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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the magnet ring and the clipping of the ring onto the ratchet ring with the slot configuration (collectively claims 13-18) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. While discussed in the specification this embodiment does not appear to be illustrated and no reference characters have been given to structure of the clipping configuration or the slot and clipping ring, in other words no distinct magnet ring or clipping ring connected to the ratchet ring or the hub shell is illustrated, what the drawings appear to show is a hub shell or ratchet ring that is configured to hold the separate magnets, while this might form a magnet ring it is not independent and distinct as the format of the claim suggests.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 2 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 appears to be setting for two different states that possibly occur simultaneously because of the current format of the claim, however a ratchet mechanism moves between two distinct states that occur at different times. The fourth and fifth clauses should be combined and state that the ratchet mechanism switches between the engaged state and the disengaged state.
Claim 2, “ratchet mechanism” should be - -pawl system- - since the subset of the pawls within the ratchet mechanism are already set forth in claim 1 and claim 2 is defining this subset has having a plurality of pawls. This suggestion general mirrors claim 10 which correctly distinguishes the subsets.
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.
Claims 3, 9 and 18 is 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 3, line 2, states “provide magnetic engagement” however it is unclear with what the magnetic engagement is with. The recitation appears to be incomplete and does not define with what the arrangement is engaged with. Is Applicant attempting to define the engagement of the magnet with the pawl or with the pawl with the ratchet ring? There is also a lack of antecedent basis for “the set of magnets” in line 2.
Regarding claims 9 and 18, the phrase "may be" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Is a magnetic system required by the claim or not? In this case “may be” is functioning in a manner similar to “for example”, see MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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)(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) 1-3, 5, 7-13, 17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Peng, US PGPub 2017/0267024.
Regarding claim 1, Peng discloses a hub assembly (10) for a wheel with an axle comprising: a hub shell (outer member indicated by 10) configured to be coupled to the wheel; a hub body (at 21) configured to be coupled to the axle (11); a ratchet mechanism (30) comprising a ratchet ring (31) and a pawl system (22/34/43) configured to engage the hub body with the hub shell (engages and disengages to connect the parts); wherein the ratchet mechanism is configured to provide an engaged state where the hub body is configured to rotate together with the hub shell (pawls 34 engaged with 31); wherein the ratchet mechanism is configured to provide a disengaged state where the hub body is configured to rotate independently relative to the hub shell (pawls 34 disengaged with 31); wherein the ratchet mechanism is configured to magnetically couple the pawl system with the ratchet ring (magnets 51 act to help rotate the pawls into position, see paragraphs 0047 or 0048).
Regarding claim 2, Peng discloses that the ratchet mechanism comprises a set of pawls (34) for engagement with gear teeth (32) within the ratchet mechanism.
Regarding claim 3, Peng discloses that a magnet arrangement (51) configured to provide magnetic engagement; wherein the magnet arrangement comprises the set of magnets within the hub shell (the set of magnets 51 is positioned within 10).
Regarding claim 5, Peng discloses that each magnet (51) within the set of magnets comprises a disc magnet (each element 51 is a disc magnet like those in the instant application).
Regarding claim 7, Peng discloses a hub assembly (10) for a wheel comprising an axle comprising: a hub shell (indicated by 10); a hub body (at 21) configured for the axle (11) of the wheel; a ratchet mechanism (40) comprising a ratchet ring (31) and a pawl system (22/34/43); a magnet arrangement comprising a set of magnets (51) configured to magnetically couple the pawl system to the ratchet ring (see paragraphs 0047 and 0048); wherein the ratchet mechanism is configured to be retained in the hub shell (fits within the end of 10, see at least figure 18); wherein the pawl system is configured to couple the ratchet ring to the hub body in an engaged state (the pawls flip up to engage 21 and the gear unit connected thereto with the ratchet ring 31 in order to provide the driving/engaged state).
Regarding claim 8, Peng discloses that the hub body is configured to be engaged for rotation with the hub shell in the engaged state and the hub body is configured to be disengaged for rotation independent of the hub shell in a disengaged state (the freewheel state is when the pawls are disengaged and the wheel rotates separate from 21 and engaged when the pedaling motion is intended to drive the wheel).
Regarding claim 9, Peng discloses that the pawl system may be configured to be magnetically drawn into engagement with the ratchet ring (the magnets 51 drive the pawls into engagement with the ratchet ring).
Regarding claim 10, Peng discloses that the pawl system comprises a set of pawls (34) configured to couple the ratchet ring (31) to the hub body by engagement with a set of teeth (32) on the ratchet ring (31).
Regarding claim 11, Peng discloses a hub assembly for a wheel comprising an axle comprising: a hub shell (at 10); a hub body (21) configured for the axle (11) of the wheel; a ratchet mechanism (40) comprising a ratchet ring (31) and a pawl system (22,34,43); a magnet arrangement (51) configured to provide for magnetically coupling for the ratchet mechanism of the hub body to the hub shell (magnetic force rotates the pawls into engagement coupling the parts together, see paragraphs 0047 and 0048); wherein the magnet arrangement is configured to magnetically couple the pawl system to the ratchet ring; wherein the ratchet mechanism is configured to be retained in the hub shell (sits within the end of 10, see at least figure 18); wherein the pawl system is configured to couple the ratchet ring to the hub body in an engaged state (when the pawls flip up into the ratchet teeth the parts are engaged).
Regarding claim 12, Peng discloses that the magnet arrangement comprises a set of magnets (51) within a set of pockets (52) within the hub shell (the ring 53 that hold the magnets is within the hub shell 10, see figure 18).
Regarding claim 13, Peng discloses that the magnet arrangement comprises a magnet ring (53 is a ring that holds all the magnets together thus forming a magnet ring of individual magnets like in the instant application).
Regarding claim 17, Peng discloses that the magnet arrangement comprises a magnet ring (53) within a recess within the hub shell (within the stepped opening of 10 that holds 31, this is a form of a recess); wherein the recess comprises a groove (the recess is annular and thus comprises a groove, alternatively the threads that retain 31 are a groove in the recess).
Regarding claim 20, Peng discloses that the hub body (21) is configured to be engaged for rotation with the hub shell (10) in the engaged state (pawls engaged with ratchet ring) and the hub body is configured to be disengaged for rotation independent of the hub shell in a disengaged state (pawls disengaged from ratchet ring allowing freewheeling).
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peng, US PGPub 2017/0267024, in view of Jegatheeson, USP 7,475,763.
Regarding claim 4, Peng does not disclose that the magnet arrangement is configured to provide for magnetization of the ratchet ring of the ratchet mechanism; wherein the ratchet ring of the ratchet mechanism is configured to magnetically engage a set of pawls to provide the engaged state for the mechanism.
Jegatheeson teaches that in a ratcheting/clutching mechanism the ratchet ring (101) can be configured as a magnetized member (regions 603) in order to attract and engage the set of a pawls (103).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Peng and make the ratchet ring as a magnetized ratchet ring that is configured to magnetically engage the set of pawls to provide the engaged state, as taught by Jegatheeson, since substituting between different known magnetic attraction/movement configurations that act to engage pawls with a ratchet ring provides the same predictable result of moving the pawls in to engagement to couple the two members together so that the rotate as a unit and using a magnetic ring further reduces the need of a plurality of individual magnets thus reducing the overall size and mass of the hub assembly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 14 and 19, and claims depending therefrom, 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.
Claim 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Peng, while disclosing a plurality of magnets, the magnets are arranged to pivot the pawl mechanism upward and are not adjacent and arranged to magnetize the ratch ring so that the ratchet ring attracts the pawls to it. While magnetized ratchet rings are also not new the ring itself tends to be magnetized (like Jegatheeson) with no need for additional magnets and thus there is no teaching or suggestion in the prior art to use a plurality of separate magnets that work in conjunction with the ratchet ring to magnetize the ring.
Regarding claim 14, the prior art of record does not teach nor render obvious the combination that includes a separate distinct ring from the hub body and/or shell and the ratchet ring that is clipped onto the magnetic ring, however see the drawing objection above as this embodiment appears to not be shown.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art of record does not teach nor render obvious the claimed combination wherein a separate magnet ring projects from a groove within the hub shell and is adjacent to the ratchet ring, however see drawing objection above as this embodiment appears to not be shown.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES PILKINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-5052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7-3.
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, John Olszewski can be reached at 571-272-2706. 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.
/JAMES PILKINGTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Prosecution Insights