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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See 102 rejection of claim 1 below, in particular Fig 21 teaches the features of original claim 6. It is noted that the clutch will permit connection when engaged.
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(s) 1-5 and 7-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Watanabe et al. (JP H11-240481 A) hereinafter, Watanabe.
Regarding claim 1, Watanabe teaches an electric bicycle (Fig 24) comprising:
a frame (Fig 24);
a handlebar (Fig 24) operatively connected to the frame;
a front wheel (Fig 24) operatively connected to the handlebar;
a rear wheel (6) operatively connected to the frame (Fig 24);
a transmission (Fig 14-15, and 20-21) connected to the frame, the transmission having:
an input shaft (39, 141);
an output shaft (91, 139) operatively connected to the input shaft, the output shaft being parallel to the input shaft (Fig 14-15, and 20-21); and
a housing (2) housing at least a portion of the input shaft and the output shaft (Fig 15 and 24);
a motor gear (56, 145b) operatively connected to and driven by the electric motor, the motor gear being disposed in the housing; and
an input gear (60, 145a) connected to the input shaft, the input gear engaging and being driven by the motor gear (through 57), the input gear driving the input shaft, the input gear being disposed in the housing (Fig 21);
a crankshaft (4) operatively connected to the input shaft to drive the transmission (Fig 14-15, and 20-21);
an electric motor (14) operatively connected to the input shaft to drive the transmission (Fig 14-15, and 20-21);
a drive sprocket (66) connected to and driven by the output shaft (Fig 14-15, and 20-21);
a driven sprocket connected to the rear wheel to drive the rear wheel (Fig 14-15, and 20-21);
a flexible drive member (5) engaging the drive and driven sprockets (Fig 14-15, and 20-21),
a lowest point of the housing being vertically lower than the drive sprocket, the driven sprocket and the flexible drive member (Fig 24);
a pair of crank arms connected to the crankshaft (Fig 14-15, and 20-21); and
a battery pack (7) connected to the frame and electrically connected to the electric motor (Second Para of Page 2 and Fig 24).
Regarding claim 2, Watanabe teaches that the electric motor is disposed in the housing of the transmission (Fig 15 and Fig 21).
Regarding claim 3, Watanabe teaches that the electric bicycle of claim 1, further comprising a plurality of gears (92, 93, 94) operatively connecting the input shaft to the output shaft, the plurality of gears being disposed in the housing (Fig 14-15).
Regarding claim 4, Watanabe teaches that the transmission further includes at least one shift assembly (95, 96) for selecting at least one gear of the plurality of gears, the at least one shift assembly being disposed in the housing (Fig 14-15).
Regarding claim 5, Watanabe teaches that the at least one shift assembly includes an electric shift motor (50, Fig 14-15).
Regarding claim 7, Watanabe teaches that the electric bicycle of claim 6, further comprising a cycloidal drive (137) operatively connecting the electric motor to the motor gear, the cycloidal drive being disposed in the housing (third to last paragraph of page 11 and Fig 21).
Regarding claim 8, Watanabe teaches that the output shaft is vertically higher than the input shaft (Fig 21).
Regarding claim 9, Watanabe teaches that the output shaft is rearward of the input shaft (Fig 20).
Regarding claim 10, Watanabe teaches that the drive sprocket and the output shaft are coaxial (Fig 21).
Regarding claim 11, Watanabe teaches that the crankshaft extends through the input shaft (Fig 21).
Regarding claim 12, Watanabe teaches that the crankshaft and the output shaft are disposed in part in the housing; and the input shaft is disposed in the housing (Fig 21).
Regarding claim 13, Watanabe teaches that the electric bicycle of claim 1, further comprising a torque sensor for sensing a torque applied to the input shaft (fourth to last paragraph of page 11), the electric motor being controlled based at least in part on a torque sensed by the torque sensor, the torque sensor being disposed in the housing (Sixth paragraph of page 2, fourth to last paragraph of page 11, Para [0090] and Fig 21).
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(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (JP H11-240481 A) in view of Kim et al (DE 10 2018 217 097 A1) hereinafter, Kim.
Regarding claims 14-15, Watanabe teaches the bicycle of claim 1. However, Watanabe does not teach the crankshaft arrangement of claims 14 15.
Kim teaches that the crankshaft defines a crankshaft axis; the flexible drive member defines a perimeter; the crankshaft axis is outside of the perimeter; and a lowest point of the drive sprocket is vertically higher than the crankshaft axis (see Fig 1 and 2E).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the invention, to modify Watanabe’s bicycle, with Kim’s arrangement, for highest possible power density and the smallest possible space requirement (fourth paragraph of page 2).
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 HOSAM SHABARA whose telephone number is (571)272-5495. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at (571) 270-7778. 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.
/HOSAM SHABARA/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/MINNAH L SEOH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights