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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 9/16/2026 has been entered.
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) 17-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rossberger et al (DE 10 2016 122 845) in view of D’Elia et al (US 10,591,371). Rossberger discloses:
With regard to claim 17 - An external force measurement unit for measuring an external force applied to a spindle 35, the external force measurement unit comprising:
a load cell comprising:
a support ring 96;
a first flap 90 arranged on the support ring 47;
a second flap 90 (see Fig. 21) arranged opposite to the first flap 90 on the support ring 47,
wherein each of the first flap 90 and the second flap 90 extends radially outwardly from the support ring 96; and
a first bearing support adapted to take up a first bearing 45 in a first bearing seat (see Fig. 11), wherein the first bearing 45 is adapted to take up a rotating spindle 35;
a first strain gauge 92 arranged on the first flap 90;
a second strain gauge 92 arranged on the second flap 90 (see Figs. 21 and 22); and
an evaluation unit 48 for measuring a resistance of the first strain gauge and a resistance of the second strain gauge (“The Tretwelle [sic] 35 is concentric to the rotor shaft 27 and to the output shaft 39 partly inside the rotor shaft 27 and partly inside the output shaft 39 arranged. The Tretwelle 35 is over a drive-side Tretwellen ball bearing 45 radially outward in a load cell 47 stored, in turn, in the motor housing 22 is used. A printed circuit board, also referred to as a "PCB force sensor" 48 with an electronic evaluation is at the load cell 47 attached and a connection of the circuit board 48 is via a ribbon cable 63 guided radially outward and with the electronics on the circuit board 23 connected.” – see translation, page 13).
Rossberger fails to explicitly disclose wherein the resistance of the first strain gauge is measured separately from the resistance of the second strain gauge. D’Elia teaches an external force measurement unit for measuring an external force applied to a spindle 210, the external force measurement unit comprising:
a load cell comprising:
a support ring 202;
a first flap 208 arranged on the support ring 202;
a second flap 208 (see Fig. 5A) arranged opposite to the first flap 208 on the support ring 202; and
a first bearing support adapted to take up a first bearing 201 in a first bearing seat 204, wherein the first bearing 201 is adapted to take up a rotating spindle 210;
a first strain gauge arranged on the first flap 208 (“A sensor 208 is located at positions shown as A, B, C, and D. In certain embodiments, bearing sensor assembly 550 is configured according to sensor array configuration 600, with strain gauges 560 disposed in positions A, B, C, and D.” – column 9, lines 15-19);
a second strain gauge arranged on the second flap 208 (see above); and
an evaluation unit 1503 for measuring a resistance of the first strain gauge and a resistance of the second strain gauge, wherein the resistance of the first strain gauge is measured separately from the resistance of the second strain gauge (“FIG. 8 is a plot of exemplary force measurements sampled from four load sensors 208 during sequential crank rotations, according to some embodiments. In one embodiment, the force measurement values are calibrated according to a sensor calibration curve. As shown, measured force exhibits a cyclic trend consistent with each revolution of the crank assembly as the cyclist pedals at increasing rotational velocity.” – column 10, lines 14-21; see Fig. 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the force measurement unit of Rossberger with the teaching of D’Elia such that the resistance of the first strain gauge is measured separately from the resistance of the second strain gauge to help generate a rotational position value of the spindle.
With regard to claim 18, Rossberger discloses with a first flap end and a second flap end being arranged at respective ends of the first flap 90 and the second flap 90 (see the ends of flaps 90 connected to outer ring 97, Figs. 21, 22).
With regard to claim 19, Rossberger fails to explicitly disclose wherein the evaluation unit determines an offset of the external force, determine a position of a lever arm of the spindle, and determine the external force applied to the spindle based on the resistance of the first strain gauge, the resistance of the second strain gauge, and the offset. D’Elia teaches wherein the evaluation unit 1503 is further adapted to:
determine an offset of the external force, determine a position of a lever arm of the spindle, and determine the external force applied to the spindle based on the resistance of the first strain gauge, the resistance of the second strain gauge, and the offset (“Load sensor 208 signals are used in power calculation by on board processor 1503. Hall Effect sensor 301 output state is changed as each magnet 212 on crank position sensor sleeve 205 passes the Hall Effect sensor 301 location. As described in further detail herein, an output signal from Hall Effect sensor 301 is used for crank position and crank velocity calculations necessary for power calculations by on board processor 1503. In one embodiment, temperature sensor 1506 changes resistance as a function of the ambient temperature. Also using a reference voltage, the voltage drop across the temperature sensor 1506 can be measured by ADC 1504. Conventional load sensors 208 can vary their output as a function of temperature. In one embodiment, temperature sensor 1506 signal information is used for calibration (temperature) compensation of the load sensor 208 signals. Various calibration curves, similar to FIG. 7, would be created in the desired range of operating temperatures. To calculate a load value (applied force) at a particular temperature, an interpolation would be performed using the calibration curves and the temperature indicated by temperature sensor 1506.” – Column 14, lines 46-67). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the force measurement unit of Rossberger with the teaching of D’Elia such that the evaluation unit determines an offset of the external force, determine a position of a lever arm of the spindle, and determine the external force applied to the spindle based on the resistance of the first strain gauge, the resistance of the second strain gauge, and the offset to calculate a more accurate profile of the applied forces.
With regard to claim 20, Rossberger discloses a motor housing 22, wherein the first flap 90 and the second flap 90 are taken up in a load cell carrier seat in the motor housing 22 (see Fig. 31).
With regard to claim 21, Rossberger discloses wherein the load cell is provided with a vertical guiding assembly that interacts with the motor housing 22 (see mounting holes 98).
With regard to claim 22, Rossberger discloses wherein the vertical guiding assembly is provided as an anchor flap 91 defining a fixing pinhole 98, a symmetry axis of the fixing pinhole being essentially parallel to a symmetry axis of the support ring (see Figs. 21 and 22).
With regard to claim 23, Rossberger discloses wherein in a mounted state of the load cell in the motor housing, a fixing pin is inserted into the fixing pinhole and into a corresponding anchor hole in the motor housing (“The outer ring 97 has four mounting holes 98 on, with which the load cell 47 at an in 1 Gear housing, not shown, can be fixed, wherein an end face of the outer ring 97 rests against the gear housing.” – see translation, page 24, Figs. 32 and 33).
With regard to claim 24, Rossberger fails to explicitly disclose wherein the evaluation unit is configured to smooth the respective measured resistances of the first strain gauge and the second strain gauge over time through a low pass filter. D’Elia teaches: “In one embodiment, power is measured using techniques disclosed herein to produce sequential power values. The sequential power values are then filtered using, for example, a conventional second order Butterworth filter to produce a smoother, more representative power output, shown in the upper plot (Filtered BB Power). Readings from a dynamometer in the same system are shown in the lower plot (Raw Dyno Power). As shown, the filtered plot in the upper graph is more intuitive and representative of cyclist power output and effort.” (column 11, lines 58-67). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the force measurement unit of Rossberger with the teaching of D’Elia such that the evaluation unit is configured to smooth the respective measured resistances of the first strain gauge and the second strain gauge over time through a low pass filter to produce a smoother, more representative power output.
With regard to claim 25, Rossberger fails to explicitly disclose wherein the evaluation unit is configured to:
determine a drift in the resistance of the first strain gauge and the resistance of the second strain gauge over time; and
recalibrate the first strain gauge and the second strain gauge by applying a drift compensation. D’Elia teaches: “Method 1600 begins at step 1610, where power measurement system 200 samples one or more vertical bearing reaction values (e.g., vertical bearing reaction 1303). In one embodiment, electrical analog signals from load sensors 208 are sampled by ADC 1504 to generate corresponding ADC samples. The ADC samples are used as input values to a sensor calibration curve, with force values provided as corresponding outputs. In certain embodiments, sensor amplifier and filter 1505 amplifies and/or filters the electrical analog signals to generate processed analog signals to be digitized by ADC 1504.” (column 17, line 65 – column 18, line 8; see Fig. 12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the force measurement unit of Rossberger with the teaching of D’Elia such that the evaluation unit is configured to determine a drift in the resistance of the first strain gauge and the resistance of the second strain gauge over time; and recalibrate the first strain gauge and the second strain gauge by applying a drift compensation to give a measurement more intuitive and representative of actual cyclist power output and effort.
With regard to claim 26, Rossberger discloses a freewheel 49 connected to the spindle 35.
With regard to claim 27, Rossberger discloses further comprising an angular encoder (Hall Effect sensor) configured to determine a radial position of the spindle (“The inner rotor shaft 27 is on the drive side to the outside through a drive-side rotor ball bearings 29 in the motor housing 22 stored. An outer ring of the drive-side rotor ball bearing 29 is in a cylindrical recess of the motor housing 22 arranged. On the drive side is axially adjacent to the outer rotor shaft 26 a sensor ring 45 on the inner rotor shaft 27 arranged, which has a Hall sensor 353 opposite, in the motor housing 22 is arranged.” – see translation, page 33)
With regard to claim 28, Rossberger discloses wherein the spindle 35 is received inside a first bearing ring of a first bearing 45 and inside a second bearing ring of a second bearing 46 (see Fig. 20).
With regard to claim 29, Rossberger discloses an electric drive for an electrically assisted bicycle, the electric drive comprising: an electric motor (20, 22, 26, 27), and the external force measurement unit according to claim 17.
With regard to claim 30, Rossberger discloses further comprising a motor housing 22.
With regard to claim 31, Rossberger discloses An electrically assisted bicycle with the electric drive according to claim 29.
Claim(s) 32-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rossberger and D’Elia, as applied to claims 17-31, and further in view of Fischer et al (EP 0496918). Rossberger discloses, with regard to claim 32, a spindle 35 provided in the vicinity of the external force measurement unit, wherein the spindle 35 is provided with magnetic material that is configured to cause a Hall sensor 353 to issue a signal upon rotation of the spindle 35. However, Rossberger fails to explicitly disclose a plurality of flux grooves extending longitudinally in parallel to a symmetry axis of the spindle, the flux grooves being arranged on a circumference in an outer cylindrical surface of the spindle. Fischer teaches a Hall Effect sensor for a spindle wherein the spindle is provided with magnetic material (“For this purpose, corresponding encoder parts with markings in the form of ferromagnetic teeth are connected to the crankshaft and the camshaft.” – see translation, page 1) that is configured to cause a Hall sensor 21, 22 to issue a signal upon rotation of the spindle, wherein a plurality of flux grooves R, L extending longitudinally in parallel to a symmetry axis of the spindle, the flux grooves being arranged on a circumference in an outer cylindrical surface of the spindle (see Figs. 1 and 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the force measurement unit of Rossberger with the teaching of Fischer such that the spindle includes a plurality of flux grooves extending longitudinally in parallel to a symmetry axis of the spindle, the flux grooves being arranged on a circumference in an outer cylindrical surface of the spindle, with a reasonable expectation of success, to allow for the Hall effect sensor to accurately discern the rotational position of the spindle.
With regard to claim 33, Fischer teaches wherein a reference flux groove R of the plurality of flux grooves R, L has a different width in a circumferential direction and/or a different depth than other flux grooves of the plurality of flux grooves (see Figs. 1 and 2).
With regard to claim 34, Fischer teaches wherein a reference flux shoulder Z between these flux grooves has a different width in a circumferential direction than that of a flux shoulder between adjacent flux grooves of other flux grooves of the plurality of flux grooves (see Figs. 1 and 2).
With regard to claim 35, Rossberger discloses wherein the spindle is configured to receive a pedal crank at each of two spindle ends of the spindle (“Furthermore, the present application discloses a door shaft for a freewheel assembly, the door shaft having at a first end a first attachment area for a pedal crank and at a second end opposite thereto a second attachment area for a pedal crank.”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the D’Elia reference, the load sensors 208 lie between inner bearing cup 202 and outer bearing cup 204. In the non-final rejection these two numbers were transposed, but Fig. 5A of the reference shows this configuration clearly. Thus, the load sensors 208, which correspond with the claimed flaps, are arranged in a radial direction towards an outside of the support ring 202.
Regarding the evaluation unit 1500 of D’Elia and whether it measures the resistances of the strain gauges separately, Fig. 8, along with the passage, “FIG. 8 is a plot of exemplary force measurements sampled from four load sensors 208” (column 10, lines 14-15), show that the resistance from the individual strain gauges is measured separately. Thus, the rejection in light of D’Elia is maintained.
With regard to Rossberg, the reference states, “According to a special embodiment, the load cell has four measuring ranges, which are arranged at intervals of 90 degrees. As a result, on the one hand a good support of the recorded in the load cell bearing can be achieved and on the other hand a measurement of defined radial forces are made possible, from which a torque acting on a crankshaft torque can be calculated, the crankshaft is supported by the bearing.” Thus, it discloses that the resistance from the individual strain gauges is measured separately, as required by claim 1. Fig. 41 also discloses two separate measurements of strain taken simultaneously. Thus, the Rossberg rejection is maintained.
Examiner agrees that Rossberger was deficient in explicitly stating that the re4sistance of the strain gauges is measured separately from one another. Thus, the original 102 rejection has been withdrawn and replaced with the above 103 rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. An examination of the prior art in light of the current amendment to claim 17 proved that while the claims now overcome the 102 rejection in light of D’Elia, Rossberger continues to read on the amended portion of the claim. Rossberger discloses connecting straps that connect a support ring portion 96 with an outer circumference of the load cell, as seen in the marked up Figs. Below, said straps corresponding to the claimed flaps.
PNG
media_image1.png
638
820
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As can be seen, these straps extend radially outward from the support ring portion 96, as required by the amendments. As the claims do not define said flaps as having a free end or being cantilevered, the reference is interpreted to continue to read on the structure of the claimed invention. Regarding the notion of claiming that the straps have a first free end, previously cited reference, Ambrosina et al (US 6,418,797), discloses just such an arrangement. Thus, such an amendment would require further detail to overcome a prior art rejection in the interest of allowability.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ambrosina discloses an external force measurement unit for measuring an external force applied to a spindle 102, the external force measurement unit comprising:
a load cell comprising:
a support ring 370;
a first flap 381A arranged on the support ring 370;
a second flap 381B (see Fig. 5A) arranged opposite to the first flap 208 on the support ring 202,
wherein each of the first flap 381A and the second flap 381B extends radially outwardly from the support ring; and
a first bearing support 340 adapted to take up a first bearing 323B in a first bearing seat (see Fig. 4), wherein the first bearing 323B is adapted to take up a rotating spindle 102;
a first strain gauge 375 arranged on the first flap 381A;
a second strain gauge 377 arranged on the second flap 381B; and
an evaluation unit 1503 for measuring a resistance of the first strain gauge and a resistance of the second strain gauge, wherein the resistance of the first strain gauge is measured separately from the resistance of the second strain gauge (“When torque is applied to the hub assembly 303B, bending strain is caused in the four bending arms 372, 374, 376, 378. The resulting tension and/or compression strain signals generated by the strain gauges are transmitted to the electronics unit 335 by wires 397, where they are processed and transmitted by transmitter 390 to the computer. The strain signals can be converted into torque measurements which can in turn be used to determine power delivered to the hub assembly 303B.” – column 11, lines 26-35).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY WILHELM whose telephone number is (571)272-6980. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:30.
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, Paul Dickson can be reached at 571-272-7742. 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.
/TIMOTHY WILHELM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617 October 14, 2026
