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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/21/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Regarding claim 4, the preamble for this dependent claim does not match the independent claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
REJECTION BASED ON BOOK
Claim(s) 1-2 and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 7,757,914 to Book.
Regarding claim 1, Book discloses an adapter (68) fixable to a fork of a bike, the adapter comprising: an elongated main portion (Figs. 7a-c – 78 (housing receiving skewer)) comprising a first end (left end in Fig. 7a) and a second end (right end in Fig. 7a) opposite the second end; and a quick release skewer clamping mechanism configured to clamp a first end portion and a second end portion of the fork, the quick release skewer clamping mechanism comprising a first movable clamp (120) and a second movable clamp (136), wherein the first movable clamp comprises a first force application surface (120) opposed to the first end of the main portion, the second movable clamp comprises a second force application surface (136) opposed to the second end of the main portion, and the first movable clamp and the second movable clamp are movable relative to the main portion such that the adapter is convertible between an open position (Fig. 6b/4d) and a closed position (Fig. 6a/4e), wherein in the open position the first force application surface is farther from the first end of the main portion and the second force application surface is farther from the second end of the main portion than in the closed position.
Regarding claim 2, Book discloses wherein the main portion comprises a first support opening (Fig. 7a – opening on left of housing receiving 80) and a second support opening (Fig. 7a – opening on right of housing receiving 92), wherein the first movable clamp comprises a first elongated shaft (80 – Fig. 7a) slidably accommodated in the first support opening and the second movable clamp comprises a second elongated shaft (92 – Fig. 7a) slidably accommodated in the second support opening.
Regarding claim 5, Book discloses wherein the first elongated shaft and the second elongated shaft extend along a longitudinal axis (Figs. 7a-c), and the main portion comprises a rib (Annotated Fig. 7a below) that extends radially outward relative to the longitudinal axis and circumferentially about the longitudinal axis.
PNG
media_image1.png
419
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Book Annotated Fig. 7a
Regarding claim 6, Book discloses a first spring (148) disposed against a first surface of the main portion (inner surface of 78 – Fig. 8a) and configured to bias the first movable clamp away from the closed position toward the open position (Figs. 7a-c, 8a).
Regarding claim 7, Book discloses wherein the first movable clamp and the second movable clamp are coupled such that force applied to the first movable clamp or the second movable clamp is transferred to the other of the first movable clamp and the second movable clamp (force applied by the lever draws both clamps inward – Figs. 6a/4e).
Regarding claim 8, Book discloses wherein the first movable clamp and the second movable clamp are coupled by an adjustment assembly (126, 134 – Figs. 7a-c) configured to adjust a distance between the force application surfaces.
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) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Book in view of US Patent 9,216,699 to Flaherty.
Regarding claim 3, Book discloses wherein the second support opening is configured to prevent the second elongated shaft from rotating relative to the main portion (via flat portion 92 – Fig. 7a). Book fails to disclose both openings and shafts configured to prevent rotation. However, Flaherty discloses a bicycle carrier in which both shafts are configured to prevent rotation (via flat portion 88 – Fig. 10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have made both shafts to prevent rotation because it would make the anti-rotation feature stronger and more robust. Further, the modification only involves a mere duplication of known elements having only predictable results. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claim 4, the combination from claim 3 discloses wherein each of the elongated shafts comprises a flat outer surface section and each of the support openings comprises a correspondingly shaped flat inner surface section (Book/Flaherty).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Book in view of US Patent 8,075,065 to Mercat.
Regarding claim 9, Book discloses a handle (134) coupled to the first clamp and second clamp. Book fails to disclose a torque limiter. However, Mercat discloses a bicycle skewer including a torque limiter (last sentence of abstract; Figs. 6-7) and a handle coupled to the torque limiter such that up to a predetermined amount of torque applied to the handle is transferred through the torque limiter. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have included a torque limiter in Book to limit the amount of torque transmitted to the tightening sub-assembly, as taught by Mercat (last sentence of abstract).
REJECTION BASED ON DEAN
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 6,494,351 to Dean.
Regarding claim 10, Dean discloses an adapter assembly fixable to a fork of a bike, the adapter assembly comprising: a first insert and a second insert (Annotated Fig. 10 below), wherein the first insert and the second insert are each configured as an adapter for a bike fork end (Fig. 10); and a main portion (16; see also Annotated Fig. 10) comprising a first longitudinal end (left end along the direction of the skewer) configured to receive the first insert and a second longitudinal end (right end along the direction of the skewer) configured to receive the second insert, wherein the first longitudinal end is opposite the second longitudinal end (Annotated Fig. 10) and the main portion is configured to be received in a bike carrier (the main portion is capable of being received in a bike carrier as claimed, for example by a tray that secures around the main portion (the bike carrier is not positively recited)).
PNG
media_image2.png
378
485
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Dean Annotated Fig. 10
Regarding claim 11, Dean discloses wherein each of the first insert and the second insert comprises: an adapter end (outer ends in Annotated Fig. 10) configured to interface with a bike fork end; and a receivable end (inner ends in Annotated Fig. 10) configured to couple to the main portion when received in one of the first or second longitudinal ends of the main portion.
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dean in view of US Patent 7,654,548 to Kanehisa.
Regarding claim 12, Dean fails to disclose a catch. However, Kanehisa discloses a bicycle carrier including a catch (77) engaging an insert (76) and a main body (70). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have included a catch in Dean for each of the inserts to prevent axial movement of the inserts, as taught by Kanehisa (Col. 8, lines 7-15). In the combination, the main portion comprises a catch (77 – Kanehisa) configured to engage with the first insert when the first insert is received in the first longitudinal end of the main portion.
Regarding claim 13, the combination from claim 12 discloses wherein the first insert comprises a recess (76g – Kanehisa) configured to receive the catch when the insert is received in the first longitudinal end of the main portion (Kanehisa Fig. 6).
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dean and Kanehisa, further in view of US Patent 1,408,993 to Eberhardt.
Regarding claim 14, the combination from claim 13 fails to disclose the claimed details of the catch. However, Eberhardt discloses a catch to hold an inner cylindrical object wherein the catch comprises a free end (25, extending to notch 32 – Fig. 2) and the catch is biased (by spring 28) toward a locking position at which the catch resists removal of the inner object (Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have included the catch in each side of the main portion to allow for easily retaining and releasing the inserts from the main portion as desired.
Regarding claim 15, the combination from claim 14 discloses wherein the main portion comprises a cavity (Eberhardt – cavity receiving the catch/spring) defined within the main portion and the catch is biased (by spring 28 – Eberhardt) toward a locking position at which a free end of the catch extends into the cavity (Fig. 2 – end of 25 extends into the cavity).
REJECTION BASED ON BUDD
Claim(s) 16 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 9,376,065 to Budd in view of EP 0602,273 to Barbieri.
Regarding claim 16, Budd discloses a bike carrier system comprising: a bike fork adapter (14) configured to receive first and second prongs of a fork of a bike (Fig. 1), wherein the bike fork adapter extends along a longitudinal axis defined relative to the bike fork adapter and a bike carrier (Fig. 1) comprising a supporting unit (Fig. 4) configured to receive the bike fork adapter in a receiving direction (downward in Fig. 4) defined relative to the supporting unit, wherein the supporting unit comprises: a locking mechanism (30, 36, 40, 60) configured to retain the bike fork adapter in the supporting unit when the locking mechanism is in a locked state (Fig. 5). Budd fails to disclose a rib and slot. However, Barbieri discloses a bicycle bracket that includes mating ribs (18a/b) extending radially outward from a longitudinal axis and circumferentially about the longitudinal axis and slots (13) for securing a cylindrical object in the bracket. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have included ribs in the adapter and slots in the supporting unit to provide better securement and stabilization of the adapter in the supporting unit.
Regarding claim 18, the combination from claim 16 discloses wherein the locking mechanism comprises a first locking member (30 – Budd) and a second locking member (36 – Budd) configured to clamp the bike fork adapter when the locking mechanism is in the locked state, and wherein either the first locking member or the second locking member comprises the slot (Barbieri – 13; at least one of the members would have the slots).
Regarding claim 19, the combination from claim 16 discloses wherein the first locking member comprises a movable locking member (30 – Budd) configured to move relative to the second locking member (36 – Budd) when the locking mechanism transitions from an unlocked state to the locked state, and the movable locking member comprises the slot (Barbieri – 13). To the extent moving the slots from the stationary member to the movable member is required, such a change would have been obvious because it only involves a mere rearrangement of known parts having predictable results. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Budd and Barbieri, further in view of US Patent 2,211,600 to Faulhaber.
Regarding claim 20, the combination from claim 16 discloses wherein the second locking member (36 – Budd) comprises a stationary locking member configured to remain stationary when the locking mechanism transitions from the unlocked state to the locked state, and the slot is a first slot. The combination fails to disclose the stationary locking member having a second slot. However, Faulhaber discloses a bicycle bracket that includes holding mechanisms (in this case ribs 28) on holding brackets on opposite sides of a cylindrical object (20). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have included slots on opposite sides of the adapter (i.e. on both the movable and stationary locking member) in the combination to hold the adapter more securely in the mount. Further, the modification only involves a mere duplication of known elements having only predictable results. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 is 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited references disclose configurations similar to that disclosed by applicant.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT T MCNURLEN whose telephone number is (313)446-4898. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-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, Nathan Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. 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.
/SCOTT T MCNURLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3734