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.
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.
Claims 27 and 28 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.
In claims 27 and 28 line 1 “the cap insert” lacks antecedent basis.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-26 and 29-30 are allowed.
Claims 27 and 28 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 1, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest a suspension fork assembly including a fork comprising a steer tube and a spring assembly tube with a cap insert and an insert assembly for a spring assembly and a damper assembly tube with a cap insert and an insert assembly for a damper assembly; a leg for the spring assembly configured to be fit within the spring assembly tube of the fork; and a leg for the damper assembly configured to be fit within the damper assembly tube of the fork.
Regarding claim 25, the prior art fails to disclose or suggest a suspension fork assembly including a fork comprising a steer tube, a spring assembly tube with an insert assembly and a leg for a spring assembly, a damper assembly tube with an insert assembly and a leg for a damper assembly wherein the fork comprises a composite material, wherein the leg for the spring assembly is fit within the spring assembly tube, wherein the leg for the damper assembly is fit within the damper assembly tube.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kevin Hurley whose telephone number is (571)272-6646. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9 am-5:30 pm Kevin.Hurley@USPTO.GOV.
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.
/KEVIN HURLEY/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3611
January 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights