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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/29/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues for claim 1 that Liao does not allow for the shock absorber to be directly replaced by simply removing a cap disposed on the head, and that instead Liao discloses that the damper part is positioned below the inwardly protruded portion, such that the damper part can be replaced only after the fixing part and the casing tube are removed. However, these limitations are not in the claim. They may be intended results of the invention but they are not required by the claim limitations. Liao does teach the claim limitations and applicant has not provided evidence otherwise.
Applicant also argues that Hsu teaches using the flange and stop member for defining a maximum displacement and preventing the inner tube from dropping out of the outer tube. Applicant states that this is different that the intended use of the instant application which uses it to stop the height due to excessive rebound of the shock absorber. However, this intended use is not functionally/structurally present in the claim. Hsu presents a reason for providing a flange and stopper and applicant has not addressed this, nor have they addressed the modification of Liao with the teachings of Hsu. Therefore, the arguments are not found persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-2 and 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liao (US 20210214031 A1) in view of Hsu (US 8302983 B1).
For claim 1, Liao discloses a height-adjustable seatpost with shock absorption, comprising:
an outer tube 20;
an inner tube 10 vertically movably disposed in the outer tube and having a head top of 10 located outside the outer tube and a bottom bottom of 10 opposite the head and situated inside the outer tube;
a height adjustment mechanism 41/42 located inside the inner tube and being configured to drive the inner tube to move relative to the outer tube;
Liao fails to disclose the inner tube further having a stop flange located on an inner wall of the inner tube; and the height adjustment mechanism having a stopper located above the stop flange and being abuttable against the stop flange. Liao does not disclose how the inner tube is retained within the outer tube and prevented from being able to slide out completely. It appears that there may be some sort of flange for this purpose, as shown in Fig. 2 between the markings for 41 and 42, but this is not described.
However, Hsu teaches an inner tube 20 which slides within an outer tube 10 and has a height adjustment mechanism 31 within the inner tube, in which the inner tube has a stop flange 41 located on an inner wall of the inner tube Fig. 1; and the height adjustment mechanism having a stopper stop member 42 located above the stop flange and being abuttable against the stop flange Fig. 2 shown abutting one another.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Liao by including a stopper flange on the inside of the inner tube and a stopper at the top of the height adjustment mechanism which abuts the stopper flange as disclosed by Hsu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to such that “the stop member 42 contacts the flange 41 when the inner tube 20 moves so as to restrict the inner tube 20 from dropping out from the outer tube 10” (Hsu, Col 4, lines 3-5), and to provide a “soft material” (Hsu, Col 4, line 2) to prevent sudden impacts between these components.
As modified, Liao discloses a shock absorber damper 53 having two ends respectively abutted against the head Fig. 3: portion 523 of tube 10 of the inner tube and the stopper 411, as modified to include a stopper shape to abut the flange.
For claim 2, Liao as modified discloses the height-adjustable seatpost as claimed in claim 1, wherein the height adjustment mechanism is a pneumatic cylinder including a valve seat 41 and a valve stem 42 vertically movably disposed in the valve seat and connected to the outer tube at 21.
For claim 8, Liao as modified discloses the height-adjustable seatpost as claimed in claim 2, wherein the stopper is integrally connected to the valve seat as modified.
For claim 9, Liao as modified discloses the height-adjustable seatpost as claimed in claim 1, wherein the head of the inner tube has an opening Fig. 6: opening at top of 10 which has threads on inner surface, and wherein the height adjustment mechanism is passed through the opening and connected to the outer tube intended use – may be installed in this way.
For claim 10, Liao as modified discloses the height-adjustable seatpost as claimed in claim 1, wherein the inner tube includes a cap Fig. 5-6: 52 and the head has a screw hole and an opening Fig. 6: opening at top of 10 which has threads on inner surface, wherein the screw hole is communicated with an exterior of the inner tube through the opening before other components are installed, wherein the height adjustment mechanism is passed through the opening and connected to the outer tube intended use – may be installed in this way, wherein the cap is provided with an external thread around an outer edge of the cap Fig. 5, and wherein the cap is engaged with the screw hole of the head of the inner tube Fig. 6.
For claim 11, Liao as modified discloses the height-adjustable seatpost as claimed in claim 10, wherein the cap has an end provided with a hexagonal hole Fig. 5: 52 contains shaft head 512 which has a hexagonal hole.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Liao as modified discloses a height-adjustable seatpost with shock absorption, but fails to disclose that the valve seat has a top provided with a screw hole, the stopper has a through hole, and the height adjustment mechanism includes a screw passing through the through hole and screwing into the screw hole. Alone or in combination with the prior art of record, it would not have been obvious to meet the overall claim without impermissible hindsight.
Claims 4-7 are dependent on claim 3 and therefore the same reasons apply.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COLIN N M ZOHOORI whose telephone number is (571)272-7996. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, JOSHUA J MICHENER can be reached at (571)272-1467. 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.
/COLIN ZOHOORI/Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights