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
Claims 9 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9, line 13, recites “said accessory arm can be” which should be changed to --said accessory arm or guard arm can be-- to maintain consistent claim terminology.
Claim 20, line 16, recites “said accessory arm can be” which should be changed to --said accessory arm or guard arm can be-- to maintain consistent claim terminology.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 3 and 20 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.
Claim 3, line 3, recites “a shim” which is indefinite because it is unclear if the shim from claim 3 is one of the at least two shims or spacers from claim 1. How does the shim from claim 3 relate to the shims or spacers from claim 1?
Claim 20 is indefinite because it is unclear if the at least one kit is to be viewed as being assembled onto the bicycle or motorcycle because line 4 of claim 20 recites "said at least one kit comprising:" then the body of the claim positively refers to one handgrip, the bicycle, and a clamp mounted on one handgrip of the bicycle. Is claim 20 directed to a bicycle or motorcycle with the structure of the kit assembled onto it? If so, would a kit even be present because the structures are no longer separated from each other and the bicycle/motorcycle? As best understood, once the parts in a kit are assembled or attached to a structure there is no longer a kit. Should claim 20 be amended in the same manner as the amendment to claim 18 as filed on March 2, 2026?
Claim 20, line 5, recites "at least one accessory" which is indefinite because it is unclear how the at least one accessory from claim 20, line 3, is related to or different from the accessory from line 5 of claim 20.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 2, 4-9 and 12-19 are allowed over the prior art of record.
Claim 3 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.
Claim 20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see the Remarks, filed March 2, 2026, with respect to the majority of the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection and all of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The prior art rejections have been withdrawn. Previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) still remain in claim 20. A new rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been presented in light of Applicant’s amendment to claim 3 as filed on March 2, 2026.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM D ROGERS whose telephone number is (571)272-6561. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 6AM-2:00PM 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, John Olszewski can be reached at (571)272-2706. 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.
/ADAM D ROGERS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Prosecution Insights