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 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) 2,5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blount (US 5036938).
Regarding claim 2, Blount discloses an electric scooter (see figure 1) comprising:
a body (80,81,82,84,85) having a support surface (82) configured to support a user's left foot and right foot;
a steering assembly (23,50,55) connected to a front of the body (see figure 2), the steering assembly comprising a handlebar (55) and a front wheel (23);
a drive assembly (see figures 23-25) connected to a rear of the body, the drive assembly comprising a rear wheel (133,134), an electric motor (136) configured to drive the rear wheel, and a battery housing (see Col. 12, line 19); and
a battery (94) configured to be received in the battery housing and to provide electric power to the electric motor, wherein when the battery is received in the battery housing:
the battery is positioned above the rear wheel (se figures 3,3A,3B and 9); and a lateral centerline of the battery is aligned with a lateral centerline of the body (see figures 8,9 and 1).
Regarding claim 5, wherein the top or upper end of the battery is above the top of the motor (see figures 9,25 and 2).
Regarding claim 6, wherein the drive assembly is removable, as a unit, from the body (see figures 3,2A and 3B).
Claim(s) 10,12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by David (US 2018/0151860).
Regarding claim 10, David discloses an electric scooter (see figure 1) comprising :
a body (10) having a support surface configured to support a user's left foot and right foot (see figure 1);
a steering assembly (12,30) connected to a front of the body, the steering assembly comprising a handlebar (30) and a front wheel (12);
a drive assembly (12,11) connected to a rear of the body, the drive assembly comprising a rear wheel (12’, see figure 2), an electric motor (see Par. 0117) configured to drive the rear wheel, and a battery housing (11) positioned above the rear wheel (see figure 1); and
a battery (90) configured to be received in the battery housing and to provide electric power to the electric motor, the battery removable from the battery housing by being pulled in an upward rearward direction (the battery can be pulled in an upward and rearward direction so as to slide the battery on the frame of the vehicle, see figure 6, on the wheels 130).
Regarding claim 12, wherein when the battery (90) is received in the battery housing (11) and a rear end of the battery protrudes from the battery housing (see figures 2 and 5).
Claim(s) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Desberg (US 12011654).
Regarding claim 16, Desberg discloses a pair of skates configured to be worn on a user's feet and configured to travel in a direction generally perpendicular to the user's feet (see figure 1A), the pair of skates comprising:
a first skate (right leg, see figure 1C) comprising:
a first longitudinal axis (longitudinal axis of the skate, see figure 6B and 7A);
a first foot platform (610,110);
a first wheel (620,120) on a first longitudinal side of the first foot platform and a second wheel (622,122) on a second longitudinal side of the first foot platform opposite the first longitudinal side, the first wheel and the second wheel each rotatable about a respective axis of rotation that is perpendicular to the first longitudinal axis (see figures 6B and 6C);
an electric motor (632,130) configured to drive the second wheel; and
a battery (636) configured to provide power to the electric motor, the battery positioned above the second wheel (see figure 6B);
a second skate (left leg) comprising:
a second longitudinal axis (longitudinal axis of the skate, see figure 6B and 7A);
a second foot platform (610,110); and
a first wheel (620,120) on a first longitudinal side of the second foot platform and a second wheel (622,122) on a second longitudinal side of the second foot platform opposite the first longitudinal side, the first wheel and the second wheel of the second skate each rotatable about a respective axis of rotation that is perpendicular to the second longitudinal axis of the second skate (see figures 6B and 6C).
Regarding claim 17, wherein the first foot platform is elevated above the axes of rotation of the first and second wheels of the first skate and the second foot platform is elevated above the axes of rotation of the first and second wheels of the second skate (see figures 6A and 6B).
Regarding claim 18, wherein the battery (636) is positioned above the electric motor (632, see figure 6B).
Regarding claim 19, wherein a top of the first and second wheels of the first skate are higher than the first foot platform and a top of the first and second wheels of the second skate are higher than the second foot platform (see figure 6B).
Regarding claim 20, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the second skate can be non-powered by removing the battery from it.
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) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blount in view of Chen (US 9180927). Blount does not mention that the battery housing has an opening that faces rearwardly.
Regarding claim 3, Chen discloses a vehicle with a battery housing (plate under battery 48, see figures 2 and 3), wherein the battery housing has an opening facing to the rear and top of the vehicle. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Blount by having a battery housing that has an opening facing to the rear and top, in order to allow easy access to the battery from the rear and top of the vehicle, or for easy connection to a battery charger.
Regarding claim 4, wherein the combination of Blount and Chen ends with a battery housing that allows the battery to protrude from the battery housing.
Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blount in view of Callahan (US 8864171). Regarding claim 7, Blount discloses a brake (134’), however Blount does not disclose that the brake is a foot pedal. However, Callahan discloses a scooter with a brake pedal (152, see figure 19). it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Blount by adding a brake pedal, in order to maximize the safety of the scooter by providing a easy to use brake actuator that the user can operate with his or her foot.
Regarding claim 8, wherein the combination of Blount and Callahan ends with, wherein a rear end of the battery (94) is positioned rearward of the brake pedal (as the brake pedal would be mounted onto the support surface 82 in Blount).
Claim(s) 13,14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over David in view of Callahan (US 8864171). Regarding claim 13, David does not disclose that the brake is a foot pedal. However, Callahan discloses a scooter with a brake pedal (152, see figure 19). it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify David by adding a brake pedal, in order to maximize the safety of the scooter by providing a brake actuator that the user can operate with his or her foot, thereby stopping the scooter.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of David and Callahan end with, wherein a rear end of the battery is positioned rearward of the brake pedal (as the brake pedal would be mounted on the support surface).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9,11 and 15 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 claims 9 and 15, the art of record did not include “a portion of the battery being received in the brake pedal”.
Regarding claim 11, the art of record did not include “a frontmost edge of the battery is rearward of a frontmost edge of the rear wheel and is frontward of a rearmost edge of the rear wheel; and a rearmost edge of the battery is rearward of the rearmost edge of the rear wheel”.
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