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 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.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "said inner housing seat" in lines 2-3 and “said outer housing seat” in lines 4-5. 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (US 5964474). Chen discloses a head tube assembly (see figure 1) adapted to be mounted between a head tube (51) and a front fork (10) of a vehicle, the front fork extending through the head tube and said head tube assembly and rotatable relative to the head tube about an axis, said head tube assembly comprising:
a cup member (20) adapted to be mounted fixedly to the head tube;
an abutment member (41) adapted to be connected co-rotatably to the front fork (see figure 1); and
a damping unit (30) disposed between said cup member and said abutment member, connected to said abutment member, and including
an outer seat (32) that is fixedly connected to said cup member,
an inner seat (see figure below, which is figure 1 with markings) that is connected co-rotatably to said abutment member, and
a bushing (50) that is mounted on the axis between said outer seat and said inner seat—{{there is two sets of outer seats and inner seats as shown in figure one, wherein the bushing seat in between one set and the other set, which can be read as saying that the bushing is mounted on the axis between the outer seat and the inner seat}}--, said outer seat and said inner seat being in frictional contact with said bushing (see figure 2) and rotatable relative to said bushing about the axis (as the inner and outer seat are able to move as they are part of the bearing unit, see 32 and 50 in figure 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
495
217
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Plioska (US 2020/0232508). Chen does not mention grease in between the bushing and the inner and outer seats. However, Plioska discloses an assembly for a bearing with grease lubricant (see Par, 0052). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Chen by adding a lubricant such as grease for the rotating portions of the head tube assembly, wherein the frictional connections in between the member of the head tube assembly would benefit from having a lubricant in between them, in order to minimize wear and ensure longevity of each component within the head tube assembly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2-9 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.
Regarding claim 2, the art of record did not include a surrounding wall and a base wall that define an accommodating space for accommodating the inner seat.
Regarding claim 4, the art of record did not include the inner seat including a seat body that loops around the abutment member and having a frictional contact with the bushing and an annular rib, wherein the bushing includes first annular groove that engages the first annular rib.
Regarding claim 5, the art of record did not include a contact surface in contact with the bushing and formed with a second annular groove, wherein, a second annular rib on a surface of the bushing that engages the second annular groove.
Regarding claim 6, the art of record did not include the inner seat which includes a seat body and an engagement block that engages one engaging notch.
Regarding claim 7, the art of record did not include “an enclosing wall and a mounting wall extending transversely and inwardly from the enclosing wall, wherein the outer seat is disposed on the mounting wall.
Regarding claim 9, the art of record did not include an end cover covering the cup member and a sealing member sleeved on the end cover between the end cover and the cup member.
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