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 .
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 longitudinal portion of the tubular section of the second receiving portion from claim 31, lines 3-4, and the longitudinal portion of the tubular section of the first receiving portion from claim 31, lines 10-11, 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
Claims 21, 26, 27, 36, and 37 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 21, lines 22-23, recites “the respective inner wall” which should be changed to --the respective tubular inner wall-- to maintain consistent claim terminology.
Claim 21, line 23, recites “said axis” which appears that it should be changed to --said first central geometrical axis-- to make it clear which axis is being referred to.
Claim 21, line 31, recites “the respective inner wall” which should be changed to --the respective tubular inner wall-- to maintain consistent claim terminology.
Claim 21, line 32, recites “said axis” which appears that it should be changed to --said second central geometrical axis-- to make it clear which axis is being referred to.
Claim 21, line 36, recites “said axis” which appears that it should be changed to --said first central geometrical axis-- to make it clear which axis is being referred to.
Claim 26, lines 1-2, recites “wherein each mechanical attaching element configured as a bolt/screw is further configured to be connected to a respective nut” which is grammatically incorrect and should be changed to --wherein each mechanical attaching element is configured as a bolt/screw and is further configured to be connected to a respective nut--.
Claim 27, line 3, recites “a lateral bar)” which is grammatically incorrect and should be changed to --a lateral bar--.
Claim 36, lines 9-10, recites “a plastic material, , and/or” which is grammatically incorrect and should be changed to --a plastic material, and/or--.
Claim 37, line 5, recites “a respective structural connecting device” which should be changed to --a respective one of the first and second structural connecting devices-- to make the limitation refer back to the structural connecting devices of claim 35.
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 21-40 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.
Claim 21, line 5, recites “the lateral bar” which is indefinite because it is unclear which one of the two lateral bars the Applicant is referring to. The Applicant has not previously singled out one of the two lateral bars. Claim 21 is directed solely to a singular structural connecting device thus it is unclear how referring to a plurality of lateral bars aids in defining the singular structural connecting device when a singular connecting device only connects to a singular lateral bar. The Applicant is advised to amend claim 21 to only focus on the singular structural connecting device and it’s structure, and that it is configured to connect between a bar end of a central bar and a bar end of a lateral bar.
Claim 21, line 12, recites “a bar end of a central bar” which is indefinite because it is unclear how the bar end and the central bar from line 12 are related to or different from the bar end and the central bar from lines 4-5. Should line 12 be amended to recite --the bar end of the central bar--?
Claim 21, lines 13-14, recites “a bar end of a lateral bar” which is indefinite because it is unclear how the bar end and the lateral bar from lines 13-14 are related to or different from the bar end and the lateral bar from line 5. Should lines 13-14 be amended to recite --the bar end of the lateral bar--?
Claim 21, lines 26-27, recites “a second direction” which is indefinite because it is unclear how the second direction from lines 26-27 is different from or related to the radial direction of said axis from claim 21, line 23. Is the Applicant referring to the Z-axis in both limitations?
Claim 21, line 32, recites “said axis” which is indefinite because it is unclear if the Applicant is trying to refer to the first central geometrical axis from line 21 or the second central geometrical axis from line 25. Which axis is the Applicant referring to?
Claim 21, line 36, recites “said axis” which is indefinite because it is unclear if the Applicant is trying to refer to the first central geometrical axis from line 21 or the second central geometrical axis from line 25. Which axis is the Applicant referring to?
Claim 22, line 8, recites “preferably” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 24, line 3, recites “a central bar” which is indefinite because it is unclear how the central bar from claim 24 is related to or different from the central bar from claim 21, lines 4-5. Should claim 24 be amended to recite --the central bar--?
Claim 24, line 4, recites “a lateral bar” which is indefinite because it is unclear how the lateral bar from claim 24 is related to or different from the lateral bar from claim 21, lines 13-14. Should claim 24 be amended to recite --the lateral bar--?
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the longitudinal direction of extension" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 26, line 4, recites “preferably” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 27, line 3, recites “a lateral bar” which is indefinite because it is unclear how the lateral bar from claim 27 is related to or different from the lateral bar from claim 21, lines 13-14. Should claim 27 be amended to recite --the lateral bar--?
Claim 31, lines 6-8, recites “wherein said longitudinal portion of the tubular section of the second receiving portion extends from its respective final end towards its respective receiving opening by at least a 40-60% of the second length” which is indefinite because it is unclear exactly what the Applicant is trying to claim. First, the limitation “at least a 40-60%” is viewed as opening the limitation to be read as being 40% or more. If the Applicant wishes to have the range 40-60% then the Applicant is advised to remove the “at least” language. Furthermore, claim 21, lines 24-25, recites “wherein the tubular section of the second receiving portion is configured to have a second length” therefore how is the longitudinal portion of the tubular section of the second receiving portion is 40-60% of the second length when it would appear that the second length is the same size as the longitudinal portion.
Claim 31, lines 13-15, recites “wherein said longitudinal portion of the tubular section of the first receiving portion extends from its respective final end towards its respective receiving opening by at least a 40-60% of the first length” which is indefinite because it is unclear exactly what the Applicant is trying to claim. First, the limitation “at least a 40-60%” is viewed as opening the limitation to be read as being 40% or more. If the Applicant wishes to have the range 40-60% then the Applicant is advised to remove the “at least” language. Furthermore, claim 21, lines 20-21, recites “wherein the tubular section of the first receiving portion is configured to have a first length” therefore how is the longitudinal portion of the tubular section of the first receiving portion is 40-60% of the first length when it would appear that the first length is the same size as the longitudinal portion.
Claim 36, line 4, recites “a lateral bar” which is indefinite because it is unclear which one of the lateral bars the Applicant is referring to. Claim 35, line 6, recites “a first and a second lateral bar”, but the Applicant has not previously singled out of the two lateral bars.
Claim 36, lines 6-7, recites “a respective damping element” which is indefinite because it is unclear if the Applicant is claiming a new structural element or if the Applicant is trying to refer to one of the damping elements from claim 36, lines 1-2. Should lines 6-7, be amended to recite --a respective damping element of the at least two damping elements--?
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 21, 31, 32, 34, 35, and 39, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Marui (US 5,408,900 A).
Regarding claim 21, Marui discloses a structural connecting device (7) for a multi-part handlebar assembly of an off-road motorcycle/bicycle (a bicycle), the multi-part handlebar assembly comprising a central bar (10; Figure 9) configured to be connected to the motorcycle/bicycle by one or more clamping means (75, 751) and two lateral bars (1), the structural connecting device configured for connecting a bar end (11) of the central bar with a bar end (the left end of 1 in Figure 9) of the lateral bar, wherein the structural connecting device is configured as a monobloc part comprising:
a first (the section of 7 that supports 10) and a second (the section of 7 that supports 1) receiving portions, each comprising:
a tubular section comprising a tubular inner wall (the part of 7 that 11 directly contacts, and the part of 7 that the exterior circumferential surface of 1 directly contacts) extending longitudinally from a receiving opening (the opening in 7 that 10 fits into, and the opening in 7 that 1 fits into), through the receiving portion, up until a final end (the innermost end of each viewed receiving opening) of the tubular section;
wherein the tubular section of the first receiving portion is configured to receive a bar end (11) of a central bar, and wherein the tubular section of the second receiving portion is configured to receive a bar end (the left end of 1 in Figure 9) of a lateral bar (1); and
an intermediate connecting portion (the material between the viewed first and second receiving portions in Figure 9) configured to connect the first and second receiving portions, such that the receiving openings of the first and second receiving portions are arranged as respective longitudinal ends of the structural connecting device, and such that at least one of the respective final ends is arranged between the two receiving openings (see Figure 9);
wherein the tubular section of the first receiving portion is configured to have a first length (shown below) extending longitudinally along a first central geometrical axis (the axial centerline of 10) extending along a first direction (horizontally in Figure 9), wherein the first central geometrical axis is separated from the respective inner wall by a first distance (shown below) in a radial direction (vertically in Figure 9) of said axis;
wherein the tubular section of the second receiving portion is configured to have a second length (shown below) extending longitudinally along a second central geometrical axis (the axial centerline of 70) extending partially along the first direction and, to a lesser extent, also partially in a second direction (vertically in Figure 9), the second direction being perpendicular to the first direction, thereby defining a first angle (the angle between the axial centerline of 10 and the axial centerline of 70; see Figure 9) between the first geometrical axis and a projection of the second central geometrical axis on a first geometrical plane formed by the first central geometrical axis and the second direction, and wherein the second central geometrical axis is separated from the respective inner wall by a second distance (shown below) in a radial direction of said axis; and
wherein the inner wall of the second receiving portion is positioned separated from the first central geometrical axis in the second direction, such that a point of the inner wall of the second receiving portion being arranged closest to the first central geometrical axis is spaced apart from said axis by a third distance (shown below) in the second direction.
PNG
media_image1.png
313
563
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 9 of Marui (US 5,408,900 A)
Regarding claim 31, Marui discloses that the intermediate connecting portion comprises a first reinforcing element (see the figure below; Applicant’s first reinforcing element (121) appears to be an integral part of Applicant’s structural connecting device (1, 1’) in the same manner as the viewed first reinforcing element of Marui is an integral part of the structure connecting device of Marui) configured to connect at least a longitudinal portion of the tubular section of the second receiving portion extending from its respective final end towards its respective receiving opening (see Figure 9), with at least a part of the final end of the tubular section of the first receiving portion (see Figure 9);
wherein said longitudinal portion of the tubular section of the second receiving portion extends from its respective final end towards its respective receiving opening by at least a 40-60% of the second length (as best understood, the structure of Marui meets this claim limitation because the tubular section of the viewed second receiving portion extends from the beginning of the receiving opening to the final end of the tubular section; the language “by at least a 40-60% of the second length” can be read that a length of 100% would meet the claim limitation because the use of the phrase “at least” opens up the range disclosed by the Applicant); and/or
wherein the intermediate connecting portion comprises a second reinforcing element configured to connect at least a longitudinal portion of the tubular section of the first receiving portion extending from its respective final end towards its respective receiving opening, with at least a part of the final end of the tubular section of the second receiving portion;
wherein said longitudinal portion of the tubular section of the first receiving portion extends from its respective final end towards its respective receiving opening by at least a 40-60% of the first length.
PNG
media_image2.png
318
525
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 9 of Marui (US 5,408,900 A)
Regarding claim 32, Marui discloses that the first reinforcing element is configured such that its thickness in the second direction progressively increases from a part of the first reinforcing element arranged closest to the receiving opening of the second receiving portion towards a part of the first reinforcing element arranged closest to the final end of the second receiving portion (the viewed first reinforcing element gets bigger starting from the rightmost side of 7 going towards the center of 7 thus meeting the claim limitation); and/or
wherein the second reinforcing element is configured such that its thickness in the second direction progressively increases from a part of the second reinforcing element arranged closest to the receiving opening of the first receiving portion towards a part of the second reinforcing element arranged closest to the final end of the first receiving portion.
Regarding claim 34, Marui discloses that the third distance in the second direction is in the range of 50-250% of the first distance; and/or
wherein the structural connecting device is made of a metal (in light of MPEP 608.02(IX), the hatching of 7 is metallic thus meeting the claim limitation).
Regarding claim 35, Marui discloses a multi-part handlebar assembly (a handlebar assembly with a central bar (10) that has each end connected to a respective element 7; it is noted that Figure 9 shows an element 5, and that each end of the handlebar assembly in Figure 2 has an element 5) of an off-road motorcycle/bicycle, comprising:
a first and a second structural connecting devices according to claim 21 (each side of the handlebar assembly would have an element 7 thus meeting the claim limitation);
a central bar (10) configured to be connected to the motorcycle/bicycle by one or more clamping means (8, 16, 19, 190), wherein the central bar comprises a first bar end (the right end of 10) and a second bar end (the left end of 10);
a first (the 1 that connects to the viewed first bar end of 10) and a second (the 1 that connects to the viewed second bar end of 10) lateral bar, wherein each lateral bar respectively comprises a first bar end (the bar end of each lateral bar that is closest to 10) and a second (the bar end of each lateral bar that is furthest from 10) bar end;
wherein the first bar end of the central bar is connected to the tubular section of the first receiving portion of the first structural connecting device, said first bar end being attached to the first receiving portion of the first structural connecting device by at least one mechanical attaching element (75, 751);
wherein the second bar end of the central bar is connected to the tubular section of the first receiving portion of the second structural connecting device, said second bar end being attached to the first receiving portion of the second structural connecting device by at least one mechanical attaching element (75, 751);
wherein the first bar end of the first lateral bar is connected to the tubular section of the second receiving portion of the first structural connecting device, said first bar end being attached to the second receiving portion of the first structural connecting device by at least one mechanical attaching element (75, 751); and
wherein the first bar end of the second lateral bar is connected to the tubular section of the second receiving portion of the second structural connecting device, said first bar end being attached to the second receiving portion of the second structural connecting device by at least one mechanical attaching element (75, 751).
Regarding claim 39, Marui discloses a fitting tolerance of the first and second bar ends of the central bar with respect to the tubular section of the first receiving portion of the first and second structural connecting devices is in the range 0.01 to 0.03 mm; and/or
wherein at least one of the central bar, the first lateral bar (in light of MPEP 608.02(IX), the hatching of 1 in Figure 10 is metallic thus meeting the claim limitation), and the second lateral bar (in light of MPEP 608.02(IX), the hatching of 1 in Figure 10 is metallic thus meeting the claim limitation) is made of metal.
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 30, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marui (US 5,408,900 A) in view of Coleburn (US 6,485,151 B2).
Regarding 30, Marui discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose that the structural connecting device further comprises one or more auxiliary connecting holes configured to connect at least one external auxiliary part to the structural connecting device.
Coleburn teaches a structural connecting device (26) that further comprises one or more auxiliary connecting holes (the hole in 26 that 27 threads into; see Figure 4) configured to connect at least one external auxiliary part (12) to the structural connecting device.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structural connecting device of Marui to further comprise one or more auxiliary connecting holes configured to connect at least one external auxiliary part to the structural connecting device, as taught by Coleburn, for the purpose of providing a structure that allows accessories to attach to the handlebar assembly.
Claim 38, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marui (US 5,408,900 A) in view of Hashimoto (US 2010/0186542 A1)).
Regarding 38, Marui discloses that the central bar, the first lateral bar, the second lateral bar, and the tubular sections of the first and second receiving portions have circular cross-sections (see Figure 1).
Marui does not disclose that the central bar has a diameter in the range 22 to 35 mm; and/or
wherein the first and second lateral bars have a diameter in the range 14 to 29 mm.
Hashimoto teaches a central bar (11) having a diameter (d1) in the range of 22 to 35 mm (see Paragraph 0039) and/or wherein first and second lateral bars (14,15) have a diameter (d3) in the range 14 to 29 mm (see Paragraph 0039) for the purpose of providing a handlebar with consistent strength throughout its length in all directions, high profile accuracy, and excellent appearance (see Paragraph 0008).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diameter of the central bar and the diameter of the first and second lateral bars of Marui to have respective diameters in the range of 14-29mm and 22-35 mm for the purpose of providing a handlebar with consistent strength throughout its length in all directions, high profile accuracy, and excellent appearance, as taught by Hashimoto.
Claim 40, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marui (US 5,408,900 A) in view of Rebstock (DE 20008748 U1; see provided machine translation).
Regarding 40, Marui discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose that the first and second lateral bars have a length in a range of 200 mm to 300 mm; and/or
wherein the first end bar of the first and second lateral bars has a respective length in the range 30 to 70 mm.
Rebstock teaches a lateral bar (2) that as a length in the range of 30 to 70 mm (see the first page of the machine translation which discloses that the handlebar stub is in the range between 30 mm and 70 mm).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first end bar of the first and second lateral bars of Marui to have a respective length in the range 30 to 70 mm, as taught by Rebstock, for the purpose of providing a length of each lateral bar that allows a user to grip the lateral bars in such a manner that provides comfortable arm positions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-29, 33, 36, and 37 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hissam (US 6,860,500 B2) discloses a motorcycle handlebar assembly that is comprised of a central bar and two lateral bars, each axial end of the central bar has a connecting structure that connects a respective end of the central bar to one of the two lateral bars, the connecting structure has two bores that extend partially into the connecting structure, an end of a respective lateral bar fits into one of the bore, and the bores being offset from each other in a radial direction.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM D ROGERS whose telephone number is (571)272-6561. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 6AM-2:00PM EST.
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.
/ADAM D ROGERS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Prosecution Insights