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 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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schlanger (US 2021/0078361 A1; newly cited).
Regarding claim 1, Schlanger, in the embodiment shown in Figs. 6d-6f, discloses a spoke comprising: a rod 2 made of a composite material containing thermoplastic resin and fibers (paragraph [0102]); and at least one tube 66, each one of the at least one tube having at least one engaging portion (portion of 66 that overlaps with second end 6 of spoke 2 as shown in Fig. 6e) each having an engaging recess 67a disposed at an outer surface of the tub (Figs. 6e and 6f), and each one of the at least one engaging portion radially embedded in the rod (internal threads 74 of engaging portion are embedded in the second end 6 of the spoke 2 as evident from paragraph [0103] and Fig. 6e).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schlanger.
Regarding claim 2, although Schlanger further discloses the engaging recess of each engaging portion of each one of the at least one tube has a width defined along an extending direction of the rod (evident from Figs. 6e and 6f, and paragraph [0103]), and a depth defined along a radial direction of the rod (evident from Figs. 6e and 6f, and paragraph [0103]), Schlanger fails to expressly disclose the width being 9 mm and the depth being greater than or equal to 0.3 mm and less than or equal to 0.9 mm.
Nonetheless, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, as a matter of routine optimization, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spoke of Schlanger so that the engaging recess has the claimed width and depth dimensions with a reasonable expectation of success in ensuring that the tube remains adequately connected to the rod during the intended use of the wheel upon which the spoke is assembled. It is further noted that Applicant has not provided any evidence of the criticality for these claimed dimensions.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schlanger in view of Passarotto et al. (US 2005/0173971 A1; hereinafter “Passarotto”).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Schlanger fails to expressly disclose the rod having a wind-resistant section disposed at a middle portion of the rod and formed by heating and shaping; and the wind-resistant section has two flat faces opposite to each other and a thickness defined between the two flat faces being smaller than a thickness of each end of the rod a thin cross-section.
Passarotto, however, teaches a spoke comprising a rod 1 having a wind-resistant section 12 disposed at a middle portion of the rod (Fig. 5; paragraphs [0047-0048]) and formed by heating and shaping (note the manner in which the wind-resistant section is formed is not afforded full patentable weight in a product claim as noted in MPEP 2113, nonetheless Passarotto teaches such in paragraphs [0051-0055]); and the wind-resistant section has two flat faces opposite to each other and a thickness defined between the two flat faces being smaller than a thickness of each end of the rod (Figs. 4 and 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spoke of Schlanger by forming the middle portion of the rod with a wind-resistant section having two flat faces opposite to each other and a thickness defined between the two flat faces being smaller than a thickness of each end of the rod a thin cross-section, such as taught by Passarotto, with a reasonable expectation of success in improving the aerodynamic properties of the spoke.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schlanger in view of Braun et al. (DE 102007019485 A1; newly cited; hereinafter “Braun”) and Chen (DE 102017103312 A1; newly cited).
Regarding claim 8, Schlanger discloses a manufacturing method for a fiber reinforced thermoplastic spoke comprising: a tube assembly step (Figs. 6d-6f): preparing a rod 2 made of a composite material containing thermoplastic resin and fibers (paragraph [0102]) and a tube 66 and mounting the tube on and around the rod (Figs. 6d-6f; paragraph [0101-0103]); a step: pressing the rod and the tube together to deform the rod and the tube together (Fig. 6e; paragraph [0103] discloses the use of crimping to perform this step) to form at least one engaging portion (portion of 66 that overlaps with second end 6 of spoke 2 as shown in Fig. 6e) each having an engaging recess 67a disposed at an outer surface of the tube (Figs. 6e and 6f) and; radially embedded in the rod for engaging the tube and the rod (internal threads 74 of engaging portion are embedded in the second end 6 of the spoke 2 as evident from paragraph [0103] and Fig. 6e).
Schlanger fails to expressly disclose the step for pressing the rod and the tube together to deform the rod and the tube together is a thermoforming step with heating. Instead, Schlanger discloses the use of crimping to perform this step (paragraph [0103]).
Braun, however, teaches the use of hot crimping, which is a thermoforming step that includes heating and pressing, for joining parts together (note the third paragraph on page 3 of the machine translation).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the manufacturing method of Schlanger by utilizing a thermoforming step with heating in the form of hot crimping instead of cold crimping, such as taught by Braun, as a well-known alternative type of crimping that would have a reasonable expectation of success in allowing the materials of the rod and tube to deform more easily so as to provide a tighter, more uniform crimp for joining the rod and tube together.
Schlanger further fails to expressly disclose a finishing step: processing the rod to remove rough edges, formed by heating and shaping, on the rod.
Chen, however, teaches a manufacturing method of a spoke in which a finishing step is employed to remove rough edges (fourth-to-last paragraph on page 2 of the machine translation).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the manufacturing method of Schlanger by utilizing a finishing step for processing the rod to remove any rough edges formed on the rod, such as taught by Chen, with a reasonable expectation of success in ensuring the rod of the spoke has a desired profile without any imperfections thereon to minimize potential stress concentrations and maintain surface integrity.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schlanger in view of Braun and Chen, as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Passarotto.
Regarding claim 9, Schlanger fails to expressly disclose the manufacturing method has a wind-resistant formation step with heating and shaping a middle portion of the rod to form a wind-resistant section having two flat faces opposite to each other and a thickness defined between the two flat faces being smaller than a thickness of each end of the rod.
Passarotto, however, teaches a manufacturing method of a spoke comprising a wind-resistant formation step with heating and shaping a middle portion 12 of the rod 1 to form a wind-resistant section having two flat faces opposite to each other and a thickness defined between the two flat faces being smaller than a thickness of each end of the rod (Figs. 4 and 5; paragraphs [0047-0048] and [0051-0055]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the manufacturing method of Schlanger, as modified by Braun and Chen, by including a wind-resistant section formation step by heating and shaping a middle portion of the rod to form a wind-resistant section having two flat faces opposite to each other and a thickness defined between the two flat faces being smaller than a thickness of each end of the rod, such as taught by Passarotto, with a reasonable expectation of success in improving the aerodynamic properties of the spoke.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 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.
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 KIP T KOTTER whose telephone number is (571)272-7953. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6 EST Monday-Friday.
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, Samuel (Joe) J Morano can be reached at (571)272-6684. 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.
/Kip T Kotter/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights