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
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “a seat tube or one or more sections of the seat tube” is repeated twice in line 4 and in line 8, one of the phrases should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “of any one” in line 1 should be removed. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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 11,12,15 and 16 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.
Claims 11 and 12 recites the limitation ”frame elements or sections " in line 2, however, claim 1 only introduces “the frame elements” claim 1 does not introduce “the sections”
. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 15 and 16 recites the limitation "the one or more moveable and/or morphable sections" in line 2 as claim 1 only introduces “the frame elements”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1,2 and 4-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Girard (US 6450520). Regarding claims 1 and 2, Girard discloses a bicycle (12) comprising: one or more frame elements (10,14,46,16,48) which are, in whole or in part, moveable (the frame elements are configured to move passively in response to an external force, see Col. 5, lines 49-54) in shape—{{the moveable elements include chain stays 30,38 that pivotably coupled to an immoveable bicycle frame element 14, the moveable frame elements include a section that comprises a flexible material, see Col. 5, lines 37-54}}--.
Regarding claim 4, wherein the moveable frame elements are moveable by actuation of an actuating mechanism (one of either the rear wheel or the suspension member 54) operatively connected thereto.
Regarding claim 5, wherein the moveable frame elements are configured to move passively when subjected to an external force (such as a bump on the wheel due to rough terrain).
Regarding claims 6-8, wherein the external force comprises a lateral force (such as the user shifting his/her weight while seating on the bicycle or wind pushing on the user of the bicycle thereby creating aerodynamic wind load).
Regarding claim 9, wherein the one or more frame elements comprise one or more moveable frame elements or sections (16 which includes the shock absorber 54), wherein the moveable frame elements or sections are coupled to one or more immovable frame elements (14) of the bicycle.
Regarding claim 10, wherein at least one of the moveable frame elements (16) are pivotably or hingedly coupled to one or more of the immovable frame elements (14, see figures 1 and 6) or sections.
Regarding claim 11, wherein the moveable frame elements or sections comprise a flexible and/or a deformable material (such as the shock absorber 54).
Regarding claim 12, wherein the moveable frame elements or sections move and/or morph by flexing and/or deforming when subjected to an external force (such as the shock absorber flexing when the rear wheel hits a bump in rough terrain).
Regarding claim 13, wherein the one or more frame elements comprise one or more moveable sections (such as member 16) coupled to one or more immovable frame elements (14) of the bicycle.
Regarding claim 14, wherein at least one of the moveable frame elements (16) are pivotably or hingedly coupled to one or more of the immovable frame elements (14, see figures 1 and 6) or sections.
Regarding claim 15, wherein the moveable frame elements or sections comprise a flexible and/or a deformable material (such as the shock absorber 54).
Regarding claim 16, wherein the moveable frame elements or sections move and/or morph by flexing and/or deforming when subjected to an external force (such as the shock absorber flexing when the rear wheel hits a bump in rough terrain).
Regarding claim 17, A frame element (10,14,46,16,48) for a bicycle comprising: at least one section (16,30) which is moveable and/or morphable in shape in response to one or more of an external force (such as bumps from rough terrain) and actuation of a control mechanism (54) operatively connected thereto.
Regarding claim 18, wherein the at least one section (16,30) is configured to move passively (along a curve/path, see figures 5 and 9 ) when subjected to the external force (such as bumps from rough terrain).
Regarding claim 19, wherein the external force comprises a lateral force (such as the user shifting his/her weight while seating on the bicycle or wind pushing on the user of the bicycle thereby creating aerodynamic wind load).
Regarding claim 20, wherein the at least one section (16,30) is shaped as a fin (sideways fin due to it being triangular, see figures 5 and 9) trailing section.
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Girard in view of Felker (US 2015/0298761)). Regarding Claim 3, Girard further discloses, a cockpit (where the top tube 18 meets the head tube 22) a seat tube (24), a top tube (18), a down tube (20) a head tube (22), a seat stay (30) and a chain stay (38), Girard does not show a handlebar, stem and forks. However, Felker discloses a front fork (5), a handle (see figure 2a) with a stem (125). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Girard by adding a front fork, a handlebar and a stem in order to complete the bicycle, as the bicycle shown by Girard does not show them, wherein adding the front fork, a handle bar and a stem would enable a person to use the bicycle, additionally the combination of Girard and Felker can be seen as the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marlon A Arce whose telephone number is (571)272-1341. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM - 4:30PM.
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.
/MARLON A ARCE/Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611