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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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) 13, 15-16, 18, 22, and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nicolai (DE 10 2019 006 708 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Nicolai teaches a drive device (4) comprising:
a motor unit having an electric motor (24, 25) configured to drive an electric bicycle (Fig 1);
a pedal crankshaft (14) rotatable about an axis of rotation;
a gearbox (35-40) coupled to the motor unit and to the pedal crankshaft, the gearbox configured to output a torque for driving the electric bicycle (Fig 1-4);
a motor housing (18, MGA, MGB) in which the motor unit and the gearbox are arranged and through which the pedal crankshaft extends; and
a speed sensor unit comprising a speed sensor (34) and a speed disc (29),
wherein the speed disc is coupled to the pedal crankshaft so as to be rotatable about the axis of rotation, and is arranged outside the motor housing (Fig 4).
Regarding claim 15, Nicolai teaches that the drive device according to claim 13, further comprising a cover (TLE) covering the speed disc and coupled to the motor housing so that the speed disc is arranged between the cover and the motor housing (Fig 4).
Regarding claim 16, Nicolai teaches that the gearbox is a planetary gear with a sun gear (40b) and at least one planet gear (42) and is arranged coaxially around the pedal crankshaft with respect to the axis of rotation thereof so that the planetary gear coaxially surrounds the pedal crankshaft (Fig 5).
Regarding claim 18, Nicolai teaches that the pedal crankshaft is a two part element comprising a first part element and a second part element, which are coupled to each other (third paragraph of page 6).
Regarding claim 22, Nicolai teaches that the drive device according to claim 13, further comprising a torque sensor (30) arranged outside the motor housing with respect to the axis of rotation (Fig 4).
Regarding claim 24, Nicolai teaches that the electric bicycle comprising:
a bicycle frame (1) with a lower frame portion extending to a bottom bracket bearing (21) comprising a pedal crank (5); and
the drive device according to claim 13 coupled to the bicycle frame such that the pedal crankshaft is coupled to the pedal crank (Fig 1-4).
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) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicolai (DE 10 2019 006 708 A1) in view of Schmidt et al. (DE 102 59 142 A1) hereinafter, Schmidt.
Nicolai teaches the device of claim 13. However, Nicolai does not teach that the speed disc has a spiral or helical contour.
Schmidt teaches that the speed disc (815) has a spiral or helical contour with respect to the axis of rotation (Fig 8), and wherein the speed sensor is arranged depending on the contour of the speed disc in such that a radial or axial speed detection is set up with respect to the axis of rotation (second paragraph of page 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Nicolai’s device, in view of Schmidt, with a spiral disc, to improve the accuracy of speed detection (second paragraph of page 16).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicolai (DE 10 2019 006 708 A1) in view of Zhu (CN 200988539 U).
Nicolai teaches the device of claim 13. However, Nicolai does not teach that the motor unit is a ring motor.
Zhu teaches that the motor unit is a ring motor (4) and is arranged coaxially around the pedal crankshaft with respect to the axis of rotation so that the ring motor coaxially surrounds the pedal crankshaft (Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Nicolai’s device, in view of Zhu, with a ring motor, to save on space and parts and consequently the cost.
Claim(s) 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicolai (DE 10 2019 006 708 A1) in view of Stockl (DE 10 2014 016 719 A1).
Nicolai teaches the device of claim 18. However, Nicolai does not teach that the first part element and the second part element are coupled to one another by a coupling structure.
Stockl teaches that the first part element and the second part element are coupled to one another by a coupling structure which couples the two part element to one another in a form-fitting, force-fitting (Thus, a force or torque transmission in one direction of rotation is possible - in the other direction, however, changes the freewheel bearing clutch 14 from a locked state to a released state, allowing relative rotation of the freewheel input body to the freewheel output body, first paragraph of page 6) and/or material-fitting manner, wherein the first part element and/or the second part element are formed in a sleeve shape (last paragraph of page 5) at least in a coupling region and at least one part element (29) of the two part element extends into the other (30), wherein the pedal crankshaft is narrower in a middle section than in an end section with respect to the axis of rotation (Fig 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Nicolai’s device, with Stockl’s coupling structure, to allow rotation in one direction, but decouples in the other direction, the narrower section will allow insertion of part 29 in part 30 (last paragraph of page 5 to first paragraph of page 6).
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicolai (DE 10 2019 006 708 A1) in view of Zhang (CN 108313190A).
Nicolai teaches that the drive device according to claim 22, further comprising a chainring system (9) coupled to the pedal crankshaft, the chainring system configured to drive the electric bicycle (Fig 1-2). However, Nicolai does not teach that the torque sensor is integrated in the chainring system.
Zhang teaches that the torque sensor (1) is integrated in the chainring system (Fig 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Nicolai’s device, in view of Zhang, with a torque sensor integrated in the chainring system, to improve reliability and precision and reduce the cost (last paragraph of page 1 to first paragraph of page 2).
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 electric bicycle drive devices 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