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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “170”, “171” and “172” in Fig. 5. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because reference number “210” (wheel body unit) in Fig. 7 is pointing to a part that is different from the part that it is pointing to in Figs. 3-5. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: the term “include” in line 1, needs to be changed to “includes”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
“position detection unit…to detect a rotation position of the operation lever” in claims 1 and 12, wherein “unit” is a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language of “to detect a rotation position of the operation lever”, without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder “unit” is not preceded by a structural modifier,
“pedal detection unit…to detect whether the pedal is rotated” in claim 5, wherein “unit” is a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language of “to detect whether the pedal is rotated”, without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder “unit” is not preceded by a structural modifier, and
“speed measurement unit…to measure a rotation speed of the flywheel” in claims 8 and 15, wherein “unit” is a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language of “to detect whether the pedal is rotated”, without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder “unit” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
“position detection unit” has the corresponding structure(s) of: two or more Hall sensors (see ¶ [0024] and [0144] of the original specification), and equivalents thereof,
“pedal detection unit” has the corresponding structure(s) of: a pressure sensor, an encoder (see ¶ [0145] of the original specification), and equivalents thereof, and
“speed measurement unit” has the corresponding structure(s) of: an infrared ray sensor, an encoder (various types of sensors, such as a non-contact sensor and a contact sensor) (see ¶ [0146] of the original specification), and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-18 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the following reason. Claim 1 recites: “a controller configured to brake the flywheel by adjusting a magnitude of the magnetic force of the stator so that the operation lever stops at a preset exposure position when a pedal is stopped”. However, it is unclear how braking the flywheel (reducing its speed, without stopping it) would have the operation lever stopped at a preset exposure position when a pedal is stopped. Further clarification and appropriate corrections are respectfully requested. For the purposes of examination, this limitation has been examined “as best understood”, whereby when the pedal rotation is stopped, the controller brakes and stops the flywheel by adjusting a magnitude of the magnetic force of the stator, such that the operation lever (rotatably installed on the flywheel) is at a preset exposure position when the flywheel is stopped. Claims 2-11 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, by virtue of dependency upon claim 1.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the following reasons. Claim 12, as currently presented recites: “A method of controlling a fitness bike, comprising: an operating operation of allowing a flywheel to operate in a non-freewheel mode or a freewheel mode; a position detecting operation of detecting, by a position detection unit, a position of an operation lever installed on the flywheel; and a braking operation of braking, by a controller, the flywheel by adjusting a magnitude of a magnetic force of a stator so that the operation lever stops at a preset exposure position when a pedal is stopped”. Since the claim is directed towards a method, the body of the claim has to recite the steps being performed, starting with an “ing” form of the functioning verb. For instance, “a position detecting operation of detecting, by a position detection unit…” would be changed to “detecting, by a position detection unit…”. Also the method recites “an operating operation of allowing a flywheel to operate in a non-freewheel more or a freewheel mode”, and it is unclear what the operating operation of allowing a flywheel to operate in these modes is. In other words, it is unclear how “allowing” a flywheel to operate in a non-freewheel mode and a freewheel mode is a functional step and/or how it is performed and/or whether it requires any specific actions to be taken by a user or any other parts of the fitness bike. In addition, similar to previous claims, the claims do not positively connect various components such as a flywheel, a stator, a controller, a position detection unit, etc., to the fitness bike. In other words, the claim, as currently presented, do not require these parts to be included in the fitness bike, rather they can be somehow connected to a fitness bike. As such, applicant is respectfully requested to provide clarification regarding these components being part of the fitness bike or separate from it. Furthermore, claim 12 recites: “a braking operation of braking, by a controller, the flywheel by adjusting a magnitude of a magnetic force of a stator so that the operation lever stops at a preset exposure position when a pedal is stopped”. However, it is unclear how braking the flywheel (reducing its speed, without stopping it) would have the operation lever stopped at a preset exposure position when a pedal is stopped. For the purposes of examination, this limitation has been examined “as best understood”, whereby when the pedal rotation is stopped, the controller brakes and stops the flywheel by adjusting a magnitude of the magnetic force of the stator, such that the operation lever (rotatably installed on the flywheel) is at a preset exposure position when the flywheel is stopped. Claims 13-18 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, by virtue of dependency upon claim 12.
Claims 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the following reason. Each of Claims 9 and 17 recites: “wherein, in the non-freewheel mode, when a pulley rotates in a forward direction and a reverse direction, a rotating gear unit, a latching gear unit, a wheel cover, and a wheel body unit are all rotated”. However, it is unclear how these structures (a pulley, rotating gear unit, a latching gear unit, a wheel cover, and a wheel body unit) are connected to each other and the other parts of the fitness bike such that in the non-freewheel mode, they would all be rotated. Further clarification and appropriate corrections are respectfully requested. Applicant is respectfully requested to include language in which these structures are clearly recited as parts of the fitness bike along with their connection with each other and other previously recited parts of the fitness bike.
Claims 10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the following reason. Each of Claims 10 and 18 recites: “wherein, in the freewheel mode, when a pulley rotates in a forward direction, a rotating gear unit, a latching gear unit, a wheel cover, and a wheel body unit are all rotated, and when the pulley is in a reverse direction, the rotating gear unit is rotated”. However, it is unclear how these structures (a pulley, rotating gear unit, a latching gear unit, a wheel cover, and a wheel body unit) are connected to each other and the other parts of the fitness bike such that in the freewheel mode, when the pulley rotates in a forward direction, they would all be rotated and when the pulley rotates in a reverse direction, the rotating gear unit is rotated. Furthermore, it is unclear whether or not when the pulley rotates in the reverse direction, the rotating gear unit is the only structure that is rotated . Further clarification and appropriate corrections are respectfully requested. Applicant is respectfully requested to include language in which these structures are clearly recited as parts of the fitness bike along with their connection with each other and other previously recited parts of the fitness bike.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Claims 3-11 and 13-18 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:
With respect to claims 1 and 12, the prior art of record fails to disclose, teach or render obvious a fitness bike, with all the structural component and functional limitations, comprising: a flywheel rotatably installed on a frame unit; a clutch gear unit rotatably and axially coupled to the flywheel; a stator configured to apply a magnetic force to the flywheel to adjust a rotation load of the flywheel; an operation lever rotatably installed on the flywheel, connected to the clutch gear unit to operate the clutch gear unit, and configured to restrict the clutch gear unit to the flywheel to allow the flywheel to operate in a non-freewheel mode and release the restriction between the clutch gear unit and the flywheel to allow the flywheel to operate in a freewheel mode, and further comprising a position detection unit installed on the flywheel to detect a rotation position of the operation lever; and a controller configured to brake the flywheel by adjusting a magnitude of the magnetic force of the stator so that the operation lever stops at a preset exposure position when a pedal is stopped,
OR a method of controlling a fitness bike, with all the structural component and functional limitations, comprising: an operating operation of allowing a flywheel to operate in a non-freewheel mode or a freewheel mode; and further comprising a position detecting operation of detecting, by a position detection unit, a position of an operation lever installed on the flywheel; and a braking operation of braking, by a controller, the flywheel by adjusting a magnitude of a magnetic force of a stator so that the operation lever stops at a preset exposure position when a pedal is stopped.
The closest prior art, Muhic et al. (US 2022/0347515 A1) teaches a fitness bike comprising: a flywheel (50) rotatably installed on a frame unit (Fig. 1, ¶ [24]); a clutch gear unit (56) rotatably and axially coupled to the flywheel (Figs. 2-5, ¶ [25]); an operation lever (108) rotatably installed on the flywheel (Figs. 2-5), connected to the clutch gear unit to operate the clutch gear unit, and configured to restrict the clutch gear unit to the flywheel to allow the flywheel to operate in a non-freewheel mode and release the restriction between the clutch gear unit and the flywheel to allow the flywheel to operate in a freewheel mode (¶ [30]); and a controller (at 26, Fig. 1). However, Muhic is silent about a stator configured to apply a magnetic force to the flywheel to adjust a rotation load of the flywheel; a position detection unit installed on the flywheel to detect a rotation position of the operation lever; and the controller configured to brake the flywheel by adjusting a magnitude of the magnetic force of the stator so that the operation lever stops at a preset exposure position when a pedal is stopped.
Another close prior art, Wrobel (US 2022/0074454 A1) teaches a fitness bike comprising: a flywheel (106, 506, ¶ [36]) rotatably installed on a frame unit (Figs. 1 and 6-1); a clutch gear unit (522 with 544) rotatably and axially coupled to the flywheel (Fig. 6-1); an operation wheel (542) lever rotatably installed on the flywheel, connected to the clutch gear unit to operate the clutch gear unit, and configured to restrict the clutch gear unit to the flywheel to allow the flywheel to operate in a non-freewheel mode and release the restriction between the clutch gear unit and the flywheel to allow the flywheel to operate in a freewheel mode (Figs. 6-1 - 14, ¶ [54]-[63]), and a controller (114, Fig. 1, ¶ [32]-[33]). Wrobel is silent about a stator configured to apply a magnetic force to the flywheel to adjust a rotation load of the flywheel; the operation wheel being an operational lever, a position detection unit installed on the flywheel to detect a rotation position of the operation lever; and the controller configured to brake the flywheel by adjusting a magnitude of the magnetic force of the stator so that the operation lever stops at a preset exposure position when a pedal is stopped.
The same also applies regarding claim 12.
Please see attached PTO-892 for other pertinent prior art references.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHILA JALALZADEH ABYANEH whose telephone number is (571)270-7403. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 am - 3:00 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, LoAn Jimenez can be reached at (571)272- 4966. 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.
/SHILA JALALZADEH ABYANEH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784