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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figures 1, 2, and 5 lack clear line drawings and include excessive shading that obscures the image. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 2 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.
In claim 2, line 4, it is not clear to what element “which” refers (the helmet, the part of the second housing seat, etc.). Clarification 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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-11 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP2020-80289 to Yamaha (cited by applicant).
Regarding claim 1, Yamaha teaches an electric or hybrid rideable saddle vehicle (electric vehicle, see Figure 2B) comprising: - a rechargeable battery 50B which extends between a bottom portion and a head portion; - an electric or hybrid traction motor 4a which can be supplied by the rechargeable battery to deliver a traction torque; a storage container N; wherein the storage container comprises: a first housing seat N2 (Figure 2B, para [034]) which at least partially houses the rechargeable battery 50B so that the rechargeable battery can be inserted into, and extracted from, the first housing seat; a second housing seat N3, adapted and configured to house at least one helmet 91 (see Figure 1), having a first portion (upper portion) and a second portion (lower portion having an angled bottom wall); wherein: - the second portion is arranged below the first portion and adjacent to the first housing seat N2
Regarding claim 2, Yamaha teaches that a part of the second housing seat N3 not occupied by the head portion of the rechargeable battery 50B defines a space configured to house said helmet (see Figure 1) which at least partially accommodates the head portion therein (the helmet is not positively recited and the container is configures such that the helmet can accommodate the head of a battery).
Regarding claim 3, Yamaha teaches the head portion (top end of battery 50B) of the rechargeable battery 50B at least partially protrudes into the second housing seat N3 (see Figures 1 and 2B).
Regarding claim 4, wherein the head portion of battery 50B comprises a gripping handle 53 (Figure 14) and wherein when the rechargeable battery is inserted into the first housing seat N2, the gripping handle at least partially protrudes into the second housing seat (top end of battery 50B and its handle extend out of seat N2 and into seat N3), see Figure 2B).
Regarding claim 5, the first housing seat N2 and the second housing seat N3 communicate with each other.
Regarding claim 6, the first housing seat N2 comprises an access opening (top end is open) which is crossable by the bottom portion (bottom of battery 50B) to insert the rechargeable battery 50B into the first housing seat, and wherein the first housing seat N2 and the second housing seat N3 communicate with each other through the access opening (see Figure 2B).
Regarding claim 7, the rechargeable battery 50B is slidingly insertable into, and extractable from, the first housing seat N2 by translation along a sliding axis (vertically slidable, see Figure 2B).
Regarding claim 8, the helmet is a jet helmet comprising a shell having a front open portion, two mutually opposite side portions, a rear portion, and an upper portion (see helmet 91 in Figure 1), wherein the front open portion
Regarding claim 9, Yamaha teaches the second portion of the second housing seat N3 is adapted and configured to accommodate at least partially the side portions of the shell (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, Yamaha further teaches a rideable saddle 6, and wherein: - the storage container N is placed below the rideable saddle (see Figure 1); - the rideable saddle can be moved between a closing configuration (Figure 1), in which the rideable saddle prevents access to the storage container, and an opening configuration (Figure 2B), in which the rideable saddle allows access to the storage container.
Regarding claim 11, Yamaha teaches a main body 7, 40, and wherein the rideable saddle 6 is hinged to the main body (see Figure 2B) to be rotated between two angular positions corresponding to the closing configuration and the opening configuration, respectively.
Regarding claim 16, Yamaha teaches the first housing seat N2 has a bottom portion arranged at a lower height with respect to the second portion (upper portion) of the second housing seat N3 (see Figure 2B).
Regarding claim 17, the first housing seat N2 extends into the vehicle 1 at a greater depth than the second housing seat N3 (see Figure 2B).
Regarding claim 18, Yamaha teaches a group of parts comprising an electric or hybrid rideable saddle vehicle 1, as discussed above, and a helmet 91 which can be housed in the second housing seat of the storage container.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaha (JP2020-80289).
Regarding claim 12, Yamaha shows a seat 6 having a support base and wherein the support base comprises a recess adapted and configured to receive partially said upper portion of the shell of the helmet 91 (see Figure 1), but is silent regarding padding. However, it is old and well known to provide a padded cover on a motorcycle seat in order to promote the comfort of the rider. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the Yamaha seat with padding, as is old and well known, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve the comfort of the rider.
Regarding claim 13, said recess in the seat 6 is rounded and/or curved (Figure 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14 and 15 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.
Guidi is a publication of applicant’s related case showing a battery locking device.
EP 4417497, Baracchino, and Okabe teach helmet carriers mounted below the straddle seat.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anne Marie M. Boehler whose telephone number is (571)272-6641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8-5pm.
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.
/ANNE MARIE M BOEHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/ab/