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 7 is 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 7 recites the limitation "said torsional geometry portion, said transverse geometry portion" in Line 2 and 3. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-13, and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lude et al. (US 2010/0164200 A1) hereinafter, Lude.
Regarding claim 1, Lude teaches a suspension, comprising:
a first upper tube (19) telescopically engaged with a first lower tube (3);
a second upper tube (18) telescopically engaged with a second lower tube (2); and
a fork arch (6, 7 and 206, 207) connecting the first lower tube with the second lower tube (Fig 5-6), wherein the fork arch comprises at least one portion having an aspect ratio that is greater than one (D1:W1, Fig 2-3 Annotated).
Regarding claim 2, Lude teaches that the aspect ratio is a depth- to- width ratio (D1:W1, Fig 2-3 Annotated).
Regarding claim 3, Lude teaches that the at least one portion is selected from a group consisting of a torsional geometry portion (To) and a transverse geometry portion (Tr, Fig 11 Annotated).
Regarding claim 5, Lude teaches that at least a portion of the torsional geometry portion extends in a longitudinal direction of a bicycle (Fig 11 Annotated).
Regarding claim 6, Lude teaches that the fork arch has a depth and a width that are variable along the length of the fork arch (Fig 2-3 Annotated).
Regarding claim 7, Lude teaches that the suspension of Claim 1, further comprising at least one material removal region (2091, 2092) that is located in a location selected from a group consisting of said torsional geometry portion, said transverse geometry portion, and a combination of said torsional geometry portion and said transverse geometry portion (Fig 11 Annotated).
Regarding claim 8, Lude teaches that said at least one material removal region is selected from at least one member of the group consisting of: an opening (2091, 2092), a thinning without an opening, a depression without an opening, a protrusion without an opening, and a groove without an opening (Fig 11 Annotated).
Regarding claim 9, Lude teaches that at least one portion of a torsional geometry portion has a depth (D) that is greater than a depth (d) of at least one portion of a transverse geometry portion (Fig 2 Annotated).
Regarding claim 10, Lude teaches that a first leg portion (6R has a recess 16) of the torsional geometry is asymmetrical with a second leg portion (6L has no recess) of the torsional geometry (Fig 3 Annotated).
Regarding claim 11, Lude teaches a suspension component, comprising:
a first lower tube (3);
a second lower tube (2); and
a fork arch (6, 7 and 206, 207) connecting the first lower tube with the second lower tube (Fig 2-3 and 11), wherein the fork arch comprises a torsional geometry portion (To) and a transverse geometry portion (Tr), wherein at least a portion of the torsional geometry portion has a depth- to- width ratio that is greater than one (D1:W1, Fig 2-3 and 11 Annotated).
Regarding claim 12, Lude teaches that the suspension component of Claim 11, further comprising at least one material removal region (2091, 2092) that is located in a location selected from a group consisting of said torsional geometry portion (Fig 11 Annotated), said transverse geometry portion, and a combination of said torsional geometry portion and said transverse geometry portion.
Regarding claim 13, Lude teaches that said at least one material removal region is selected from at least one member of the group consisting of: an opening (2091, 2092), a thinning without an opening, a depression without an opening, a protrusion without an opening, and a groove without an opening.
Regarding claim 15, Lude teaches a suspension (Fig 6), comprising:
a first fork leg comprising a first upper tube (19) telescopically engaged with a first lower tube (3),
a second fork leg comprising a second upper tube (18) telescopically engaged with a second lower tube (2), and
a fork arch (6, 7 and 206, 207) connecting the first fork leg with the second fork leg (Fig 11 Annotated), wherein the fork arch comprises a torsional geometry portion (To) and a transverse geometry portion (Tr), wherein at least one portion (d) of the transverse geometry portion extends in a first direction, and at least one portion (D) of the torsional geometry portion extends in the first direction, wherein said at least one portion of the torsional geometry portion extends a greater distance than said at least one portion of the transverse geometry portion (Fig 2 Annotated).
Regarding claim 16, Lude teaches that the first direction is a longitudinal direction of a bicycle (Fig 1-2 and 5-6).
Regarding claim 17, Lude teaches that a majority of the torsional geometry portion extends a greater distance in the longitudinal direction of a bicycle than a majority of the transverse geometry portion (Fig 2 Annotated).
Regarding claim 18, Lude teaches that the at least one of the torsional geometry portion and transverse geometry portion comprises at least one material removal region selected from the group consisting of: an opening (2091, 2092), a thinning without an opening, a depression without an opening, a protrusion without an opening, and a groove without an opening (Fig 11 Annotated).
Regarding claim 19, Lude teaches that the fork arch has a depth and a width that are variable along the length of the fork arch (Fig 2-3 Annotated).
PNG
media_image1.png
293
256
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
848
556
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
841
559
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 1-6, 9-11, 15-16 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Achenbach (US 2010/0102530 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Achenbach teaches a suspension (Fig 1-6), comprising:
a first upper tube (30) telescopically engaged with a first lower tube (4);
a second upper tube (27) telescopically engaged with a second lower tube (3); and
a fork arch (1) connecting the first lower tube with the second lower tube, wherein the fork arch comprises at least one portion having an aspect ratio that is greater than one (D1:W1, Fig 15 Annotated).
Regarding claim 2, Achenbach teaches that the aspect ratio is a depth- to- width ratio (D1:W1, Fig 15 Annotated).
Regarding claim 3, Achenbach teaches that the at least one portion is selected from a group consisting of a torsional geometry portion (9) and a transverse geometry portion (14 or 17).
Regarding claim 4, Achenbach teaches that the aspect ratio of the other of said torsional geometry portion or said transverse geometry portion is less than one D2:W2, Fig 15 Annotated).
Regarding claim 5, Achenbach teaches that at least a portion (D1) of the torsional geometry portion extends in a longitudinal direction of a bicycle (Fig 15 Annotated).
Regarding claim 6, Achenbach teaches that the fork arch has a depth and a width that are variable along the length of the fork arch (Fig 15 Annotated).
Regarding claim 9, Achenbach teaches that at least one portion of a torsional geometry portion has a depth (D1) that is greater than a depth (D2) of at least one portion of a transverse geometry portion (Fig 15 Annotated).
Regarding claim 10, Achenbach teaches that a first leg portion of the torsional geometry is asymmetrical with a second leg portion of the torsional geometry (Fig 13 Annotated).
Regarding claim 11, Achenbach teaches a suspension component, comprising:
a first lower tube (4);
a second lower tube (3); and
a fork arch (1) connecting the first lower tube with the second lower tube (Fig 6), wherein the fork arch comprises a torsional geometry portion (14) and a transverse geometry portion (9), wherein at least a portion of the torsional geometry portion has a depth- to- width ratio that is greater than one (d:w, Fig 6 Annotated).
Regarding claim 14, Achenbach teaches that a majority of the torsional geometry portion has a depth-to-width ratio that is greater than 1 (d:w, Fig 6 Annotated).
Regarding claim 15, Achenbach teaches a suspension, comprising:
a first fork leg comprising a first upper tube (30) telescopically engaged with a first lower tube (4),
a second fork leg comprising a second upper tube (27) telescopically engaged with a second lower tube (3), and
a fork arch (1) connecting the first fork leg with the second fork leg (Fig 1 and 15), wherein the fork arch comprises a torsional geometry portion (8) and a transverse geometry portion (14), wherein at least one portion of the transverse geometry portion extends in a first direction, and at least one portion of the torsional geometry portion extends in the first direction, wherein said at least one portion of
the torsional geometry portion (D1) extends a greater distance than said at least one portion (D2) of the transverse geometry portion (Fig 15 Annotated).
Regarding claim 16, Achenbach teaches that the first direction is a longitudinal direction of a bicycle (Fig 1 and 15).
Regarding claim 19, Achenbach teaches that the fork arch has a depth and a width that are variable along the length of the fork arch (Fig 15 Annotated).
Regarding claim 20, Achenbach teaches that the transverse geometry portion comprising:
a first leg portion coupled with an upper portion (through 9) of said first lower tube, said first leg portion comprising:
at least one portion (L12) extending distally from a vertical central plane; and
at least one portion (L11) extending proximally to said vertical central plane; and a second leg portion coupled with an upper portion of said second lower tube, said second leg portion comprising:
at least one portion (L22) extending distally from said vertical central plane; and at least one portion (L21) extending proximally to said vertical central plane; and the torsional geometry portion comprising:
a first torsional geometry leg portion (T11 and T12) coupled with an upper portion of said first lower tube (Fig 15 Annotated), said torsional geometry leg portion coupled partially (lower portion below 32 is not coupled) with said first leg portion and extending proximally (T11) to said vertical central plane; and
a second torsional geometry leg portion (T21 and T22) coupled with an upper portion of said second lower tube, said second torsional geometry coupled partially (lower portion below 32 is not coupled) with said second leg portion and extending proximally (T21) to said vertical central plane (Fig 15 Annotated).
PNG
media_image4.png
272
396
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
362
227
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
527
259
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references noted on the attached PTO-892 form teach fork arches of interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOSAM SHABARA whose telephone number is (571)272-5495. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm.
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.
/H.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /VALENTIN NEACSU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611