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 § 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) 1-7 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yeh et al. (US 2022/0187149 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yeh et al. discloses a shaft member (10) for a human-powered vehicle (bicycle; ¶ [0003]), the shaft member (10) being configured to be attachable to a frame (crank arms are part of a bicycle frame) of the human-powered vehicle (bicycle) in a manner restricting rotation relative to the frame (connection portions 14 and 15 allow attachment to for example, left and right crank arms of a bicycle, and connection portions 14 and 15 restrict rotation of shaft 10 relative to the crank arms; ¶ [0020]), the shaft member (10) comprising: a setting surface (12, 13) on which strain gauges (20, 30) are arrangeable (strain gauges 20 are arranged on side portions 12 and 13; ¶ [0021]), the setting surface (12, 13) including a plurality of setting portions (120, 130) configured to allow for arrangement of one or more of the strain gauges (recesses 120 allow for arrangement of one of more strain gauges 20; fig. 1), and the setting portions (120) are provided in the setting surface (12) at different positions in a circumferential direction of the shaft member (recesses 120 are provided on side portion 12 at different positions in a circumferential direction of spindle 10; fig. 1).
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Yeh et al. discloses wherein each of the setting portions (120) includes a flat part (recesses 120 includes a flat part; figs. 1 and 5); wherein each of the setting portions (120) includes a recess (¶ [0019]).
Regarding claim 4, wherein at least one of the setting portions (portion of spindle 10 including recess 120 and 130; fig. 1) is configured to allow at least two of the strain gauges (20, 30) to be arranged in an axial direction of the shaft member (10).
Regarding claim 5, Yeh et al. discloses wherein two of the setting portions (120) are provided at positions that differ in phase by 90 degrees in the circumferential direction of the shaft member (recesses 120 are provided in positions that differ by 90 degrees in the circumferential direction of spindle 10; fig. 1).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Yeh et al. discloses wherein two of the setting portions (120) are provided at positions that differ in phase by 180 degrees in the circumferential direction of the shaft member (top and bottom recesses 120 are provided at positions that differ in phase by 180 degrees in the circumferential direction of spindle 10; fig. 1); wherein the two of the setting portions (120) are substantially equal in shape (recesses 120 have the same shape).
Regarding claim 18, Yeh et al. discloses further comprising the strain gauges (20) arranged on the setting surface (strain gauges 20 are arranged on side portion 12; ¶ [0021]).
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lin et al. (US 11,135,474 B2).
Regarding claim 22, Lin et al. discloses a detection device for a human-powered vehicle (crank apparatus for bicycle; c. 1, ll. 17-20), the detection device comprising: at least one strain gauge (130; fig. 1B) configured to be provided on a shaft member (110) of the human-powered vehicle (strain gauges 130 are provided on crank arm 110 of a bicycle; c. 4, ll. 27-29), the strain gauge (130) configured to detect a strain in an axial direction of the shaft member (strain gauges 130 are disposed on layer 120 of crank arm 110 to measure strain along any three orthogonal axial directions to determine tensile strain, compressive strain, and torsion strain; c. 7, ll. 21-28); and a calculator (some calculating means is required to perform calculating of the force applied to the crank arm based on the strain measurements; c. 9, ll. 40-44) that calculates load (force) acting in a lateral direction on the human-powered vehicle (bicycle) in accordance with an output of the at least one strain gauge (the force applied to crank arm 110 is calculated in accordance with an output of strain gauges 130; c. 8, ll. 58-61).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeh et al. (US 2022/0187149 A1) in view of Grassi (US 9,097,598 B2).
Regarding claim 8, Yeh et al. discloses the invention as set forth above with regard to claim 1, and further discloses the setting portions (120) include four setting portions (four recesses 120; fig. 1); the four setting portions (120) of the setting surface (12) are provided parallel to a center axis of the shaft member (10) at equal intervals in the circumferential direction of the shaft member (recesses 120 are provided parallel to a center axis of spindle 10 at equal intervals in the circumferential direction of spindle 10).
Yeh et al. is silent on the sensor circuit connections.
Grassi teaches a shaft member (26) with strain gauges (52, 54) that are bridge-connected to each other (fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yeh et al. with the bridge connection of Grassi to measure shear strain from torsional forces while negating bending forces (c. 2, ll. 20-25). In modifying the apparatus of Yeh et al. with that of Grassi, one of ordinary skill would know that the strain gauges arranged on opposite sides of the shaft member would be bridge-connected to each other to negate the influence of bending forces.
Claim(s) 14, 15, and 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeh et al. (US 2022/0187149 A1) in view of Janecek et al. (US 2012/0234108 A1).
Regarding claims 14, 15, and 19, Yeh et al. discloses the invention as set forth above with regard to claim 1.
Yeh et al. is silent on the shaft member including a wheel axle or hub axle.
Janecek et al. discloses a shaft member (200) including a strain gauge (240), wherein the shaft member (200) includes a wheel axle of a human-powered vehicle (torque sensing system 200 includes rear wheel axle 244; ¶ [0040]); wherein the shaft member (200) includes a hub axle (244) of the human-powered vehicle (bicycle); a hub for a human-powered vehicle (bicycle), the hub comprising: the shaft member (axle 244 may be connected to a hub; fig. 2D and ¶ [0063]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yeh et al. to be used on the wheel axle or hub axle as taught in Janecek et al. to allow sensing of torque and other forces at the wheels.
Regarding claims 20 and 21, Yeh et al. discloses an axle (10) for a human-powered vehicle (bicycle), the axle (10) comprising: a first end (14) in an axial direction of the axle (10), the first end including a male thread (140) configured to be engaged with a female thread provided in a frame (crank arms are part of a bicycle frame) of the human-powered vehicle in a manner restricting rotation relative to the frame (male thread 140 must be engaged with a corresponding female thread to allow connection to crank arms and restrict rotation of shaft 10 relative to the crank arms; ¶ [0020]); and a setting surface (12) including at least one setting portion (120) configured to allow for arrangement of at least one strain gauge (strain gauges 20 are arranged in recesses 120; ¶ [0021]; further comprising: a second end (15) opposite the first end (14) in the axial direction of the axle (10); and at least one of the first end (14) and the second end (15) includes a tool engagement portion engageable with a tool to fasten the male thread to the female thread (some portion of connection portions 14 and 15 may be engaged with a tool during fastening).
Yeh et al. is silent on the shaft member including a wheel axle.
Janecek et al. discloses a shaft member (200) including a strain gauge (240), wherein the shaft member (200) includes a wheel axle of a human-powered vehicle (torque sensing system 200 includes rear wheel axle 244; ¶ [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yeh et al. to be used on the wheel axle as taught in Janecek et al. to allow sensing of torque and other forces at the wheels.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeh et al. (US 2022/0187149 A1) in view of Lin et al. (US 11,135,474 B2).
Regarding claim 23, Yeh et al. discloses the invention as set forth above with regard to claim 1.
Yeh et al. is silent on the strain gauges detecting strain in an axial direction.
Lin et al. teaches a shaft member (110) for a human-powered vehicle (crank apparatus for bicycle; c. 1, ll. 17-20), a setting surface (120) on which strain gauges (130) are arrangeable (figs. 1A and 1B); the strain gauges are configured to detect a strain in an axial direction of the shaft member (strain gauges 130 are disposed on layer 120 of crank arm 110 to measure strain along any three orthogonal axial directions to determine tensile strain, compressive strain, and torsion strain; c. 7, ll. 21-28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Yeh et al. with the strain gauge arrangement of Lin et al. to provide more accurate force detection in a bicycle component by allowing measurement of tensile strain, compressive strain, and torsion strain (Lin et al., c. 7, ll. 21-28).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-12, 16, and 17 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.
The prior art does not disclose or suggest “a first end and a second end in an axial direction of the shaft member, wherein the setting surface includes at least one wire groove in which electric wires connected to the strain gauges are arrangeable, and the at least one wire groove is located between at least one of the setting portions and at least one of the first end and the second end” in combination with the remaining claim elements as recited in claims 9-12.
The prior art does not disclose or suggest “wherein: the human-powered vehicle includes a hub; the hub includes a hub shell; and at least some of the setting portions are arranged in a cavity defined in the hub shell” in combination with the remaining claim elements as recited in claims 16 and 17.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with regard to independent claim 1, filed 23 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant presents that in the Interview conducted 16 December 2025, “it was generally agreed that Yeh’s shaft 10 is not attachable to the frame of the human-powered vehicle in a manner restricting rotation relative to the frame.” Response, page 7. However, similar to the discussion of the previously claimed “body,” the presently amended language of “the frame” is not defined in the claim. Under a broadest reasonable interpretation, the term “frame” is interpreted as the entire bicycle, including its components. Shaft 10 of the bicycle of Yeh et al. is “attachable to” at least crank arms, which are a component of the frame, “in a manner restricting rotation relative” to the crank arms (¶ [0020]), and thus, meets the language recited in claim 1.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claim(s) 22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Erika J. Villaluna whose telephone number is (571)272-8348. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00 am - 5:30 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at (571) 272-3555. 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.
/ERIKA J. VILLALUNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights