OFFICE ACTION – FINAL REJECTION
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 .
Amendment
The merits of the application have been reviewed in view of applicant’s 28 November 2025 remarks and amendment, and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) are withdrawn. However, applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this office action, and the following final rejection under 35 USC 112(a) is set forth.
Accordingly, THE REJECTIONS IN THIS ACTION ARE MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
OBJECTION – DRAWINGS
The broken lines shown throughout the disclosure exhibit an overall poor line quality. Specifically, the broken lines shown on the tires and below the seat are extremely uneven and close together, creating instances where they are almost indistinguishable from surrounding solid line borders. All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well defined. The weight and character of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. This requirement applies to all lines however fine. See 37 C.F.R. 1.84(l), and MPEP 608.02(V). Therefore, the broken lines in the drawings must comply with the requirements of 37 C.F.R. 1.84. See the following annotations for reference:
PNG
media_image1.png
246
392
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
308
325
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
When preparing new drawings in compliance with the requirement therefor, care must be exercised to avoid introduction of anything which could be construed to be new matter prohibited by 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121.
The examiner recommends using a lossless file format when submitting drawings through EFS-web (e.g., TIFF, PNG, GIF, BMP). EFS-web PDF Guidelines may be found at https://www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/applying-online/efs-web-pdf-guidelines.
CLAIM REJECTION – 35 U.S.C. § 112(a)
The claim is finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the description requirement thereof since the amendment to the drawing introduces new matter not supported by the original disclosure. The original disclosure does not reasonably convey to a designer of ordinary skill in the art that applicant was in possession of the design now claimed at the time the application was filed. See In re Daniels, 144 F.3d 1452, 46 USPQ2d 1788 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Rasmussen, 650 F.2d 1212, 211 USPQ 323 (CCPA 1981).
Specifically, there is no support in the original disclosure for the following.
Surface area inside the chevron shapes of the front tire has been added and is not supported by the original disclosure. Original Figure 5.1 discloses a plain surface, whereas amended Figure 5.1 adds the broken line lettering “HUDORA.” However, the original disclosure never described such appearances. See the following annotation for reference:
PNG
media_image3.png
833
1630
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Surface ornamentation on the front tire tread has been omitted and is not supported by the original disclosure. Original Figure 5.2 discloses small marks in the tire tread not seen in the amended Figure 5.2. However, the original disclosure never described such appearances. See the following annotation for reference:
PNG
media_image4.png
581
1148
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Surface ornamentation on the bike seat has been omitted and is not supported by the original disclosure. Original Figure 5.2 discloses a small mark on the bike seat not seen in the amended Figure 5.2. However, the original disclosure never described such appearances. See the following annotation for reference:
PNG
media_image5.png
240
644
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Surface ornamentation on the rear tire tread and fork has been omitted and is not supported by the original disclosure. Original Figure 5.2 discloses small marks on the fork and tire not seen in the amended Figure 5.2. However, the original disclosure never described such appearances. See the following annotation for reference:
PNG
media_image6.png
662
997
media_image6.png
Greyscale
By altering and omitting features, the scope of the claim has changed and new matter has been added.
There is no support in the original disclosure that provides antecedent basis for the design shown in the amended figures.
To overcome this rejection, applicant may attempt to demonstrate (by means of argument or evidence), that the original disclosure establishes that he or she was in possession of the amended claim.
Alternatively, applicant may amend the disclosure to align more perfectly with the original disclosure.
A response is required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. If corrected drawings are submitted in response to this Office action, they must be in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d). 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 all the figures on a drawing sheet are canceled, a replacement sheet is not required. A marked-up copy of the drawing sheet (labeled as “Annotated Sheet”) including an annotation showing that all the figures on that drawing sheet have been canceled must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change to the drawings. 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) .
The amended drawings must not contain new matter. See 35 U.S.C. 132 and 37 CFR 1.121.
CONCLUSION
The claim stands FINALLY rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH LYNNE SMITH whose telephone number is 571-272-6076.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Holly Thurman, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-8068. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, please visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center, and https://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.
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.
/SLS/
Examiner, Art Unit 2919
/LAUREN D MCVEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2921