CTNF 18/685,783 CTNF 67692 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-6, 8, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hancock (PGPub 2022/0266946) . Regarding claim 1, Hancock teaches a control system 108-116 for an electric bicycle 100 comprising; a drive controller 112 configured to provide drive control of the electric bicycle, wherein the drive control is based on a set of drive parameters (para [0060], input parameters controlled by user through user interface; para [0067], user input parameters 202, 204A-204C, specifying ride experience, fitness objective, or ride objective, including target amount of battery life remaining at end of route, level of effort required, etc.), and wherein the drive parameters for one or more assistance modes ((Figure 8; “Laid Back” mode, “Normal” mode, “Superhero” mode) are configured by way of a user interface (for example, user interface 116, in Fig. 1; 702 in Figure 7; 802 in Figure 8; 1202, in Figure 12). Regarding claim 2, the control system is further configured to perform an automatic change between different selectable assistance modes, so that the drive control after the change is based on the set of drive parameters of the assistance mode to which the change has been made (para [0008], “controlled variable settings may be automatically and dynamically determined”; [0077] describes an automatic shift from “superhero” mode a to “battery conservation mode” in response to a threshold amount of charge; para [0090] describes a mode determination engine 402 that automatically determines the operation mode based on sensed parameters). Regarding claim 3, the automatic change is dependent on at least one condition (battery charge level which is configurable by way of the user interface; Hancock, in para [00122], teaches that the rider can set a ride objective parameter that is a battery charge at the end of the ride, then the mode can be automatically transitioned to battery conservation modes). Regarding claim 4, Hancock teaches Hancock teaches a computing device 1302 (for example a cloud-based server, Fig. 13, para [0054] and [0124]) wherein: the control system is set up to receive and/or transmit the set of drive parameters associated with an assistance mode via an interface (communication network interface 1312; para [0124]), and the interface is an interface to a telecommunications network, a smartphone or a server of an online platform (smart phone or cloud-based server). Regarding claim 5, the drive parameters of an assistance mode received via the interface is unconfigurable by a user (data storage 208). Regarding claim 6, Hancock teaches the control system is configured to send an identifier describing the control system via the interface before a possible reception or transmission of the set of drive parameters associated with an assistance mode via the interface (para [[0070], “biometric information 210 C may further include fingerprint data captured by a fingerprint sensor, iris data captured by an iris scanner, or the like. Such biometric information can be used to uniquely identify a rider and access a corresponding rider profile for the rider” that is stored in data storage 208). Regarding claim 8, Hancock teaches that a crank length and/or a weight of a rider are configured as drive parameters via the user interface (para [0115], “the user interface 1102 may include one or more selectable fields via which the rider may input the physical attribute information” such as weight), and the drive control (produced by ride control algorithm 214) is based on the configured crank length and/or the configured weight of the rider (para [0073], rider height/weight are an input parameters to ride control algorithm 214; and [0115]). Regarding claim 12, the control system is set up to detect a riding behavior of a user during operation of the electric bicycle and to adjust the set of drive parameters based on the detected riding behavior or to create a new set of drive parameters ([para 0091]-[0092]) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hancock . Regarding claim 7, Hancock does not explicitly teach that the controller deactivates or deletes the set of drive parameters of an assistance mode received via the interface after a predetermined period of time, and the predetermined period of time is received as a data set together with the received drive parameters of the assistance mode. However, it does teach that “the data within the memory 1306 may be cleared or ultimately transferred to the storage 1308” (para [0125]) and some of the memory data come from the telecommunications network 1302 (cloud server) via the interface (para [0124]). It is also well known to periodically update information from a network. Therefore, it would have been obvious to delete or deactivate (clear) information from a network at time intervals and that the period of time to the update is communicated from the network in order to inform the user that an update is pending, in order to alert the user to a possible change in parameters or pause in service . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hancock in view of DE102019106585 to Tsuchizawa (cited by applicant) . Regarding claim 9, the drive control of Hancock is suitable for controlling a motor assistance provided by a motor of the electric bicycle, and further wherein: the motor assistance is selected based on the configured crank length, with a stronger motor assistance being provided for a configured first crank length than for a comparatively greater configured second crank length, and/or the motor assistance is selected based on the configured weight, however, Hancock lacks an explicit teaching that a stronger motor assistance is provided for a configured first weight than for a configured second weight. Tsuchuzawa teaches a drive control where motor assistance is selected based on a configured weight (weight can be input from a sensor or an input unit), and a stronger motor assistance is provided for a configured first weight than for a configured second weight (para [0069], [0104]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the drive control of Hancock such that stronger motor assistance is provided in the presence of a higher user weight than for a lighter weight, in view of Tsuchuzawa, in order to provide more motor assistance when it is needed to move a larger load . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hancock in view of DE 10 2018 109 272 (cited by applicant) . The combination control system lacks an operating parameter of a hill start assist or a push assist is configurable as a drive parameter, via the user interface and wherein the user interface is used to configure a pushing behavior as a drive parameter. DE ‘272 teaches an operating parameter of a push assist that is configurable as a drive parameter (control unit 42 has a push assist mode, para [0006], that uses push assist as a configurable parameter), via the user interface and wherein the user interface is used to configure a pushing behavior as a drive parameter (controller 42 controls the motor at a reset speed set by the user in a calibration mode, para [0170]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the drive control of Hancock to include an operating parameter of a push assist mode as a drive parameter and configure the user interface so the user can configure a drive parameter of the pushing behavior, in view of DE’272, in order to provide a push mode where a walking or running user is assisted by the motor and allow the user to configure at least one parameter of the push mode using the user interface . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Griffith teaches an electric bike having identity verification before stored user parameters can be accessed. Brulais and Contello teache using crank length to determine user effort. Jager teaches a hill start control for an ebike. Matsumoto, Miyoshi, Gillet, Hamed, Samona, Nakhjiri, and Yamamoto teach ebike controls. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anne Marie M. Boehler whose telephone number is (571)272-6641. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8-5pm. 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, 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. /ANNE MARIE M BOEHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611 /ab/ Application/Control Number: 18/685,783 Page 2 Art Unit: 3611 Application/Control Number: 18/685,783 Page 3 Art Unit: 3611 Application/Control Number: 18/685,783 Page 4 Art Unit: 3611
Prosecution Insights