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 .
Claims 10 and 15-20 have been canceled.
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) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lay (PGPub 2024/0010288, cited by applicant) in view of Wecker (PGPub 2019/0337588).
Regarding claim 1, Lay teaches a bicycle (“bicycle” storage; see title, abstract, etc.) comprising: a tube (bicycle frame tube 10) having an edge defining an opening 14 (internal edges are formed along opening 14, see Figure 1); and a door 16 having a latching member 18 movable between a latched position (Figure 1) and an unlatched position (Figure 5).
Lay lacks a latching member coupled to the door wherein in the latched position the door is configured to be held in compression between the latching member and the edge of the tube.
Wecker teaches a bicycle (having bicycle frame 3; para [0139], last line; Figures 14 and 15) with a tube 3 having an edge defining an opening (insertion opening 13) and a door (cover 4) having a sliding latch member 11 coupled to the door and movable between a latched position (Figure 15) and an unlatched position (Figure 14), wherein in the latched position the door is configured to be held in compression between the latching member 11 and the tube (at fixing element 9 and insertion opening 13 on one side and at fixing element 10 on the opposite side of the cover 4, as seen in Figure 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure Lay with a latching member on the door that holds the door in compression, in view of Wecker, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to fixedly hold the door so it does not rattle as the bicycle is operated, thereby reducing noise and wear due to movement of the cover.
Regarding claim 2, Lay teaches the tube defines a longitudinal axis (along the center of tube 10, as seen in Figure 1), wherein the edge (surrounding opening 14) extends perpendicular to the longitudinal axis, and wherein the door is configured to be held in compression along an axis that is parallel to the longitudinal axis and perpendicular to the edge (a lateral axis, as seen in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, Lay teaches the tube 10 defines a longitudinal axis, wherein the door includes a wedged portion 36 having an inclined surface that extends orthogonal to the longitudinal axis when the door is coupled to the tube and positioned within the opening, wherein the inclined surface is configured to engage the edge of the tube.
Regarding claim 4, Wecker teaches the door 4 includes a main body, and wherein the latching member 11 (Figure 15) is coupled to the main body and is configured to move linearly relative to the main body between the latched position (Figure 15) and the unlatched position (Figure 14).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Lay teaches the door 16 includes a first alignment feature (guiding lug or boss 44) and the tube includes a second alignment feature (opening 14/recess accommodating the guiding lug/boss 44), wherein the second alignment feature is configured to engage the first alignment feature to align the door within the opening on the tube (Figure 1; para [0027]).
Regarding claim 7, Lay shows the tube 10 defines a longitudinal axis (at center of tube 10, as seen in Figure 1), and has a maximum tube width as measured along a direction that is perpendicular to the longitudinal axis, wherein the opening 14 has a maximum opening width as measured along the direction, wherein the maximum width of the opening is the majority of the width of the tube. It is not clear that the opening has a maximum opening width that is at least 80% of the maximum width of the tube. However, it would have been an obvious design variation to further widen the opening, including to at least 80 percent of the maximum tube width, in order to maximize the opening through which items can be inserted into the storage space, thereby allowing easier access to the space and maximizing the size of the items than can be inserted into the space.
Regarding claim 8, Wecker teaches the door 4 includes a main body and a handle (element 11 includes a toggle) coupled to the main body, wherein rotation of the handle is configured to move the latching member between the latched position and the unlatched position.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lay and Wecker as applied to claims 1-8 above, and further in view of Wen (USPN 11,878,758).
Regarding claim 9, Lay shows thickening 50 for an insert for attaching a bottle holder (para [0030], last three lines) but the combination lacks an insert having an insert aperture configured to receive a fastener for supporting an accessory mount, wherein the insert is movable from a first position to a second position to change a position of the accessory mount.
Wen teaches a bottle holder 25 mounted to an insert 21, as broadly recited, having an insert aperture (aperture for fastener 26, seen in Figure 5) configured to receive a fastener 26 for supporting an accessory mount 25 (Figure 5), wherein the insert is movable from a first position to a second position to change a position of the accessory mount (col. 2, lines 12-18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to provide a movable insert for mounting a bottle holder on the door of the combination structure, in view of Wen, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to movably attach the bottle holder to the door.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-14 and 21 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 22, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that neither Lay nor Wecker teaches the claimed invention. Specifically, applicant argues that Lay lacks a latching member coupled to the door. The examiner agrees that the latch member taught by Lay is mounted to the frame and engages the door to latch the door in place. Applicant also argues that Wecker fails to teach a door. The examiner disagrees. However, Wecker does teach a bicycle frame tube 3 having an internal storage area that contains battery 1. Battery 1 includes a plate 4 and housing 12 that form a door for the storage compartment. Wecker also teaches positioning a door latching member 11 on the door and engaging the door and the latching member with the frame such that the door is held in compression between the latching member and the edge of the frame tube 3. The examiner maintains that it would have been obvious to modify door latch of the storage compartment of Lay with a latching member on the door such that the door is held in compression, as taught by Wecker, to provide an effective latching mechanism that resists rattle.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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