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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 15-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. 12359699. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding claim 15, the claimed subject matter has been anticipated by claim 1 of U.S. Patent 12359699, to include the detent freewheel (which is called pawl freewheel), the detents (which are called pawls) and the sensor apparatus (which is called sensor device).
Regarding claims 16 and 17, the claimed subject matter has been anticipated by claims 2 and 3 of U.S. Patent 12359699.
Claim Objections
Claims 16-27 (and also claim 28) are objected to because of the following informalities: claims 16-27 all depend on claim 14 which has been canceled, additionally the last claim has been numbered 14 but it appears to depend on itself, the last claim in the set of claim will be treated as claim 28. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 15-17,19,20-22,25 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoshiie (US 6851497).
Regarding claim 15, Yoshiie discloses a drive arrangement for a bicycle (see figure 1), comprising:
a detent freewheel mechanism (see figure 10) that includes a first ring (100,124) with detents (102) movably supported on the first ring (see figure 10) and also includes a second ring (112) with a tooth arrangement (114,116); and
a sensor apparatus (see figure 10) configured to detect deformation of the first ring (see Col. 15, lines 54-58) of the detent freewheel mechanism on the basis of a drive force which is applied (by the user through the pedals 8R,8L), the sensor apparatus comprising a respective deformation sensor (126) for each detent (through member 124, See Col. 15, lines 40-54).
Regarding claim 16, wherein the first ring (100,124) forms an inner ring, and the second ring (112) forms an outer ring (see figure 10).
Regarding claim 17, wherein the first ring (2, in a different embodiment, see figure 4) forms an outer ring, and the second ring (60, in a different embodiment, see figure 4) forms an inner ring.
Regarding claim 19, wherein the first ring (100) comprises a plurality of recesses (see marked figure 10 below), each recess of the plurality of recesses disposed in a respective circumferential region between a respective pair of adjacent detents (see figure 10 below).
Regarding claims 20 and 25, wherein each deformation sensor (126) is arranged on the first ring (100) in a circumferential direction behind the respective detent (see figure 10) in a direction of a force acting from the respective detent on the first ring (see figure 10).
Regarding claims 21 and 25, wherein the drive arrangement comprises an evaluator computing device (14) configured to evaluate the deformations of the first ring as detected by the deformation sensors (126).
Regarding claim 22, wherein the evaluator computing device is configured to determine a pedaling behavior (pedaling force) of a rider in accordance with the deformation of the first ring as detected by the deformation sensors (see Col. 15, lines 20-53).
Regarding claim 28 (which has been marked as claim 14, see last claim in the set of claims), Yoshiie discloses a bicycle (see figure 1) with an output element (2,12) configured to be driven by the drive arrangement.
PNG
media_image1.png
531
533
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18,23,24,26 and 27 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.
Regarding claim 18, the art of record did not include “each deformation sensor being arranged adjacent the respective detent on the first ring”.
Regarding claim 23, The art of record did not include “the evaluator computing device being configured to determine an engagement behavior of the detent freewheel mechanism in accordance with the deformations of the first ring as detected by the deformation sensors”.
Regarding claim 26, the art of record did not include “determining assembly errors in the detent freewheel mechanism in accordance with the determined engagement behavior, determining production errors in the detent freewheel mechanism in accordance with the determined engagement behavior, producing a maintenance prediction for the detent freewheel mechanism in accordance with the determined engagement behavior, and identifying damaged teeth of the tooth arrangement of the second ring and controlling a drive motor of the drive arrangement in order to avoid engagement of the detents with teeth which have been identified as being damaged”.
Regarding claim 27, the art of record did not include “producing a maintenance prediction for the detent freewheel mechanism in accordance with the determined engagement behavior, and identifying damaged teeth of the tooth arrangement of the second ring and controlling a drive motor of the drive arrangement in order to avoid engagement of the detents with teeth which have been identified as being damaged”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marlon A Arce whose telephone number is (571)272-1341. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM - 4:30PM.
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, 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.
/MARLON A ARCE/Examiner, Art Unit 3611
/KEVIN HURLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3611
Prosecution Insights