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 .
Status of the Claims
Applicant’s amendment including claim amendments and specification amendments filed 7/18/25 (hereinafter Response) has been entered. Examiner notes that claims 1-3, 5, 9-11, 13, 17, 20, 22, 27, 29 and 30 have been amended, claim 18 has been cancelled, and claim 31 is new. Claims 1-17 and 19-31 remain pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Based on the amendments to the claims the claim objections raised in the non-final office action mailed 1/22/25 (hereinafter Office Action) are hereby withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Based on the amendments to the claims the 112(b) claim rejections raised in the Office Action are hereby withdrawn.
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 (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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 207060287 U to He in view of US 2017/0197686 A1 to Pong
Regarding claim 1, He discloses a folding vehicle (Fig. 1 and Abstract) wherein said folding vehicle includes a folding transmission (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶ disclose the transmission pictured in Fig. 2 includes folding hinge assembly 213 enabling folding of the transmission), said folding transmission has a forward portion (304,305), a rearward portion (308,309,310), and an intermediate releasable disconnection joint (312) between said forward portion (304,305) and said rearward portion (308,309,310); and said forward portion (304,305) and said rearward portion (308,309,310) are enclosed in respective forward (301) and rearward housings (302) (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶); said forward portion (304,305) … ; said rearward portion (308,309,310) includes a rearward portion endless tension element (310) ; and said forward portion (304,305) … is drivingly connectable to said rearward portion endless tension element (310) by said intermediate releasable disconnection joint (312) (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶).
He does not appear to disclose the forward portion (304,305) includes a forward portion endless tension element and said forward portion endless tension element is drivingly connectable to said rearward portion endless tension element by said intermediate releasable disconnection joint.
Pong teaches that it was old and well known in the art of folding bicycles, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the forward portion (19,20,22) includes a forward portion endless tension element (22) and said forward portion endless tension element (22) is drivingly connectable to said rearward portion endless tension element (10) by said intermediate releasable disconnection joint (6) (Fig. 18 & [0028]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of folding bicycles before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the folding bicycle disclosed by He to incorporate for the forward portion includes a forward portion endless tension element and said forward portion endless tension element is drivingly connectable to said rearward portion endless tension element by said intermediate releasable disconnection joint as taught by Pong in order to enable various bicycle geometries where the crankset can be offset from the intermediate joint by a distance greater than the size allowable based on the fixed gear ration of the drive gear and the intermediate gear by use of a chain to connected the drive gear and the intermediate gear, e.g., see Fig. 18, and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results.
Regarding claim 2, depending on claim 1, the modified combination of He/Pong further discloses wherein at least one of said forward portion endless tension element (Pong - 22) or said rearward portion tension element (He – 310/Pong – 10) includes a chain drive (He - Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶ disclose the transmission folds and includes chain 310. Pong - Fig. 18 & [0028]).
It would have been obvious to have modified He in view of the teachings of Pong for at least the same reasons discussed above in claim 1 and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results.
Regarding claim 4, depending on claim 1, He further discloses wherein the folding transmission includes one of a planetary gear, a continuously variable transmission and a single speed hub (309) (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶).
Regarding claim 6, depending on claim 1, He further discloses wherein said folding vehicle has a middle portion (405) and a rearward portion (308,309,310) that are joined together at a hinge (312); there is a gear connection (304,308) between the forward portion (304,305) and the rearward portion (308,309,310) of the folding transmission (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶ noting that 405 generally indicates the middle portion); folding said rearward portion (308,309,310) relative to said middle portion (405) splits said gear connection (304,308) (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶); and said gear connection (304,308) is adjacent to said hinge (312) (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶).
Regarding claim 7, depending on claim 1, He further discloses wherein said releasable disconnection joint includes (312) a hinge and a self-actuating latch (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶ disclose the joint 312 is a hinge and p. 5 - ¶ 5 and Fig. 10 disclose a self locking latch in line with applicant’s description, e.g., see [0428] of Applicant’s published Specification.).
Regarding claim 8, depending on claim 1, He further discloses wherein said forward portion (304,308) includes an output drive coupler (304) and said rearward portion (308,309,310) includes an input drive coupler (308), said output drive coupler (304) and said input drive coupler (308) being mating couplers (304,308) defining said intermediate releasable disconnection joint (312) (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶ disclose the gears 304/308 couple the front and rear portions of the transmissions and are considered to be a part of the joint 312 and thus also define the joint.).
Regarding claim 10, depending on claim 8, He further discloses wherein said input drive coupler (308) and said output drive coupler (304) are mating gears (304,308) mounted in respective enclosure surround portions of the rearward portion and the forward portion respectively (301,302) (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶).
Regarding claim 11, depending on claim 1, He further discloses wherein said forward housing (301) and said rearward housing (302) are connected by a hinge (312) (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶).
Regarding claim 12, depending on claim 1, He further discloses wherein said rear wheel (311) remains attached to said rearward housing (302) during folding of said rearward housing (302) relative to said forward housing (301) (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶ noting that the hinge 312 is the same hinge depicted and shown in Figs. 5-7 folding the front wheel as discussed on p. 5 - ¶5 and Fig .10 and thus is interpreted as folding, as discussed on p. 4, in the same manner even though not explicitly shown in the drawings. The folding of hinge 312 and the rear wheel is further discussed on p. 2 - ¶ 5.).
Regarding claim 13, depending on claim 1, He further discloses wherein: said forward housing (301) and said rearward housing (302) are connected at a hinge (312);
locking and release of said rearward portion (308,309,310) of said transmission relative to said forward portion (304,305) of said transmission is governed by a self-actuating latch (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶ disclose the joint 312 is a hinge and p. 5 - ¶ 5 and Fig. 10 disclose a self locking latch in line with applicant’s description, e.g., see [0428] of Applicant’s published Specification.);
PNG
media_image1.png
788
261
media_image1.png
Greyscale
said latch (A) is spaced from said hinge (B) by a transmission overlap region; and when said vehicle is in an unfolded position (Annotated Fig. 5) said intermediate releasable disconnection joint (312) is located in said transmission overlap region (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶ and Annotated Fig. 5 the hinge 312 is the same hinge depicted and shown in Figs. 5-7 folding the front wheel as discussed on p. 5 - ¶5 and Fig .10 and thus is interpreted as folding, as discussed on p. 4, in the same manner);
said intermediate releasable disconnection joint (312) includes an output coupler (308) from said forward portion (304,305) and an inlet coupler (308) of said rearward portion (308,309,310), said respective output (304) and input couplers (308) being mutually self-centering, and said input and output couplers (304, 308) are mating gears (304,308) (Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶ disclose the gears 304/308 couple the front and rear portions of the transmissions and are considered to be a part of the joint 312 and the gears 304/308 are engaged with each other in a toothed relationship. In folding the joint 312 from an open to a closed position, the teeth of the gears 304/308 are interpreted as meshing with each-other, i.e., self-centering.).
Regarding claim 14, depending on claim 1, He further discloses wherein no part of any endless tension element (310) of said transmission is externally exposed (Figs. 1&3 disclose the chain 310 is fully enclosed by the rear housing 302).
Regarding claim 16, depending on claim 6, He further discloses wherein said gear connection (304,308) comprises an input gear (308) and an output gear (304), and when said rearward portion (308,309,310) is in an unfolded position relative to said middle portion (405) said input gear (308) is in a facing relationship with said output gear (304) (Fig 2 depicts the teeth of input gear 308 and output gear 304 are facing each other, i.e., meshed, and therefore are interpreted in a “facing relationship”).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He in view of US 2007/0035106 A1 to Thorpe.
Regarding claim 3, depending on claim 1, the modified combination of He/Pong further discloses wherein at least one of said forward portion endless tension element (Pong - 22) or said rearward portion tension element (He – 310/Pong – 10) includes a … drive (He - Figs. 1-3 & p. 4 - 2nd last ¶ disclose the transmission folds and includes chain 310. Pong - Fig. 18 & [0028]).
It would have been obvious to have modified He in view of the teachings of Pong for at least the same reasons discussed above in claim 1 and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results.
He does not disclose that the drive is a belt drive.
Thorpe teaches that it was old and well known in the art of enclosed bicycle transmissions, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, for a drive to be a belt drive ([0018]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the noted features of Thorpe with teaching of the modified combination of He/Pong since the combination of the two references is merely simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result (KSR rationale B). Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself—that is, in the substitution of the belt drive of Thorpe for the chain drive of He. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He in view of US 2005/0217914 A1 to Sugimoto.
Regarding claim 15, depending on claim 1, He does not appear to disclose wherein a motor is fully enclosed within one of said forward housing (301) and said rearward housing (302).
Sugimoto teaches that it was old and well known in the art of single sided swingarm bicycles, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include a motor (30) fully enclosed within said forward housing (20) (Fig. 2 and [0043] & [0054] disclose the motor 30 is enclosed in the housing at the crankset).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of single sided swingarm bicycles before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the swingarm of the bicycle disclosed by He to incorporate for the swingarm to include a motor fully enclosed within said forward housing as taught by Sugimoto in order to allow the rider to pedal faster with less effort, e.g., see Sugimoto [0026], and because doing so could be readily and easily performed by any person of ordinary skill in the art, without undue experimentation or risk of unexpected results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 17, and 19-31 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Response pp. 4-5 with respect to the 35 USC §102 rejection of claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of He in view of Pong. Pong addresses all argued deficiencies of He and therefore Applicant’s arguments are moot.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER B WEHRLY whose telephone number is (303)297-4433. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 - 4:30 MT.
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.
/CHRISTOPHER B WEHRLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611