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, “each of the plurality of connection members comprises two pieces that are connected together in a clam shell manner” stated in Claim 2 and “fasteners removably securing the first side wall to the first side frame and the second side wall to the second side frame” stated in Claim 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim uses the term “comprise” instead of “comprises”. 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 1-20 are 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.
Claims 1, 11 and 17 recite in the preamble the subcombination of a “canopy assembly” that is inconsistent with the body of the claim that recites limitations directed to the combination of the canopy assembly and a bicycle. This inconsistency presents the question as to whether the claim recites a combination or subcombination. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation that is directed to the combination rather than to the subcombination because a bicycle is not an inherent component of the canopy assembly.
Claims 2-10,12-16 and 18-20 are rejected as above due to dependency.
Claims 1, 14 and 19 introduce “a rear support”, “a front support” and “a pivot joint” more than one time in the claim. This renders the claim unclear when citing the structure later in the claim as it is unclear which rear/front support and pivot joint the limitation is referring to. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-10 are rejected as above due to dependency on Claim 1.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 11-13 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Knapp (US 20230159124 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Knapp teaches a canopy assembly for a bicycle, comprising: a canopy frame assembly (Fig. 3 element 300) comprising: a first side frame (Fig. 3 starboard elements 320 and 310) having a first end and a second end; a second side frame having a first end and a second end (Fig. 3 port elements 320 and 310); a plurality of connection members operably secured to the bicycle, the first and second side frames removably secured to the plurality of connection members (Fig. 3 elements 315); and, a canopy cover assembly connected to the canopy frame assembly, the canopy cover assembly comprising a top canopy secured to the first side frame and the second side frame (Fig. 2b top canopy section), and a plurality of walls removably secured to the canopy frame assembly (Fig. 2B walls canopy sections).
Regarding Claim 12, Knapp teaches the limitations set forth in Claim 11 a joining member connecting the first side frame with the second side frame (Fig. 3 a joining member connecting the first side frame with the second side frame).
Regarding Claim 13, Knapp teaches the limitations set forth in Claim 11 and further discloses a front mounting member at the first end of the first side frame, a front mounting member at the first end of the second side frame, a rear mounting member at the second end of the first side frame, and a rear mounting member at the second end of the second side frame, wherein each of the front mounting members and the rear mounting members are removably secured to one of the plurality of connection members for removably securing the first side frame and the second side frame thereto (Fig. 3 lower ends of elements 312 and 310).
Regarding Claim 15, Knapp teaches the limitations set forth in Claim 11 and further discloses the plurality of walls of the canopy frame assembly comprise a first side wall removably secured to the canopy assembly adjacent the first side frame, and a second side wall removably secured to the canopy assembly adjacent the second side frame (Shown in Fig. 2B).
Regarding Claim 16, Knapp teaches the limitations set forth in Claim 15 and further discloses a front canopy member extending away from top canopy toward the first end of the front supports and removably secured to the first side frame and the second side frame, and a rear wall extending away from the top canopy toward the second end of the rear supports and removably secured to the first side frame and the second side frame (Shown in Fig. 2B).
Claim(s) 17-18 and 20is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Knapp (US 20230159124 A1).
Regarding Claim 17, Knapp teaches a canopy assembly for a bicycle, comprising: a plurality of connection members operably secured to the bicycle (Shown in Fig. 2C); a canopy frame assembly (Fig. 3 element 300) comprising: a first side frame having a first end and a second end (Fig. 3 starboard elements 320 and 310); a second side frame having a first end and a second end (Fig. 3 port elements 320 and 310); a front mounting member at the first end of the first side frame, and another front mounting member at the first end of the second side frame; and, a rear mounting member at the second end of the first side frame, and another rear mounting member at the second end of the second side frame (Fig. 300 elements 315), wherein each of the front and rear mounting members are adapted to be removably secured to one of the plurality of connection members; and, a canopy cover assembly (Fig. 2B element 110) connected to the canopy frame assembly, the canopy cover assembly comprising a top canopy secured to the first side frame and the second side frame, and a plurality of walls removably secured to the canopy frame assembly (Shown in Fig. 2B).
Regarding Claim 18, Knapp teaches the limitations set forth in Claim 17 and further discloses each of the plurality of connection members has a receiver, and wherein the front mounting members and the rear mounting members mate with the receiver in the respective plurality of connection members to removably connect the canopy frame to the plurality of connection members (“the frame, via the front mounting portion 310 and/or the rear mounting portion 312, can include attachment feet 315 that receive a bolt to attach to the mounting accessory 115 of the rear rack 135 of the cargo bike 130. The feet 315 can have a geometry that matches the mounting points of the mounting accessory 115 of the rear rack 135. Of course, in other configurations the frame can be mounted directed to the rear rack 135” Par. [0031] lines 5-12).
Regarding Claim 20, Knapp teaches the limitations set forth in Claim 17 and further discloses the plurality of walls of the canopy frame assembly comprises a first side wall removably secured to the canopy assembly adjacent the first side frame, and a second side wall removably secured to the canopy assembly adjacent the second side frame (Shown in Fig. 2B).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knapp (US 20230159124 A1) in view of Francis (GB 2521400 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Knapp teaches a canopy assembly for a bicycle, comprising: a canopy frame assembly (Fig. 3 element 300) comprising: a first side frame (Fig. 3 starboard elements 320 and 310) having a front support connected to a rear support (Fig. 3 element 312), the front support having a first end (Fig. 3 front section of starboard element 310) opposite the pivot joint, and the rear support having a second end opposite the pivot joint (Fig. 3 lower end of element 312); a second side frame (Fig. 3 port elements 320 and 310) having a front support connected to a rear support, the front support having a first end (Fig. 3 front section of port element 310) opposite the pivot joint, and the rear support having a second end opposite the pivot joint (Fig. 3 lower end of element 312); a front mounting member at the first end of each of the front supports (Fig. 3 front elements 315); and a rear mounting member at the second end of each of the rear supports (Fig. 3 rear elements 315); a plurality of connection members operably secured to the bicycle, wherein each of the front mounting members and the rear mounting members of the canopy frame assembly are removably secured, respectively, to one of the plurality of connection members (Shown in Fig. 2C); and, a canopy cover assembly (Fig. 2B element 110) connected to the canopy frame assembly, the canopy cover assembly comprising: a top canopy (Fig. 2B top canopy section) secured to the first side frame and the second side frame; a front canopy member (Fig. 2B element 220) extending away from top canopy toward the first end of the front supports and removably secured to the first side frame and the second side frame; a first side wall (Fig. 2B starboard element 230) removably secured to the canopy assembly adjacent the first side frame; a second side (Fig. 2B port element 230) wall removably secured to the canopy assembly adjacent the second side frame; and, a rear wall (Fig. 2B element 210) extending away from the top canopy toward the second end of the rear supports and removably secured to the first side frame and the second side frame (Fig. 2C shows removability of canopy panel structures).
Knapp fails to explicitly teach a first side frame having a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support; and a second side frame having a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support.
However, Francis teaches a first side frame having a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support (Fig. 5 rear pivot connection of starboard longitudinal support structure); and a second side frame having a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support (Fig. 5 rear pivot connection of port longitudinal support structure).
Knapp and Francis are considered analogous to the claimed invention as they are in the same field of deployable canopy structures for vehicles. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rear connection portions of Knapp to be pivot connections as disclosed by Francis. Doing so would allow for the canopy to be foldable when not in use. This would ease the storage and deployment of the canopy.
Regarding Claim 3, Knapp and Francis teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Knapp further discloses one of the plurality of connection members is provided at the first end of the first side frame, wherein one of the plurality of connection members is provided at the second end of the first side frame, wherein one of the plurality of connection members is provided at the first end of the second side frame, and wherein one of the plurality of connection members is provided at the second end of the second side frame (Fig. 3 elements 315).
Regarding Claim 4, Knapp and Francis teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Knapp further discloses each of the plurality of connection members has a receiver for removably securing one of the front and rear mounting members thereto (“the frame, via the front mounting portion 310 and/or the rear mounting portion 312, can include attachment feet 315 that receive a bolt to attach to the mounting accessory 115 of the rear rack 135 of the cargo bike 130. The feet 315 can have a geometry that matches the mounting points of the mounting accessory 115 of the rear rack 135. Of course, in other configurations the frame can be mounted directed to the rear rack 135” Par. [0031] lines 5-12).
Regarding Claim 5, Knapp and Francis teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Knapp further discloses the front canopy member has a plastic windshield (Fig. 2B element 245).
Regarding Claim 6, Knapp and Francis teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Knap further discloses the front canopy member has a screen (Fig. 2B element 220).
Regarding Claim 7, Knapp and Francis teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Knapp further discloses the first side wall, second side wall and rear wall can be individually removed from the canopy cover assembly (Shown in Fig. 2C).
Regarding Claim 8, Knapp and Francis teach the limitations set forth in Claim 7.
Knapp further discloses a zipper connects the first side wall to the top canopy, and wherein a zipper connects the second side wall to the top canopy (Fig. 2B elements 260).
Regarding Claim 9, Knapp and Francis teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Knapp further discloses fasteners removably securing the first side wall to the first side frame and the second side wall to the second side frame (“The attachment components 410 can include Velcro straps or other components that fix a portion of the cover (e.g., the covering material) to the frame 300” Par. [0033] lines 5-8).
Regarding Claim 10, Knapp and Francis teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Knapp further discloses a rear joining member connecting the first side frame with the second side frame adjacent the pivot joints (Fig. 3 upper horizontal segment of element 312), and a front joining member connecting the first side frame with the second side frame toward the first end of the front supports (Fig. 3 upper horizontal segment of element 310).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knapp (US 20230159124 A1) in view of Francis (GB 2521400 A) and further in view of Kitson (GB 2096955 A).
Regarding Claim 2, Knapp and Francis teach the limitations set forth in Claim 1.
Knapp and Francis fail to explicitly teach each of the plurality of connection members comprises two pieces that are connected together in a clam shell manner.
However, Kitson teaches each of the plurality of connection members comprises two pieces that are connected together in a clam shell manner (Shown in Fig. 5).
Knapp, Francis and Kitson are considered analogous to the claimed invention as they are in the same field of deployable canopy structures for vehicles. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the connection members of Knapp in view of Francis to be connected in a clam shell manner as disclosed by Kitson. Doing so would provide a secure connection between the canopy frame and the tubular structure of the bicycle frame. Two-piece, hinged connectors are known in the art to provide secure connections to cylindrical structures and are not considered novel.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knapp (US 20230159124 A1) in view of Francis (GB 2521400 A).
Regarding Claim 14, Knapp teaches the limitations set forth in Claim 11 and further discloses the first side frame comprises a front support (Fig. 3 front section of port element 310) connected to a rear support, the front support having a first end opposite the pivot joint, and the rear support having a second end opposite the pivot joint, and wherein the second side frame comprises a front support connected to a rear support (Fig. 3 element 312), the front support having a first end opposite the pivot joint, and the rear support having a second end opposite the pivot joint (Shown in Fig. 3).
Knapp fails to explicitly teach the first side frame comprises a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support; and the second side frame comprises a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support.
However, Francis teaches the first side frame comprises a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support (Fig. 5 rear pivot connection of starboard longitudinal support structure); and the second side frame comprises a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support (Fig. 5 rear pivot connection of port longitudinal support structure).
Knapp and Francis are considered analogous to the claimed invention as they are in the same field of deployable canopy structures for vehicles. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rear connection portions of Knapp to be pivot connections as disclosed by Francis. Doing so would allow for the canopy to be foldable when not in use. This would ease the storage and deployment of the canopy.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knapp (US 20230159124 A1) in view of Francis (GB 2521400 A).
Regarding Claim 19, Knapp teaches the limitations set forth in Claim 17 and further discloses the first side frame has a front support (Fig. 3 front section of port element 310) connected to a rear support (Fig. 3 element 312), the front support having the first end opposite the pivot joint, and the rear support having the second end opposite the pivot joint, and wherein the second side frame has a front support connected to a rear support, the front support having the first end opposite the pivot joint, and the rear support having the second end opposite the pivot joint (Shown in Fig. 3).
Knapp fails to explicitly teach the first side frame has a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support; and the second side frame has a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support.
However, Francis teaches the first side frame has a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support (Fig. 5 rear pivot connection of starboard longitudinal support structure); and the second side frame has a front support pivotally connected with a pivot joint to a rear support (Fig. 5 rear pivot connection of port longitudinal support structure).
Knapp and Francis are considered analogous to the claimed invention as they are in the same field of deployable canopy structures for vehicles. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rear connection portions of Knapp to be pivot connections as disclosed by Francis. Doing so would allow for the canopy to be foldable when not in use. This would ease the storage and deployment of the canopy.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC ACOSTA whose telephone number is (571)272-4886. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-4:00pm.
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, Timothy Collins can be reached at 571-272-6886. 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.
/E.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3644
/Nicholas McFall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3644
Prosecution Insights