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 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 1-16 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 1 recites “releasing the battery unlocking” in lines 5 and 7. This is unclear and confusing because it is not clear what “releasing” the act of battery unlocking is. Releasing is the act of setting free or making something available. Unlocking is also an act of making something available or releasing a restraint. Therefore, the recitation “releasing the battery unlocking” is indefinite in that it does not specifically define a clear limitation.
Claim 1 also recites “an electric bicycle, comprising… connected to a release device.” This is unclear and confusing because the structure of the claim appears to be reciting elements of the apparatus with each indent, except the last clause is not directed to structure but a step, function, or intended use. Specifically, stating “an electric bicycle, comprising… connected to a release device” is grammatically incorrect and renders the claim indefinite because it is not clear if this final clause should be listed under the others in the manner provided under “comprising.”
Claims 6, 9, 10, 15 and 16 are unclear and confusing for the recitation of “an opening angle.” This is unclear and confusing because the angle is not defined relative to any point. The claim does not recite an element “rotating through an arc of 90 degrees” or “an open position orientation of the element being greater than 90 degrees from the closed position orientation,” etc.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-8 and 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Bender (US Pub. No. 2021/0402883).
Regarding claim 1, Bender discloses a locking and unlocking apparatus for an electrically driven vehicle (figs 11-16), in particular an electric bicycle (at least fig 3A), comprising a housing (at least frame 624) for accommodating components; a built-in element (at least 850, 912 of figs 11, 15) for mechanical battery unlocking, wherein the built-in element comprises an actuating element (852, fig 11) for releasing the battery unlocking; an electronic unlocking element (actuator, para 95); and connected to a release device (authentication module) for releasing the mechanical battery unlocking by means of the electronic release element (para 97).
Regarding claim 2, Bender discloses wherein the housing comprises an access to a charging socket (at least charging circuit 730; where the housing comprises “an access to” the charging socket providing space for components of the battery to connect to the docking station 750).
Regarding claim 3, Bender discloses wherein the built-in element is provided movably for opening and closing, respectively (at least pivoting of latch 852).
Regarding claim 4, Bender discloses wherein the built-in element is attached to the housing by means of a spring arrangement with a first spring (918, fig 15), a shaft (surrounded by 918, fig 15) and a locking ring (at least flared terminal end of bosses, 916 of fig 15).
Regarding claim 5, Bender discloses wherein the mechanical battery unlocking comprises a second spring for ejecting a battery (at least one of the springs 918, fig 15, para 107).
Regarding claim 7, Bender discloses wherein the housing is installable in a recess of a vehicle frame in a form-fitting manner (at least figs 11-14) and is protected by means of a securing bracket (at least 812, fig 17B).
Regarding claim 8, Bender discloses wherein the housing has at least one groove which accommodates a securing bracket for locking (at least one of grooves noted in annotated fig below, particularly groove of 850 accommodating 824).
PNG
media_image1.png
538
577
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Bender discloses wherein the electronic unlocking element comprises an electric solenoid (see “electromechanical lock” para 95).
Regarding claim 12, Bender discloses wherein the release device is configured for mechanical battery unlocking by means of a code to be entered (at least para 97).
Regarding claim 13, Bender discloses wherein a mechanical battery lock is provided by closing the actuating element after battery insertion (at least figs 12-16 and associated description - para 93-107).
Regarding claim 14, Bender discloses a vehicle frame for an electrically driven vehicle, in particular an electric bicycle, for receiving and coupling with an apparatus according to claim 1 (at least fig 3A, 6-16 in view of discussion above).
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) 6, 9, 10, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bender (US Pat. No. 11,945,316).
Regarding claim 6, Bender discloses wherein the mechanical battery unlocking is effected by means of an actuating element and an opening angle of the actuating element of more than 90 degrees; wherein the mechanical battery unlocking is carried out by the release device by means of the electronic unlocking element and the actuating element is moved to an opening angle of 90 degrees or more; wherein the mechanical battery locking takes place when the actuating element is at an opening angle of 90 degrees or less; a method of unlocking for an electrically driven vehicle, in particular an electric bicycle, by means of an apparatus according to claim 1, comprising the steps of: release of the mechanical battery unlocking by the release device by means of an electronic release element; and opening of the actuating element via an opening angle of more than 90 degrees; and a method of locking for an electrically driven vehicle, in particular an electric bicycle, by means of an apparatus according to claim 1, comprising the step of: closing the actuating element to a closing angle of 90 degrees or less (see discussion of claims 1-5, 7-8 and 11-14 above) except for an angle of more or less than 90 degrees.
Bender does not specifically disclose an unlocking with an opening angle of more than 90 degrees, an opening angle of 90 degrees or more; a locking with an opening angle of 90 degrees or less, or a closing angle of 90 degrees or less. However, Bender discloses a well-known latching technique for locking the battery, wherein the latch pivots between an open position and a locked position. Bender does not specifically disclose the degree of rotation of the latch 852.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an unlocking with an opening angle of more than 90 degrees, an opening angle of 90 degrees or more; a locking with an opening angle of 90 degrees or less, or a closing angle of 90 degrees or less, since it was well-known in the art to provide rotating latches for locking and unlocking that rotate between any substantial degrees of rotation in order to prevent accidental unlocking/locking as well as to provide leverage when unlocking/locking.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB B MEYER whose telephone number is (571)270-3535. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-7.
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, J Allen Shriver can be reached at 303.297.4337. 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.
JACOB B. MEYER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3613
/JACOB B MEYER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3613
Prosecution Insights