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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 9/12/25, 10/22/25, and 10/22/25 have been considered by the examiner.
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 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee [US 2022/003378] in view of Horn [US 11465705].
As to claim 6, Lee discloses a saddle-ride vehicle [see figure 16] comprising: a lighting device [10, figure 2], the lighting device emitting predetermined light capable of providing a higher brightness than headlight light of the vehicle at a predetermined position spaced away from the vehicle [see figure 14, note one set of light and reflector may be a high beam which provides brighter lights at different distributions or may be powered higher], the predetermined light being emitted from a position forward of the center of the vehicle in a front-rear direction [see figure 16, 2], the lighting device including: a plurality of light sources [200] being arranged to be displaced in the front-rear direction of the vehicle [see figures 2, 16], and a reflector [100] that reflects light from either one of the plurality of light sources to emit the predetermined light [see figures 2, 16], the plurality of light sources including left [201, 211, see also figure 10] and right headlight [222, 212, figure 10] light sources, and the reflector is disposed forward of the plurality of light sources including the headlight light sources and between the left headlight light source and the right headlight light source [see figure 14, note that the reflector is between the left and right light sources in that it extends between two points above each light source, see figure 3a, note that claim language does not require the reflector to be directly between or to shield said light sources from each other].
Lee fails to explicitly disclose wherein the front surface of the lighting device has an inclined shape that narrows in a vehicle width direction as being further forward in the vehicle. Horn teaches implementing a saddle ride vehicle with a front surface including an inclined shape that narrows in a vehicle width direction as being further forward in the vehicle was well known [see figures 1, 1d]. It would have been obvious to implement the front form factor of the motorcycle of Horn with the lighting unit of Lee, depending on a user’s aesthetic tastes [see Lee, paragraph 222]
As to claim 7, Lee discloses the saddle-ride vehicle according to claim 6, further comprising: a steering handlebar [40, figure 16], wherein the predetermined light is emitted from a position forward of the handlebar [see figure 16].
As to claim 8, Lee discloses the saddle-ride vehicle according to claim 6, further comprising: a cover that covers a part of the lighting device, wherein a part of the cover is located forward of the reflector and overlaps the reflector in vehicle front view [see figure 1].
As to claim 9, Lee discloses the saddle-ride vehicle according to claim 7, further comprising: a cover that covers a part of the lighting device, wherein a part of the cover is located forward of the reflector and overlaps the reflector in vehicle front view [300, figure 1].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Monma [see PTO-892], Sato, Horn, Oguchi, Horn, and Kimura all teach alternative lighting embodiments for a lighting unit on a saddle type vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYON GYLLSTROM whose telephone number is (571)270-1498. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Jong-Suk Lee can be reached at 571-272-7044. 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.
/BRYON T GYLLSTROM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights