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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Response to Final Rejection filed June 21, 2026. Claims 1-5, 9-11, 13-20, and 22-26, are presently pending and presented for examination.
Response to Amendment
The examiner recognizes that all original rejections made under 35 U.S.C. § 103 previously stated for the original claims 1-5, 9-11, 13-17, and 22-26, are overcome by the amendments made by the applicant unless stated otherwise below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks, filed June 21, 2026, with respect to claims 1-5, 9-11, 13-17, and 22-26, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. § 103 Rejection of the Non-Final Rejection filed April 20, 2026, has been withdrawn.
Applicant's remaining arguments filed June 21, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the applied art of Schoolcraft, JR et al. (US 20210331550; hereinafter Schoolcraft, of record in IDS) does not teach or anticipate the limitations recited in amended claim 18. Specifically Applicant states that Schoolcraft does not disclose “...a configuration wherein the at least one control signal includes at least: a first limiting control signal to limit the function of the device to a first operating state; a second limiting control signal to set the device to a second operating state different from the first operating state; and a third limiting control signal to set the device to a third operating state different from the first operating state and the second operating state, the third operating state being a normal operating state in which the function of the device is not limited...” and that Schoolcraft does not describe “...an operating state include both a first period in which the function of the device is not limited and a second period in which the function of the device is limited...”
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding Applicant’s statement that Schoolcraft does not disclose “...a configuration wherein the at least one control signal includes at least: a first limiting control signal to limit the function of the device to a first operating state; a second limiting control signal to set the device to a second operating state different from the first operating state; and a third limiting control signal to set the device to a third operating state different from the first operating state and the second operating state, the third operating state being a normal operating state in which the function of the device is not limited...” Examiner states that Schoolcraft, as noted in the rejection and by applicant, teaches three separate damping states: High Damping, Intermediate Damping, Low Damping, which are referred to as the “locked state”, “pedal state” and “open state” respectively as described in at least paragraph [0044] of Schoolcraft. Schoolcraft goes on to describe how each of the states limit the function of the suspension by locking it to different degrees to change the amount of travel the suspension is allowed to have with the locked state being the most limited and the open state being the least limited therefore satisfying the requirements of the aforementioned amended limitations of the claims as currently drafted.
Regarding Applicant’s statement that Schoolcraft does not describe “...an operating state include both a first period in which the function of the device is not limited and a second period in which the function of the device is limited...” Examiner states that the Schoolcraft discloses a system for analyzing sensor data periodically at a set frequency in at least paragraph [0100]. This analysis leads to the system selecting values for different flags which determine what state the suspension should be in. Specifically, the system checks the large and medium vibration flags along with the pedal short flag in order to determine if the suspension should remain in an open state (i.e. a first period where the function is not limited) or if it should move to a more locked state (i.e. a second period where the function is limited) therefore satisfying the limitation of having the system go from the not limited state to the limited state. As described above, the analysis of sensor data and setting flags is done continuously and periodically and Schoolcraft therefore satisfies the requirements of the amended limitations as currently drafted.
An updated and detailed rejection follows below.
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.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schoolcraft, JR et al. (US 20210331550; hereinafter Schoolcraft, of record in IDS).
Regarding Claim 18,
Schoolcraft teaches
A control system of a human-powered vehicle, the control system comprising:
electronic controller circuitry configured to generate at least one control signal based on motion information relating to whether a motion state of a rider falls outside a predetermined range, the electronic controller circuitry being configured to limit, based on the at least one control signal, a function of a device which is functional with respect to the human-powered vehicle. (Schoolcraft: Paragraph [0128]-[0129]; The system increases the dampening of the suspension which limits the amount of travel of the suspension when traveling in rough conditions.) wherein
the at least one control signal includes at least:
a first limiting control signal to limit the function of the device to a first operating state; (Schoolcraft: Paragraph [0028], [0044]-[0045]; “The locked state may be considered a high damping state that provides relatively high (e.g., maximum) damping. In some examples, the locked state provides the highest amount of damping, which substantially limits movement of the front suspension component 136.”; The locked or high damping state is a state that limits the travel and therefore function of the suspension the most.)
a second limiting control signal to set the device to a second operating state different from the first operating state; (Schoolcraft: Paragraph [0028], [0044], [0046]; “The pedal state is an intermediate damping state between the open state (low damping state) and the locked state (high damping state). The pedal state enables more movement than the locked state, but less movement than the open state.”; The pedal or intermediate damping state is a state where the suspension has more travel than the high damping state, but it is still less than what is allowed by the open state. Therefore, the intermediate damping state has more function than the high damping state, however said function is still limited to some degree.) and
a third limiting control signal to set the device to a third operating state different from the first operating state and the second operating state, the third operating state being a normal operating state in which the function of the device is not limited, (Schoolcraft: Paragraph [0028], [0044]; “The damping states provide different levels of damping, which affect the operation of the front suspension component 136. For example, the open state may be considered a low damping state that provides relatively low (e.g., minimum) damping. Therefore, in the open state, the front suspension component 136 is easily compressible, which equates to a high level of shock and vibration absorption.”; In the open or low damping state, the suspension is allowed to compress further than in the previous two states and the function is not limited as it is with the high or intermediate damping states.) and
the second operating state includes a first period in which the function of the device is not limited and a second period in which the function of the device is limited the device being configured to repeat the first period and the second period at a first frequency when in the second operating state. (Schoolcraft: Paragraph [0100]; “For example, the process 600 may be executed at a frequency of 200 Hz. Therefore, every 5 ms, the processor 208 analyzes the sensor data, selects values for the flags 602 (or keeps the flags 602 at their current value), determines whether the front suspension component 136 is to stay in the suspension state or change to a different suspension state, and updates the thresholds for the next execution.”; [0163]-[0164]; “If the large vibration flag 602B is not set (i.e., the large vibration flag 602B is clear, indicating a large vibration is not being detected), the processor 208, at block 1412, checks whether the medium vibration flag 602A is set. If the medium vibration flag 602A is set (indicating at least a medium amount of vibration is being detected), the processor 208, at block 1414, checks whether the pedal short flag 602G is set. If the pedal short flag 602G is not set (i.e., the pedal short flag 602G is clear, indicating that pedaling has not occurred for a certain amount of time), the processor 208, at block 1406, sets the suspension state to the open state and resets the hold time for the open state process. ... If the pedal short flag 602G is set (determined at block 1414), the processor 208, at block 1416, sets the suspension state to the pedal state and resets the hold time for the pedal state process. The processor 208 sets the suspension state to the pedal state by activating the motion controller 206 to switch the damper 204 to the pedal state (the intermediate damping state). As such, if the rider is pedaling the bicycle 100, and the bicycle is experiencing medium vibration, the processor 208 switches the front suspension component 136 into the pedal state.”)
Regarding Claim 19,
Schoolcraft teaches
The control system according to claim 18, wherein
the motion information includes fluctuation in a running condition of the human-powered vehicle for a predetermined time. (Schoolcraft: Paragraph [0082], [0087], [0124]-[0126]; “At block 1002, the processor 208 detects whether the bicycle 100 has ridden over a bump. The processor 208 detects whether the bicycle 100 has ridden over a bump based on the output value of the filtered acceleration data of block 606 in FIG. 6.”)
Regarding Claim 20,
Schoolcraft teaches
The control system according to claim 19, wherein
the fluctuation in the running condition relates to at least one of a tire air pressure, a vehicle acceleration, a handlebar load, a saddle load, an assist power output, a rider's motion, a chain state, and a running speed of the human-powered vehicle. (Schoolcraft: Paragraph [0124]; “At block 1002, the processor 208 detects whether the bicycle 100 has ridden over a bump. The processor 208 detects whether the bicycle 100 has ridden over a bump based on the output value of the filtered acceleration data of block 606 in FIG. 6.” A bump cause uncomfortable rider motion for the rider.)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5, 9-11, 13-17, and 22-26, are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The amendments made to Independent Claim 1 place this application in condition for allowance.
The closest prior art of record includes previously applied prior art Schoolcraft, JR et al. (US 20210331550; hereinafter Schoolcraft, of record in IDS) in view of Sessions (US 20240107264, already of record), further in view of Hancock et al. (US 20220266946; hereinafter Hancock, already of record). Schoolcraft generally discloses a system for automatically adjusting the damping of a bicycle’s suspension to compensate for the current riding environment of the bicycle. Sessions generally discloses a communication interface connected to a control device for a bicycle where the communication device is configured to receive signals from another communication device. Hancock generally discloses a system for automatically and dynamically adjusting ride control of a bicycle based on various factors detected by sensors equipped on the bicycle.
While the aforementioned references disclose elements of the invention, the combination of references does not fully capture the structure and interplay of the elements as recited in the claims. Therefore, upon review of the evidence at hand, it is hereby concluded that the evidence obtained and made of record, alone or in combination, neither anticipates, reasonably teaches, nor renders obvious all the features of applicant’s invention as the features amount to more than a predictable use of elements in the prior art.
Claims 2-5, 9-11, 13-17, and 22-26, are allowable due to their dependencies on allowable claim 1.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAULO ROBERTO GONZALEZ LEITE whose telephone number is (571)272-5877. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:00 am - 4:30 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, Abby Flynn can be reached at 571-272-9855. 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.
/P.R.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ABBY J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
