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 .
This communication is in response to application No. 18/876,041; Motorcycle-Type Vehicle, in Particular Motorcycle, with a Particulate Filter; filed on 12/17/2024. Claims 1 - 10 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 1 - 10 have been rejected as follows.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 9 should read; "the at least one rear wheel". 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.
Claim 2 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.
Regarding claim 2, the beginning limitation is a duplicate of the final limitation of the independent claim 1. Specifically the limitation; “the particulate filter is arranged at least partially between the internal combustion engine and the rear wheel when viewed in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle”.
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) s 1-7, and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu (DE 10 2017 004376 A1) in view of Onohara (WO 2023 058496 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
535
751
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Muramatsu discloses;
A motorcycle-type vehicle comprising: (Fig. 1 and paragraph 21 describe a motorcycle.)
at least one front wheel (front wheel 51; fig. 1),
at least one rear wheel (rear wheel 55; fig. 1),
an internal combustion engine (drive machine 3; fig. 1) by which the motorcycle-type vehicle can be driven, and
an exhaust tract (exhaust pipes 6, chamber 7, silencer 70; fig. 1) through which exhaust gas from the internal combustion engine can flow,
Muramatsu does not disclose a particulate filter. However Onohara teaches,
an exhaust tract in which a particulate filter (particulate filter 110; paragraph 76) is arranged, wherein:
the particulate filter is arranged at least partially between the internal combustion engine (engine 1; fig. 7; Onohara) and a rear wheel (rear wheel 55; fig. 1, Muramatsu) when viewed in a longitudinal direction of the vehicle. (Muramatsu, fig. 13, discloses an exhaust system with two catalysts (401 and 402) as part of the exhaust system, located downstream of the headers and upstream of the muffler. Fig. 1 of Muramatsu indicates this position in the exhaust system as beneath the engine and chassis (vertically) and between the front of the engine and the swingarm pivot (horizontally, longitudinally). A combination of Muramatsu to include the particulate filter, described by Onohara as located between upstream and downstream catalysts, would locate the particulate filter in the exhaust system of Muramatsu, at least partially between the engine and the rear wheel.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Muramatsu to include a particulate filter arranged at least partially between the engine and the rear wheel, as taught by Onohara, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to internal combustion engine exhaust aftertreatment systems. As disclosed by Onohara, it is well known for an engine exhaust aftertreatment system to include a particulate filter arranged at least partially between the engine and the rear wheel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Muramatsu to include a particulate filter arranged at least partially between the engine and the rear wheel, as taught by Onohara, as such a modification would reduce exhaust particulate emissions.
Regarding claim 2; Muramatsu in view of Onohara discloses;
wherein: the particulate filter (particulate filter 110; paragraph 76, Onohara) is arranged at least partially between the internal combustion engine (engine 1; fig. 7; Onohara) and the rear wheel (rear wheel 55; fig. 1, Muramatsu), viewed in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle, in such a way that the particulate filter is at least partially overlapped by the internal combustion engine towards the front (fig. 2 of Muramatsu) in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle and at least partially overlapped by the rear wheel towards the rear in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle. (A modification of Muramatsu to include that particulate filter of Onohara between the catalysts of Muramatsu would place the filter beneath the engine and overlapping the engine, but fully in front of the rear wheel, as demonstrated in fig. 1 of Muramatsu. However, the full exhaust extends rearward and overlaps the rear wheel. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to reshape the exhaust system and reposition the filter within the exhaust system further rearward, or to rearrange the swingarm such that the rear wheel is positioned further forward such that the filter and the rear wheel overlap. It has been held that, absent any showing of unexpected results, rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Exhaust systems shapes and swingarm lengths vary greatly between different types of motorcycles. Muramatsu illustrates an inline four cylinder engine with exhaust headers exiting the front of the engine, but V-twin and V-four engines are well known in the art and comprise headers which exit the engine to the rear, requiring the downstream catalysts and particulate filter to move rearward. Additionally, the rear wheel’s (longitudinal) mounting position can vary greatly across varying motorcycle types, even within a single motorcycle, the rear axle position is allowed to vary to adjust for drive chain wear.)
Regarding claim 3, Muramatsu discloses;
further comprising: a frame (frame 21, 22, 23; fig. 1) on which a rear wheel swing arm (swingarm 11) is pivotably mounted, on which the rear wheel (rear wheel 55) is rotatably held (swingarm pivot 23b).
Regarding claim 4, Muramatsu in view of Onohara discloses;
wherein: at least a partial area of the particulate filter is arranged lower than at least a partial area of the rear wheel swing arm when viewed in a vertical direction of the vehicle. (A combination of Muramatsu to include the particulate filter, described by Onohara as located between upstream and downstream catalysts, would locate the particulate filter in the exhaust system of Muramatsu. Muramatsu indicates this position in the exhaust system as
PNG
media_image2.png
506
774
media_image2.png
Greyscale
beneath the engine, chassis and swing arm (fig. 1; Muramatsu).
Regarding claim 5, Muramatsu in view of Onohara discloses;
further comprising: a transmission (drive machine 30; fig. 2, Muramatsu) via which the motorcycle-type vehicle can be driven by the internal combustion engine, wherein the particulate filter is arranged at least partially between the transmission and the rear wheel (rear wheel 55; fig. 1) when viewed in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle. (Muramatsu positions the chamber beneath the transmission, but it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to reshape the exhaust system and reposition the filter within the exhaust system further rearward such that the filter is at least partially between the transmission and the rear wheel. It has been held that, absent any showing of unexpected results, rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Exhaust systems shapes and swingarm lengths vary greatly between different types of motorcycles. Different engine configurations, including V-twin and V-four engines, would require the downstream catalysts and particulate filter to move rearward.)
Regarding claim 6, Muramatsu in view of Onohara discloses;
wherein: the particulate filter is arranged at least partially between the transmission (drive machine 30; fig. 2, Muramatsu) and the rear wheel (rear wheel 55; fig. 1) as viewed in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle in such a way that the particulate filter is at least partially overlapped by the transmission towards the front in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle and at least partially overlapped by the rear wheel towards the rear in the longitudinal direction of the vehicle. (Muramatsu positions the chamber beneath the transmission, but it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to reshape the exhaust system and reposition the filter within the exhaust system further rearward such that the filter is at least partially overlapped by the transmission and the rear wheel. It has been held that, absent any showing of unexpected results, rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Exhaust systems shapes and swingarm lengths vary greatly between different types of motorcycles. Different engine configurations, including V-twin and V-four engines, would require the downstream catalysts and particulate filter to move rearward.)
Regarding claim 7, Muramatsu in view of Onohara discloses;
wherein: a muffler (silencer 70; fig. 1, Muramatsu) is arranged in the exhaust tract, wherein the particulate filter is arranged in the muffler or upstream of the muffler. (A combination of Muramatsu to include the particulate filter, described by Onohara as located between upstream and downstream catalysts, would locate the particulate filter in the exhaust system of Muramatsu. Muramatsu indicates this position in the exhaust system as upstream of the muffler (fig. 1; Muramatsu). Additionally, fig. 13 of Muramatsu indicates that a portion of the catalyst (408) may be located in the chamber (404), which is part of the sound attenuation (muffler) arrangement. This would make it obvious to locate at least a portion of the particulate filter in the muffler.)
Regarding claim 9, Muramatsu in view of Onohara discloses;
wherein: the exhaust tract (exhaust pipes 6, chamber 7, silencer 70; fig. 1, Muramatsu) has at least two exhaust gas flows (exhaust pipes 6a, 6b, 6c, 6d) through which respective partial areas of the exhaust gas can flow and which are separated from one another at least in respective partial regions upstream of the particulate filter, wherein the particulate filter is a particulate filter which is common to the exhaust gas flows and through which parts of the exhaust gas flowing through the exhaust gas flows can flow. (A combination of Muramatsu to include the particulate filter, described by Onohara as located between upstream and downstream catalysts, would locate the particulate filter in the exhaust system of Muramatsu in a common flow channel where all of the partial exhaust gases flow.)
Regarding claim 10, Muramatsu in view of Onohara discloses;
wherein: the particulate filter has precisely one inlet (second assembly pipe 61, fig. 5, Muramatsu) or a plurality of separate inlets via which the exhaust gas can be introduced into the particulate filter. (A combination of Muramatsu to include the particulate filter, described by Onohara as located between upstream and downstream catalysts, would locate the particulate filter in the exhaust system of Muramatsu with a single inlet from the upstream catalyst. Exhaust systems shapes vary greatly between different types of motorcycles. Different engine configurations, including V-twin and V-four engines, would make a plurality of separate inlets an obvious modification to the exhaust system.)
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu (DE 10 2017 004376 A1) in view of Onohara (WO 2023 058496 A1) and further in view of Crawford (US 11,060,433 B2).
Regarding claim 8, Muramatsu in view of Onohara does not disclose a particulate filter with a catalytic coating. However, Crawford teaches;
wherein: the particulate filter has a catalytic coating. (col. 9, lines 27-30 describe the application of a catalytic coating to a particulate filter.)
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Muramatsu in view of Onohara to include a particulate filter with a catalytic coating as taught by Crawford, as the references and the claimed invention are directed to internal combustion engine exhaust aftertreatment systems. As disclosed by Crawford, it is well known for an engine exhaust system to include a particulate filter with a catalytic coating. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Muramatsu in view of Onohara to include a particulate filter with a catalytic coating as taught by Crawford, as such a modification would reduce engine exhaust emissions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT LAWRENCE STRICKLER whose telephone number is (703)756-1961. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 9:30am to 5:30pm.
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, Vivek Koppikar can be reached at 571-272-5109. 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.
/SCOTT LAWRENCE STRICKLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3612
/VIVEK D KOPPIKAR/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3612
July 24, 2026
Prosecution Insights