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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because: Element 110 (rubber ring) in Fig. 3 must be labeled and correction of the label of the adjustable height leg from element 90 to element 50 must be made. Also, the “wheel extensions” as illustrated in Figure 1 appear to be different than those as illustrated in Figure 2 and Figure 3. Additionally, the quality of the images are poor and pixelated, rendering the details of the images to be difficult to discern. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: PORTABLE BIKE RAMP
Claim Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Recitation of “(MTB ramp)” is redundant and should be removed from all claims.
Claim 1 should be corrected to read as follows: “A portable mountain bike ramp of the frame sides, the ramp surface capable of being folded along with the frame sides , each of the pair of wheel extensions connected to each of the pair of adjustable height legs rubber foot assembly comprising a pair of rubber feet, each of the pair of rubber feet connected to bottom ends of
Claim 5 should be corrected to read as follows: “wherein the
Claim 6 should be corrected to read as follows: “wherein the ramp assembly
Claim 7 should be corrected to read as follows: “wherein each rubber foot of the rubber foot assembly includes a circular wooden plate surrounded by a rubber ring”
Claim 9 should be corrected to read as follows: “wherein the pair of wheel extensions allows to be moved in a ready-to-use form from one location to another location without disassembling the ramp assembly
Claim 10 should be corrected to read as follows: “wherein the ramp assembly is capable of being disassembled and stacked to allow for portability of the ramp assembly, wherein the pair of wheel extensions are mounted on one of the plurality of frame sides while stacked.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: “a pair of wheel extensions adapted in between the pair of adjustable height legs”. As claimed, it is unclear how the wheel extensions are physically connected to the rest of the bike ramp, and if there is in fact a pair of said wheel extensions. As is noted above, this is further complicated by the discrepancies noted in the Figures as discussed above. As best understood and in light of the specification, the pair of wheel extensions are connected to the pair of adjustable height legs as it relates to Claims 1, 9, and 10, such an interpretation being utilized in the suggested Claim language of Claims 1, 9, and 10 as noted in the Claim Objections above. Claims 2-8 are rejected due to their dependence thereto.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the Claim objections and rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record, including that which is now listed on the attached PTO-892, namely Knight (WO 2022/082274 A1), Hickey (US 2005/0107171), McIntosh (US 2016/0090699), Karsky (US 2021/0394041), Utt (US 2021/0078726), and Pratt (US 2006/0150347), while either alone or in combination teaching a portable bike ramp with a foldable frame having a plurality of frame sides and a ramp surface capable of being folded along with the foldable frame, a pair of adjustable height legs connected to one of the plurality of frame sides using a leg lock; wheel extensions, and a rubber foot assembly provided below each of the pair of adjustable height legs, fails to disclose or render obvious in particular the pair of wheel extensions connected to each of the pair of adjustable height legs as called for (as best understood) in the claimed combination of independent Claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER K GARLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3599. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 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, Jessica Han can be reached at 571-272-2078. 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.
/ALEXANDER K GARLEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896