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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraph [0183] the driving chute has been represented by both reference numbers “41a” and “421a”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6, 8-11, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application 2007/0051565 to Chen.
Re: claim 1. Chen shows in figure 9 a brake device for a wheel set of a baby carriage comprising: a first brake mechanism 7 arranged on a first wheel 2 of the baby carriage for locking or unlocking the first wheel; a second brake mechanism 7’ arranged on a second wheel 7’ the baby carriage for locking or unlocking the second wheel 7’; and a traction element 8 connected between the first brake mechanism 7 and the second brake mechanism 7’, so that the first brake mechanism 7 and the second brake mechanism 7’ are mutually linked when locking or unlocking, and an operating direction during locking is same as an operating direction during unlocking as described in
PNG
media_image1.png
352
646
media_image1.png
Greyscale
paragraph [0026] of Chen via rotation of lever 52.
Re: claim 3. Chen shows in figure 2 wherein the first brake mechanism comprises a first shaft pin 6 locking or unlocking the first wheel 2, and the second brake mechanism comprises a second shaft pin locking or unlocking the second wheel 2’ as described in claim 5 of Chen.
Re: claim 4. Chen describes in paragraph [0020] and shows in figures 2 and 3 wherein the first brake mechanism 7 further comprises a first driver shown in figures 2 and 7 for driving the first shaft pin 6, the second brake mechanism 7’ further comprises a second driver described in paragraph [0020] for driving the second shaft pin described in claim 5 of Chen, and the traction element 8 is connected between the first driver and the second driver as shown in figure 9 and described in paragraph [0027].
Re: claims 5, 6, 8, 9, and 11. Chen describes in paragraph [0020] wherein the first driver shown in figures 2 and 7 is rotatably arranged and provided with a first driving slope of cam 53 at a side, the first brake mechanism further comprises a first elastic element 56, and the first shaft pin 6 is slidably arranged, so as to be inserted into the first wheel 2 by pushing of the first driving slope when the first driver shown in figures 2 and 7 is rotated, or to be withdrawn from the first wheel under an elastic force of the first elastic element 56. With respect to claim 6, also see figure 3. With respect to claim 9, see claim 5. With respect to claim 11, also see figure 3 and claim 5.
Re: claim 10. Chen shows in figures 2, 3, and 9 wherein the second driver as shown in figure 9 and described in paragraph [0027] and in claim 5 is provided with a driving inclined hole surrounding element 42, and the second brake mechanism 7’ further comprises a third elastic element 55 providing an elastic force to reset the second driver as described in paragraph [0021], and a second operating member having a shaft pin 42 slidably inserted into the driving inclined hole.
Re: claim 17. Chen shows in figures 2, 3, and 9 wherein the brake device further comprises a driving mechanism 52 arranged on a frame 1 shown in figure 1 of the baby carriage, the driving mechanism 52 is connected to the first brake mechanism 7 and the second brake mechanism 7’ via the traction element 8 and is operated so that the first brake mechanism 7 and the second brake mechanism 7’ are driven by the traction element 8 to lock the first wheel and the second wheel, or the first brake mechanism and the second brake mechanism are driven by the traction element to unlock the first wheel and the second wheel as shown in figure 9 and described in paragraph [0027].
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 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) 2 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application 2007/0051565 to Chen in view of DE-20009693 (DE’693).
Chen is silent with regard to the limitation set forth in claim 2.
DE’693 teaches in the paragraph beginning “As already described above, the two sliding elements 15 and 16” the use of a brake device wherein when the first brake
mechanism locks the first wheel, the first brake mechanism drives the second brake mechanism to lock the second wheel through the traction element, and when the second brake mechanism unlocks the second wheel, the second brake mechanism drives the first brake mechanism to unlock the first wheel through the traction element.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the brake device of Chen, as modified, to have operated as recited in claim 2, in view of the teachings of DE’693, in order to provide a means of simplifying the application and release of the first and second brake mechanisms to reduce the number of parts needed resulting in lower cost.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application 2007/0051565 to Chen in view of CN-107757688 (CN’688).
Chen is silent with regard to the limitation of the first driver being provided with an arc-shaped guide hole for guiding its rotation.
CN’688 teaches in figures 11 and 12 the use of an arc-shaped guide hole 143a for guiding the rotation of element 143 of the baby carriage brake system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the brake device of Chen, as modified, to have achieved rotation of the first driver of the baby carriage brake element, in view of the teachings of CN’688, in order to provide a means of brake actuation that offers reduced wear and binding compared to straight slots due to less chance of jamming or uneven stress.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-16 and 18-23 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent Applications: US20200198682, US20180319214, US20180229751, and US20180043918 teach similar brake devices for baby carriages.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELODY M BURCH whose telephone number is (571)272-7114. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 6:30AM-3PM, generally.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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.
mmb
April 4, 2026
/MELODY M BURCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Prosecution Insights