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 .
INFORMATION DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 21 March 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has been considered by the Examiner herein.
CLAIM STATUS
Claims 1-16 were originally filed.
Claims 1-16 are currently pending and have been examined herein.
INITIAL REMARKS
Applicant is reminded that in order to be entitled to reconsideration or further examination, the Applicant or patent owner must reply to the Office action. The reply by the Applicant or patent owner must be reduced to a writing which distinctly and specifically points out the supposed errors in the examiner' s action and must reply to every ground of objection and rejection in the prior Office action. The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. If the reply is with respect to an application, a request may be made that objections or requirements as to form not necessary to further consideration of the claims, be held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is indicated. The Applicant's or patent owner's reply must appear throughout to be a bona fide attempt to advance the application or the reexamination proceeding to final action. A general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section.
Should the Applicant believe that a telephone conference would expedite the prosecution of the instant application, Applicant is invited to call the Examiner.
CLAIM REJECTIONS - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 3-6, 8-11, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fischer et al., DE102021120276B4, (“FISCHER”).
Re claim 1, FISCHER discloses a bicycle handlebar comprising:
a frame structure comprising at least one tube surrounding an internal space [Figs.1-2 and associated text]; and
an integrated aero measuring device housed within the internal space and configured to measure coefficient of drag area (CdA) in real-time [Figs.1-2 and associated text]
Re claim 3, FISCHER discloses the bicycle handlebar of claim 1, as shown above. FISCHER further discloses wherein the integrated aero measuring device comprises a notification system configured to report a change in CdA [Fig.3 and associated text]
Re claim 4, FISCHER discloses the bicycle handlebar of claim 3, as shown above. FISCHER further discloses wherein the notification system comprises at least one of a visual display system, auditory alert system, or haptic alert system configured to report CdA in real-time [Fig.3 and associated text]
Re claim 5, FISCHER discloses the bicycle handlebar of claim 1, as shown above. FISCHER further discloses a bicycle [Abstract]
Re claims 6, 8, 10-11, 13, and 16, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claims 1 and 3-5. Accordingly, claims 6, 8, 10-11, 13, and 16 are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as respective claims 1 and 3-5.
Re claim 9, FISCHER discloses the system of claim 6, as shown above. FISCHER further discloses wherein the notification system is configured to notify the bicycle operator of CdA after the change in CdA exceeds a reporting threshold [p.6]
Re claim 14, FISCHER discloses the method of claim 11, as shown above. FISCHER further discloses wherein reporting the change in CdA occurs after the CdA exceeds a reporting threshold [p.6]
Re claim 15, FISCHER discloses the method of claim 14, as shown above. FISCHER further discloses wherein the reporting further comprises maintaining the notification until the CdA is below the reporting threshold [p.6]
configured to report a change in CdA [Fig.3 and associated text]
Re claim 16, FISCHER discloses the method of claim 11, as shown above. FISCHER further discloses wherein the notification is a visual notification, an auditory notification, or a haptic notification [Fig.3 and associated text]
CLAIM REJECTIONS - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 2, 7, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over FISCHER in view of Doldi et a., WO2017103878A1, (“DOLDI”).
Re claim 2, FISCHER discloses the bicycle handlebar of claim 1, as shown above.
FISCHER fails to explicitly disclose wherein the integrated aero measuring device comprises a pitot tube that extends at least partially outside of the at least one tube so that it is exposed to external air
However, DOLDI, in the same or similar field of endeavor, teaches a bicycle handlebar system for measuring CdA in real time wherein the integrated aero measuring device comprises a pitot tube that extends at least partially outside of the at least one tube so that it is exposed to external air [p.3]
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant invention, to modify FISCHER to include the specific structure of the drag measurement system. One would have been motivated to do so in order to provide an improved bicycle structure for measuring performance values [p.1]. Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provided that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, DOLDI merely teaches that it is well-known to for a CdA system of a bicycle to include a pitot tube. Since both FISCHER and DOLDI disclose similar bicycle handlebar measurement systems, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results.
Re claims 7 and 12, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 2. Accordingly, claims 7 and 12 are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 2.
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS M HAMMOND III whose telephone number is 571-272-2215. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 0800-1700.
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached on 571-272-2375. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. For more information about the PAIR system, see: https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair.
Respectfully,
/Thomas M Hammond III/Primary Examiner, GAU 2855
Prosecution Insights