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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 17, “top pivot opening” should be “a top pivot opening”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 17 – 20 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 17 recites the limitation "the down tube" in lines 15 – 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giroux (US 20210276659) in view of Twers (US 20110272909).
Regarding claim 1, Giroux discloses a bicycle frame (frame 20) comprising:
a head tube (near indicia 20, Fig. 2) coupled to a top tube (top tube 21) and a down tube (down tube 22);
a seat tube (seat tube 23) coupled to the top tube and the down tube;
an upper pivot opening (at pivot J3) disposed in the seat tube configured to receive an upper pivot point (pivot J3) that pivotally couples to a rear suspension system (components 30, 40, 50), where the rear suspension system comprises a seatstay (component 40) coupled at a first end (at J2, Fig. 2) with a first end of a chainstay (component 30), and where a second end (at J3) of the seatstay is coupled to a linkage member (component 50) above a second end (near pivot J1) of the chainstay;
a plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4), where each of the plurality of lower pivot openings is separately defined by the seat tube (See Fig 2) and configured to receive a lower pivot point (pivot J1) disposed within the second end of the chainstay; and
a bottom bracket shell (bottom bracket shell BB) disposed at a junction of the seat tube (seat tube 23) and the down tube (down tube 22) and a chainring (chain ring 4C).
However, Giroux does not disclose where each of the plurality of lower pivot openings causes, when coupled to the rear suspension system via the lower pivot point, the rear suspension system to define a different wheel path as a rear wheel of the rear suspension system travels from an extended position to a compressed position; and
where the plurality of lower pivot openings comprises at least a lower pivot opening at a first distance from a center of the bottom bracket shell that is substantially equal to a chainring radius, and top pivot opening at a second distance from a center of the bottom bracket shell, and where a ratio of the second distance to the first distance is about 2.1.
Twers discloses a vehicle suspension linkage (See bicycle 1) wherein a plurality of lower pivot openings (proximal pivots 11 and 13, Figs. 34 – 35), where each of the plurality of lower pivot openings is separately defined by a seat tube (seat tube 1) and configured to receive a lower pivot point disposed within the second end of the chainstay (at proximal pivot 11, See Figs. 34 and 35), where each of the plurality of lower pivot openings causes, when coupled to the rear suspension system via the lower pivot point, the rear suspension system to define a different wheel path as a rear wheel (rear wheel 2B) of the rear suspension system travels from an extended position to a compressed position (shortening effect and lengthening effect, Paragraph [0077] – [0078]); and
where the plurality of lower pivot openings (proximal pivots 11 and 13, Figs. 34 – 35) comprises at least a lower pivot opening (the lowest of pivots 13, See Figs. 34 and 35). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Giroux, to have pivot openings as configured by Twers to improve the comfort of the rider.
Recognizing that the first distance (further affecting the recited distance ratio and relationship with the chainring radius) is a result effective variable directly correlated to ride comfort, which is a desirable characteristic, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art when the application was filed, to modify the first distance of Giroux so that the recited ratio becomes about 2.1 and the first distance is equal to the chainring radius, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed invention. See MPEP 2133.05 – II – Routine Optimization.
Regarding claims 2 – 6, 8, 9, 15 and 16, Giroux, modified by Twers, discloses the bicycle frame (frame 20) of claim 1. Giroux further discloses:
[Claim 2] further comprising a linkage member (component 50) pivotally coupled to the upper pivot point (pivot J3), and coupling the seatstay (component 40) with a shock absorber (shock absorber 60);
[Claim 3] where the shock absorber (shock absorber 60) is coupled at a first end (at J5) to the linkage member (component 50) and at a second end (at J6) to a structural member (near bottom bracket BB, Fig. 2) coupled to the bicycle frame (frame 20), and
where the shock absorber is configured to flexibly maintain a separation between the structural member and the linkage member (component 50);
[Claim 4] where the chainstay (component 30) is coupled at a first end to the lower pivot point (pivot J1) and coupled at a second end (at J2) to the seatstay (component 40);
[Claim 5] where the rear suspension system (components 30, 40, 50) comprises the shock absorber (shock absorber 60), the linkage member (component 50), the seatstay (component 40), and the chainstay (component 30);
[Claim 6] further comprising an idler pulley (idler 35) coupled to the first end (at JP1, Fig. 3) of the chainstay (component 30);
[Claim 8] where the seat tube (seat tube 23) defines a longitudinal axis, and at least one of the plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4) is disposed to a side of the longitudinal axis (each pivot J1, J3 and J4 is off center from the longitudinal axis of seat tube 23);
[Claim 9] where the plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4) comprises at least a second pivot opening (at J3) at a second distance from the bottom bracket shell, and a third pivot opening (at J4) at a third distance from the bottom bracket shell (See Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Giroux, modified by Twers, discloses the bicycle frame of claim 1. Giroux further discloses where the seat tube defines a longitudinal axis. Giroux does not disclose each of the plurality of lower pivot openings is centered laterally on the longitudinal axis. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Giroux such that the pivot openings are all centered laterally on the longitudinal axis, to improve the design by making the bicycle more compact. Additionally and in the alternative, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to rearrange the Giroux/Twers bike or bike frame so that pivot openings are specifically located as recited, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Please note that in the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation.
Regarding claim 10, Giroux discloses a system comprising:
a bicycle frame (frame 20) comprising:
a head tube (near indicia 20, Fig. 2) coupled to a top tube (top tube 21) and a down tube (down tube 22);
a seat tube (seat tube 23) coupled to the top tube and the down tube;
an upper pivot opening (at pivot J3) disposed in the seat tube configured to receive an upper pivot point (pivot J3) that pivotally couples to a rear suspension system (components 30, 40, 50); and
a plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4), where each of the plurality of lower pivot openings is separately defined by the seat tube and configured to receive a lower pivot point (pivot J1) that pivotally couples to the rear suspension system, where the lower pivot point (pivot J1) is disposed within an end of a chainstay (component 30);
a bottom bracket shell (bottom bracket BB) disposed at a junction of the seat tube (seat tube 23) and the down tube (down tube 22), and where the plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4) comprises at least a first pivot opening (pivot J1);
where the rear suspension system (components 30, 40, 50) supports a portion of the bicycle frame (frame 20), the rear suspension system comprising:
a linkage member (component 50) pivotally coupled to the upper pivot point (pivot J3);
a seatstay (component 40) having a first end and a second end and coupled to the linkage member at a first end;
the chainstay (component 30) having a first end and a second end and coupled at the second end to the second end of the seatstay and the lower pivot point at the first end, where the first end of the chainstay is coupled below the first end of the seatstay (Fig. 2);
a shock absorber (shock absorber 60) coupled to the linkage member (component 50) and the bicycle frame (frame 20); and
a chainring (chain ring 4C).
However, Giroux does not disclose the plurality of lower pivot openings are configured to receive a lower pivot point that pivotally couples to the rear suspension system, where the lower pivot point is disposed within an end of a chainstay, where each of the plurality of lower pivot openings causes, when coupled to the rear suspension system via the lower pivot point, the rear suspension system to define a different wheel path as a rear wheel of the rear suspension system travels from an extended position to a compressed position; and
comprises at least a first pivot opening at a first distance from a center of the bottom bracket shell that is substantially equal to a chainring radius.
Twers discloses a vehicle suspension linkage (bicycle 1) wherein a plurality of lower pivot openings (proximal pivots 11 and 13, Figs. 34 – 35), are configured to receive a lower pivot point disposed within an end of a chainstay (at proximal pivot 11, See Figs. 34 and 35), where each of the plurality of lower pivot openings causes, when coupled to the rear suspension system via the lower pivot point, the rear suspension system to define a different wheel path as a rear wheel (rear wheel 14) of the rear suspension system travels from an extended position to a compressed position (shortening effect and lengthening effect, Paragraph [0077] – [0078]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Giroux, to have pivot openings as configured by Twers to improve the comfort of the rider.
Recognizing that the first distance (further affecting the recited distance ratio and relationship with the chainring radius) is a result effective variable directly correlated to ride comfort, which is a desirable characteristic, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art when the application was filed, to modify the first distance of Giroux so that the first distance is equal to the chainring radius, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed invention. See MPEP 2133.05 – II – Routine Optimization.
Regarding claims 11 – 13, Giroux, modified by Twers, discloses the system of claim 10. Giroux further discloses:
[Claim 11] where the shock absorber (shock absorber 60) is configured to flexibly maintain a separation between a structural member and the linkage member (component 50);
[Claim 12] where the chainstay (component 30) is coupled at the first end to one of the plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4) via the lower pivot point (pivot J1);
[Claim 13] further comprising an idler pulley (idler 35) coupled to the first end of the chainstay (component 30) at the one of the plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4; Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 14, Giroux, modified by Twers, discloses the system of claim 10, including the seat tube defining a longitudinal axis. Neither Giroux nor Twers discloses each of the plurality of lower pivot openings is centered laterally on the longitudinal axis. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Giroux such that the pivot openings are all centered laterally on the longitudinal axis, to improve the design by making the bicycle more compact.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Giroux, modified by Twers, discloses the system of claim 10, where:
[Claim 15] where the seat tube (seat tube 23) defines a longitudinal axis, and at least one of the plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4) is disposed to a side of the longitudinal axis (each pivot J1, J3 and J4 is off center from the longitudinal axis of seat tube 23); and
[Claim 16] where the plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4) comprises at least a second pivot opening (at J3) at a second distance from the bottom bracket shell, and a third pivot opening (at J4) at a third distance from the bottom bracket shell (See Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 17, Giroux discloses a method of making a suspension system for supporting a frame of a vehicle (bicycle 1) on at least one wheel (rear wheel 2B) of the vehicle, the method comprising:
providing the frame of a vehicle (bicycle 1) having a seat tube (seat tube 23);
providing an upper pivot opening (at pivot J3) disposed in the seat tube configured to receive an upper pivot point (at pivot J3) that pivotally couples to a rear suspension system (components 30, 40, 50), where the rear suspension system comprises a seatstay (component 40) coupled at a first end (at J2) with a first end of a chainstay (component 30), and where a second end (at J1) of the seatstay is coupled to a linkage member (component 50) above a second end of the chainstay;
providing a plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4), where each of the plurality of lower pivot openings is separately defined by the seat tube (seat tube 23) and configured to receive a lower pivot point (pivot J1) disposed within the second end of the chainstay (component 30) that pivotally couples to the rear suspension system (components 30, 40, 50), and
providing a bottom bracket shell (bottom bracket BB) disposed at a junction of the seat tube and the down tube (down tube 22); and
a chainring (chain ring 4C).
However, Giroux does not disclose where each of the plurality of lower pivot openings causes, when coupled to the rear suspension system via the lower pivot point, the rear suspension system to define a different wheel path as a rear wheel of the rear suspension system travels from an extended position to a compressed position; and
where the plurality of lower pivot openings comprises at least a first pivot opening at a first distance from a center of the bottom bracket shell that is substantially equal to a chainring radius.
Twers discloses a vehicle suspension linkage (bicycle 1) wherein a plurality of lower pivot openings (proximal pivots 11 and 13, Figs. 34 – 35) causes, when coupled to the rear suspension system via the lower pivot point, the rear suspension system to define a different wheel path as a rear wheel (rear wheel 14) of the rear suspension system travels from an extended position to a compressed position (shortening effect and lengthening effect, Paragraph [0077] – [0078]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Giroux, to have pivot openings as configured by Twers to improve the comfort of the rider.
Recognizing that the first distance (further affecting the recited distance ratio and relationship with the chainring radius) is a result effective variable directly correlated to ride comfort, which is a desirable characteristic, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art when the application was filed, to modify the first distance of Giroux so that the first distance is equal to the chainring radius, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Please note that in the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed invention. See MPEP 2133.05 – II – Routine Optimization.
Regarding claims 18 – 20, Giroux, modified by Twers. Discloses the method of claim 17. Giroux further discloses the method comprising:
[Claim 18] coupling, via a linkage member (component 50), the rear suspension system (components 30, 40, 50) to a shock absorber (shock absorber 60);
[Claim 19] further comprising disposing the plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4) along a longitudinal axis defined by the seat tube (seat tube 23; See Fig. 2); and
[Claim 20] further comprising disposing at least one of the plurality of lower pivot openings (at pivots J1, J3, J4) to a side of a longitudinal axis defined by the seat tube (seat tube 23; See Fig. 2, the pivots J1, J3 and J4 are not located on the centerline of the seat tube 23 axis but off to the side of it).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Felicia L Brittman-Alabi whose telephone number is (313)446-6512. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-6.
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.
/Felicia L. Brittman-Alabi/ Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/VALENTIN NEACSU, Ph.D./ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights