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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/26/26 has been entered.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 6-8, 11, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fanning et al. (US 2023/0384106; “Fanning”; reference of record).
Regarding claim 1, Fanning teaches an electric bicycle (Figures 1-3 and 6) comprising:
a frame (Figure 2 shows handle bars of the frame);
a front wheel supporting the frame (para. [0018]);
a rear wheel supporting the frame (para. [0018]);
a motor coupled to the frame (para. [0018]);
a crankset coupled to the motor (para. [0018]); and
a display device (12) coupled to the frame (on the handle bars), wherein the display device (12) is configured to display a performance attribute (for example, level of pedal assist) of the electric bicycle, and is further configured to display a length of time over which the electric bicycle has been set to the performance attribute (Para. [0040] teaches displaying the amount of assist used in a current route and the amount of time the rider has been on the current route.).
As for claim 3, Fanning teaches wherein the display device is configured to display a duration of traveling distance over which the electric bicycle has been set to the performance attribute (See figure 7).
As for claim 6, Fanning teaches wherein the frame includes a head tube, wherein the display device is coupled to the head tube (See figure 2).
Regarding claim 7, Fanning teaches wherein the display device is configured to be wirelessly connected to a mobile phone (Para. [0019] teaches the display device being a smartphone, which wirelessly connects to other mobile phones.).
Regarding claim 8, Fanning teaches a human machine interface (28 in figure 3) coupled to the frame, wherein the human machine interface is coupled to the display device and is configured to control what is displayed on the display device, wherein the human machine interface is arranged such that a user may manually interact with the human machine interface to change the performance attribute of the electric bicycle, and wherein the display device is then configured to display the change in the performance attribute (Para. [0025], [0034], and [0039] teach manually changing performance attributes for the electric bicycle of Fanning then displaying the changed performance attribute.).
As for claim 11, Fanning teaches a human machine interface coupled to the frame and to the display device, wherein the human machine interface is configured to be used to change the performance attribute, and wherein at least one of the human machine interface or the display device is configured to display feedback confirming that a change in the performance attribute was successful (Para. [0025], [0034], and [0039] teach manually changing performance attributes for the electric bicycle of Fanning then displaying the changed performance attribute.).
Regarding claim 14, Fanning teaches a human machine interface coupled to the frame and to the display device, wherein the human machine interface is configured to be used to change the performance attribute (Para. [0025], [0034], and [0039] teach manually changing performance attributes for the electric bicycle of Fanning then displaying the changed performance attribute.), wherein the human machine interface is configured to permit only a select group of users to change the performance attribute (The performance attributes are changed by the rider of the electric bicycle of Fanning. The rider is interpreted as part of the “select group of users”).
Regarding claim 15, Fanning teaches a human machine interface coupled to the frame and to the display device, wherein the human machine interface is configured to be used to change the performance attribute (Para. [0025], [0034], and [0039] teach manually changing performance attributes for the electric bicycle of Fanning then displaying the changed performance attribute.), wherein the human machine interface is configured to notify a third party when the performance attribute has been changed or selected (Ride data is transmitted to a remote server of Fanning. Para. [0041]).
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 4, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fanning in view of Silsby et al. (US 2022/0204110; “Silsby”; reference of record).
Regarding claim 4, Fanning teaches the electric bicycle of claim 1, as detailed above, but fails to teach wherein the performance attribute is at least one of a motor classification, maximum speed, or maximum power of the electric bicycle.
However, it is well-known to those of ordinary skill in the art to display electric bicycle performance attributes including bike class, top speed, pedal assist, power information, and battery level. For example, see para. [0023], [0024], [0040], [0045], [0048], [0053], [0055], [0060], [0072], [0079] of Silsby.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display performance attributes including motor classification, maximum speed, and maximum power of the electric bicycle of Fanning because such a modification would have been exercising well-known electric bicycle display information.
As for claim 12, Fanning teaches a human machine interface coupled to the frame and to the display device, wherein the human machine interface is configured to be used to change the performance attribute (Para. [0025], [0034], and [0039] teach manually changing performance attributes for the electric bicycle of Fanning then displaying the changed performance attribute.), but fails to teach wherein at least one of the human machine interface or the display device is configured to display an error code if the performance attribute fails to display on the display device or if the display device fails to display a currently selected performance attribute.
However, it is well-known to those of ordinary skill in the art to display an error code if the performance attribute fails to display on the display device or if the display device fails to display a currently selected performance attribute. For example, Silsby teaches displaying error codes for an electric bicycle in para. [0057].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display an error code for the electric bicycle of Fanning because such a modification would have been exercising well-known electric bicycle display information.
Regarding claim 13, Fanning teaches a human machine interface coupled to the frame and to the display device, wherein the human machine interface is configured to be used to change the performance attribute (Para. [0025], [0034], and [0039] teach manually changing performance attributes for the electric bicycle of Fanning then displaying the changed performance attribute.), wherein at least one of the human machine interface or the display device is configured to display for a geographical location of the electric bicycle (Para. [0024], [0029], [0033]).
Fanning fails to teach wherein at least one of the human machine interface or the display device is configured to notify a user whether the performance attribute is a legal performance attribute for a geographical location of the electric bicycle.
However, it is well-known to those of ordinary skill in the art to notify an electric bicycle rider about local laws with respect to the electric bicycle. For example, Silsby teaches displaying bike parameters that are “within class or local regulations or standards”. Para. [0057].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display local electric bicycle regulations for the electric bicycle of Fanning because such a modification would have been exercising well-known electric bicycle display information.
Claims 5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fanning in view of Johnson (US 2021/0192229; “Johnson”; reference of record).
Regarding claim 5, Fanning teaches wherein the display device is configured to be powered on and off (Electronic components can inherently be turned on and off.), but fails to teach wherein the display device is configured to continue to display the performance attribute for at least one hour of time after the display device has been powered off.
However, it is well-known to those of ordinary skill in the art to implement electric ink displays with lasting display capabilities on electric transport device, e.g., electric bicycles. For example, see para. [0059]-[0060] of Johnson.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize an electric ink display as the display device of Fanning because such a modification would have been implementing a well-known display device for an electric bicycle.
As for claim 9, Fanning teaches wherein the display device (12) is coupled to a display power source (battery of electric bicycle) configured to selectively provide electricity to the display device, but fails to teach the display device is configured to hold a display state displaying the performance attribute after the display device is not receiving electricity from the display power source.
However, it is well-known to those of ordinary skill in the art to implement electric ink displays with lasting display capabilities on electric transport device, e.g., electric bicycles. For example, see para. [0059]-[0060] of Johnson.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize an electric ink display as the display device of Fanning because such a modification would have been implementing a well-known display device for an electric bicycle.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fanning in view of Weinmann et al. (US 2024/0174322; “Weinmann”; reference of record).
As for claim 10, Fanning teaches a human machine interface coupled to the frame and to the display device, wherein the human machine interface is configured to be used to change the performance attribute (Para. [0025], [0034], and [0039] teach manually changing performance attributes for the electric bicycle of Fanning then displaying the changed performance attribute.).
Fanning fails to teach wherein changing the performance attribute requires a restart of the electric bicycle, and wherein changing the performance attribute requires changing the performance attribute within a predetermined period of time after the restart of the electric bicycle.
However, it is well-known to those of ordinary skill in the art to restart an electric bicycle before changing any performance attributes/modes. For example, see para. [0048] of Weinmann: "If this is the case (path "y"), the possibility of enabling the activation of the walk mode is completely deactivated in method step 216, at least until a restart of the control unit 26 of the electric bicycle 10. Consequently, this function is no longer available until the control unit 26 is restarted."
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to restart the electric bicycle of Fanning before changing performance attributes because such a modification would have been implementing a well-known electric bicycle performance adjustment protocol. The "predetermined period of time after the restart of the electric bicycle" is interpreted as time period after the restart of the electric bicycle before the electric bicycle runs out of power.
Claims 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silsby in view of Chuang (US 2020/0092128; reference of record).
Regarding claim 20, Silsby teaches an electric bicycle (figures 1-3A) comprising:
a frame (See frame in figure 1);
a front wheel supporting the frame (See front wheel in figure 1);
a rear wheel supporting the frame (See rear wheel in figure 1);
a motor (150) coupled to the frame;
a crankset (See crankset in figure 1) coupled to the motor (150);
a display device (120) coupled to the frame (at handlebars 160), wherein the display device is configured to display a performance attribute of the electric bicycle (Silsby teaches at least the following performance attributes that are controlled and displayed: class, speed, pedal assist, power information, battery level. Para. [0023], [0024], [0040], [0045], [0048], [0053], [0055], [0060], [0072], [0079]);
a human machine interface (110) coupled to the frame (at handlebars 160) and to the display device (120), wherein the human machine interface (110) is configured to be used to change the performance attribute; and
a global positioning system (para. [0025]) configured to determine a geographical location of the electric bicycle, wherein the display device is configured to notify a rider whether the performance attribute is a legal attribute for the geographical location of the electric bicycle (Silsby sets and displays bike parameters that are “within class or local regulations or standards.” Para. [0053]. Para. [0025] teaches determining the locality using GPS.);
wherein at least one of the human machine interface or the display device includes a success feedback indicator that is configured to provide feedback confirming that a change in the performance attribute was successful (Silsby teaches at least the following performance attributes that are controlled and displayed: class, speed, pedal assist, power information, battery level. Para. [0023], [0024], [0040], [0045], [0048], [0053], [0055], [0060], [0072], [0079]. After a performance attribute is changed, it can be seen on the display 120 that a change has been made.).
Silsby fails to teach wherein the success feedback indicator is separate from a display of the performance attribute itself.
However, it is well-known to those of ordinary skill in the art to provide an indication that a change in an electronic system of an electric bicycle has been successfully made. For example, paragraph [0028] of Chuang teaches updating parameters of an electric bicycle and providing a display that the parameter update was successful.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display a message of a successful change in a performance attribute in the electric bicycle of Silsby because such a modification would have provided the well-known benefit of alerting a rider of the electric bicycle to a successful performance attribute change.
As for claim 21, Silsby modified by Chuang teaches wherein the success feedback indicator includes at least one of a visible, audible, or tactile indicia indicating that the change in the performance attribute was successful (Para. [0028] of Chuang).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-19 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The best prior art references of record, Fanning and Silsby, fail to teach:
“wherein the predetermined period of time includes a predetermined number of seconds”, as set forth in claim 16.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEVI GANNON whose telephone number is (571)272-7971. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00AM-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, Menatoallah Youssef can be reached at 571-270-3684. 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.
/LEVI GANNON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836 July 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights