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.
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.
Claims 1-10 are 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 1 recites the limitations "at the operative above the ground level" in Line 7, “the rear axle” in Line 9, and “the operative rear end” in Line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation " the processing unit" in Line 22. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1, 5-6, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Denysenko et al. (US 2022/0194519 A1) hereinafter, Denysensko in view of DeCordova (US 2016/021467 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Denysenko teaches a pedal-assisted RTO registrable two-wheeled electric vehicle (Fig 1) including a frame (1), a steerable fork (2) extending from an operative front portion of the frame, a front wheel (3) and a rear wheel (4) mounted to the frame, handle bar (Fig 1) mounted on the fork, an accelerator (Para [0019]) mounted on one side of the handle bar, a seat assembly (5) mounted on the frame operatively behind the handle bar and between the front wheel and the rear wheel, a pedal assembly (Fig 1) mounted at the operative above the ground level of the frame between the front wheel and the rear wheel (Fig 1), a hub motor (11) mounted on the rear axle of the rear wheel for driving the rear wheel, a pedal sprocket (Para [0010]) fitted to the pedal assembly, a chain sprocket (implicit) fitted to the rear axle, and a drive chain (implicit) wound around the pedal sprocket and the chain sprocket to assist in driving the vehicle by means of the pedal, said vehicle comprising:
a compartment formed by panels (6) fitted around an operative front element of the frame behind the front wheel and the handle bar (Fig 1), and operatively in front of the pedal assembly and the seat assembly (Fig 1);
a swing arm (13) secured between the frame and the rear axle for securing the pedal assembly at the front end and the rear axle at the operative rear end (Fig 1);
a battery pack (8) housed in said compartment (Fig 1);
connectors connecting the battery pack to the hub motor (Para [0008]) to drive the hub motor which in turn drives the rear wheel to drive the vehicle;
a sensing unit fitted in the accelerator (the speed and the intensity of the movement will depend on the angle of rotation of the accelerator handle, Para [0019]) for sensing the angular displacement of the accelerator to generate a sensed displacement value;
a torque sensor (rotation sensor not shown) fitted in the frame between the pedals, said torque sensor configured to sense the torque applied by the pedal assembly while driving, and further configured to generate a sensed torque value (Para [0019]); and
a control module connected to said sensing unit, said torque sensor and said battery pack (Para [0019]), said control module configured to receive said sensed displacement value and said sensed torque value, and further configured to generate an actuating signal for supplying power from the battery pack to drive the hub motor (Para [0019]);
wherein the vehicle can be driven in either a battery mode or a pedal assisted mode (Para [0019]), wherein the user's action of pedaling will rotate the chain sprocket and hence the rear wheel for driving the vehicle (Fig 1).
However, Denysenko does not explicitly teach that said battery pack configured to deliver power greater than 250 Watts to drive the vehicle at a top speed greater than 25kmph.
DeCordova teaches that said battery pack configured to deliver power greater than 250 Watts (Para [0032]) to drive the vehicle at a top speed greater than 25kmph (Para [0012]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Denykenso’s vehicle, in view of DeCordova, with a battery configured to deliver power greater than 250 Watts and drive the vehicle at a top speed greater than 25kmph, to meet the legal requirements for RTO.
Regarding claim 5, Denysenko teaches that the vehicle includes a front suspension unit (Fig 1) provided in the fork.
Regarding claim 6, Denysenko teaches that the vehicle includes a rear suspension unit (12) connected to the frame operatively below the seat assembly for absorbing the shocks as the vehicle traverses on a ground surface (Fig 1).
Regarding claim 9, Denysenko teaches that the vehicle is a non-carriage vehicle (Fig 1).
Claim(s) 2-3 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Denysenko et al. (US 2022/0194519 A1) hereinafter, Denysensko in view of DeCordova (US 2016/021467 A1) and further in view of Tanaka (US 2018/0015986 A1).
Regarding claims 2-3, Denysensko in view of DeCordova teaches the vehicle of claim 1. However, Denysensko in view of DeCordova does not teach that said control module includes a motor control unit and a vehicle control unit.
Tanka teaches that the said control module (45) includes a motor control unit (53) and a vehicle control unit (54), said motor control unit configured to communicate with said sensing unit (42) to receive said sensed displacement value, and said vehicle control unit configured to communicate with said torque sensor to receive said sensed torque value (Fig 12), wherein said motor control unit and said vehicle control unit are connected to a processing unit (processor, Para [0018]), said processing unit configured to analyse the sensed values and actuate the battery pack to supply power to the hub motor (see analysis of processing example of Fig 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Denysenko’s vehicle, in view of Tanaka, with a motor control unit and a vehicle control unit connected to a processing unit, to improve travel performance (Para [0034]).
Regarding claims 10, Denysensko in view of DeCordova teaches the vehicle of claim 1. However, Denysensko in view of DeCordova does not teach that the sensing unit is a throttle position sensor.
Tanka teaches that the sensing unit is a throttle position sensor (153, Para [0064]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Denysenko’s vehicle, in view of Tanaka, with a throttle position sensor, to improve motor control performance.
Claim(s) 4 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Denysenko et al. (US 2022/0194519 A1) hereinafter, Denysensko in view of DeCordova (US 2016/021467 A1) and further in view of Ishikawa et al. (US 4,169,512 A) hereinafter, Ishikawa.
Regarding claim 4, Denysensko in view of DeCordova teaches the vehicle of claim 1. However, Denysensko in view of DeCordova does not teaches that the vehicle includes a chain tensioner.
Ishikawa teaches that the vehicle includes a chain adjuster (97) assembly fitted to the rear wheel axle for adjusting the slack of the drive chain (Fig 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Denysenko’s vehicle, in view of Ishikawa, with a chain tensioner, to ensure smooth power transmission with minimal slippage.
Regarding claim 8, Denysensko in view of DeCordova teaches the vehicle of claim 1. However, Denysensko in view of DeCordova does not teaches that the vehicle includes a carriage.
Ishikawa teaches that the vehicle includes a carriage (22, Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Denysenko’s vehicle, in view of Ishikawa, with a carriage, to facilitate transporting goods.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Denysenko et al. (US 2022/0194519 A1) hereinafter, Denysensko in view of DeCordova (US 2016/021467 A1) and further in view of Yokoya et al. (JP 2004-149001 A) hereinafter, Yokoya.
Denysensko in view of DeCordova teaches the vehicle of claim 1. However, Denysensko in view of DeCordova does not teaches that the vehicle includes a regenerative braking system.
Yokoya teaches a vehicle includes a regenerative braking system comprising a brake switch sensor, said brake switch sensor configured to generate a brake sensed signal on application of the brakes (Para [0016]) to cause the processing unit to cut-off the power supply to the motor (9), and redirect the power already delivered to the motor (charges the battery 10 using the motor 9 as a generator, Para [0029]) back to the battery pack (10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Denysenko’s vehicle, in view of Yokoya, with a regenerative braking system, to save on power and increase the battery life.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references noted on the attached PTO-892 form teaches pedal assisted electric vehicles of interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOSAM SHABARA whose telephone number is (571)272-5495. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 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, 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.
/H.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611