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
Claims 1 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 12, “pivotable coupled” should be “pivotably coupled”;
Claim 1, line 24, “of first end” should be “of the first end”; and
Claim 13, line 13, “pivotable coupled” should be “pivotably coupled”.
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 8 and 9 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 8, line 2, includes the limitation “can pivot in multiple axis”, which is indefinite. It is unclear whether the claim refers to more than one axis as in “multiple axes” or if the claim is referring to a feature of the invention named “multiple axis”. If applicant intends to refer to more than one axis, then, the term “multiple axes” may be used. An appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 includes similar indefinite limitations to that of claim 8, and is, therefore, rejected for the same reason.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 13, 14, and 17 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by international application publication number WO 2021/105954 A2 to Mercier.
Regarding claims 13, 14, 17 and 18, Mercier discloses a suspension assembly (suspension assembly 100) for a motorcycle (vehicle 10):
[Claim 13]- a steering knuckle (steering knuckle 102), the steering knuckle defining an axle (the inherent axle created by the steering knuckle 102 geometry due to the steering knuckle 102 being rotationally connected to the front wheel 22, which is rotating about a wheel axis 96 defined by the steering knuckle 102, Paragraph [0079]) structurally configured to receive a wheel (front wheel 22);
- a steering mount (V-shaped bracket 74) coupled to the steering knuckle (steering knuckle 102), the steering mount having a first end (at the tie rod end 94) and a second end (the end of V-shaped bracket 74 attached to steering knuckle 102, Fig. 8) opposite the first end, an offset portion (the bottom of the V of V-shaped portion 74) of the first end defined as being offset relative to the steering knuckle (See Fig. 8), with a steering arm (tie rod 72) attachable to the first end of the steering mount (See Fig. 8);
- an upper control arm (upper swing arm 106) having a first end (at fastener 160 in Fig. 8) structurally configured for pivotable coupling to a frame (front vertical arms 88), and a second portion (at ball joint 116, Fig. 8) pivotably coupled to the first end of the steering mount (V-shaped bracket 74, coupled via steering knuckle 102);
- a lower control arm (lower swing arm 104) spaced apart from the upper control arm, the lower control arm having a first end (at fastener 134, Fig. 8) structurally configured for pivotable coupling to the frame and a second portion (at ball joint 112) pivotable coupled to the second end (the end of V-shaped bracket 74 attached to steering knuckle 102, Fig. 8) of the steering mount; and
- wherein the axle is positioned between the frame (front vertical arms 88) and the steering knuckle (the axle is in front of arms 88 and behind the frontmost surfaces of steering knuckle 102) and positioned so as to define a rake and a trail, wherein the rake is substantially vertical and the trail is positive (See Fig. 5 showing an almost vertical steering column 68 making a positive trail with the front wheel);
[Claim 14] wherein the rake is substantially perpendicular to the axle (the angle of the steering column 68 is close to vertical which is close to perpendicular to the wheel axis 96, See Fig. 5);
[Claim 17] further including a suspension member (shock absorber assembly 108) having a first end (at tabs 126) coupled to one of the lower and the upper control arm (upper swing arms 104 and 106), and a second end (at shock absorber axis 122, Fig. 7) attachable to the frame (front vertical arms 88); and
[Claim 18] wherein the suspension member (shock absorber assembly 108) comprises a coil-over member (the coil/spring surrounding shock absorber assembly 108) wherein the first end is coupled to the lower control arm (lower swing arm 104; the first end of the shock absorber assembly 108 is coupled to the lower control arm via the vehicle frame, Fig. 9).
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Mercier discloses a suspension assembly (suspension assembly 100) for a motorcycle (vehicle 10):
[Claim 19] - a steering knuckle (steering knuckle 102), the steering knuckle defining an axle (the inherent axle created by the steering knuckle geometry due to the steering knuckle 102 being rotationally connected to the front wheel 22, which is rotating about a wheel axis 96 defined by the steering knuckle 102, Paragraph [0079]) structurally configured to receive a wheel (front wheel 22), the steering knuckle structurally configured to be pivotably attachable to a frame (front vertical arms 88; via ball joints 112 and 116); and
- a steering mount (V-shaped bracket 74) coupled to the steering knuckle;
- wherein the axle is positioned between the frame (front vertical arms 88) and the steering knuckle (the axle is in front of arms 88 and behind the frontmost surfaces of steering knuckle 102) and positioned so as to define a rake and a trail, wherein the rake is substantially vertical and the trail is positive (See Fig. 5 showing an almost vertical steering column 68 making a positive trail with the front wheel); and
[Claim 20] further comprising:
- an upper control arm (upper swing arm 106) extending between the steering knuckle (steering knuckle 102) and structurally configured to be attached to the frame (front vertical arms 88, See Fig. 5); and
- a lower control arm (lower swing arm 104) extending between the steering knuckle and structurally configured to be attached to the frame (See Fig. 5).
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8 – 12 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mercier, in view of patent application publication number US 10,166,909 B2 to Suzuki et al (hereinafter referred to as Suzuki).
Regarding claim 1, Mercier discloses a motorcycle (vehicle 10) comprising:
- a frame (front vertical arms 88) having a lower stem (steering column 68);
- a suspension assembly (suspension assembly 100) comprising:
- a steering knuckle (steering knuckle 102), the steering knuckle defining an axle (the inherent axle created by the steering knuckle 102 geometry due to the steering knuckle 102 being rotationally connected to the front wheel 22, which is rotating about a wheel axis 96 defined by the steering knuckle 102, Paragraph [0079]) structurally configured to receive a wheel (front wheel 22);
- a steering mount (V-shaped bracket 74) coupled to the steering knuckle, the steering mount having a first end (at the tie rod end 94) and a second end (the end of V-shaped bracket 74 attached to steering knuckle 102, Fig. 8) opposite the first end, an offset portion (the bottom of the V of V-shaped portion 74) of the first end defined as being offset relative to the steering knuckle (See Fig. 8);
- an upper control arm (upper swing arm 106) having a first end (at fastener 160 in Fig. 8) pivotably coupled to the frame, and a second portion (at ball joint 116, Fig. 8) pivotably coupled to the first end of the steering mount;
- a lower control arm (lower swing arm 104) spaced apart from the upper control arm (upper swing arm 106), the lower control arm having a first end (at fastener 134, Fig. 8) pivotably coupled to the frame (front vertical arms 88) and a second portion (at ball joint 116, Fig. 8) pivotably coupled to the second end (the end of V-shaped bracket 74 attached to steering knuckle 102 via the steering knuckle, Fig. 8) of the steering mount; and
- a suspension member (shock absorber assembly 108) extending between the frame and at least one of the upper control arm and the lower control arm between the frame and the steering knuckle;
- wherein the axle is positioned between the frame (front vertical arms 88) and the steering knuckle (the axle is in front of arms 88 and behind the frontmost surfaces of steering knuckle 102); and
- a steering assembly (steering assembly 62) comprising:
- a stem (steering column 66) rotatably positionable within (via universal joint 90) the lower stem (steering column 68) of the frame (front vertical arms 88), the stem having an upper end and a lower end opposite the upper end, with a lower steering arm (pitman arm 70) extending therefrom and positioned so that a distal end thereof is spaced apart from an axis defined by the stem within the stem tube (See Fig. 7); and
- a tie rod (tie rod 72) pivotably coupled at a first end (at the tie rod end 94) to the distal end of the lower steering arm (pitman arm 70), and pivotably coupled to the offset portion (the bottom of the V of V-shaped portion 74) of first end of the steering mount; and
- wherein a rake is defined and a trail is defined, wherein the rake is substantially vertical and the trail is positive (See Fig. 5 showing an almost vertical steering column 68 making a positive trail with the front wheel).
However, Mercier does not disclose a stem tube or that the steering mechanism is made of tubing.
Suzuki discloses a motorcycle steering mechanism comprising a head pipe that is a tube (head pipe 211). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date, to modify the vehicle of Mercier, such that the steering mechanism includes a stem tube to reduce the overall weight of the vehicle.
Regarding claims 2, 4, 5, and 8 – 12, Mercier, modified by Suzuki, discloses the motorcycle of claim 1. Mercier further discloses:
[Claim 2] wherein the upper control arm (upper swing arm 106) and the lower control arm (lower swing arm 104) are substantially parallel with each other through an operating range of motion thereof (See Fig. 5);
[Claim 4] wherein the stem tube (steering column 68) is oblique to the rake (the lower steering column is neither parallel to or perpendicular to the caster angle 98 as the upper steering column 66 is, Fig. 7);
[Claim 5] further including a brake caliper (caliper 58, Paragraph [0075]) coupled to the steering knuckle (steering knuckle 102);
[Claim 8] wherein the second end (at ball joint 112) of the lower control arm (lower swing arm 104) and the second end (at ball joint 116) of the upper control arm (upper swing arm 106) can pivot in multiple axes relative to the steering mount (V-shaped bracket 74; the ball joints allow free rotation in multiple directions);
[Claim 9] wherein the tie rod (tie rod 72) can pivot relative to the distal end of the lower steering arm (pitman arm 70) in multiple axes (Paragraph [0078]) and the tie rod can pivot relative to the steering mount (V-shaped bracket 74) in multiple axes (Paragraph [0078]);
[Claim 10] further comprising handle bars (handlebar 62) coupled to the upper end of the stem (steering column 66), opposite the lower steering arm (pitman arm 70);
[Claim 11] wherein the rake is vertical (See Fig. 7, where the steering columns 66 and 68 are substantially vertical); and
[Claim 12] wherein the suspension member (shock absorber assembly 108) is a coil-over member (the coil/spring surrounding shock absorber assembly 108, Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 16, Mercier, modified by Suzuki, discloses the suspension assembly (suspension assembly 100) of claim 1, but they do not teach wherein a distance between the rake at a contact with a ground and an axis taken perpendicular to the axle at the ground is between 1.5” and 6” when the lower control arm and the upper control arm are substantially parallel to the ground. Recognizing that rake and trail (as a result effective variable) is directly correlated to motorcycle stability, which is a desirable characteristic, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed, to adjust the rake of Mercier’s motorcycle to make a trail of between 1.5 degrees and 6 degrees, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller 105 USPQ 233.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 6, 7 and 15 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.
Regarding claim 3, Mercier, modified by Suzuki discloses a motorcycle of claim 1, but they do not teach the suspension member is mounted at a second end to the lower control arm.
Regarding claim 6, Mercier, modified by Suzuki, discloses the motorcycle of claim 1. Mercier further teaches the axle is substantially perpendicular to the rake. However, neither Mercier nor Suzuki discloses wherein the axle extends to an opposite side of the lower control arm from the upper control arm, so as to be positionable between an outside riding surface and the lower control arm.
Regarding claim 7, Mercier, modified by Suzuki, discloses the motorcycle of claim 1, but they do not teach wherein the first end of the lower control arm and the first end of the upper control arm are pivotable relative to the frame along an axis that is parallel to the axle.
Regarding claim 15, Mercier discloses the suspension assembly of claim 13, but does not teach when the upper and lower control arms are perpendicular to the steering mount, the axle extends below the lower control arm.
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
/KEVIN HURLEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights