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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on July 29, 2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information referred to in the IDS filed July 29, 2026 has been considered.
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.
Claim(s) 24 and 27-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jacobs (US4098537).
Note a bicycle saddle comprising: a cushion (10) comprising a monolithic component that comprises an elastomeric material (polyurethane) formed into structures that define a plurality of regions, wherein properties of the structures are different in different regions of the plurality of regions such that each region of the plurality of regions has different stiffness characteristics (note as described in lines 9-22 in column 3) than at least one other region of the plurality of regions, wherein the plurality of regions comprises at least a first region (area at 60 and the area surrounding 70 and/or 72, as shown in Figure 2) and a second region (70 and/or 72), the first region comprising a first stiffness and the second region comprising a second stiffness, wherein the second stiffness is lower than the first stiffness, wherein the plurality of regions are configured such that, when considered as projections onto a lateral plane (see Figures 1 and 2): at least a portion of the second region is positioned at a widest part of the bicycle saddle (see Figure 2); and the first region at least partially surrounds the second region (see Figure 2), with at least a portion of the first region positioned laterally inward of the second region and at least a portion of the first region positioned laterally outward of the second region (see Figure 2); and a base structure (30) that supports the cushion and is configured to be attached to a bicycle frame.
Regarding claim 27, note the properties of the structures that are different in different regions includes spacing of the structures. Note spacing relative to the front end or a lateral side, as shown in Figure 2.
Regarding claim 28, note the properties of the structures that are different in different regions includes size of the structures. Note the size differentials a shown in Figure 2.
Regarding claim 29, note the properties of the structures that are different in different regions includes orientation of the structures. Note the orientation of each relative to the longitudinal center axis 52, as shown in Figure 2.
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.
Claim(s) 25 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacobs (US4098537) in view of CN109677516A.
The primary reference shows all claimed features of the instant invention with the exception of a top of the monolithic component of the cushion comprises a plurality of voids therethrough.
Regarding claim 26, note the cushion further comprises a covering over the top of the monolithic component. See lines 22-24 in column 2.
The secondary reference teaches configuring a bicycle saddle assembly as having a cushion wherein the top of the cushion comprises a plurality of voids (5) therethrough.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the pertinent art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the primary reference in view of the teachings of the secondary reference by adding a plurality of voids through the top of the cushion. This modification enhances ventilation to a user of the bicycle saddle.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 35-43 are allowed.
Claims 30-34 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MILTON NELSON JR whose telephone number is (571)272-6861. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30am-2:00pm.
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.
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.
mn /MILTON NELSON JR/August 4, 2026 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights