5, modified Ricciardi teaches that the plate further comprises a flange on an extremity facing away from the spring (Ricciardi Figure 4).
Regrading claim 8, modified Ricciardi meets all the requirements as discussed above in claim 1.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ricciardi (US 5,484,153 A) in view of Maranell et al. (US 4,474,387 A) hereinafter, Maranell and further in view of Leppke (US 2002/0014766 A1).
Modified Ricciardi teaches the accessory of claim 5. However, modified Ricciardi does not teach that the flange further comprises a ring element secured to the flange by an attachment means.
Leppke teaches that the flange further comprises a ring element (4) secured to the flange (3, 3’) by an attachment means (5, see Figure 4-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Ricciardi’s accessory, in view of Leppke, with a ring element, to maintain the apparatus in place for use (paragraph [0036]).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ricciardi (US 5,484,153 A) in view of Wiinamaki (US 2017/0297640 A1).
Ricciardi teaches the accessory of claim 1. However, Ricciardi does not teach that the plate is removably attached to the chain such that the plate can be replaced by a different plate.
Wiinamaki teaches that the plate is removably attached to the chain such that the plate can be replaced by a different plate (paragraph [0020]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Ricciardi’s accessory, in view of Wiinamaki, with a removable plate, to be able to replace it with a new one for a different use.
Claim(s) 9 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ricciardi (US 5,484,153 A) in view of Qian et al. (CN 111252172 A) hereinafter, Qian.
Ricciardi teaches an accessory (10) for attachment to a motorcycle (12) for alleviating a weight of a motorcycle from bearing down on a kickstand (18), the accessory comprising:
a plate (24) having an operative position interposed between a leg (18) and a surface (20, see Figure 6);
a housing (30) configured to store the plate, a spring (28) having an inner end (28A) fixed against movement and presenting an unfixed outer end (28B, see Figure 4), a chain (26) configured to connect the plate and the unfixed outer end of the spring such that the plate can be manually removed against spring urgency and the plate can return to the housing under the spring urgency (Figure 4-5 and Col. 2, lines 37-47), wherein the operative position of the plate holds the plate (Figure 6 and Col. 2, Lines 46-48); and
a mounting element (38) configured to attach the housing to the motorcycle (Figure 4 and Col. 3, Lines 4-7).
However, Ricciardi does not teach a light.
Qian teaches a light (80, Figure 1); and
a power source (implicit) configured to power the light.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Ricciardi’s accessory, in view of Qian, with a light, to illuminate the ground (second paragraph of page 5).
Regarding claim 13, modified Ricciardi teaches that the plate further comprises a flange (24A), wherein the flange comprises a pull element (the flange can be grabbed and pulled by the user, Figures 2 and 4).
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ricciardi (US 5,484,153 A) in view of Qian et al. (CN 111252172 A) hereinafter, Qian and further in view of Ringelstetter (US 2.999.696 A).
Modified Ricciardi teaches the plate further comprises a flange (24A, Figures 2 and 4). However, modified Ricciardi does not teach that the flange comprises: a lock.
Rinelstetter teaches a lock (27) configured to engage with a key (38); and
an operable element (30), wherein the operable element is operably attached to the lock such that an engagement of the lock with the key moves the operable element either into a locked position or an unlocked position (Figures 1-4 and Col. 1, Lines 61-65), wherein the housing further comprises a lip (21) configured to meet the operable element in the locked position (Col. 2, Lines 34-36 and Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Ricciardi’s accessory, in view of Ringeltetter, with a lock, for theft prevention.
Regarding claim 15, modified Ricciardi teaches all the limitations (as discussed in claim 14 above).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ricciardi (US 5,484,153 A).
Ricciardi teaches the accessory of claim 18. However. Ricciardi does not expressly disclose that the heat sensitive element is configured to perform the visual change in reaction to a change in temperature from below 100 degrees Fahrenheit to at or above 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Ricciardi to perform the visual change in reaction to a change in temperature from below 100 degrees Fahrenheit to at or above 100 degrees Fahrenheit since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative ranges of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative ranges would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Ricciardi would not operate differently with the claimed temperature and since the visual change of the device would function appropriately having the claimed temperature. Further, applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the heat sensitive element is configured to perform the visual change in reaction to a change in temperature from below 100 degrees Fahrenheit to at or above 100 degrees Fahrenheit (specification pp. [0065]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, and 10-12 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 3 recites that the mounting element is non-removably attached to the motorcycle via a pipe on the motorcycle.
Claim 10 recites that the computing circuitry is configured to transmit GPS coordinates of the computing circuitry to an application and receive an instruction to turn on the light.
Claim 11 recites that the light is configured to turn on only when the plate is pulling from the housing.
Since the prior art (e.g. Ricciardi) teaches motorcycle kickstand accessory that lack said features, the prior art does not anticipate the claimed subject matter.
For illustration purposes, Fig 2A of the examined disclosure shows the accessory, which is different than the accessory taught by the prior art of record (Fig. 2 of Ricciardi and Fig. 1 of Wiinamaki, etc.)
Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to a skilled artisan to have modified the prior art in order to arrive at the claimed invention without resorting to impermissible hindsight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references noted on the attached PTO-892 form teach motorcycle kickstand accessories of interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOSAM SHABARA whose telephone number is (571)272-5495. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm.
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.
/H.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611