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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-11 are pending in the application.
In Applicant’s most recent response filed 25 May 2026, claim 1 was amended. These amendments have been entered.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 25 May 2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Interpretation – Functional Language
From the outset, it should be noted that some of the language in the claims is functional in nature. For example, in claims 1-7 the language related to an “accessory”, a “bicycle seatpost”, and a “strap” is functional in nature and limited patentable weight is given to this section of the claim. Additionally, Examiner notes that while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does and thus, a prior art device must only be capable of performing the stated function in order to read on the functional limitation. In this instance, the prior art discloses every structural limitation of the claim and thus this limitation fails to distinguish the claimed apparatus from that of the prior art. Please see MPEP 2114.
[Examiner notes that this section of the Office Action does not constitute a rejection or objection, but is merely meant to indicate the manner in which the claims have been interpreted by the Examiner.]
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (US Patent Application Publication 2008/0298886).
PNG
media_image1.png
662
959
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re Claim 1: Chen discloses a collar attachment (1) for supporting an accessory (see note above related to this functional element) on a bicycle seatpost (5, 6), the collar attachment (1) having a first internal bore (22) for receiving the seatpost, and a second internal bore (32), of larger diameter than the first internal bore, situated below the first internal bore with respect to the orientation of the seatpost in normal use, the collar attachment being provided with a front strap-retaining (see note above related to this functional element) lip (see annotated Figs. 2 and 4 above) situated at the a lower region (including lower tube portion 3 in combination with connection portion 4) of the collar attachment (1) and with a rear supporting lip (see annotated Figs 2 and 4 above) situated at the lower region of the collar attachment opposite the front strap-retaining lip, wherein the rear supporting lip is axially offset (note the difference in height of the dashed lines in annotated Fig. 4 above) from the front strap-retaining lip with respect to a longitudinal axis of the first internal bore (22) or the second internal bore (32) such that the rear supporting lip is disposed at a lower level than the front strap-retaining lip.
Re Claim 2: Chen discloses a collar attachment (1), in which the first and second internal bores (22, 23) are coaxial.
Re Claim 3: Chen discloses a collar attachment (1), which comprises two parts (the two halves of the body 1, separated by grooves 213, 313) which are secured together by fasteners (217, 317).
Re Claim 4: Chen discloses a collar attachment (1), which comprises two parts (the two halves of the body 1, separated by grooves 213, 313) interconnected by a living hinge (the flexing portion of body 1, opposite from grooves 213, 313).
Re Claim 7: Chen discloses a collar attachment (1), which is fitted to a bicycle seatpost (5, 6), the first internal bore (22) being a close fit on the seatpost.
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.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US Patent Application Publication 2008/0298886), as applied to claims 1-4 and 7 above, and further in view of Lien (US Patent 7,225,956).
Re Claim 5: Chen discloses a collar attachment significantly as claimed except wherein a liner of resilient material is provided on the first internal bore.
Lien teaches the use of a collar attachment (93) for supporting an accessory (7) on a bicycle seatpost (82), the collar accessory comprising a bore (at the inner surface of frame 93) for receiving the seatpost, and further wherein a liner (6) of resilient material is provided on the first internal bore, for the purpose of cushioning the seatpost.
PNG
media_image2.png
409
842
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Chen, with a reasonable expectation of success, such that a liner of resilient material is provided on the first internal bore, as taught by Lien, for the purpose of cushioning the seatpost.
Re Claim 6: Chen, as modified above in view of Lien, discloses a collar attachment significantly as claimed. Neither Chen nor Lien explicitly disclose wherein the liner comprises thermoplastic polyurethane.
Examiner notes that it has been held that the selection of a known material based upon its suitability for the intended use is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) [discussed in MPEP 2144.07].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Chen, with a reasonable expectation of success, such that the liner comprises thermoplastic polyurethane, for the purpose of achieving a desired cushioning and gripping effect, and since such a modification would amount to a design consideration within the skill of the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-11 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Independent claim 8 requires a “bicycle provided with a collar attachment in accordance with claim 7 in which a saddlebag is mounted on the bicycle, the saddlebag being connected to the seatpost by the collar attachment.” As such, claim 8 requires not just the collar attachment, but also the combination of the bicycle along with the collar attachment and the saddlebag. As discussed above, Chen discloses a collar attachment as claimed. However, Chen does not teach or disclose the ”saddlebag” as required by claim 8. The collar attachment of Chen is used to secure the two cushion support tube 5 and the seat tube 6 together, and is not used to attach a saddlebag. Further, it would not have been obvious to modify the device of Chen in such manner, since there would have been no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so. Accordingly, claim 8 is considered allowable over the prior art of record. Claims 9-11 are considered allowable at least due to their dependence from claim 8.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to all pending claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection set forth in this Office Action.
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 MATTHEW R MCMAHON whose telephone number is (571)270-3067. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-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, Amber Anderson can be reached at (571) 270-5281. 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.
/MATTHEW R MCMAHON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights