DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 11 and 12 in the reply filed on 7/15/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that there would be no undue burden to consider all claims. This is found persuasive and the claims have been rejoined.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 12 recites the limitation “an assistance-required state” which should be changed to “the assistance-required state”.
Claim 2, line 6 recites the limitation “one end” which should be changed to “one of the ends”.
Claim 6, line 6 recites the limitation “an assistance-required state” which should be changed to “the assistance-required state”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 9 is 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.
Claim 9, lines 9 – 10 recites the limitation “all electrical components of the exercise device”. However, such limitation is unclear and indefinite as to what is encompassed by the recited “all electrical components”.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed 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 Ikemura (JP H08207876 A).
For claim 1, Ikemura discloses an exercise device 1 comprising:
a base unit (top tube, bottom tube, seat post of frame 7);
a training unit 5, 7a, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19 [arranged on the base unit] (fig. 1) and configured to perform a corresponding action under force exerted by a user] (pages 37 and 38, paragraph [0020]);
a detection unit 47 [arranged on the training unit] (page 17, paragraph [0009]) and [configured to detect an action performed by the training unit to generate a detection signal] (page 19, paragraph [0010]);
an analyzing and processing module 43 [coupled to the detection unit] (page 17, paragraph [0009]) and [configured to determine that the training unit is in a normally-used state or an assistance-required state according to the detection signal] (pages 30 and 31, paragraph [0016]), [wherein the analyzing and processing module generates an electrical auxiliary signal in an assistance-required state] (pages 30 and 31, paragraph [0016]); and
an electrical auxiliary unit 41, 45 [coupled to the analyzing and processing module] (page 17, paragraph [0009]) and [configured to assist in driving the training unit according to the electrical auxiliary signal] (pages 30 and 31, paragraph [0016]).
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.
Claims 2 – 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikemura (JP H08207876 A) in view of Torre (US 6,283,487 B1).
For claim 2, Ikemura discloses the exercise device wherein the base unit comprises:
a main body (top tube and bottom tube of frame 7);
a post (seat post of frame 7) [connected between two ends of the main body] (fig. 1);
a cushion 21 arranged on the post;
a vertical rod (head tube of frame 7); and
a handle 9 [arranged at another end of the vertical rod] (fig. 1); but does not explicitly disclose the vertical rod with one end thereof pivotally connected to one end of the main body.
Torre discloses a bicycle comprising an anchor tube 7; a top tube 5; a down tube 6; a head tube 2; two suspension tubes 4a, 4b; and a shock/spring unit 15 attached to the main body of the bicycle frame at the suspension anchor tube and to a front wheel through the head tube, and provides an upward force on the frame and a downward force on the front wheel] (col. 9, lines 3 – 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to alternatively use the attachment of a shock absorber between a head tube and anchor tube of Torre with the exercise device of Ikemura with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for improved overall front wheel performance and allow for quickly and fully adjusting spring rate, shock rate, ride height, and suspension travel, thus allowing for the bicycle to be optimized for different riders, terrains and riding situations.
For claim 3, Ikemura modified as above discloses the exercise device wherein the training unit comprises:
a transmission member 15, 17, 19 [arranged on the main body] (fig. 1);
a rear wheel set 5 [connected to the transmission member] (fig. 1, indirectly); and
a first force-bearing member (left portion of element 13) [with one end thereof connected to one side of the transmission member] (fig. 1, connected to chainwheel 15);
[wherein the first force-bearing member is configured to receive external force to drive the transmission member, thereby rotating the rear wheel set] (pages 37 and 38, paragraph [0020]).
For claim 4, Ikemura modified as above discloses the exercise device wherein the training unit further comprises a first pedal 11 [arranged at another end of the first force-bearing member and configured to receive external force and drive the first force-bearing member] (pages 37 and 38, paragraph [0020]).
For claim 5, Ikemura modified as above discloses the exercise device wherein the training unit further comprises:
a second force-bearing member (right portion of element 13) [with one end thereof connected to another end of the transmission member] (fig. 1, connected to chainwheel 15); and
a second pedal 11 [arranged another end of the second force-bearing member and configured to receive external force to drive the second force-bearing member, thereby driving the transmission member] (pages 37 and 38, paragraph [0020]).
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikemura (JP H08207876 A) in view of 木村 将行 (JP 5839375 B1).
For claim 11, Ikemura does not explicitly the exercise device according to claim 1, further comprising a fixing frame where the front wheel set and the rear wheel set are arranged and the front wheel set and the rear wheel set separate from the ground.
木村 将行 discloses a bicycle trainer 100 includes a pair of front wheel rollers 10, 12 that support a front wheel of a bicycle; a pair of rear wheel rollers 20, 22 that support a rear wheel of a bicycle; a front wheel frame 30 on which the front wheel rollers are mounted; a rear wheel frame on which the rear wheel rollers are mounted, and connecting frames 50, 52 that connect the front wheel frame and the rear wheel frame] (page 53, paragraph [0060]); and a pulley 60 which has a same diameter as the front wheel roller 10; a pulley 62 which has a same diameter as the front wheel roller 12; a pulley 64 which has a same diameter as the rear wheel roller 20, a belt wrapped around pulleys 60,, 62, 64] (fig. 7, pages 61 and 62, paragraph [0067]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally use the bicycle trainer of 木村 将行 with the exercise device of Ikemura with a reasonable expectation of success because it would allow for practicing independent running of a bicycle with the front wheel of the bicycle being supported so that a trailer is equivalent to that during actual running, the degree to which the steering wheel operation feeling differs from that during actual running can be reduced.
For claim 12, Ikemura modified as above discloses the exercise device wherein the fixing frame comprises:
a front roller set 10, 12 [where the front wheel set is arranged] (page 53, paragraph [0060] of 木村 将行);
a rear roller set 20, 22 [where the rear wheel set is arranged] (page 53, paragraph [0060] of 木村 将行);
a pair of pulleys 60, 62, 64, [wherein one of the pair of pulleys 60, 62 is arranged on the front roller set and another 64 of the pair of pulleys is arranged on the rear roller set] (fig. 7, pages 61 and 62, paragraph [0067] of 木村 将行); and
[a belt arranged on the pair of pulleys] (fig. 7, page 61 and 62, paragraph [0067] of 木村 将行)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 – 8 and 10 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.
Claim 9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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: the prior art fails to disclose:
For claims 6 – 9: the front wheel set is drive by the electric auxiliary unit in an assistance-required state, the rear wheel set rotates with the front wheel set, and the transmission member rotates the first pedal and the second pedal;
For claim 10: a movable fixing element configured to fix or unfix a disk to the first force-bearing member; wherein when the movable fixing element is unfixed to the first force-bearing member, the disk is rotated to adjust positions of a plurality of objects, when the movable fixing element is fixed to the first force-bearing member, the detector detects a rotational position of the disk.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-20110172059 – comprising an exercise cycle comprising a bicycle frame; a front wheel; an electric motor; a support member; a seat; and a controller; and
US-5599034 – comprising a bicycle comprising a top tube; a down tube; a steering column; a head tube; a stem; a control arm; a strut cylinder; and a fork.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jacob D. Knutson whose telephone number is (571)270-5576. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:00 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.
/JACOB D KNUTSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights