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 2, 7, 8, and 18 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 2, line 2, recites “two opposed pedal platform bases” which is indefinite because it is unclear how the two opposed pedal platform bases from claim 2 are related to the at least one pedal platform base from claim 1, line 3. Are the two opposed pedal platform bases from claim 2 a part of the at least one pedal platform base from claim 1? Should claim 2 be amended to recite --the at least one pedal platform base is comprised of two opposed pedal platform bases--?
Claim 2, line 3, recites “two opposed pedal platform surfaces” which is indefinite because it is unclear how the two opposed pedal platform surfaces from claim 2 are related to the pedal platform surface from claim 1, line 4. Do the two opposed pedal platform surfaces from claim 2 include the pedal platform surface from claim 1? Is the Applicant trying to claim three pedal platform surfaces?
The term “valley-shaped” in claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “valley-shaped” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Valleys can come in various shapes thus the metes and bounds of the limitation cannot be determined.
The term “valley-shaped” in claim 18 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “valley-shaped” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Valleys can come in various shapes thus the metes and bounds of the limitation cannot be determined.
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 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A).
Regarding claim 15, P. J. Willard discloses a bicycle pedal, comprising:
a main pedal body (the body of A) adapted to rotatably receive an axle (the member that the pedal engages which fits into the central tube of A; Furthermore, this is an instance of intended use/functional language; see MPEP 2114);
the main pedal body defining at least one pedal platform base (B) upon which is disposed a layer of elastomeric material (C; rubber) to form a pedal platform surface (the top of the top two C in Figure 1);
for each pedal platform base, the main pedal body defines a delamination shield (shown below) that extends beyond the respective pedal platform base to shield a vanguard inferior edge (shown below) of the respective layer of low-rebound elastomeric material.
PNG
media_image1.png
394
673
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1 of P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A)
Regarding claim 17, P. J. Willard discloses that each pedal platform surface comprises a plurality of spaced-apart protrusions (the top of each C in Figure 2 is shown with a rippled line thus showing a plurality of spaced-apart protrusions).
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 1-3 and 5, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A) in view of UnParallel Rubber (see the Non-Patent Literature document of UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties cited in the parent application (18/203247); while the NPL document is undated, the pdf was found in the first post of the Mountain Project NPL which was posted on February 11, 2020 thus the UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties NPL is viewed as having a published/publicly available date of February 11, 2020).
Regarding claim 1, P. J. Willard discloses a bicycle pedal, comprising:
a main pedal body (the body of A) adapted to rotatably receive an axle (the member that the pedal engages which fits into the central tube of A; Furthermore, this is an instance of intended use/functional language; see MPEP 2114);
the main pedal body defining at least one pedal platform base (B) upon which is disposed a layer of elastomeric material (C; rubber) to form a pedal platform surface (the top of the top two C in Figure 1).
P. J. Willard does not disclose that the elastomeric material is a low-rebound elastomeric material (per Applicant’s definition of a low-rebound elastomeric material found in Paragraph 0017 of the specification).
UnParallel Rubber teaches an elastomeric material (the UP RH REAL HONOR material found in the chart).
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 elastomeric material of P. J. Willard to be a low-rebound elastomeric material, as taught by UnParallel Rubber, for the purpose of a material that is hard enough to be resilient yet soft enough to be pliable.
Regarding claim 2, P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber discloses that the main pedal body defines two opposed pedal platform bases (see Figure 1 of P. J. Willard); and
the low-rebound elastomeric material forms two opposed pedal platform surfaces (one of the top C and one of the bottom C in Figure 1 of P. J. Willard).
Regarding claim 3, P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber discloses that for each pedal platform base, the main pedal body defines a delamination shield (shown below) that extends beyond the respective pedal platform base to shield a vanguard inferior edge (shown below) of the respective layer of low-rebound elastomeric material.
PNG
media_image1.png
394
673
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1 of P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A)
Regarding claim 5, P. J. Willard discloses that each pedal platform surface comprises a plurality of spaced-apart protrusions (the top of each C in Figure 2 is shown with a rippled line thus showing a plurality of spaced-apart protrusions).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A) in view of UnParallel Rubber (see the Non-Patent Literature document of UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties cited in the parent application (18/203247); while the NPL document is undated, the pdf was found in the first post of the Mountain Project NPL which was posted on February 11, 2020 thus the UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties NPL is viewed as having a published/publicly available date of February 11, 2020) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of J. A. Phillips (GB 727816 A).
Regarding claim 4, P. J. Willard discloses a travel axis (left-to-right in Figure 1) of the pedal.
P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber does not disclose that each pedal platform surface is concave along the travel axis of the pedal.
J. A. Phillips teaches a pedal platform surface (the top of 12) that is concave along a travel axis (left-to-right in Figure 1) of a pedal (see Figure 1).
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 pedal platform surface of P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber to be concave along the travel axis of the pedal, as taught by J. A. Phillips, for the purpose of providing a pedal platform surface aids in preventing the user’s foot from disengaging the pedal when pedaling since the user’s foot would be able to deform to match the concave surface.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A) in view of UnParallel Rubber (see the Non-Patent Literature document of UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties cited in the parent application (18/203247); while the NPL document is undated, the pdf was found in the first post of the Mountain Project NPL which was posted on February 11, 2020 thus the UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties NPL is viewed as having a published/publicly available date of February 11, 2020) as applied to claims 5 and 17, respectively, above, and further in view of Bouvy (GB 827144 A).
Regarding claim 6, P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose that sides of the protrusions are generally orthogonal to a floor of the layer of the low-rebound elastomeric material.
Bouvy teaches a pedal that has protrusions (see Figure 2) that have sides (the vertical sides that form each protrusion in Figure 2) which are generally orthogonal to a floor (the horizontal bottom of each protrusion) of an elastomeric material (7 is made of rubber) for the purpose of increasing the adhesive propensity between the supporting surface and the sole of a footwear of a cyclist (Page 2 / Lines 49-54).
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 protrusions of P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber to have sides that are generally orthogonal to a floor of the layer of the low-rebound elastomeric material for the purpose of increasing the adhesive propensity between the supporting surface and the sole of a footwear of a cyclist, as taught by Bouvy.
Claims 7 and 8, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A) in view of UnParallel Rubber (see the Non-Patent Literature document of UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties cited in the parent application (18/203247); while the NPL document is undated, the pdf was found in the first post of the Mountain Project NPL which was posted on February 11, 2020 thus the UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties NPL is viewed as having a published/publicly available date of February 11, 2020) as applied to claims 5 and 18, respectively, above, and further in view of J. R. Thorp (US 1,977,415 A).
Regarding claim 7, P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose that the protrusions have sloped sides to form valley-shaped gaps between adjacent ones of the protrusions.
J. R. Thorp teaches a pedal pad (10) that has protrusions (15) with sloped sides (see the angled sides of each 15) to form valley-shaped gaps between adjacent ones of the protrusions (see Figure 1).
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 protrusions of P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber to have sloped sides to form valley-shaped gaps between adjacent ones of the protrusions, as taught by J. R. Thorp, for the purpose of providing a structure that is capable of deforming a user’s foot thereby providing a more stable connection between the user and the pedal.
Regarding claim 8, P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber and further in view of J. R. Thorp discloses that the valley-shaped gaps are one of U-shaped, V-shaped (see Figure 1 of J. R. Thorp) and half-round.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A) in view of UnParallel Rubber (see the Non-Patent Literature document of UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties cited in the parent application (18/203247); while the NPL document is undated, the pdf was found in the first post of the Mountain Project NPL which was posted on February 11, 2020 thus the UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties NPL is viewed as having a published/publicly available date of February 11, 2020) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of C. H. Davids (US 527,384 A).
Regarding claim 9, P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose that each pedal platform surface is substantially smooth and free of protrusions.
C. H. Davids teaches a pedal platform surface (the top of each K) that is substantially smooth and free of protrusions (see the top of each K in Figures 2 and 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify each pedal platform surface of P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber to be substantially smooth and free of protrusions, as taught by C. H. Davids, for the purpose of providing a surface that is capable of holding a user’s foot in place during riding, but also allows a user’s foot to slide off of the surface in the event of an accident or dismounting the bicycle.
Claims 10, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bremer (US 6,725,742 B2) in view of P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A) in view of UnParallel Rubber (see the Non-Patent Literature document of UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties cited in the parent application (18/203247); while the NPL document is undated, the pdf was found in the first post of the Mountain Project NPL which was posted on February 11, 2020 thus the UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties NPL is viewed as having a published/publicly available date of February 11, 2020).
Regarding claim 10, Bremer discloses a system, comprising:
two pedals (the pedal shown in Figure 3 and the other pedal on the opposite side of the pedal; it is well-known in the art of bicycles that each side of the bicycle has a pedal which is engaged by a respective user’s foot); and
two pieces of footwear (50 and the shoe that engages the non-shown pedal), each piece of footwear having an outer sole (54) and having a plurality of studs (64) projecting from the sole.
Bremer does not disclose that the pedals are according to claim 1.
P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber discloses a pedal according to claim 1.
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 pedals of Bremer to be the pedals according to claim 1, as taught by P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber, for the purpose of providing a pedal that allows the user to more easily disengage the pedals in the event of an accident.
Regarding claim 13, Bremer discloses a mountain biking kit, comprising:
at least one pedal (10); and
at least one of:
at least one studded-sole footwear (50);
at least one footwear-mountable studded sole plate; or
a plurality of threaded sole studs (64).
Bremer does not disclose that the at least one pedal is according to claim 1.
P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber discloses a pedal according to claim 1.
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 at least one pedal of Bremer to be the pedals according to claim 1, as taught by P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber, for the purpose of providing a pedal that allows the user to more easily disengage the pedals in the event of an accident.
Regarding claim 14, Bremer discloses a mountain biking kit, comprising:
two pedals (the pedal shown in Figure 3 and the other pedal on the opposite side of the pedal; it is well-known in the art of bicycles that each side of the bicycle has a pedal which is engaged by a respective user’s foot); and
at least one of:
a pair of one studded-sole footwear (50 and the shoe that engages the non-shown pedal);
a pair of footwear-mountable studded sole plates; or
a plurality of threaded sole studs (64).
Bremer does not disclose that the two pedals are according to claim 1.
P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber discloses a pedal according to claim 1.
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 two pedals of Bremer to be the pedals according to claim 1, as taught by P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber, for the purpose of providing pedals that allow the user to more easily disengage the pedals in the event of an accident.
Regarding kit claims 13 and 14, in view of the structure disclosed by Bremer in view of P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to break the components down and assemble them into kit form.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bremer (US 6,725,742 B2) in view of P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A) in view of UnParallel Rubber (see the Non-Patent Literature document of UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties cited in the parent application (18/203247); while the NPL document is undated, the pdf was found in the first post of the Mountain Project NPL which was posted on February 11, 2020 thus the UnParallel Rubber Physical Properties NPL is viewed as having a published/publicly available date of February 11, 2020) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Chaney (US 10,653,206 B2).
Regarding claim 11, Bremer in view of P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose that tips of the studs have a hardness of at least 40 Rockwell B.
Chaney teaches a stud cleat (50) that has a Rockwell C hardness of 60 or greater (Column 6 / Lines 41-43; a Rockwell C hardness of 60 is greater than a 40 Rockwell B hardness thus meeting the claim limitation).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify tips of the studs of Bremer in view of P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber to have a Rockwell B hardness of at least 40, as taught by Chaney, for the purpose of providing a hardness that resists deformation and/or bending.
Regarding claim 12, Bremer in view of P. J. Willard in view of UnParallel Rubber and further in view of Chaney discloses that the tips of the studs have a hardness of at least 40 Rockwell C (Chaney teaches a stud cleat having a Rockwell C hardness of 60 or greater in Column 6 / Lines 41-43 thus meeting the claim limitation).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A) in view of J. A. Phillips (GB 727816 A).
Regarding claim 4, P. J. Willard discloses a travel axis (left-to-right in Figure 1) of the pedal.
P. J. Willard does not disclose that each pedal platform surface is concave along the travel axis of the pedal.
J. A. Phillips teaches a pedal platform surface (the top of 12) that is concave along a travel axis (left-to-right in Figure 1) of a pedal (see Figure 1).
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 pedal platform surface of P. J. Willard to be concave along the travel axis of the pedal, as taught by J. A. Phillips, for the purpose of providing a pedal platform surface aids in preventing the user’s foot from disengaging the pedal when pedaling since the user’s foot would be able to deform to match the concave surface.
Claim 18, as best understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A) in view of J. R. Thorp (US 1,977,415 A).
Regarding claim 18, P. J. Willard discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose that the protrusions have sloped sides to form valley-shaped gaps between adjacent ones of the protrusions.
J. R. Thorp teaches a pedal pad (10) that has protrusions (15) with sloped sides (see the angled sides of each 15) to form valley-shaped gaps between adjacent ones of the protrusions (see Figure 1).
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 protrusions of P. J. Willard to have sloped sides to form valley-shaped gaps between adjacent ones of the protrusions, as taught by J. R. Thorp, for the purpose of providing a structure that is capable of deforming a user’s foot thereby providing a more stable connection between the user and the pedal.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over P. J. Willard (US 581,095 A) in view of Bouvy (GB 827144 A).
Regarding claim 19, P. J. Willard discloses all of the claim limitations, see above, but does not disclose that sides of the protrusions are generally orthogonal to a floor of the layer of the low-rebound elastomeric material.
Bouvy teaches a pedal that has protrusions (see Figure 2) that have sides (the vertical sides that form each protrusion in Figure 2) which are generally orthogonal to a floor (the horizontal bottom of each protrusion) of an elastomeric material (7 is made of rubber) for the purpose of increasing the adhesive propensity between the supporting surface and the sole of a footwear of a cyclist (Page 2 / Lines 49-54).
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 protrusions of P. J. Willard to have sides that are generally orthogonal to a floor of the layer of the low-rebound elastomeric material for the purpose of increasing the adhesive propensity between the supporting surface and the sole of a footwear of a cyclist, as taught by Bouvy.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cuomo (US 12,509,180 B2) discloses a bicycle pedal with an outer surface with a plurality of protrusions.
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