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 § 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 18-22 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 18 recites the limitation "second lower tube" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 19-22 are rejected for depending on rejected claim 18
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.
Claims 1, 8, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20210237828 A ("Barefoot").
Claim 1: Barefoot teaches a front fork for a bicycle, the front fork (100) comprising: a leg (108, 106; Fig. 2) including an upper tube (314) and a lower tube (312) (Fig. 3), the upper tube and the lower tube configured in a telescopic arrangement with the upper tube fitting into an interior space of the lower tube (para. 43, lines 6-10), the upper tube and the lower tube defining an interior region that is sealed and contains a volume of air (338, 336) in the lower tube (336 in 312; Fig. 3) (para. 45, lines 12-14); and a valve (1482) disposed in a flow path at or near a top end of the upper tube (Fig. 3), wherein the flow path is formed between the volume of air in the lower tube and the valve such that when the valve is opened, pressure in the lower tube is equalized with atmospheric pressure (para. 75, lines 1-7).
Claim 8: Barefoot teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Barefoot further teaches the front fork, wherein the valve (1482) is on a side of the upper tube (Fig. 3).
Claim 12: Barefoot teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. Barefoot further teaches the front fork, further including a spring (341) in the leg (106), the spring including: a spring body (341) defining a chamber (338), the spring body disposed in and coupled to the upper tube (314) (Fig. 3); a shaft (348) coupled to a bottom end of the lower tube (312), the shaft extending into the chamber in the spring body (Fig. 3; para. 47, lines 6-9); and a piston (342) in the chamber and coupled to the shaft (Fig. 3).
Claim 13: Barefoot teaches the limitations of claim 12 as noted above. Barefoot further teaches the front fork, wherein an outer diameter of the spring body (341) is less than an inner diameter of the upper tube (314) (Fig. 3), wherein the flow path is at least partially formed by a gap or space between the spring body and the upper tube (para. 47, lines 9-16).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2-7, 9-11, 14-16 and 18-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210237828 A ("Barefoot") in view of US 20110121525 A1 ("Shirai").
Claim 2: Barefoot teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. But does not teach the front fork, further including a crown, wherein a top portion of the upper tube is coupled to the crown, and wherein the valve is disposed at or near an interface of the top portion of the upper tube and the crown.
However, Shirai teaches the front fork, further including a crown (22), wherein a top portion of the upper tube (36) is coupled to the crown (via 22c), and wherein the valve (50, 57) is disposed at or near an interface of the top portion of the upper tube and the crown (Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Barefoot with the features of Shirai. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Shirai teaches an air filling valve and switching valve located at the top of the fork assembly, which provides superior ergonomic access for manual, hand-actuated adjustments by the rider compared to side-mounted valves, thereby allowing for quicker and more convenient pressure tuning.
Claim 3: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 2 as noted above. Shirai further teaches the front fork, further including a cap (48) coupled to the top end of the upper tube (32), the valve (50, 57) coupled to the cap (Fig.3; para. 40, lines 1-12).
Claim 4: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 3 as noted above. Shirai further teaches the front fork, wherein the valve (57a, 57b of 57) is offset from a central axis of the leg (Fig. 3; para. 38, lines 1-9).
Claim 5: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 2 as noted above. Shirai further teaches the front fork, wherein the valve (50, 57) is coupled to the crown (22c) (Fig. 3).
Claim 6: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 5 as noted above. Shirai further teaches the front fork, wherein the upper tube (32) is disposed in a cylindrical portion (22c) of the crown (22), wherein the cylindrical portion has a first opening extending between an outer surface and an inner surface of the cylindrical portion, and wherein the valve is disposed in the first opening (the first opening being the top of 22c as Fig. 2 shows the top of leg 24 above the crown and Fig. 3 shows that the valve of 57a is above the opening in 22c).
Claim 7: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 6 as noted above. Shirai further teaches the front fork, wherein the upper tube has a second opening extending between an outer surface and an inner surface of the upper tube, the second opening being aligned with the first opening, wherein the flow path is at least partially formed by the first opening and the second opening (the second opening being the bottom of the hole of 22c where the leg 24 goes into, so leg enters from the bottom of 22c and exits on top of 22c and the flow goes through the leg of 24 which goes through both openings to reach the valve at 57,50 shown in Fig. 3).
Claim 9: Barefoot teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. But does not teach the front fork, wherein the valve is a manually operated valve.
However, Shirai teaches the front fork, wherein the valve (57a) is a manually operated valve (para. 43, lines 1-9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Barefoot with the features of Shirai. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Shirai teaches an air filling valve and switching valve located at the top of the fork assembly, which provides superior ergonomic access for manual, hand-actuated adjustments by the rider compared to side-mounted valves, thereby allowing for quicker and more convenient pressure tuning.
Claim 10: Barefoot teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. But does not teach the front fork, further including a damper in the leg, the damper including: a damper body defining a chamber, the damper body disposed in and coupled to the upper tube; a shaft coupled to a bottom end of the lower tube, the shaft extending into the chamber in the damper body; and a damper member in the chamber and coupled to the shaft, wherein an outer diameter of the damper body is less than an inner diameter of the upper tube, and wherein the flow path is at least partially formed by a gap or space between the damper body and the upper tube.
However, Shirai teaches the front fork, further including a damper (60, 62) in the leg (26), the damper including: a damper body (60) defining a chamber (64), the damper body disposed in and coupled to the upper tube (36) (Fig. 3; para. 46, lines 17-26); a shaft (63) coupled to a bottom end of the lower tube (Fig. 3), the shaft extending into the chamber in the damper body (Fig. 3; para. 36, lines 5-8); and a damper member (62) in the chamber and coupled to the shaft (Fig. 3), wherein an outer diameter of the damper body is less than an inner diameter of the upper tube (damper body 60 fitting in upper tube 36; Fig. 3), and wherein the flow path is at least partially formed by a gap or space (64a) between the damper body and the upper tube (Fig. 3; para. 47, lines 6-10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Barefoot with the features of Shirai. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Shirai teaches an air filling valve and switching valve located at the top of the fork assembly, which provides superior ergonomic access for manual, hand-actuated adjustments by the rider compared to side-mounted valves, thereby allowing for quicker and more convenient pressure tuning.
Claim 11: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 10 as noted above. Shirai further teaches the front fork, wherein the damper body (60) has a portion with a radial opening (60a; is radially around shown in Figs. 10-12), wherein the flow path is at least partially formed by the portion and the radial opening (para. 47, lines 6-10).
Claim 14: Barefoot teaches the limitations of claim 12 as noted above. But does not teach the front fork, further including a cap coupled to the top end of the upper tube and a center sleeve coupled to the cap, the valve coupled to the center sleeve, the center sleeve extending through the piston such that the center sleeve is in fluid communication with an inside of the shaft, and wherein an inside of the shaft and the center sleeve form at least a portion of the flow path.
However, Shirai teaches the front fork, further including a cap (48) coupled to the top end of the upper tube (32) and a center sleeve (upper part of piston 52 in 55) coupled to the cap, the valve (50, 57) coupled to the center sleeve, the center sleeve extending through the piston (52) such that the center sleeve is in fluid communication with an inside of the shaft (Fig. 3), and wherein an inside of the shaft and the center sleeve form at least a portion of the flow path (Fig. 3; para. 40, lines 1-12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Barefoot with the features of Shirai. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Shirai teaches an air filling valve and switching valve located at the top of the fork assembly, which provides superior ergonomic access for manual, hand-actuated adjustments by the rider compared to side-mounted valves, thereby allowing for quicker and more convenient pressure tuning.
Claim 15: Barefoot teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. But does not teach the front fork, wherein the leg is a first leg, the upper tube is a first upper tube, the lower tube is a first lower tube, and the valve is a first valve, the front fork further including: a second leg including a second upper tube and a second lower tube, the second upper tube inserted into the second lower tube and configured in a telescopic arrangement, the second upper tube and second lower tube defining an interior region that is sealed and contains a volume of air in the lower tube; and a second valve coupled to the second upper tube at or near a top end of the second upper tube, wherein a flow path is formed between the volume of air in the second lower tube and the second valve, such that when the second valve is opened, pressure in the second lower tube is equalized with atmospheric pressure.
However, Shirai teaches the front fork, wherein the leg is a first leg (24), the upper tube is a first upper tube (32), the lower tube is a first lower tube (34), and the valve is a first valve (50, 57), the front fork further including: a second leg (26) including a second upper tube (36) and a second lower tube (38), the second upper tube inserted into the second lower tube and configured in a telescopic arrangement, the second upper tube and second lower tube defining an interior region that is sealed and contains a volume of air in the lower tube (Fig. 3; para. 30, lines 1-13 and para. 31, lines 1-14); and a second valve (90) coupled to the second upper tube at or near a top end of the second upper tube (component 46 of Fig. 4 is coupled to the top end of 36 shown in Fig. 3, 90 is the valve of 46; para. 59, lines 3-10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Barefoot with the features of Shirai. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Shirai teaches a complete front suspension system that allows for the independent and selective control of both the air-spring characteristics and the damping characteristics across separate legs of the fork, thereby optimizing suspension performance, adjustability, and overall ride quality (para. 35, lines 1-9).
However, Shirai does not teach wherein a flow path is formed between the volume of air in the second lower tube and the second valve, such that when the second valve is opened, pressure in the second lower tube is equalized with atmospheric pressure. But, Barefoot teaches a bleed-off valve mechanism used to equalize air pressure in a suspension tube (para. 75, lines 1-7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the combined Shirai and Barefoot device to duplicate the valve mechanism taught by Barefoot, thereby adding a second valve in fluid communication with the second lower tube of Shirai. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide this second valve because Barefoot teaches that such a valve allows the gas within a suspension system to equalize with ambient air pressure. Duplicating this feature on the second tube would allow the second leg to achieve the exact same pressure-equalization benefits taught by Barefoot.
Claim 16: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 15 as noted above. Shirai further teaches the front fork, further including: a first cap (48) coupled to the top end of the first upper tube (32), the first valve (50, 57) integrated into the first cap (Fig.3; para. 40, lines 1-12); and a second cap (92) coupled to the top end of the second upper tube (36) (component 46 of Fig. 4 is coupled to the top end of 36 shown in Fig. 3, 92 is the cap of 46), the second valve (90) integrated into the second cap (Fig. 4) (para. 59, lines 3-10).
Claim 18: Shirai teaches a front fork for a bicycle, the front fork comprising: a crown (22) having a top side (top of 22) and a bottom side (bottom of 22) opposite the top side (Fig. 2); a steerer tube (22) coupled to the crown and extending outward from the top side (connected to the top via 22a; Fig. 2); a leg (26, 24) coupled to the crown and extending outward from the bottom side (connected to the bottom via 22c; Fig. 2), the leg including an upper tube (36, 32) and a lower tube (38, 34), the upper tube coupled to the crown (via 22c; Fig. 2), the upper tube extending into a top end of the lower tube, the upper tube and second lower tube defining an interior region that is sealed and contains a volume of air in the lower tube (para. 30, lines 1-14 and para. 31, lines 1-13); the valve (57, 50) having a manually operable portion (57a) that is above the top end of the lower tube in an orientation in which the upper tube is above the lower tube (Fig. 3; para. 43, lines 1-9). But does not teach and a valve to equalize pressure of the volume of air in the lower tube with atmospheric pressure when the valve is opened.
However, Barefoot in a similar field of art teaches and a valve (1482) to equalize pressure of the volume of air in the lower tube with atmospheric pressure when the valve is opened (para. 75, lines 1-7). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Shirai with the features of Barefoot. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Barefoot teaches the pressure or force of the gas within the suspension system may be at or around ambient air pressure, and a one-way valve may be included to allow ambient air to enter the suspension system.
Claim 19: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 18 as noted above. Shirai further teaches the front fork, wherein the valve is integrated into a cap (48) coupled to a top end of the upper tube (32) (Fig. 3; para. 40, lines 1-12).
Claim 20: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 18 as noted above. Shirai further teaches the front fork, wherein the valve (57a) is on a side of the upper tube (32) (Fig. 3).
Claim 21: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 18 as noted above. Shirai further teaches the front fork, wherein the valve (57a) is on the crown (22c) (Fig. 3; and although not labeled in Fig. 2 it can be seen 57a is on top of the crown mount of 22c).
Claim 22: The prior art teaches the limitations of claim 18 as noted above. Barefoot further teaches the front fork, wherein the valve (1482) is a poppet valve (para. 75, lines 1-13).
Claims 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210237828 A ("Barefoot") in view of US 20110121525 A1 ("Shirai") and further in view of US 20220373056 A ("Mathews").
Claim 17: The prior art of Shirai and Barefoot teaches the limitations of claim 1 as noted above. The cited prior art does not teach the front fork, further including a volume spacer in the interior region of the lower tube, and wherein the volume spacer is constructed of activated carbon.
However, Mathews teaches the front fork, further including a volume spacer in the interior region of the lower tube, and wherein the volume spacer is constructed of activated carbon (para. 58, lines 12-14). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of the cited prior art with the features of Mathews. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as Mathews teaches "selectively retains and releases air molecules in response to changes in pressure, thereby changing the effective volume of the chamber containing the adsorptive material." (para. 58, lines 14-17).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AL-BIRR RAHMAN CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-4661. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am - 6:00pm.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at (571) 270-7778. 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.
/A.R.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3618 /MINNAH L SEOH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3618
