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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of made of record does not teach or fairly suggest the combination of claimed elements “wherein the user interface is configured to receive an additional user input different from the user input, and the second electronic controller is configured to control the second wireless communicator to restrict connecting to the first wireless communicator based on the additional user input received by the user interface in the disconnection state” as recited in claim 10.
Claims 11-15 are depending on claim 10. Therefore, claims 11-15 are allowed for the same reason as claim 10.
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.
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komada et al. (US 20210070390 A1) in view of Auvenshine et al. (US 9773401 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Komada teaches a first electric device (Fig. 2, device 22) of a human-powered vehicle (Fig. 1), the first electric device comprising:
a first wireless communicator configured to wirelessly communicate with a second wireless communicator of a second electric device (Fig. 3, WC4 (first wireless communicator), WC1 (second wireless communicator) and Pars. 69, 101, 106);
an electric actuator (Fig. 3, actuator RD3) configured to generate an actuation force (Par. 113, move (generate an actuation force));
a first electronic controller (Fig. 3, controller 22) configured to control the electric actuator to generate the actuation force based on a user input received by the second electric device in a connection state where the first wireless communicator is paired with the second wireless communicator and where the first wireless communicator is wirelessly connected to the second wireless communicator (WC1 (second wireless communicator) generates and transmit the first control signal CS11 in response to the first user input U11 (Par. 69), the controller 22 is configured to generate a first control command CC11 based on the received first control signal CS11, and control the actuator RD3 to move (Pars. 110 and 114-115).
Komada lacks on the teaching of the first electronic controller being configured to control the first wireless communicator to reconnect to the second wireless communicator based on the user input received by the second electric device in a disconnection state where the first wireless communicator is paired with the second wireless communicator and where the first wireless communicator is wirelessly disconnected from the second wireless communicator.
However, it is well-known in wireless communication art that the wireless devices/communicators reconnect or reestablish, after a disconnection, either automatically or via user input (in this case) as evidence by Auvenshine (Fig. 3, Col. 6 Lines 1-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught by Auvenshine into Komada in order to manually control the connection.
Regarding claim 6, modified Komada teaches previous claim. The modified Komada further teaches the first electric device according to claim 1, wherein the first wireless communicator is configured to be wirelessly disconnected from the second wireless communicator based on a disconnection operation performed for at least one of the first electric device and the second electric device (See rejection of claim 1).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komada et al. (US 20210070390 A1) in view of Auvenshine et al. (US 9773401 B1) in further view of Bruton et al. (US 20250072523 A1).
Regarding claim 2, modified Komada teaches previous claim.
The modified Komada does not specifically teaches the first electric device according to claim 1, wherein the first electronic controller is configured to control the first wireless communicator to wirelessly transmit a first signal based on the user input received by the second electric device in the disconnection state.
However, it is very well-known in the wireless communication art that the link connection/reconnection comprising a request/advertise message (second signal) and a response (first signal) between the two devices as evidence by Bruton (Figs. 1-2, user interface 30 Pars. 71-72).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught by Bruton into Helvick in order to manually control the connection to conserve battery power.
Regarding claim 3, modified Komada teaches previous claim. The modified Komada further teaches the first electric device according to claim 2, wherein the second wireless communicator is configured to wirelessly transmit a second signal based on the user input, the first electronic controller is configured to control the first wireless communicator to wirelessly transmit the first signal based on the second signal in the disconnection state, and the first electronic controller is configured to control the first wireless communicator to reconnect to the second wireless communicator based on the second signal (See rejection of claim 2).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komada et al. (US 20210070390 A1) in view of Auvenshine et al. (US 9773401 B1) in further view of Sobue et al. (US 20220198856 A1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Komada teaches previous claim.
The modified Komada does not specifically teaches the first electric device according to claim 1, wherein the first electronic controller includes a first memory configured to store second pairing information of the second electric device received during pairing.
However, that is a very well-known feature in the wireless communication art as evidence by Sobue (Fig. 1 and Par. 17).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught by Sobue into the modified Komada in order to identify the target device.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Komada et al. (US 20210070390 A1) in view of Auvenshine et al. (US 9773401 B1) in further view of Helvick et al. (US 20200298011 A1).
Regarding claim 5, modified Komada teaches previous claim.
The modified Komada does not teach claim 5.
Helvick teaches the first electric device according to claim 1, wherein the first wireless communicator is configured to wirelessly communicate with the second wireless communicator of the second electric device using a communication protocol in the connection state (Fig. 1A), and the second wireless communicator is configured to wirelessly communicate with a third wireless communicator of a third electric device using the communication protocol in an additional connection state where the second wireless communicator is paired with the third wireless communicator and where the second wireless communicator is wirelessly connected to the third wireless communicator (Fig. 1B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught by Helvick into the modified Komada in order to communicate in short range.
Claims 7-9, 16, 22 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helvick et al. (US 20200298011 A1) in view of Bruton et al. (US 20250072523 A1) and Komada et al. (US 20210070390 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Helvick teaches a second electric device of a human-powered vehicle, the second electric device comprising:
a second wireless communicator configured to wirelessly communicate with a first wireless communicator of a first electric device using a communication protocol (Fig. 1, CP (first device), IPG (second device)),
the second wireless communicator being configured to wirelessly communicate with a third wireless communicator of a third electric device using the communication protocol (Fig. 1, PR (third device), IPG (second device) and Par. 32);
(Fig. 2B and Pars. 46-47 and 50-51, IPG begins advertising by wirelessly sending out an advertising message);
a second electronic controller configured to control the second wireless communicator to reconnect to the first wireless communicator based on the user input in a disconnection state where the second wireless communicator is paired with the first wireless communicator and where the second wireless communicator is wirelessly disconnected from the first wireless communicator (Fig 2B, a connection of the IPG and the CP would be a reconnection when the process of Fig. 2B is repeated) and Par. 38, PR would try to reestablish the wireless communication BLE with the associated implantable pulse generator IPG); and
the second electronic controller being configured to control the second wireless communicator to restrict connecting to the third wireless communicator based on the user input in an additional disconnection state where the second wireless communicator is paired with the third wireless communicator and where the second wireless communicator is wirelessly disconnected from the third wireless communicator (Fig 2B, Pars. 46-47 and 50-51, enters a blocking mode (restrict connection)).
Helvick lacks on the teaching of the advertising message sent out by IPG as taught above is based on the user input on a user interface.
Bruton teaches such well-known feature (Figs. 1-2, user interface 30 Pars. 71-72).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught by Bruton into Helvick in order to manually control the connection to conserve battery power.
However, the modified Helvick does not the second wireless device is the device of a human-powered vehicle.
Komada teaches the second wireless device 16 and also the first wireless device 22 of a human-powered vehicle (Figs. 1-2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught by Komada into the modified Helvick in order to operate a bicycle.
Regarding claim 8, modified Helvick teaches previous claim. The modified Helvick further teaches the second electric device according to claim 7, wherein the second electronic controller is configured to control the second wireless communicator to wirelessly transmit a second signal to the first electric device based on the user input received by the user interface in the disconnection state (Bruton, Pars. 71-72).
Regarding claim 9, modified Helvick teaches previous claim. The modified Helvick further teaches the second electric device according to claim 7, wherein the second electronic controller is configured to control the second wireless communicator to reconnect to the first wireless communicator based on a first signal wirelessly transmitted from the first wireless communicator of the first electric device in the disconnection state (Bruton, Pars. 71-72).
Regarding claim 16, modified Helvick teaches previous claim. The modified Helvick further teaches the second electric device according to claim 7, wherein the second wireless communicator is configured to be in at least one of the disconnection state and the additional disconnection state (Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 22, modified Helvick teaches previous claim. The modified Helvick further teaches the second electric device according to claim 7, wherein the second electronic controller is configured to execute pairing between the first wireless communicator and the second wireless communicator without the third electric device (Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 24, the modified Helvick teaches a control system of a human-powered vehicle, the control system comprising: a first electric device; and the second electric device according to claim 7; and the first electric device comprising; a first wireless communicator configured to wirelessly communicate with the second wireless communicator of the second electric device (See rejection of claim 7); and
However, the modified does not teach the first electric device further comprising: an electric actuator configured to generate an actuation force.
Komada teaches such feature (Pars. 110 and 114-115, control the actuator RD3 to move).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught by Komada into the modified Helvick in order to change/shift gear of the bicycle.
Regarding claim 25, the modified Helvick teaches previous claim. The modified Helvick further teaches the control system according to claim 24, wherein the first electric device is configured to be mounted to a vehicle body of the human-powered vehicle, and the second electric device is configured to be mounted to the vehicle body of the human-powered vehicle (Komada, Figs. 1-2, items 16 and 22).
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helvick et al. (US 20200298011 A1) in view of Bruton et al. (US 20250072523 A1) and Komada et al. (US 20210070390 A1) and in further view of Gobara et al. (US 20160205423 A1).
Regarding claim 17, modified Helvick teaches previous claim. The modified Helvick further teaches the second electric device according to claim 7, wherein the second electronic controller includes a second memory configured to store first pairing information of the first electric device received during pairing,
However, the modified Helvick does not specifically teach the second memory further configured to store a state where the second wireless communicator is paired with the first wireless communicator includes a state where the second memory stores the first pairing information.
Gobara teaches such well-known feature (Fig. 3 and Par. 44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught by Gobara into Helvick in order to manually control the connection to conserve battery power.
Regarding claim 18, modified Helvick teaches previous claim. The modified Helvick further teaches the second electric device according to claim 17, wherein the second electronic controller is configured to control the second wireless communicator to reconnect the first wireless communicator of the first electric device based on the user input in the disconnection state where the second memory stores the first pairing information and where the second wireless communicator is wirelessly disconnected from the first wireless communicator (Gobara, Fig. 3, item 707).
Regarding claim 19, modified Helvick teaches previous claim. The modified Helvick further teaches the second electric device according to claim 17, wherein the second electronic controller is configured to control the second wireless communicator to restrict connecting to the third wireless communicator based on the user input in the disconnection state where the second memory stores the first pairing information(Fig. 2B), where the second wireless communicator is wirelessly disconnected from the third wireless communicator, and where a third electric device stores the second pairing information (Fig. 1B and Par. 34).
Regarding claim 20, modified Helvick teaches previous claim. The modified Helvick further teaches the second electric device according to claim 17, wherein the second memory is configured to store the first pairing information of the first electric device received during pairing executed between the first electric device and the second electric device, and the second memory is configured to store third pairing information of the third electric device received during pairing executed between the second electric device and the third electric device (Fig. 1B and Par. 34).
Claims 21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helvick et al. (US 20200298011 A1) in view of Bruton et al. (US 20250072523 A1) and Komada et al. (US 20210070390 A1) and in further view of Lin et al. (US 20190241236 A1).
Regarding claim 21, modified Helvick teaches previous claim.
However, the modified Helvick further does not teach the second electric device according to claim 7, wherein the second electronic controller is configured to control the second wireless communicator to execute pairing between the first wireless communicator and the second wireless communicator via the third electric device.
Lin teaches such feature (Fig. 1 and Pars. 19-21).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught by Lin into the modified Helvick in order to anti-theft.
Regarding claim 23, modified Helvick teaches previous claim.
However, the modified Helvick further does not teach the second electric device according to claim 7, wherein the third electric device includes at least one of a smartphone and a cycle computer.
Lin teaches such feature (Fig. 1 and Par. 18).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the above teaching as taught by Lin into the modified Helvick in order to prevent connection to anti-theft when the smartphone is away from the bicycle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Watarai et al. (US 20160257269 A1) teaches controller 56 of the cycle computer updates information stored in the storage unit of the cycle computer, based on the received individual information update request from the external device E via the first wireless communication unit 36 or the second wireless communication unit 40 (Par. 198), wherein electrical system 30 comprising the drive unit (Par. 203), the drive unit comprises a first actuator for assisting a human power drive force that is inputted to the bicycle 10 and the drive unit operates the first actuator based on a signal from the first wireless communication unit 36 (Par. 201), and when a signal to turn the first actuator ON or to increase or decrease the drive force of the first actuator is inputted from the operating unit 44, the controller 56 stops the drive or changes the torque of the first actuator, based on the signal (Par. 201).
Kincaid et al. US 20210144634 A1 For example, in some embodiments, the edge device 102 may subsequently reconnect in response to a manual and/or user input (e.g., pushing a button on the edge device 102, a BLE connection, etc.).
Nozaki et al. US 20220081068 A1
Uhr et al. (US 20180330348 A1) user request connection and user request disconnection
Kindo US 12432797 B2 (85) When the BLE connection with an unintended smartphone is disconnected in the process of S82, the application transmits an instruction of restarting the transmission of the terminated advertising packet to the BLE communication circuit 202. The BLE communication circuit 202 restarts the transmission of the advertising packet based on the instruction received from the application (S83). The BLE communication circuit 202 transmits a signal indicating that the transmission of the advertising packet has been restarted to the application. When the application receives the signal indicating that the transmission of the advertising packet has been restarted from the BLE communication circuit 202, the application executes the process of S80 again.
Warmer et al. US 20250214674 A1
[0020] Furthermore, it is proposed that the connection of the control device to the electric bicycle is via pairing. In particular, the control device and the electric bicycle each comprise a Bluetooth communication interface. The pairing may be automatic and/or semi-automatic, wherein the semi-automatic pairing requires at least one user input.
Mitty et al. (US 20230309163 A1) (3 devices)
Komatsu et al. US 20180257737 A1
Jordan et al. US 10392078 B2
Inoue et al. (US 10667316 B1).
Popkave et al. US 20220210262 A1
Singh et al. US 20240015007 A1 [0034] FIG. 2 illustrates example operations establishing a connection using an audio signal, in accordance with certain aspects of the present disclosure. As shown, at block 202, a source device and a sink device may perform a pairing procedure. After the pairing procedure, the devices may disconnect. In some aspects of the present disclosure, an audio signal may be used for reconnection of the connection. For example, the sink device may enable a microphone of the sink device. Once the sink device (e.g., wireless earbuds or smart glass device) microphone is on, the source device may receive user input at block 206. For example, the user may click a icon on the source device (e.g., smartphone) which may output (e.g., play) an audio signal (e.g., any audio signal such as a unique encrypted tone).
Berggren et al. US 20230092687 A1 [0034] The communication system may include a wireless link between the UE and the BS. Downlink (DL) signals may be transmitted by the BS on the wireless link and received by the UE. Uplink (UL) signals may be transmitted by the UE and received by the BS. Hereinafter, techniques will be described that facilitate operation of a UE in a disconnected mode. The disconnected mode may restrict connectivity, e.g., in terms of when the UE can receive data and/or in terms of what signals the UE can receive.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CINDY HUYEN TRANDAI whose telephone number is (571)270-1914. 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, Wesley L. Kim can be reached at 571-272-7867. 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.
/Cindy Trandai/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648
1/8/2026