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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 6-9, 11, and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities: each claim recites the phrase “bridges pieces”; it is recommended to amend the phrase to “bridge pieces” for grammatical correctness and clarity. 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.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 25 refers to the method according to claim 19, however, claim 19 is not a method claim therefore the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. For the purpose of advancing prosecution, it is assumed the applicant intended to refer to the method according to claim 24.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8, 14, 16, 17, 19, 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Galardo FR 2640203 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Galardo discloses A cycle hub assembly comprising: a wheel hub 1; and a plurality of spoke mounting elements 4a; wherein the spoke mounting elements 4a are present in two axially spaced rows positioned around the circumference of the wheel hub 1 (the spoke mounting elements are positioned around each of the two flanges 4 of the wheel hub; 4th paragraph after description of figures in the English translation), wherein each spoke mounting element 4a comprises at least one spoke mounting hole for receiving at least part of at least one spoke 3, and wherein at least two adjacent spoke mounting elements are interconnected via at least one bridge piece 4b, wherein at least part of said bridge piece 4b has a width which is smaller than a width of at least one spoke mounting element 4a connected with said bridge piece. (Figs 4, 9, and 10;)
Regarding claim 2, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, comprising a plurality of bridge pieces 4b, wherein the spoke mounting elements 4a of each row are interconnected via bridge pieces 4b which at least partially have a width which is smaller than the width of at least one spoke mounting element 4a connected with said bridge piece. (Fig 9 shows multiple spoke mounting elements with multiple bridge pieces, each spoke mounting element connected to an adjacent spoke mounting element by a bridge piece)
Regarding claim 3, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein multiple spoke mounting elements 4a are interconnected via the same bridge piece 4b. (Fig 10 shows a single annular bridge piece with spoke mounting elements positioned on either side)
Regarding claim 4, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least one spoke mounting element 4a is supported by at least one bridge piece 4b. (Fig 10; the skinny spoke mounting elements rely on the annular bridge piece for strength)
Regarding claim 5, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least part of the spoke mounting elements 4a and bridge pieces 4b are integrally connected. (Fig 9 and 10)
Regarding claim 6, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein all spoke mounting elements 4a and all bridges pieces 4b of at least one row, are integrally connected. (Fig 9 and 10)
Regarding claim 7, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least part of the spoke mounting elements 4a and/or at least part of the bridges pieces 4b of at least one row, are integrally connected with the wheel hub 1. (Fig. 4 and 10)
Regarding claim 8, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein the spoke mounting elements, the bridges pieces and the wheel hub are made of a single piece (Fig. 4 and 10)
Regarding claim 14, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least part of the centre line of at least one spoke mounting hole extends in a direction substantially perpendicular to the axial direction of the wheel hub 1 (Fig. 3) and/or, wherein at least part of the centre line of at least one spoke mounting hole extends in a direction substantially parallel to the radial direction of the wheel hub. (Fig. 4)
Regarding claim 16, the limitation “wherein the configuration of at least part of the bridge pieces, is designed via topology optimization” is a product-by-process claim (MPEP 2113) and is therefore given minimal patentable weight. In addition, “topology optimization” is well known in the art and would have been obvious to use by a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 17, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least one bridge piece 4b is positioned at a distance above the wheel hub 1 (Fig. 3) and/or, wherein at least part of the bridge pieces 4b are substantially identical. (Fig. 9)
Regarding claim 19, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least one row comprises N spoke mounting elements 4a and wherein at least one row, comprises a plurality of bridge pieces 4b, wherein the number of bridge pieces is at least 0.5N. (Fig. 9 shows the number of bridge pieces is one less than the number of spoke mounting elements which is more than 0.5N)
The limitation “and/or wherein at least one spoke mounting element, and preferably each spoke mounting element, is at least partially bowl shaped” is not disclosed by Galardo but the “or” statement means the limitation is optional to the design. It is also addressed in the 35 USC §103 section below.
Regarding claim 21, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least one spoke mounting element 4a comprises at least two spoke mounting holes, wherein each spoke mounting hole is configured for receiving at least part of at least one spoke. (fig. 9)
Regarding claim 22, Galardo discloses the cycle hub assembly according to claim 17, wherein at least one spoke mounting element 4a comprises at least two receiving spaces which are oriented in opposite directions, wherein each receiving space is provided with at least one spoke mounting hole. (Fig. 9)
Regarding claim 23, Galardo discloses a ring shaped spoke mounting body for use in a cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least two adjacent spoke mounting elements 4a are interconnected via at least one bridge piece 4b, wherein at least part of said bridge piece 4b has a width which is smaller than a width of at least one spoke mounting element 4a connected with said bridge piece. (Fig. 10)
Regarding claim 24, Galardo discloses a method of manufacturing at least one cycle hub assembly, the method comprising the steps of: providing a wheel hub 1; and providing a plurality of spoke mounting elements 4a; wherein the spoke mounting elements 4a are present in two axially spaced rows positioned around the circumference of the wheel hub 1, wherein each spoke mounting element 4a comprises at least one spoke mounting hole for receiving at least part of at least one spoke 3, and wherein at least two adjacent spoke mounting elements 4a are interconnected via at least one bridge piece 4b, wherein at least part of said bridge piece 4b has a width which is smaller than a width of at least one spoke mounting element 4a connected with said bridge piece 4b. (Fig. 3 and 10)
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.
Claims 9 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galardo FR 2640203 A1 in view of Jenny US 20230339263 A1.
Regarding claim 9, Galardo teaches the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1. Galardo does not teach at least part of the spoke mounting elements and/or at least part of the bridges pieces are manufactured via 3D printing and/or wherein at least part of the wheel hub is manufactured via 3D printing.
Jenny teaches a hub for a bicycle that is at least partially manufactured using 3D printing to reduce the amount of extra space needed around features for a tool path (runout) or create features that would be extremely difficult or impossible with conventional machining (para. 117). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to 3D print at least a portion of the hub, spoke mounting elements, or bridge pieces to reduce material waste and machining time.
Regarding claim 25, Galardo teaches the method according to claim 24, Galardo does not teach at least part of the spoke mounting elements and/or at least part of the bridges pieces are manufactured via 3D printing and/or wherein at least part of the wheel hub is manufactured via 3D printing.
Jenny teaches a hub for a bicycle that is at least partially manufactured using 3D printing to reduce the amount of extra space needed around features for a tool path (runout) or create features that would be extremely difficult or impossible with conventional machining (para. 117). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to 3D print at least a portion of the hub, spoke mounting elements, or bridge pieces to reduce material waste and machining time.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galardo FR 2640203 A1 in view of D’aluisio WO 2007075735 A2
Regarding claim 11, Galardo teaches the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1. Galardo does not teach wherein at least part of the spoke mounting elements and/or at least part of the bridges pieces are at least partially made of an alloy or an alloy comprising aluminium, magnesium, and/or scandium.
D’aluisio teaches a bicycle hub with spoke mounting elements (flanges and flange extensions) that are made out of a “strong and lightweight material” such as an aluminum alloy. (para. 39) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an aluminum alloy for at least part of the spoke mounting elements or bridge pieces to create a hub structure that was both strong and lightweight with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 12, Galardo teaches the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1. Galardo does not teach wherein the wheel hub is at least partially made of an alloy or, an alloy comprising aluminium, magnesium, and/or scandium and/or wherein at least part of the spoke mounting elements and/or at least part of the bridges pieces are at least partially made of a polymer material.
D’aluisio teaches a bicycle hub with spoke mounting elements (flanges and flange extensions) that are made out of a “strong and lightweight material” such as an aluminum alloy or carbon fiber composite. (para. 39) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an aluminum alloy or carbon fiber polymer composite for at least part of the hub, spoke mounting elements or bridge pieces to create a hub structure that was both strong and lightweight with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galardo FR 2640203 A1 in view of Koshiyama US 20130207448 A1
Regarding claim 19, Galardo teaches the cycle hub assembly according to claim 1, wherein at least one row comprises N spoke mounting elements 4a and wherein at least one row, comprises a plurality of bridge pieces 4b, wherein the number of bridge pieces is at least 0.5N. (Fig. 9 shows the number of bridge pieces is one less than the number of spoke mounting elements which is more than 0.5N)
Galardo does not teach and/or wherein at least one spoke mounting element, and preferably each spoke mounting element, is at least partially bowl shaped. Koshiyama teaches a bowl shaped portion 34 in a spoke mounting element 18a for better distributing the forces created by the spokes. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement bowl shaped spoke receiving areas in the spoke mounting elements taught by Galardo in order to better spread the force load of each spoke in increase the life and durability of the hub and wheel with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Pun US 20220220589 A1 teaches a method for 3d printing aluminum alloy. Mercat EP 2199636 A1 teaches another hub with small bridge pieces (in between the spoke mounting elements pointed radially directly away from the hub) that meets many of the claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX R PALMER whose telephone number is (703)756-1981. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 pm MST.
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, Samuel (Joe) Morano can be reached at (571) 272-6684. 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.
/AP/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615