DETAILED ACTION
Examiner acknowledges receipt of amendment to application 18/539,854 filed on February 27, 2026. 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
Claims 1-3, 5-11 and 13-22 are still pending, with claim 1 being currently amended, and claims 14-22 being newly added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3, 5-11 and 13-22 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 1-3, 5, 15-20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim Korean Patent KR100866988B1 in view of Hashimoto et al. US PGPUB 2013/0030603, and further in view of Schroeter European Publication EP2283739A1. (It is noted that the Schroeter citations are taken from the machine translation, until a translation is obtained.)
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a bicycle component adapted to be mounted on a bicycle [figs. 1-4; a main frame 20 supports solar panels 22-1 and 22-2 on the rear fender of the bike] comprising:
a platform comprising a mounting arrangement adapted to be mounted to the bicycle [figs. 1-4; a main frame 20 supports solar panels 22-1 and 22-2 on the rear fender of the bike; pars. 28-35], the platform forming a fender [fig. 4; the platform is on top of and/or forms the fender of the bike; pars. 28-35];
a solar cell array arranged on the platform [figs. 1-4; solar panels 22-1 and 22-2; pars. 28-35];
a reinforcement structure for the platform [fig. 7, frame 32; par. 28] and
a battery charging unit with a battery arranged on the platform and operatively connected to the solar cell array [fig. 7, power electronics 28 for charging battery 29 are both mounted on the frame 20 and connected to the solar cells; par. 28], the reinforcement structure configured to support the battery charging unit [par. 28; fig. 7, the frame 32 supports the platform on which is arranged the power electronics 28].
Kim does not explicitly disclose the battery is removeable.
However, Hashimoto discloses a bicycle with a battery wherein the battery is removeable [fig. 1; abs.; par. 28].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim to further include the battery is removeable for the purpose of allowing a failed battery to be replaced, and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) which was ready for improvement in order to yield results predictable by one of ordinary skill the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Kim does not explicitly disclose the fender blocks spray from a tire of the bicycle.
However, Schroeter discloses a solar powered bicycle, wherein the fender blocks spray from a tire of the bicycle [fig. 3; mudguards 19 (fenders which block spray) have solar cells attached for charging the battery 12 of the bicycle; pars. 19 & 28].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kim and Hashimoto to further include wherein a surface of the platform is curved for the purpose of increasing the charging capacity of the battery by adding additional solar cells in other places such as the fender, as taught by Schroeter (pars. 19 & 28).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses wherein the battery charging unit is located within 60 mm of the mounting arrangement [figs. 1 & 7; the solar cells are mounted on the same frame 20 as the power electronics 28, they are thus adjacent and clearly within 60mm; par. 28].
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses wherein the mounting arrangement comprises at least one opening [fig. 7, openings in the frame 20; furthermore, the support frame 30 supporting frame 20 is “fastened” to the rear wheel shaft, i.e. screwed in through the holes illustrated in figure 1; par. 28].
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses wherein the fender comprises an upper surface, wherein the solar cell array is arranged on the upper surface [fig. 4; the platform forms the fender of the bike, the solar cells are on top; pars. 28-35].
Regarding claim 15, Kim does not explicitly disclose wherein a surface of the platform is curved.
However, Schroeter as applied in claim 1 discloses wherein a surface of the platform is curved [fig. 3; mudguards 19 (fenders) have solar cells attached for charging the battery 12 of the bicycle; pars. 19 & 28].
Regarding claim 16, Kim discloses wherein the platform is supported by at least one tube of a fork [figs. 2 & 4, rear fork].
Kim does not explicitly disclose wherein the platform is supported by the front fork.
However, Schroeter discloses a solar powered bicycle, wherein the platform is supported by the front fork [fig. 3; mudguards 19 (fenders), which are supported by the fork so as to remain above the wheel, have solar cells attached for charging the battery 12 of the bicycle; pars. 19 & 28].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kim and Hashimoto to further include wherein the platform is supported by the front fork for the purpose of increasing the charging capacity of the battery by adding additional solar cells in other places such as the fender, as taught by Schroeter (pars. 19 & 28).
Regarding claim 17, Kim does not explicitly disclose wherein the platform is attached to a front steering assembly.
However, Schroeter discloses a solar powered bicycle, wherein the platform is attached to a front steering assembly [fig. 3; mudguards 19 (fenders), which are supported by the fork so as to remain above the wheel, the fork is attached to the front steering assembly, have solar cells attached for charging the battery 12 of the bicycle; pars. 19 & 28].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kim and Hashimoto to further include wherein the platform is attached to a front steering assembly wherein the platform is supported by the front fork for the purpose of increasing the charging capacity of the battery by adding additional solar cells in other places such as the fender, as taught by Schroeter (pars. 19 & 28).
Regarding claim 18, Schroeter as applied in claim 17, discloses wherein the platform is positioned inside legs of the front steering assembly [fig. 3; pars. 19 & 28; the platform is the fender, which is inside legs of the front steering assembly on a bicycle (see also figs. 2-3 of Kim for an example of bicycle construction)].
Regarding claim 19, Schroeter as applied in claim 17, discloses wherein the platform is connected to a bridge of the front steering assembly [fig. 3; pars. 19 & 28; the platform is the fender, which is connected to the tube, which is connected to a bridge of the front steering assembly on a bicycle (see also figs. 2-3 of Kim for an example of bicycle construction)].
Regarding claim 20, Kim discloses wherein the platform comprises a mounting arrangement for accepting one or more fasteners [fig. 1; fasteners 33 & 36 hold together parts of the frame and are part of the platform].
Regarding claim 22, Kim discloses wherein the platform is fixed relative to a fork assembly carrying a wheel of the bicycle [figs. 2 & 4; when mounted, the platform is fixed related to a fork assembly (rear)].
Kim does not explicitly disclose wherein the platform is fixed relative to a front fork assembly carrying a front wheel of the bicycle.
However, Schroeter discloses a solar powered bicycle, wherein the platform is fixed relative to a front fork assembly carrying a front wheel of the bicycle [fig. 3; mudguards 19 (fenders), are fixed relative to the fork and are supported by the fork so as to remain above the wheel, the fork is attached to the front steering assembly, have solar cells attached for charging the battery 12 of the bicycle; pars. 19 & 28].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim to further include wherein the platform is fixed relative to a front fork assembly carrying a front wheel of the bicycle for the purpose of increasing the charging capacity of the battery by adding additional solar cells in other places such as the fender, as taught by Schroeter (pars. 19 & 28).
Claims 6-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim Korean Patent KR100866988B1 in view of Hashimoto et al. US PGPUB 2013/0030603, further in view of Schroeter European Publication EP2283739A1 and further in view of Arditi et al. US PGPUB 2020/0295569.
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses wherein the platform comprises a centerline longitudinal axis and wherein the solar cell array comprises at least a first branch and a second branch, wherein the first and second branches are arranged on opposite sides of the longitudinal axis [see annotated fig. 2 below], wherein the first and second branches are connected in parallel [fig. 9, group of branches 22-1 and group of branches 22-2 are connected in parallel to power controller 28].
Though it is generally understood that a solar “panel” comprises a plurality of cells connected in series, Kim does not explicitly disclose each of the first and second branches comprising respective first and second pluralities of solar cells connected in series.
PNG
media_image1.png
578
471
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Arditi discloses a solar panel system [fig. 4b] wherein each of the first and second branches comprise respective first and second pluralities of solar cells connected in series [fig. 4b, first branch 205a comprising a plurality of modules connected in series and second branch 205b comprising a plurality of modules connected in series; the strings are set in parallel; pars. 181-182].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim to further include each of the first and second branches comprising respective first and second pluralities of solar cells connected in series for the purpose of increasing the voltage, as taught by Arditi (par. 182).
Regarding claim 7, Kim discloses wherein the solar cell array comprises a first plurality of first branches arranged on a first side of the longitudinal axis, and a second plurality of second branches arranged on an opposite second side of the longitudinal axis [see annotated fig. 2 above].
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses wherein the first and second branches have first and second lengths measured along the longitudinal axis [fig. 2].
Kim does not explicitly disclose wherein the first and second lengths are less than 160 mm.
However, Admitted Prior Art discloses using a panel with a length less than 160 mm. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim to further include wherein the first and second lengths are less than 160 mm for the purpose of providing a compact panel that won’t be a hindrance for the bicycle rider, and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) which was ready for improvement in order to yield results predictable by one of ordinary skill the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
NB: Examiner took Official Notice with respect to the above limitation of claim 9 in the Non-Final Rejection mailed July 2, 2024. Applicant did not traverse or did not adequately traverse. Thus, the limitation is being treated as taught by admitted prior art. See MPEP 2144.03.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim Korean Patent KR100866988B1 in view of Hashimoto et al. US PGPUB 2013/0030603, further in view of Schroeter European Publication EP2283739A1, further in view of Arditi et al. US PGPUB 2020/0295569, and further in view of Young US PGPUB 2005/0016785.
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses the branches are connected in parallel [fig. 9, group of branches 22-1 and group of branches 22-2 are connected in parallel to power controller 28].
Arditi as applied in claim 6 discloses the branches comprises a plurality of solar cells electrically connected in series [fig. 4b, first branch 205a comprising a plurality of modules connected in series and second branch 205b comprising a plurality of modules connected in series; the strings are set in parallel; pars. 181-182].
The combination of Kim, Hashimoto and Arditi does not explicitly disclose wherein the solar cell array comprises a third branch arranged on the platform between the first and second branches, wherein the third branch runs along the longitudinal axis.
However, Young discloses a bicycle with a solar power system wherein the solar cell array comprises a third branch arranged on the platform between the first and second branches, wherein the third branch runs along the longitudinal axis [fig. 15; pars. 24 & 65; a tri-fold solar panel with three branches, the third branch running on along the fender platform axis between the other two branches].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kim, Hashimoto and Arditi to further include wherein the solar cell array comprises a third branch arranged on the platform between the first and second branches, wherein the third branch runs along the longitudinal axis for the purpose of using a tri-fold solar panel that can provide 210 square inches of usable space when folder out, and otherwise fold to a third of its width, as taught by Young (par. 65).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim Korean Patent KR100866988B1 in view of Hashimoto et al. US PGPUB 2013/0030603, further in view of Schroeter European Publication EP2283739A1 and further in view of Griffith et al. US PGPUB 2020/0398923.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kim and Hashimoto does not explicitly disclose wherein the battery charging unit comprises a capacitor operatively connected to the solar cell array, a boost converter operatively connected to the capacitor, and a microcontroller unit operatively connected to the boost converter.
However, Griffith discloses a bicycle with a solar power system [abs.] wherein the battery charging unit comprises a capacitor operatively connected to the solar cell array, a boost converter operatively connected to the capacitor, and a microcontroller unit operatively connected to the boost converter [figs. 11-12; pars. 67 & 71-76; capacitor 1210 connected to panel 130, boost converter 1110, computer 1130 controls the boost converter such that it can be time multiplexed between the two solar panels, thus is operatively connected to the boost converter; furthermore, the computer is powered by the battery, which is connected to the capacitor, thus the computer is operatively connected to the capacitor].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kim and Hashimoto to further include wherein the battery charging unit comprises a capacitor operatively connected to the solar cell array, a boost converter operatively connected to the capacitor, and a microcontroller unit operatively connected to the boost converter for the purpose of conditioning solar power to be used in charging a battery, as taught by Griffith (par. 67).
Regarding claim 11, Kim does not explicitly wherein the boost converter transmits power at an output between 6.0 and 8.4 volts.
However, Hashimoto further discloses a bicycle power management system [abs.] wherein a boost converter transmits power at an output between 6.0 and 8.4 volts [par. 36; voltage step-up circuit raises a power to a voltage of 6V-9V].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim to further include wherein the boost converter transmits power at an output between 6.0 and 8.4 volts for the purpose of providing sufficient voltage to a bicycle electric system, as taught by Hashimoto (par. 36).
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim Korean Patent KR100866988B1 in view of Hashimoto et al. US PGPUB 2013/0030603, further in view of Schroeter European Publication EP2283739A1 and further in view of Hagimoto et al. US PGPUB 2021/0001945.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Kim and Hashimoto does not explicitly disclose wherein the platform is formed of a flexible plastic material.
However, Schroeter as applied in claim 1 discloses the platform is formed of a flexible material [fig. 3; mudguards 19 (fenders which block spray) have solar cells; mudguards are flexible pars. 19 & 28].
The combination of Kim, Hashimoto and Schroeter does not explicitly disclose the platform is plastic.
However, Hagimoto discloses a motorbike with a platform (fender), wherein the platform is plastic [par. 24].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kim, Hashimoto and Schroeter to further include wherein the platform is plastic for the purpose of allowing to transmit emitted radio waves, as taught by Hagimoto (par. 24).
Regarding claim 14, Kim does not explicitly disclose wherein the platform is elastically deformed into a curved shape.
However, Schroeter as applied in claim 1, discloses wherein the platform is elastically deformed into a curved shape [fig. 3; mudguards 19 (fenders which block spray) have solar cells; mudguards are elastically deformed; pars. 19 & 28].
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim Korean Patent KR100866988B1 in view of Hashimoto et al. US PGPUB 2013/0030603, further in view of Schroeter European Publication EP2283739A1 and further in view of Masserang et al. US PGPUB 2012/0205175.
Regarding claim 21, Kim does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more fasteners comprise a plurality of bolts.
However, Masserang discloses a bike add-on kit wherein the one or more fasteners comprise a plurality of bolts [par. 58].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Kim, Hashimoto and Schroeter to further include wherein the one or more fasteners comprise a plurality of bolts for the purpose of using any desirable fastener, as taught by Masserang (par 58), and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) which was ready for improvement in order to yield results predictable by one of ordinary skill the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
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 DAVID V HENZE whose telephone number is (571)272-3317. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 9am to 7pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
/DAVID V HENZE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights