Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/882,352

Arm, Leg and Core Exercise Machines

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Aug 05, 2022
Examiner
LETTERMAN, CATRINA A
Art Unit
3784
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
160 granted / 238 resolved
-2.8% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
265
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
§103
32.3%
-7.7% vs TC avg
§102
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§112
34.9%
-5.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 238 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Election/Restrictions Claims 4 and 6-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 20 February 2025. Response to Amendment Replacement drawing sheets for Figures 1-41C were received on 25 September 2025 and have been approved by the Office. The drawing objections have been obviated in view of the amended drawings except with regards to the requirement for black and white line drawings. See below. The specification objections have not been obviated in view of Applicant’s amendments filed 25 September 2025. The claim objections have been obviated in view of Applicant’s amendments filed 25 September 2025. The rejections of claims 1-3 and 5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) have not been fully obviated in view of Applicant’s amendments filed 25 September 2025. See below. The rejections of claims 1-3 and 5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been obviated in view of Applicant’s amendments filed 25 September 2025 and are withdrawn. Claims 1-9 are still pending. Claims 4 and 6-9 are withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-3 and 5 are examined on the merits as follows. Drawings Figures 1-7, 9, 12A-21C, and 26A-41C are objected to as being color drawings or computer-aided design (CAD) drawings. The figures include dark coloring/shading that render the figures difficult to reproduce and the reference characters/lead lines difficult to distinguish. The drawings should be black and white line drawings. 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. Specification The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). The following limitations lack antecedent basis in the specification: “a main armature” in claim 1. “at least three interacting cable pull units allowing a multiplicity of starting and finishing points of a main armature during exercise” in claim 1. “ a plurality of pulley assemblies” and “each pulley assembly comprising three sets of dual pulleys” in claim 1. “a pedal weight selector” in claim 1. “a proximate armature” in claim 1. “a proximate hand grip” and “a distal hand grip” in claim 5. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Objections Claims 1 and 5 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 5, “a plurality of pulley assemblies associated with each of the at least three interacting cable pull units” should read --a plurality of pulley assemblies, each pulley assembly of the plurality of pulley assemblies respectively associated with an interacting cable pull unit of the at least three interacting cable pull units-- Claim 5, line 2, “a a proximate” should read --a proximate-- Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation “at least three interacting cable pull units allowing a multiplicity of starting and finishing points of a main armature during exercise” in lines 3-4. This limitation is not properly described in the specification. The specification appears to describe the cable pull units as providing resistance to a moving of the main armature during exercise, but does not describe how the cable pull units allow “a multiplicity of starting and finishing points of [the] main armature” as claimed. Cable pull units are shown throughout the drawings as comprising the second, third, and fourth double pulley sets 204, 281, and 282 (see at least Figs. 8A-8D) and it is not described or shown how the double pulley sets of the cable pull units would allow for the multiplicity of starting and finishing points of the main armature. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 25 September 2025 have been fully considered but they are not fully persuasive. Regarding the drawing objections, Applicant argues that the drawings are black and white line drawings and not colored drawings. The drawings appear to be CAD drawings that have dark shading that makes it difficult to distinguish between various structures of the apparatus and various reference characters/lead lines. Applicant is requested to amend the drawings to be black and white line drawings without shading and with bold black lines. Regarding the specification objections, Applicant argues that each of the limitations listed do have antecedent basis in the specification. The Office respectfully disagrees. While many of the limitations have support in the disclosure, the specification does not provide proper antecedent basis for the limitations. That is, the specification does not contain the claim language. Providing proper antecedent basis for the limitations in the specification would make it clear where support for each of the limitations is found in the disclosure. Applicant is requested to amend the specification to include the limitations and claim language listed. Regarding the specification objection and 112(a) rejection of the limitation of “at least three interacting cable pull units allowing a multiplicity of starting and finishing points of a main armature during exercise” in claim 1, Applicant draws attention to at least Figure 16 and paragraph [0088] as support for and description of the limitation. The Office respectfully disagrees. In particular, with reference to Figure 16, Applicant describes that the position on the right could be the starting point and the position on the left could be the finishing point. This does not provide support for or describe how the at least three interacting cable pull units allow for a multiplicity of starting and finishing points of a main armature or of the wrist handle. In the Figure, the cable pull units do not appear to be responsible for or allowing the movement of the wrist handle, but are instead providing resistance to a moving of the wrist handle. The starting and finishing points of an armature in the apparatus is not determined or “allowed” by the cable pull units. The cable pull units are described as providing tension. In as much as is understood, the disks 265, 273, and 274 determine the starting and finishing points of the armatures, not the cable pull units. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Higgins (US 2014/0057761) teaches a mechanical exercise apparatus (exercise machine 110) for isolated and compound exercises of an upper extremity, comprising at least three interacting cable pull units (pivots 140 and 144) allowing a multiplicity of starting and ending points of a main armature during exercise (Fig. 7: The various extensions and parts 134, 142, 138 of a main armature are pivotable via pivots 140 and 144); a wrist exercise handle (rotatable hand grips 146) for various exercises of the wrist; and a cable converter (tensioner device 135) for taking up cable slack. Higgins does not teach a plurality of pulley assemblies within each of the at least three interacting cable pull units comprising three sets of dual pulleys, a cable converter for converting a flat cable to a round cable, or a pedal weight selector for selection of a desired weight level. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Catrina A Letterman whose telephone number is (303)297-4297. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8am - 4pm MT. 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, LoAn Jimenez can be reached at (571) 272-4966. 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 C enter. 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. /C.A.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3784 /LOAN B JIMENEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3784
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 05, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 31, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Sep 25, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582868
Rowing Machine Adaptor
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576305
EXERCISE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564761
DEVICE FOR FACIAL AND NECK MUSCLES STIMULATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12564754
PLUG-IN WEIGHTED DUMBBELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558589
EXERCISE BENCH COMPRISING INDEPENDENTLY ADJUSTABLE HANDLE AND STABILIZER PAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+29.0%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 238 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month