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
The claims are objected to because they include reference characters which are not enclosed within parentheses. See claim 1, line 4.
Reference characters corresponding to elements recited in the detailed description of the drawings and used in conjunction with the recitation of the same element or group of elements in the claims should be enclosed within parentheses so as to avoid confusion with other numbers or characters which may appear in the claims.
See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claims 3 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3: The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein after the step S3, the method further includes a step S4 milling; a top surface of each of the two lateral shoulders corresponding to the suspension tube sections are milled to get s and the assembly holes are communicating with the suspension tube sections for mounting dampers.
Claim 4: The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein after the step S3, the method further includes a step S5 reaming; performing reaming on an open end of the suspension tube sections for increasing a tube diameter and convenient mounting of dampers.
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 1-8 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 1: In lines, 3-4, the claim recites “selecting an aluminum ingot as a base material”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear. Is this a new base material or the base material already presented? Are these two different steps or the same step?
Claim 1: In lines, 5-6, the claim recites “initially forming a crown prototype”. This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear. Is this a new prototype or the prototype already presented? Are these two different steps or the same step?
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) 1 and 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dodman et al. (US 2010/0230926).
Claim 1: Dodman et al. provides a method of manufacturing an integrally forged bike suspension fork comprising the steps of: S1: providing a base material (238, Fig. 31); selecting an aluminum ingot as a base material ([0059-0062]); and forging/deep drawing the aluminum ingot to form an integrally forged bike suspension fork (Fig. 37).
Dodman et al. teaches in [0058] that the method recited in [0058-0062] can be used to form the unitary steerer tube crown (135) of Fig. 3-4 that includes two lateral shoulders, a solid protuberant base located between the two lateral shoulders and extending upward, and a concave portion on a bottom surface between the two lateral shoulders; (Fig. 3).
Performing the method steps disclosed by Dodman et al. to obtain the steerer tube crown (135) would result in a method of: initially forging a prototype; initially forming a crown prototype by forging of the base material; the crown prototype includes two lateral shoulders (198,200, Fig. 3), a solid protuberant base located between the two lateral shoulders and extending upward (Fig. 3), and a concave portion on a bottom surface between the two lateral shoulders (Fig. 3); and S3: performing deep drawing: the two lateral shoulders and the solid protuberant base are processed by deep drawing at the same time; bottom surfaces of the two lateral shoulders are drawn down vertically and extended to form suspension tube sections; at the same time, a top end of the solid protuberant base is drawn upward vertically and extended to form a front fork section; thereby the integrally forged bike suspension fork is obtained ([0058-0062]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the method steps of selecting, forging, and deep drawing to obtain the unitary steerer crown (135) illustrated in Figures 3 and 4 in order to provide a method of manufacturing an integrally forged bike suspension fork with the required steps of claim 1 to form the required shape of the integrally forged bike suspension fork of claim 1.
Claim 3: Dodman provides after the step S3, the method further includes a step S4 milling; a top surface of each of the two lateral shoulders corresponding to the suspension tube section is milled to get an assembly hole and the assembly hole is communicating with the suspension tube section for mounting dampers (Fig. 3, shows two holes 202, and 204 which could be formed after the forging process shown in Figs. 31- 37; [0062] states forming other features such as bores after the crown and legs).
Claim 4: Dodman provides after the step S3, the method further includes a step S5 reaming; performing reaming on an open end of the suspension tube section for increasing a tube diameter and convenient mounting of dampers ([0059-0062]; other secondary operations are performed including machining or joining drop outs 194 (Fig. 38)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 5-8 are only rejected under 112 as being dependent upon claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Amanda J Kreiling whose telephone number is (571)272-6091. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Sunil Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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.
/Amanda Kreiling/Examiner, Art Unit 3726 2/19/26
/JASON L VAUGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726