In this patent, 6805657, the original inventor filed for a Body-connected bike on November 5th, 2002 and was later published on October 19th, 2004. This patent includes "A body-connected bike" which "comprises a front roller assembly and a separate rear roller assembly." Essentially, this bike has two wheels but no chain connecting the first and second wheel. What makes this patent silly is not only its absurdity--but the mechanics which would create a dangerous riding experience for the biker.
Non-Obviousness, Prior Art, Reasonable, Novel?
This patent is clearly not obvious as it appears rather ridiculous to patent a bike without a connection from the first to the second wheel. There is likely patents related to traditional bikes but none like this. It appears to be very unreasonable and not novel as the rider will likely be unsafe from riding on such a device.
Claim Analysis:
Claim 1: 1. A wheeled apparatus for transporting a rider, the apparatus comprising a separate front roller assembly and a separate rear roller assembly such that the roller assemblies are only coupled together by the rider's body during exercise the front roller assembly comprising a front wheel and a handgrip portion disposed on both sides of, and operatively supported from, the front wheel.
2. The wheeled apparatus of claim 1 wherein the handgrip portion is supported by a bearing engaging an axle through the front wheel.
3. The wheeled apparatus of claim 1 wherein a first handgrip portion comprises a brake operably attached to the front wheel.
4. The wheeled apparatus of claim 3 wherein the brake comprises a friction element disposed on the handgrip engageable with a complementary friction element operatively connected to the front wheel.
This claim outlines that both components are separate and are connected by the rider holding the front wheel. There appears to be a brake on the front wheel. While the claim is descriptive, it is truly absurd.
Conclusion:
The "Body-connected bike" is truly a silly patent that could be a dangerous riding experience all around. It is unlikely that this patent would bring a novel idea into society and it will be very unlikely for the innovator to license or sell this patent.
This is honestly a ridiculous patent. How would one even break on one of those, especially if you are going down a hill? This thing sounds insanely dangerous. The fact that the front and back wheel are separate make this a ridiculous patent. I'm just curious what the logic the PTO used to approve this patent.
ReplyDeleteNice patent. I saw Bloomberg wrote about this too. I don't understand how somebody could use this realistically. I don't think anybody could keep their body in that position for long amounts of time while biking and exercising. It may have been a nice thought, but in reality this patent doesn't pan out.
ReplyDeleteHi Siddharth, great analysis of the patent! I enjoyed your concise but clear format that lists all the important points, prior art, and claims. I'm interested in how this patent relates to vaguely similar modes of transportation in non-traditional ways, such as via Wheelie shoes or the hoverboard.
ReplyDelete