DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/23/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Non-Patent Literature Documents listed in the information disclosure statement filed 2/27/2023, 12/26/2024 and 6/24/2026 have been placed in the application file, but many of the information referred to therein have not been considered as to the merits. Examiner notes that many of the Non-Patent Literature Documents are unascertainable as listed (i.e., it is very difficult to appropriately match document(s) to the description(s) as listed, illegible, etc.). Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
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 pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 21, 32, and 34 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Badsey (US 4,448,278), previously cited by Applicant.
Regarding claim 21, Badsey (at least Figs. 1-12; also see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith) discloses a three wheeled vehicle (at least Abstract), comprising:
a vehicle frame 21, 27, 25, 26, 20, 31, 32, 28, 29, 30 comprising:
a front frame portion (see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith);
a mid frame portion (see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith) coupled
to the front frame portion (as much as in Applicant’s application);
and
a rear frame portion 29, 30 (also see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached
herewith) fastened to the mid frame portion;
an engine 6 mounted to the front frame portion;
a front suspension coupled to the front frame portion, defined by left and right
side suspension assemblies (at least column 3 lines 49-53);
front wheels 1’, 2’, defined by a front left wheel 2’ coupled to the left side
suspension assembly and a front right wheel 1’ coupled to the right side
suspension assembly (at least column 3 lines 49-53);
a steering assembly coupled to the front wheels 1’, 2’ (at least column 3 lines 49-
53);
side by side seat compartments 9, 10 defined by the mid frame portion rearward
of the front frame portion, the side by side seat compartments 9, 10 are
recessed downwardly relative to at least a portion of the mid frame
portion (at least highest portion of 28; also see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith); and
a single rear wheel 3’ coupled to the vehicle frame (via swing arms 17, 18)
rearward of the mid frame portion, and drivingly coupled to the engine 6,
the rear frame portion disposed generally above the single rear wheel 3’
(at least Figs. 2-4, 6).
PNG
media_image1.png
629
890
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
700
907
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
539
857
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
526
891
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 32 and 34, Badsey (at least Figs. 1-12; also see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith) discloses the three wheeled vehicle (at least Abstract),
(claim 32) further comprising a rear suspension system including a rear shock absorber 42, 42 and a rear swing arm 17, 18, the rear swing arm 17, 18 defining a pivotable coupling 19 with the mid frame portion, the rear shock absorber 42, 42 having an upper end coupled to the mid frame portion and a lower end coupled to the rear swing arm 17, 18 (at least Fig. 4, 9, 12);
(claim 34) wherein the single rear wheel 3’ extends rearwardly further than the rear frame portion 29, 30 (at least Figs. 1, 2, 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 22 and 35 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Badsey (US 4,448,278) in view of Pelnar (US 7,641,234 B1).
Regarding claim 22, Badsey (at least Figs. 1-12; also see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith) discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the rear frame portion 29, 30 is removably coupled to the mid frame portion (see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith), whereby the rear frame portion 29, 30 is a replaceable portion of the vehicle frame 21, 27, 25, 26, 20, 31, 32, 28, 29, 30.
Pelnar (at least Figs. 1-7) discloses that it is known in the art to provide a vehicle, wherein a rear frame portion/roll bar 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36 is removably coupled to a mid frame portion 2, 4, 10, 12, whereby the rear frame portion/roll bar 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36 is a replaceable portion of a vehicle frame 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 (at least Abstract, column 3 lines 4-34, column 4 lines 52-56, Figs. 1-2) for the purpose of compact storage or shipment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rear frame portion 29, 30 of Badsey according to the teachings of Pelnar, such that the rear frame portion 29, 30 of Badsey is removably coupled to the mid frame portion (see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith), whereby the rear frame portion 29, 30 of Badsey is a replaceable portion of the vehicle frame 21, 27, 25, 26, 20, 31, 32, 28, 29, 30, in order to achieve the desirable result of a compact configuration for storage or shipment.
Regarding claim 35, Badsey (at least Figs. 1-12; also see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith) discloses a frame assembly 21, 27, 25, 26, 20, 31, 32, 28, 29, 30 for a three wheeled vehicle (at least Abstract), the frame assembly 21, 27, 25, 26, 20, 31, 32, 28, 29, 30 comprising
a front frame portion (see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith) configured to
support an engine 6 and a front suspension system (at least column 3 lines 49-53);
a mid frame portion (see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith) coupled to the
front frame portion (as much as in Applicant’s Application), the mid frame portion configured to support side by side seats 9, 10 rearward of the front frame portion, the side by side seats recessed downwardly relative to at least a portion of the mid frame portion (at least highest portion of 28; also see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith);
a rear suspension system including a rear shock absorber 42, 42 and a rear
swing arm 17, 18, the rear swing arm 17, 18 defining a pivotable coupling
19 with the mid frame portion and configured to rotatably support a single
rear wheel 3’, the rear shock absorber 42, 42 having an upper end
coupled to the mid frame portion and a lower end coupled to the rear
swing arm 17, 18 (at least Fig. 4, 9, 12); and
a rear frame portion 29, 30.
But Badsey (at least Figs. 1-12; also see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith) does not explicitly disclose the rear frame portion 29, 30 being removably coupled to the mid frame portion (see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith), such that the rear frame portion 29, 30 is detachable independent of the rear suspension system.
Pelnar (at least Figs. 1-7) discloses that it is known in the art to provide a vehicle, wherein a rear frame portion/roll bar 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36 is removably coupled to a mid frame portion 2, 4, 10, 12, such that the rear frame portion/roll bar 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, 36 is detachable independent of a rear suspension system (at least Abstract, column 3 lines 4-34, column 4 lines 52-56, Figs. 1-2) for the purpose of compact storage or shipment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rear frame portion 29, 30 of Badsey according to the teachings of Pelnar, such that the rear frame portion 29, 30 of Badsey is removably coupled to the mid frame portion (see annotated Figs. 5-11 attached herewith), such that the rear frame portion 29, 30 of Badsey is detachable independent of a rear suspension system, in order to achieve the desirable result of a compact configuration for storage or shipment.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23-31, 33, and 36-40 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 primary reason for the allowance of claims 23-26 and 37 in this case, is the inclusion of the limitation “wherein the mid frame portion comprises: a pair of rear frame tubes; a left pair of plates fixed to a left portion of the pair of rear frame tubes; and a right pair of plates fixed to a right portion of the pair of rear frame tubes; and the rear frame portion comprises: a first left frame tube removably coupled to the left pair of plates; and a first right frame tube removably coupled to the right pair of plates” now included in claims 23 and 37, in combination with the other elements recited, which is not found in the prior art of record.
The primary reason for the allowance of claims 27-31 and 38-40 in this case, is the inclusion of the limitation “wherein the rear frame portion comprises: a first left frame tube having a forward end connected to a left-rear portion of the mid frame portion, the first left frame tube extending rearwardly and inwardly from the forward end of the first left frame tube toward a rearward end of the first left frame tube aligned with a front-to-rear longitudinal centerline of the vehicle; and a first right frame tube having a forward end connected to a right-rear portion of the mid frame portion, the first right frame tube extending rearwardly and inwardly from the forward end of the first right frame tube toward a rearward end of the first right frame tube aligned with the front-to-rear longitudinal centerline of the vehicle, the rearward end of the first left frame tube joined to the rearward end of the first right frame tube, such that the rear frame portion comes to a point aligned with the front-to-rear longitudinal centerline of the vehicle” in claims 27 and 38, in combination with the other elements recited, which is not found in the prior art of record.
The primary reason for the allowance of claims 33 and 36 in this case, is the inclusion of the limitation “wherein the rear frame portion defines a lower coupling with the mid frame portion near the pivotable coupling of the rear swing arm, and an upper coupling with the mid frame portion near the upper end of the rear shock absorber” in claims 33 and 36, in combination with the other elements recited, which is not found in the prior art of record.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to at least claims 21 and 35 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on previous interpretation of any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Additionally, in response to Applicant’s arguments with respect to at least claims 21 and 35, it is the Examiner’s position that at least claims 21 and 35 are sufficiently broad that the references to Badsey (US 4,448,278) and Pelnar (US 7,641,234 B1) are still applicable. See rejections above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSELYNN Y SLITERIS whose telephone number is (571)272-6675. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm 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, Jason D. Shanske can be reached on 571-270-5985. 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.
/JOSELYNN Y SLITERIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3614
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights