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 Objections
Claim 6 objected to because of the following informalities: “the upper and lower to define” should be rewritten as “the upper and lower distal ends to define”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 6 fails to further limit claim 5, as claim 5 depends from claim 4, which introduces all of the limitations contained in claim 6. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eitel (US-6263994-B1), henceforth referred to as Eitel, in view of Hebert (US-20200198724-A1), henceforth referred to as Hebert.
Regarding claim 7, Eitel discloses a rear suspension assembly comprising: an upright including an upper upright end and a lower upright end (Figure 1: rear suspension assembly includes upright 13 comprising upper and lower ends), and a knuckle disposed therebetween the knuckle being adapted for operably coupling to a wheel characterized by an axis of rotation (Figure 1: rear suspension assembly includes upright 13 comprising upper and lower ends, further comprising a knuckle coupled to rear wheel 15), an upper link including an upper link line characterized by an upper proximal end and an upper distal end (Figure 1: upper arm 7 comprises an arm body between proximal and distal ends), the upper proximal end being adapted for rotatable coupling to a support frame (Figure 1: proximal end of upper arm 7 attached to vehicle frame post 2 at pivot 11), and the upper distal end being rotatably coupled to the upright at the upper upright end (Figure 1: distal end of upper arm 7 attaches to upright 13 at pivot 37), a lower link including a lower link line characterized by a lower proximal end and a lower distal end (Figure 1: lower arm 5 comprises an arm body between proximal and distal ends), the lower proximal end being adapted for rotatable coupling to said support frame (Figure 1: proximal end of lower arm 5 attached to vehicle frame post 2 at pivot 9), and the lower distal end being rotatably coupled to the upright at the lower upright end (Figure 1: distal end of lower arm 5 attaches to upright 13 at pivot 36), wherein the upper and lower link lines diverge from the upper and lower proximal ends to the upper and lower distal ends to define an instantaneous center (Figures 1 and 7: upper arm 7 and lower arm 5 converge towards the proximal ends to define an instantaneous center). However, Eitel does not teach an enclosure. Hebert discloses an enclosure that at least partially surrounds the rear suspension assembly, and wherein at least a portion of the enclosure is disposed between the instantaneous center and the upper and lower links (Figure 1: frame cover 12 partially covers swing arm 18, and is disposed between the instantaneous center and upper link 19, and swing arm 18). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the suspension of Eitel with the cover of Yoichi in order to protect the vehicle components and make the rider more comfortable (Paragraph [0035]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5 are allowed.
Claim 6 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 4th paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 8-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the “proximal damper end being adapted for rotatable coupling to said support frame at a point about the level of the axis of rotation, the distal damper end rotatably connected to said upper link at a point above the connection of said proximal damper end to said support frame” as found in independent claim 1, is not an obvious combination of prior art. The “proximal damper end being adapted for rotatable coupling to said support frame at a point about the level of the axis of rotation, the distal damper end rotatably connected to said upper link at a point above the connection of said proximal damper end to said support frame” as found in dependent claim 8 is not an obvious combination of prior art.
Cited Prior Art not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes Park (US-8727057-B2), which discloses a rear suspension with an upright and instant center.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J O'NEILL whose telephone number is (571)272-4752. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri: 7AM-4PM.
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, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571) 270-5985. 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.
/MATTHEW JAMES O'NEILL/Examiner, Art Unit 3614
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614