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 7 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the bottom of the radiator cover” which should be changed to “a bottom of the radiator cover”.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “a single structural unit” which should be changed to “the single structural unit”.
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.
Claims 4, 7, and 13 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 4 recites the limitation “a plurality of horizontal louvers”. It is uncertain whether this limitation refers to the plurality of horizontal louvers introduced in claim 1, or if this limitation is introducing another instance of “a plurality of horizontal louvers”. Clarification is required.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the interface" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “all components”, which renders the claim indefinite because it is uncertain what is included or excluded. Claim 13 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d), see below.
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.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) 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. Claim 13 omits the two-wheeled vehicle of claim 10 except for the cooling assembly of claim 10, and thus fails to include every limitation of parent claim 10. Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 1 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2010/0187033 A1 to Hayashi et al (hereinafter Hayashi).
Regarding claim 1, Hayashi discloses [a two-wheeled vehicle (10)] (Fig. 1; paragraphs 0020, 0035), comprising:
[a frame (11) including a down tube (27)] (Fig. 2; paragraph 0036);
[a plurality of ground engaging members for supporting the frame (16, 22)] (Fig. 1; paragraph 0035); and
[a cooling assembly (70, 100) including a radiator (70) and a radiator cover (100), and the radiator cover includes a plurality of horizontal louvers (124) and a plurality of vertical louvers (122)] (Figs. 3, 10A, 10B; paragraph 0096).
Regarding claim 2, Hayashi further discloses [the vertical louvers are positioned at an angle at least 0 to 45 degrees from a vehicle centerline (CL)] (Annotated Fig. 10(A), below – e.g., lines indicated by reference characters “W” and “X” are at angles substantially 45 degrees from the vehicle centerline, lines indicated by reference characters “Y” and “Z” are substantially parallel to vertical louvers rightward and leftward of the vehicle centerline, respectively, and thus the vertical louvers are positioned at angles at least between 0 to 45 degrees from the vehicle centerline).
PNG
media_image1.png
2459
1453
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Hayashi further discloses [the radiator cover is coupled to the down tube and the radiator] (Figs. 7, 9; paragraph 0078 discloses element 97, shown in Figs. 7 and 9, protrudes from the down tube; paragraph 0080).
Regarding claim 4, Hayashi further discloses [the innermost vertical louvers of the plurality of vertical louvers are separated by a plurality of horizontal louvers (HL)] (Ann. Fig. 10(A) – e.g., the plurality of horizontal louvers HL are respective portions of 124 disposed between and separating the innermost vertical louvers of the plurality of vertical louvers).
Regarding claim 5, Hayashi further discloses [the horizontal louvers are generally parallel to each other and perpendicular to the vertical louvers] (Fig. 10(A)).
Regarding claim 6, Hayashi further discloses [the vertical louvers are generally parallel to each other and perpendicular to the horizontal louvers] (Fig. 10(A)).
Regarding claim 7, Hayashi further discloses [the plurality of vertical louvers extend vertically from the bottom (135) of the radiator cover to the interface with the horizontal louvers] (Ann. Fig. 10(A) – e.g., the interface being comprised of portions of the plurality of vertical louvers that intersect with the horizontal louvers).
Regarding claim 8, Hayashi further discloses [the plurality of vertical louvers have a recessed portion (RP)] (Annotated Fig. 10(B), below – the recessed portion is understood as being between line RL and the radiator cover 100).
PNG
media_image3.png
966
389
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Hayashi further discloses [the radiator cover and the radiator are coupled to the frame at a same location (102)] (Fig. 9; paragraph 0089; see also the rejection of claim 3).
Regarding claim 10, Hayashi discloses [a two-wheeled vehicle (10)] (Fig. 1; paragraphs 0020, 0035), comprising:
[a frame (11) including a down tube (27) and a mounting arm (97) on the down tube] (Fig. 2; paragraphs 0036, 0078);
[a plurality of ground engaging members for supporting the frame (16, 22)] (Fig. 1; paragraph 0035); and
[a cooling assembly (70, 80, 100, 73) including a radiator (70), fan (80), a radiator cover (100), and coolant bottle (73) as a single structural unit] (Figs. 3, 6; paragraphs 0046 – 0048, 0053).
Regarding claim 11, Hayashi further discloses [the radiator is pivotably mounted to the down tube] (Fig. 4(A), Fig. 4(B), Fig. 5; paragraph 0066, To the upper left and right portions of the radiator...a pair of...bosses...are integrally provided. To the [down tube]...boss receivers 95...are provided...boss receivers 95 protrude...from the [down tube] and receive the bosses 90, respectively; paragraph 0069, …boss receivers 95 can rotatably support the radiator).
Regarding claim 12, Hayashi further discloses [the fan, and coolant bottle are coupled to the radiator] (Figs. 5, 6; paragraph 0048; paragraphs 0053 – 0054).
Regarding claim 13, Hayashi further discloses [the cooling assembly, wherein all components move with the radiator as a single structural unit relative to the frame] (The single structural unit is disclosed in the rejection of claim 10; paragraph 0073 discloses the radiator is rotatably supported by the down tube of the frame, and thus all components of the cooling assembly move, e.g., rotatably, with the radiator as the single structural unit relative to the frame).
Regarding claim 14, Hayashi further discloses [the radiator cover and the radiator are coupled to the frame at a same location (102)] (Figs. 9, 10(A); paragraphs 0089, 0091).
Regarding claim 15, Hayashi discloses [a two-wheeled vehicle (10)] (Fig. 1; paragraphs 0020, 0035), comprising:
[a frame (11) including a down tube (27) and a mounting arm (97) on the down tube] (Fig. 2; paragraphs 0036, 0078);
[a plurality of ground engaging members for supporting the frame (16, 22)] (Fig. 1; paragraph 0035); and
[a cooling assembly (70, 80, 73) including a radiator (70), a fan (80), and a coolant bottle (73) positioned below the radiator] (Figs. 3, 6; paragraphs 0046 – 0048, 0053).
Regarding claim 16, Hayashi further discloses [the fan and the coolant bottle are coupled to the radiator] (Figs. 5, 6; paragraphs 0048, 0053).
Regarding claim 17, Hayashi further discloses [the fan, the coolant bottle, and the radiator move together relative to the frame] (Figs. 5, 6; paragraphs 0048, 0053 – 0054, 0073).
Regarding claim 18, Hayashi further discloses [the fan is positioned above the coolant bottle and behind the radiator, and the fan is coupled to the coolant bottle and the radiator] (Fig. 6; paragraph 0054).
Regarding claim 19, Hayashi further discloses [the cooling assembly is pivotably coupled to the frame] (paragraphs 0054, 0073; see also the rejection of claim 11).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US Pub 2022/0144075 A1 – discloses a cooling system for a two-wheeled vehicle;
US Pub 2008/0006458 A1 – discloses a radiator cover for a two-wheeled vehicle;
US Pat 5,984,035 A – discloses a cooling device for a two-wheeled vehicle; and
US Pat 4,660,624 A – discloses a radiator for a two-wheeled vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tyler Ferguson whose telephone number is (571)272-7374. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am - 5:00pm.
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.
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.
/Tyler Ferguson/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/ANNE MARIE M BOEHLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
