Patent Watch: Cycling Products in Development

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderators: robbosmans, Moderator Team

User avatar
prendrefeu
Posts: 8580
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Glendale / Los Angeles, California
Contact:

by prendrefeu

From a side-discussion that spring up over here, I thought it might be a good idea to start an active thread that keeps tabs on what the industry is up to in terms of innovation, products in development, or just ideas that may or may not make it to market at all.

What is interesting in all of this is patent laws themselves and how one company/business or individuals may gain some margin of profit from the licensed use of their design by another company. I think we may see those instances come up frequently over time as we compare filed or application-status patents with what is being marketed to the consumer and by whom. Many of these patents are filed in the United States, but being an international forum if you have the opportunity to search patent filings in your own country which may be relevant to what we're passionate about (cycling!!) then please, please contribute!

Also, hopefully the discussion here can continue the trend of this forum being a distinct and valuable place for shared knowledge separate from the types of banter that take place on other well known forums.

Here's a start, feel free to contribute:

Madfiber's patent is for their construction technique and the composition of their wheels.

Reynolds/Lew had a few applications recently, haven't read through all of them just skimmed
"Bead seat clincher" ?
"triple-flange hub"


Just browsing through the patents for a few minutes revealed some interesting stuff coming possibly to market:
Fox may be developing a front shock system with 'inertia valve'
Some person (I can't place them with a company, name is unfamiliar) is developing a system for the connection between spoke, nipple, and rim.
Some dudes in Milwaukee, Wisconsin (United States) are developing a cassette-based power meter system.
Seiko-Epson (yes, the watches and printer company) have filed patent for a crank assembly, but on cursory glance I can't see how it is different from what's already on market? :noidea:
CrankBrothers has a new stem system coming out maybe.

Specialized has a slew of stuff, of course. Interesting things that caught my eye:
Cycling Shoe with Rear Entry perfect for those transitions in a Tri race.

Oh, and some folks from Connecticut (who own other brands, mind you) are working on a new crankset. *cough*Cannondale*cough*
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



User avatar
bJay
Posts: 633
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:13 am
Location: Vancouver

by bJay

For what it's worth, I've tried searching the main names of individuals from ENVE, and the companies I've found that Simon Smart is linked to without any luck.

B
a riddle wrapped in an enigma wrapped in lycra

Life is like riding a bicycle - in order to keep your balance, you must keep moving.
Albert Einstein

milroy
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:37 am

by milroy

bJay wrote:For what it's worth, I've tried searching the main names of individuals from ENVE, and the companies I've found that Simon Smart is linked to without any luck.

B


Patent Applications are not usually published until 18 months after filing. You may be able to determine that an application has been filed before then, but you won't be able to see details.

User avatar
bJay
Posts: 633
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:13 am
Location: Vancouver

by bJay

Ive been keeping an eye on patents for a while now because it comes up with my degree a bit.

Having only had a quick skim read, Im pretty sure the manufacturing technique employed by Cannondale under the direction of Peter Denk is covered by this patent

METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING A FIBER-REINFORCED SYNTHETIC PART

B
a riddle wrapped in an enigma wrapped in lycra

Life is like riding a bicycle - in order to keep your balance, you must keep moving.
Albert Einstein

User avatar
prendrefeu
Posts: 8580
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Glendale / Los Angeles, California
Contact:

by prendrefeu

milroy wrote:Patent Applications are not usually published until 18 months after filing. You may be able to determine that an application has been filed before then, but you won't be able to see details.


Really?
The most recent I've been reading (not-cycling related) were filed in late December 2010. That's 5 months.
Perhaps we may not see publications immediately, but where are you getting the 18 month estimate?
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.

User avatar
mythical
Posts: 1515
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:49 am
Location: Europe
Contact:

by mythical

Great thread! :thumbup: It seems Raphael Schlanger is a big fan of carbon. I'm curious to see what will come of it. That Cannondale crank idea looks interesting but I have yet to see it come to fruition. I use Espacenet to search for patents.

Small remark: That Crank Brothers stem from the patent is already available. :arrow: http://crankbrothers.com/stems.php
“I always find it amazing that a material can actually sell a product when it’s really the engineering that creates and dictates how well that material will behave or perform.” — Chuck Teixeira

Quickdraw
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South of the Republic of Boulder.

by Quickdraw

prendrefeu wrote:
milroy wrote:Patent Applications are not usually published until 18 months after filing. You may be able to determine that an application has been filed before then, but you won't be able to see details.


Really?
The most recent I've been reading (not-cycling related) were filed in late December 2010. That's 5 months.
Perhaps we may not see publications immediately, but where are you getting the 18 month estimate?


Milroy is correct. Two general points: (1) You must look at the earliest priority date claimed, not the filing date for the particular application published. For example, the published application may have been filed off of an earlier provisional application, which would create the earlier priority date to which you would look back 18 months. (2) The applicant can request earlier publication (such as when they believe there will be potentially infringing devices on the market), though this seems to be rarely requested.

35 U.S.C. 122(b) sets out the 18 month window as follows:

(b) PUBLICATION.-

(1) IN GENERAL.-

(A) Subject to paragraph (2), each application for a patent shall be published, in accordance with procedures determined by the Director, promptly after the expiration of a period of 18 months from the earliest filing date for which a benefit is sought under this title. At the request of the applicant, an application may be published earlier than the end of such 18-month period.

(B) No information concerning published patent applications shall be made available to the public except as the Director determines.

(C) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a determination by the Director to release or not to release information concerning a published patent application shall be final and nonreviewable.

(2) EXCEPTIONS.-

(A) An application shall not be published if that application is-

(i) no longer pending;

(ii) subject to a secrecy order under section 181 of this title;

(iii) a provisional application filed under section 111(b) of this title; or

(iv) an application for a design patent filed under chapter 16 of this title.

(B)

(i) If an applicant makes a request upon filing, certifying that the invention disclosed in the application has not and will not be the subject of an application filed in another country, or under a multilateral international agreement, that requires publication of applications 18 months after filing, the application shall not be published as provided in paragraph (1).

(ii) An applicant may rescind a request made under clause (i) at any time.

(iii) An applicant who has made a request under clause (i) but who subsequently files, in a foreign country or under a multilateral international agreement specified in clause (i), an application directed to the invention disclosed in the application filed in the Patent and Trademark Office, shall notify the Director of such filing not later than 45 days after the date of the filing of such foreign or international application. A failure of the applicant to provide such notice within the prescribed period shall result in the application being regarded as abandoned, unless it is shown to the satisfaction of the Director that the delay in submitting the notice was unintentional.

(iv) If an applicant rescinds a request made under clause (i) or notifies the Director that an application was filed in a foreign country or under a multilateral international agreement specified in clause (i), the application shall be published in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (1) on or as soon as is practical after the date that is specified in clause (i).

(v) If an applicant has filed applications in one or more foreign countries, directly or through a multilateral international agreement, and such foreign filed applications corresponding to an application filed in the Patent and Trademark Office or the description of the invention in such foreign filed applications is less extensive than the application or description of the invention in the application filed in the Patent and Trademark Office, the applicant may submit a redacted copy of the application filed in the Patent and Trademark Office eliminating any part or description of the invention in such application that is not also contained in any of the corresponding applications filed in a foreign country. The Director may only publish the redacted copy of the application unless the redacted copy of the application is not received within 16 months after the earliest effective filing date for which a benefit is sought under this title. The provisions of section 154(d) shall not apply to a claim if the description of the invention published in the redacted application filed under this clause with respect to the claim does not enable a person skilled in the art to make and use the subject matter of the claim.

Quickdraw
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South of the Republic of Boulder.

by Quickdraw

bJay wrote:Ive been keeping an eye on patents for a while now because it comes up with my degree a bit.

Having only had a quick skim read, Im pretty sure the manufacturing technique employed by Cannondale under the direction of Peter Denk is covered by this patent

METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING A FIBER-REINFORCED SYNTHETIC PART

B


The document that you reference is a published patent application, not an actual patent. No rights accrue until the application is a granted patent. Has this application been granted, and, if so, what are the final claims? The claims can change dramatically during prosecution before the U.S. Patent Office.

For what it is worth, it is the claims of the patent that define the scope of the rights conferred by the patent. The rest of the patent (i.e. the drawings, the detailed description) matter very little in terms of determining the scope of property rights conferred by the patent. So you must determine if the claims of the patent "read on" a potentially infringing device.

There are four patents that I can locate to an inventor named "Denk-Peter", as follows:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=in%2Fdenk-peter&d=PTXT

The application that you list does not appear to have matured into a patent at this time.

musket

by musket

Great thread idea.

prendrefeu wrote:Fox may be developing a front shock system with 'inertia valve'[/size]


They've released one such fork years ago, and recently re-released the tech in a new fork. It's marketed as Terralogic. It's hard to know if it uses the patent linked, or another.

Quickdraw
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South of the Republic of Boulder.

by Quickdraw

prendrefeu wrote:From a side-discussion that spring up over here, I thought it might be a good idea to start an active thread that keeps tabs on what the industry is up to in terms of innovation, products in development, or just ideas that may or may not make it to market at all.

What is interesting in all of this is patent laws themselves and how one company/business or individuals may gain some margin of profit from the licensed use of their design by another company. I think we may see those instances come up frequently over time as we compare filed or application-status patents with what is being marketed to the consumer and by whom. Many of these patents are filed in the United States, but being an international forum if you have the opportunity to search patent filings in your own country which may be relevant to what we're passionate about (cycling!!) then please, please contribute!

Also, hopefully the discussion here can continue the trend of this forum being a distinct and valuable place for shared knowledge separate from the types of banter that take place on other well known forums.

Here's a start, feel free to contribute:

Madfiber's patent is for their construction technique and the composition of their wheels.

Reynolds/Lew had a few applications recently, haven't read through all of them just skimmed
"Bead seat clincher" ?
"triple-flange hub"


Just browsing through the patents for a few minutes revealed some interesting stuff coming possibly to market:
Fox may be developing a front shock system with 'inertia valve'
Some person (I can't place them with a company, name is unfamiliar) is developing a system for the connection between spoke, nipple, and rim.
Some dudes in Milwaukee, Wisconsin (United States) are developing a cassette-based power meter system.
Seiko-Epson (yes, the watches and printer company) have filed patent for a crank assembly, but on cursory glance I can't see how it is different from what's already on market? :noidea:
CrankBrothers has a new stem system coming out maybe.



You appear to use the terms "application" and "patent" interchangeably. There is a big difference between the two. An "application," or "application for patent," is just that. Someone has applied for a patent, but no rights have been granted yet. When rights are granted, it becomes a "patent." During the examination process before the granting authority (e.g. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or "USPTO") much can change from the application. For example, the application can be rejected by the USPTO, which can lead to, among others things, (1) the application being abandoned, (2) the scope of the claims being amended or (3) argument from the application in the form of a response to the rejection as to why the claims should not be rejected. Most applications (>97%?) receive at least one rejection.

All of the documents you reference are applications. These will show a number in the upper right hand corner of the official document such as US 2010/0301663A1 for the Madfiber published application.

see: http://www.google.com/patents?id=tcDdAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false

About one-third of the way down on the page it lists the application number for this patent, which is 12/709,178. Note that the application number is not the same as the publication number!

The following is an image from a patent that was the subject of the thread http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=80010&hilit=speedplay, which referred to US Patent No. 7,174,807 B2 with the inventor Richard Byrne and assinged to Speedplay.

see: http://www.google.com/patents?id=E-F-AAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false

The patent number is in the upper right hand corner and has a different number format (i.e. 7,174,807 B2 as opposed to something such as US 2010/XXXXXXX A1)

If you want to know the current status of an application, such as the Mad Fiber app. no. 12/709,178, and what is going on with the application, you can use a system on the USPTO's website called "Public PAIR", which is found here: http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair Two important points about PAIR: (1) you must have a bit of information about the application such as the app. no. or the pub. no. (or patent no. of a patent has been granted) and (2) the application must have been published, or the patent granted, for it to be viewable in Public PAIR.

According to my PAIR search the current status of the Mad Fiber application is "Docketed New Case - Ready for Examination." Thus, nothing has really happened on it yet. When you are in PAIR looking at an application most of the interesting information for an application will be found in the "Image File Wrapper" tab. This shows the correspondence back-and-forth between the USPTO and the Applicant's patent attorney/agent (or the applicant himself if pro se). In particular, this is where you would find the rejections, if any, and how the Applicant sought to overcome the rejections. Again, at this point, there is nothing of interest in the Image File Wrapper for the Mad Fiber application, as exmination has not yet begun.

Lastly, one of the best places to search US patents and applications for patent is the USPTO's site at: http://patft.uspto.gov/ More generally, the USPTO's patents section can be found at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/index.jsp

User avatar
prendrefeu
Posts: 8580
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Glendale / Los Angeles, California
Contact:

by prendrefeu

Geez, I'm just attempting to start a thread that may have something interesting come up. Sorry I'm a novice. :oops:
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.

Quickdraw
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:40 pm
Location: South of the Republic of Boulder.

by Quickdraw

prendrefeu wrote:Geez, I'm just attempting to start a thread that may have something interesting come up. Sorry I'm a novice. :oops:

I apologize if I came off too strong. Being slightly argumentative is an occupational hazard in my line of work. Also, patents, and patent law, can be very confusing. Often people disucss patents and can quickly get off base due to a lack of understanding. I see it all the time. I was trying to set the record straight.

I guess I deserve one of these: :smartass:

User avatar
prendrefeu
Posts: 8580
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Glendale / Los Angeles, California
Contact:

by prendrefeu

I look forward to your contributions to this thread then!
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.

taina
Posts: 115
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:17 pm
Location: near Seattle

by taina

How about clipless pedals comprising two wide thin iron plates on either side of the spindle, paired with electromagnet cleats wired to battery packs strapped to the rider's ankles? In the entry-level version, the battery packs have manual on-off switches. The most expensive version includes joysticks for selectively magnetizing regions of the cleats. Just kidding.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



User avatar
HammerTime2
Posts: 5814
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 4:43 pm
Location: Wherever there's a mountain beckoning to be climbed

by HammerTime2

How about a Gruber Assist power meter? Not only would it measure and record power, it would create it. There's already a precarious line as soon as you allow battery power for measuring.

Ah yes, that battery only supplies power to measure power, not to power the bike. Really occifer, I mean your excellency, we had no idea.

This post establishes prior art. I'll go in 50/50 with anyone who develops the concept, submits a successful patent application, and brings it to market. Of course, we will not use the name Gruber Assist unless we go into business with them.

Now :back2topic:

Post Reply