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 § 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 2-6 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.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “a piston” is unclear. It is unclear since “a piston” has been defined in claim 1 from which claim 2 depends. It is unclear if it is the same piston or a different piston. Referring to the piston of claim 2 as “a rebound damper piston” or “ a second piston” would provide clarity.
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.
Claims 1-2, 7, 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Galasso et al. (US-9156325).
Regarding claim 1, Galasso et al. discloses a front fork for a bicycle (fig 1), the front fork comprising: a leg including an upper tube (113) and a lower tube (105) configured in a telescopic arrangement (fig 1); an air spring in the leg (at least fig 4), the air spring including a pneumatic chamber (112) and a piston (115) in the pneumatic chamber, the piston dividing the pneumatic chamber into a positive air chamber (112 above 115) and a negative air chamber (112 below 115); and a rebound damper including a rebound damper chamber (420), the rebound damper chamber in fluid communication with the positive air chamber (112) via a first flow path (430/438) and a second flow path (408 and/or 416), the first flow path defined by an orifice (fig 4, at or near 430/438/436), wherein, during a compression event, the first flow path (430/438) and the second flow path (408) are configured to allow air to flow from the positive air chamber (112) to the rebound damper chamber (420) (col. 5, line 40-67), wherein pressurized gas in the main chamber 112 acts upon a first piston surface 407 of a valve piston 405 via apertures 408 formed in the body 403 of the valve 400. Acting opposite the first piston surface 407 is another, larger piston surface 402 adjacent a secondary gas chamber 420 (this embodiment does not include a valve gas chamber) and at a predetermined pressure in a compression stroke of the gas spring piston 115, the valve piston 405 moves against the pressure of the secondary chamber 420 (and against any resistance brought about by an enlargement of an isolated area 415) and fluid communication is initiated between the two chambers 112, 420) and wherein, during a rebound event, the second flow path (408) is configured to be closed such that air in the rebound damper chamber flows along the first flow path (430) through the orifice (438) into the positive air chamber at a metered rate (col. 5, line 40-67 wherein when the valve returns to a “closed” position (shown in FIG. 4) a check valve 430 disposed between the two chambers and preset to open above a certain pressure (as determined by compression of spring 432) in the secondary chamber 420, permits communication between the chambers, thereby ensuring that the secondary chamber 420 is not left with an unsuitably high pressure that might prevent the valve from operating correctly in subsequent cycles. In operation, the check valve opens during a rebound stroke of the piston 115 as pressure in the main gas chamber is reduced.).
Regarding claim 2, Galasso et al. discloses wherein the rebound damper includes: a cylinder (403) defining the rebound damper chamber; and a piston (405) coupled to the cylinder (fig 4), the piston having a first side (402) facing the rebound damper chamber (420) and a second side (407), opposite the first side, facing the positive air chamber (112).
Regarding claim 7, Galasso et al. discloses a cap coupled to a top end of the upper tube (fig 4, unnumbered cap above 420), the rebound damper including a cylinder (403) defining the rebound damper chamber (420), the cylinder coupled to and extending from the cap (fig 4see threaded /andor sealed coupling between 4030 and the cap).
Regarding claim 14, Galasso et al. discloses wherein the pneumatic chamber (112) is formed by an interior of the upper tube (113, fig 1), the piston (115) slidable within the upper tube (fig 1).
Regarding claim 15, Galasso et al. discloses wherein the leg is a first leg (105), the upper tube is a first upper tube (112), and the lower tube (105) is a first lower tube (fig 1), the front fork including: a second leg (101) including a second upper tube and a second lower tube configured in a telescopic arrangement (fig 1 upper and lower portions of 101); and a damper in the second leg (wherein 101 is a damper leg and 105 is a gas spring leg (col. 2, line 47).
Regarding claim 16, Galasso et al. discloses front fork for a bicycle (fig 1), the front fork comprising: a leg (105) including an upper tube (113) and a lower tube (105) configured in a telescopic arrangement (fig 1); a piston (115) in an interior of the upper tube (fig 1 and 4), the piston dividing the interior of the upper tube into a positive air chamber and a negative air chamber (at least above and below 115); a cylinder (403 in the upper tube, the cylinder defining a rebound damper chamber (420); and a flow control member having an orifice (430/438), the orifice defining a portion of a flow path between the rebound damper chamber (420) and the positive air chamber (112 above 115), the orifice to restrict air flow from the rebound damper chamber to the positive air chamber during a high speed rebound event (col. 5, line 40-67, wherein when the valve returns to a “closed” position (shown in FIG. 4) a check valve 430 disposed between the two chambers and preset to open above a certain pressure (as determined by compression of spring 432) in the secondary chamber 420, permits communication between the chambers, thereby ensuring that the secondary chamber 420 is not left with an unsuitably high pressure that might prevent the valve from operating correctly in subsequent cycles. In operation, the check valve opens during a rebound stroke of the piston 115 as pressure in the main gas chamber is reduced).
Regarding claim 17, Galasso et al. discloses further including a cap (unnumbered cap coupled to 403) coupled to a top end of the upper tube, wherein the cylinder is coupled to the cap (fig 4 unnumbered cap coupled to 403).
Regarding claim 18, Galasso et al. discloses wherein the cylinder (403) is spaced from an inner surface of the upper tube (113) such that a gap is formed between the cylinder and the upper tube (fig 4 wherein at least two solid lines indicate a gap between the outside of 403 and the inner surface of 113).
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.
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.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galasso et al. (US-9156325) in view of Berg et al. (US-10137751).
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Galasso et al discloses as set forth above but lack a volume spacer. Berg et al. teaches wherein a compressed air apace of an air spring having adsorptive material, such as activated carbon, positioned inside the gas volume in order to use the absorptive material to improve suspension characteristics. Berg et al teaches several embodiments wherein the activated carbon can be an annular element (fig 4), a volume filling element (fig 3) or a separate insert (9) in a gas chamber (figs 1-8) (col. 2, lines 27-44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the air spring of Galasso et al with the absorptive material of Berg et al. and include a volume spacer constructed of activated carbon in the gas chamber at least in order to provide an improvement of the suspension and damping behavior of the air spring system achieved by adsorptive material being introduced into the compressed air spaces of the air springs and/or of the compressed air storage device. The air volume in the compressed air spaces can be increased several times by means of the adsorptive material. The uptake of the absorbed gas molecules increases as the pressure increases. The knowledge derived from this fact is that an improved, particularly softer, suspension or damping can be achieved by introducing adsorptive material into the compressed air spaces. However, it is also possible to reduce a reduction of the external dimensions of the air springs or of the compressed air storage device volume without altering its suspension or damping properties by inserting adsorptive material into the compressed air spaces. A better spring rate is thus achieved in the case of air springs, and a smaller constructional volume in the case of compressed air storage devices (Berg et al. col. 2, lines 27-44).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES K HSIAO whose telephone number is (571)272-6259. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5, 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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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.
/J.K.H/Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/Robert A. Siconolfi/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Prosecution Insights