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
Figures 1 and 2 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated as discussed in the background of the specification as well as the brief descriptions of the drawings. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the boosting motor arranged on the front wheel as claimed in claims 11-20 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: Lines 1-2 should read: “wherein the driving shaft is connected to the at least one of the wheel transmission shafts” for the purpose of consistency with claim 2 from which claim 4 depends.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 5 should read “the second universal joint is connected to the at least one of the wheel transmission shafts” for the purpose of consistency with claims 4 and 2 from which claim 5 depends.
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.
Claims 2-7 and 12-17 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 2 lines 3-4 recites “wheel transmission shafts arranged on the wheel installation members” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if each of the two recited installation members requires “wheel transmission shafts” in the plural for a minimum of four transmission shafts or if each one of the two wheel installation members has one wheel transmission shaft arranged on it for a total of two transmission shafts. For the purpose of examination, examiner interprets the claim to mean that each of the two wheel installation members has one wheel transmission shaft arranged on it which is consistent with the specification and drawings. Claims 3-7 and 12-17 depend from claim 2.
Claim 3 lines 1-2 and lines 2-3 recite “wherein brake pad mechanisms are arranged on the wheel installation members, brake drums or brake discs are arranged on the rear wheels” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if multiple brake pad mechanisms are required to be arranged on each wheel installation member or if one brake pad mechanism is arranged on each of the two wheel installation members. For the purpose of examination and consistent with the drawings and specification, examiner interprets one brake pad mechanism to be arranged on each of the two wheels. Additionally, using the same reasoning as above, it is unclear if each of the two rear wheels requires multiple brake drums or brake discs or if a brake drum or a brake disc is arranged on each of the two previously recited rear wheels. For the purpose of examinations, examiner interprets each brake wheel to require a brake drum or a brake disc arranged on it.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada (US 6,104,154) in view of Templeton (US 3,843,145).
In regards to claim 1: Harada teaches an easily-assembled swing-type tricycle (Generally shown in Figure 1), comprising a frame assembly (1), a wheel frame (3) arranged on the frame assembly (shown in Figure 1), a transmission chamber (9c,e and space containing 8a) arranged in the frame assembly (Column 6 lines 10-14: “An end of a shaft casing 9c is fit into the flexible thrust bearing mechanism shaft holder 12d […] thereby the shaft casing may cover the drive shaft 9”), and a transmission mechanism (9, 7, 13, 15) arranged in the transmission chamber (drive shaft 9 arranged in shaft casing 9c, shown in Figure 2); wherein two rear wheels (4) are symmetrically arranged on the wheel frame (see Figure 3), and a front wheel (2) is arranged on the frame assembly (Shown in Figure 1); the frame assembly comprises a front frame (Front portion of 1 extending forward to front wheel from frame portion 9a shown in Figures 2 and 3), a swinging mechanism (12), and a gear box (See annotated Figure 2, box containing gears 10a and 10b); the front frame is connected to the gear box through the swinging mechanism (See annotated Figure 2 where the front frame connects through 12 to the gearbox); the gear box is connected to the wheel frame (at least via wheel shaft, unlabeled shown through gear 10b and bearings 16, and also connected through the rearward end of 12a which is connected to rear frame 3, Column 6 line 3: “a housing 12a fixed to the rear wheel frame 3”); the transmission mechanism comprises a shaft (Shown in Figures 2 and 3, not labeled) arranged on the gear box (Shown in annotated Figure 2 below); and, the shaft is in linkage cooperation with at least one of the two rear wheels (See Figure 3 where shaft connects through belt drive 15 to additional unlabeled shaft(s) connected with wheels 4, See abstract:).
Harada fails to explicitly teach wherein the unlabeled shaft is a drive shaft, though it is shown and connected to the wheels via a belt drive 15. Nevertheless, Templeton teaches a tricycle drive train with a drive shaft (outer casing of 31) similarly connected via belt drives (43) to wheel drive shafts (24, Figures 1 and 3, Column 4 lines 12-24: “A secondary drive chain 43 engages sprockets 44 and 45 respectively of the differential apparatus 28 and formed on the outer periphery of the coaster brake 31. Motive power is then transmitted through the half-shaft rear axles 24 journalled in the rear axle housings 22 to the spaced rear wheels 23 carried on the outer ends of the axles 24 and secured thereto by the nuts 46.”) supported on framework (22) where rear wheels (23) are installed on wheel installation members (Shown in Figure 3 but not labeled on inner side of rear wheels and outer side of shafts 24. Discussed as 46 but not labeled: Column 4 lines 19-23: “Motive power is then transmitted through the half-shaft rear axles 24 journalled in the rear axle housings 22 to the spaced rear wheels 23 carried on the outer ends of the axles 24 and secured thereto by the nuts 46.”) so as to evenly apply motive or braking power to the driven wheels and permit free-wheeling operation of the tricycle (Column 1 lines 16-20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art with a reasonable expectation of success before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the drivetrain with the drive shafts and drive belts connected the rear wheels as in Templeton on the tricycle of Harada so as to evenly apply motive or braking power to the rear driven wheels as in Templeton thereby creating an effective and easily controlled drive train and allowing for a safer and more controlled ride for the user.
PNG
media_image1.png
1165
789
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1172
781
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2: The easily assembled swing-type tricycle of claim 1 is taught by Harada in view of Templeton. The combination further teaches wherein the wheel frame (3 of Harada) comprises a framework (22 of Templeton relied upon in the combination above as part of the support and connection of the drivetrain and wheel connection to the drivetrain relied upon for the combination), two wheel installation members (46 of Templeton, discussed in quote given above in Column 4, not labeled in drawings) symmetrically arranged on the framework (See Figure 3 of Templeton where the rear wheels are symmetrically arranged on the framework 22 with wheel installation members 46, shown not labeled), and wheel transmission shafts (24 of Templeton) arranged on the wheel installation members (See Figure 3 of Templeton as well the quote of Column 4 above where nuts 46 secure the wheels 23 to the axles 24), the rear wheels are arranged on the wheel transmission shafts (See Figure 3 of Templeton), and, the driving shaft (outer casing of 31 of Templeton) is connected to at least one of the wheel transmission shafts (via drive chain 43 and differential apparatus 28 of Templeton providing motive power to wheel transmission shafts 24).
In regards to claim 9: The easily-assembled swing-type tricycle according to claim 1 is taught by Harada in view of Templeton. The combination further teaches wherein the transmission chamber comprises a shaft moving chamber (See annotated Figure 2 of Harada below) and a shaft moving passage (See annotated Figure 2 of Harada below) which are arranged in the front frame, a transmission-via-hole (Harada: hole through 12 allowing for transmission shaft 9 to pass through from the front frame to the rear wheel frame) formed in a middle portion of the swinging mechanism, and a gear moving chamber arranged in the gear box (see annotated Figure 2 of Harada below); and, the shaft moving chamber, the shaft moving passage, the transmission-via-hole, and the gear moving chamber are communicated successively (see order in annotated Figure 2 of Harada below).
PNG
media_image3.png
757
532
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 10: The easily-assembled swing-type tricycle according to claim 9 is taught by Harada in view of Templeton. The combination further teaches wherein the transmission mechanism comprises a first torque output assembly (8a and 8b of Harada) arranged in the shaft moving chamber (See annotated Figure 2 of Harada above), a second torque output assembly (10a and 10b of Harada) arranged in the gear moving chamber (See annotated Figure 2 of Harada above), and a transmission shaft (9 of Harada) which penetrates through the shaft moving passage (See annotated Figure 2 of Harada above) and the transmission-via-hole (See annotated Figure 2 of Harada above); and, the first torque output assembly is in linkage with the second torque output assembly through the transmission shaft (Column 5 lines of Harada lines 32-38: “In the present invention, first bevel gears 8a and 8a, are connected to the pedals 6, so that a rotational force of the pedals 6 is transmitted to drive means 9 as a drive shaft via the first bevel gears 8a and 8a. The rotational force is then transmitted from the drive shaft 9 to second bevel gears 10a and 10b via the one-way clutch 7.”, See also Figure 2 of Harada).
Claims 11, 12, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harada in view of Templeton and further in view of Ricco (US 2021/0061409 A1). Claims 1, 2, 9, and 10 are taught by the combination of Harada in view of Templeton. The combination fails to teach a storage battery arranged on the frame assembly or the wheel frame, a boosting motor arranged on the front wheel, and a torque sensor arranged in the transmission mechanism; both the storage battery and the torque sensor are connected to the boosting motor.
However, Ricco teaches a bicycle with a storage battery (300) arranged on the frame assembly (12), a boosting motor (100’ shown in Figure 1A) arranged on the front wheel (16), and a torque sensor arranged in a transmission mechanism (Paragraph 0020: “the speed control is configured to receive a signal from one or more pedal assist sensors configured to measure user input through the pedals, e.g., pedaling cadence and/or torque.” Underline added for clarity); both the storage battery and the torque sensor are connected to the boosting motor (Paragraph 0020: “the drive unit assembly 100 can apply a proportional level of power-assist based on the signal from the pedal assist sensors without manual speed control input from the user.”, Examiner points to paragraph 0021 for application of the sensor to drive unit assembly 100’ on the front wheel: “Although the following disclosure provides a detailed description of the rear drive unit assembly 100 and the rear driven unit assembly 200, in some embodiments the components of the front drive unit assembly 100′ and the front driven unit assembly 200′ can be the same, or at least generally similar in structure and function to those of the rear drive unit assembly 100 and the rear driven unit assembly 100′, respectively, but may be configured to provide rotational power to the front wheel 16.”, and Paragraph 0020: “a battery 300 configured to provide power to the drive unit assemblies 100 and 100′.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art with a reasonable expectation of success before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to additionally have a boosting motor arranged on the front wheel and connected to a battery and torque sensor as in Ricco of the tricycle of Harada in view of Templeton so as to provide additional power assist to the tricycle as needed by the user thereby allowing for an easier ride for users depending upon ability and/or difficult terrains such as hills.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 and 13-17 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.
In regards to claim 3: The claim recites brake pad mechanisms arranged on the wheel installation mechanisms and brake drums or discs on the rear wheels. The combination of Harada and Templeton fails to teach this limitation in the claims. The wheel installation members (46 of Templeton) relied upon do not and can not have brake pad mechanisms arranged on them. Furthermore, there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation nor would it be obvious to further modify the combination of Harada and Templeton, and specifically the relied upon drivetrain of Templeton in that way. Claim 13 is found to have allowable subject matter due to its dependency from claim 3.
In regards to claim 4: The claim recites that the driving shaft is connected to the wheel transmission shaft through a universal shaft assembly. Examiner is relying upon the definition of “universal shaft assembly” given on page 9 second paragraph of applicant’s description. The combination of Harada and Templeton fails to teach a universal shaft assembly connecting the driving shaft to the wheel transmission shaft. Furthermore, it would not be obvious, nor would there be motivation to modify the combination of Harada and Templeton in this way. Claim 5 depends from claim 4. Claims 5, 14, and 15 are found to have allowable subject matter due to their dependency from claim 4.
In regards to claim 6: The claim recites a bearing plate arranged on the framework, and the gearbox is connected to the bearing plate through a bolt. Neither Harada nor Templeton teaches a bearing plate. Additionally, it would not be obvious nor would there be motivation to continue to modify the combination of Harada in view of Templeton by adding a bearing plate connected to framework (relied upon as 22 in Templeton) with a bolt. Claim 16 is found to have allowable subject matter due to its dependency from claim 6.
In regards to claim 7: The claim recites wherein the wheel installation members are detachably mounted on the framework through bolts. The framework relied upon in the combination of Harada and Templeton is 22 of Harada and the wheel installation members are 46. There would be motivation or reasoning, and would likely break the combination to modify Harada in view of Templeton to have the wheel installation members mounted to the framework through bolts. Claim 17 is found to have allowable subject matter due to its dependency from claim 7.
Claims 8 and 18 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 8 recites the swinging mechanism comprising a first swinging member, a second swinging member, a connecting shaft, and an elastic block clamped between the first and second swinging members. While the relied upon swinging mechanism, 12 of Harada, does teach first and second members rotatable relative to each other, it fails to teach a connecting shaft between the first and second rotatable members separate from the transmission shaft 9. There would be no motivation, and it is unclear how one would modify the relied upon swing mechanism of Harada to add an additional shaft other than the transmission shaft 9 to connect the two rotatable members which are already in rotatable connection as one is nested inside of the other. Claim 18 is found to have allowable subject matter due to its dependency from claim 8.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zadeh (WO 2022/240399 A1) teaches a tricycle with a swing arm powered by both pedals and a motor. Provost (US 10569833 B1) teaches a tricycle with a split drivetrain. Lin (US 2007/0152422 A1) teaches a tricycle with a pivoting device between the front and rear frames.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL R HYMEL whose telephone number is (571)272-0389. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-F 7:30-4:30.
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.
/ABIGAIL R HYMEL/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights