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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 14 October 2025, amending claims 1, 4, and 7, has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, the instant disclosure does not provide original support for the newly claimed:
“injecting melt into the shaping cavity in a first direction at a first injection point arranged at a first extreme end of the handlebar;
injecting a fluid into the shaping cavity in a second direction at a second injection point arranged at a second extreme end of the handlebar, opposite the first extreme end, the fluid configured to displace a plastic core from the interior of the component, and wherein the first direction is opposite to the second direction”
Support is found at FIG. 1-2 for the first and second injection points at opposite ends of the handlebar, but not at first and second “extreme” ends. There is not enough support to precisely define the injection point as the “extreme” end vs. a more broad interpretation of an end. It appears that Applicant has attempt to amended to define the injection points in order to differ from the teachings of Pearson. However, there is insufficient support in the original description to differentiate the claimed injection points at opposite ends of the handlebar from the opposite ends injection points disclosed in FIG. 3A-E; 8:8+ of Pearson.
Regarding claim 4, the instant disclosure does not provide original support for the newly claimed:
“wherein injecting the plasticized thermoplastic melt occurs at a same time as injecting the fluid.”
No support for such an amendment is found.
Claims 2-3, 5-18 are rejected for their dependence.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pearson (US 6,767,487 B2) in view of Wolfsberger (US 2018/0186049 A1) and Darland et al. (US 2002/0020249 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Pearson discloses a method injection molding for forming hollow channels within the plastic, particularly beneficial for thick section moldings, such as handles, which could have the intended use of the claimed handlebar for a two wheeler (MPEP § 2111.02; title/abstract, 1:22+), said method comprising:
closing an injection molding tool having a shaping cavity 108;
injecting a plasticized thermoplastic melt 102 into the shaping cavity 108, in a first direction at a first injection point arranged at a first extreme end of the handlebar (FIG. 3A-B);
injecting a fluid 122 into the shaping cavity in a second direction opposite to the first direction at a second injection point arranged at a second extreme end of the handlebar, opposite the first extreme end to displace a plastic core from the interior of the component (FIG. 3C-D);
maintaining fluid pressure for a defined time to ensure wall conformity and cooling; and
removing the plastic handlebar by demolding or ejection from the tool (FIG. 3A-E; 8:8+).
Pearson does not appear to expressly disclose integrated inserts or the geometry of the handlebars.
However, Wolfsberger suggests a similar method of injection molding hollow components (title/abstract) which includes additional components to be integrated in the component by overmolding or co-injection molding (¶ 64).
At the time of invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the process of Pearson to include the additional components of Wolfsberger, in order to co-molded and/or overmolded elements to be integrated into the component as desired (Wolfsberger ¶¶ 17-18).
Additionally, Darland discloses gas-assisted injection molded integral support structure for handlebars of a two-wheeler (title/abstract; ¶ 76) which includes two-component part of hard and soft components, with components such as grip pieces on the plastic handlebar being formed as soft components that are produced by means of an index plate or turntable injection molding tool or by means of a second cavity arranged in the injection molding tool (¶¶ 75-76, 95, 119+; FIG. 8).
At the time of invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the process of Pearson to include the hard and soft components of Darland, in order to form the handlebars with a desirable gripping surface for greater rider control and comfort.
Regarding claim 2, Pearson discloses a set fluid pressure of the at least one fluid is maintained over a specific time period in the interior of the component and is blown out, expelled, and/or sucked out after maintenance (FIG. 1C-1D, 2: 5:13+, 6:35+).
Regarding claim 3, Pearson discloses the at least one fluid presses the plastic core into an overflow cavity 32 introduced in the injection molding tool (FIG. 1D; 5:22+).
Regarding claim 4, Pearson discloses more than one overflow cavity is provided in the injection molding tool (4:58+) and the injection is conducted during the same injection cycle, equated with the claimed “same time” (FIG. 3A-E; 8:8+).
Regarding claim 5, Pearson discloses the component is manufactured by a mass back pressure process, with the at least one fluid displacing the plastic core back through a channel into a screw antechamber on the injection molding tool (FIG. 3A-3E; 8:8+).
Regarding claim 6, Pearson discloses a conventional method for manufacturing the component wherein at least one shaping component cavity introduced into the injection molding tool is only partially filled with the thermoplastic melt and the plastic core is displaced by the injection of the fluid, with the liquid melt being inflated such that it is placed on the wall of the injection molding tool and a hollow space is created in the interior of the component, and with the at least one shaping component cavity being completely filled (1:33+).
Regarding claim 7, Pearson suggests multi-cavity molds (7:8+).
Pearson does not appear to expressly disclose replaceable cavities.
However, Wolfsberger discloses a similar method of injection molding hollow components (title/abstract) which includes cavities with different shapes that are substantially replaceable (FIG. 1, 6, 11).
At the time of invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the process of Pearson to include the different cavities of Wolfsberger, in order to allow for the manufacture of a variety of components with the same operating principles.
Regarding claim 8, Pearson does not appear to expressly discloses additional metallic and/or non-metallic components that are reinforcing or non-reinforcing integrated in the component.
However, Wolfsberger discloses a similar method of injection molding hollow components (title/abstract) which includes additional metallic components to be integrated in the component such as components of aluminum and/or steel and/or non-metallic components such as pultruded woven or wound glass fiber tubes are placed into the injection molding tool individually or in groups and are back injection molded or overmolded (¶¶ 19-20, 53-54, 59, 65; claims 8, 9, 12).
At the time of invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the process of Pearson to include the additional components of Wolfsberger, in order to form specific reinforcement and/or overmolded elements to be integrated into the component as desired (Wolfsberger ¶¶ 17-18).
Regarding claim 9, Wolfsberger discloses unidirectional tapes and/or organosheets are placed and back injection molded in partial regions of the injection molding tool or over large areas before the injection of the plastic melt, with a connection to the thermoplastic melt with material continuity being produced (¶ 54).
Regarding claim 10, Wolfsberger discloses the unidirectional tapes and/or the organosheets are placed into the injection molding tool in a cold and/or in a hot state (¶ 54).
Regarding claim 11, Darland discloses gas-assisted injection molded integral support structure for handlebars of a two-wheeler (title/abstract; ¶ 76) which includes two-component part of hard and soft components, with components such as grip pieces on the plastic handlebar being formed as soft components that are produced by means of an index plate or turntable injection molding tool or by means of a second cavity arranged in the injection molding tool (¶¶ 75-76, 95, 119+; FIG. 8).
Regarding claim 12, Wolfsberger suggests co-injection (¶ 64); Darland suggests the grip regions of the component and the spacers in the second cavity serve as a centering aid to prevent a deformation of the component on the injection molding of the soft components (¶¶ 95, 119+; FIG. 8).
Regarding claim 13, Darland suggests the component has at least one defined interface for the attachment of the stem, with the interface being formed such that different stems correspond via a shape matched connection (¶¶ 72+, FIG. 4-6).
Regarding claim 14, Wolfsberger suggests the at least one interface is an electronic interface for signal transmission (¶¶ 18-19).
Regarding claim 15, Pearson discloses gas, such as nitrogen is injected (1:19+).
Regarding claim 16, Wolfsberger discloses a plurality of fluids are injected into the injection molding tool and their individual fluid volume flows or pressure/time profiles are regulated separately from one another (¶¶ 11, 38, claim 16).
Regarding claim 17, Wolfsberger discloses co-injected elements such as brake lever mounts, cable routings, a bell, and/or other elements are integrated in the component (¶ 18, claim 19).
Regarding claim 18, Darland suggests elevated and/or depressed pockets are integrated in the component to hold elements such as light guides, headlamps, indicators, and/or comparable elements (¶¶ 99, 141, 152).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 14 October 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant contends that Pearson does not teach or suggest injection points at opposite extreme ends, specifically pointing to Pearson’s injection via a plunger at one extreme end, and a gas injection between the one extreme end and a different extreme end as shown in FIG. 3A-E. The Examiner does not agree with Applicant’s conclusion. Notwithstanding the new matter issues the skilled artisan would recognize that the gas injection location of Pearson FIG. 3A-E is equivalent to the second extreme end opposite the first as claimed. Applicant has not provided arguments or evidence why said gas injection point could not be interpreted as at an extreme end, but rather makes conclusory statements that it is so.
Applicant further contends that Pearson fails to teach or suggest that the injections are in opposite directions as claimed, again making conclusory statements without providing arguments or evidence. The Examiner’s position is that Pearson’s injection of the melt and gas occur in opposite direction as shown in FIG. 3A-E, the melt is injection from left to right and the gas is injected from right to left.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin A Schiffman whose telephone number is (571)270-7626. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-530p EST.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at (571)272-1176. 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.
/BENJAMIN A SCHIFFMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742