DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to applicant’s amendments filed 10/20/2025. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . The effective filing date of the present application is 03/22/2022. In applicant’s amendments filed 10/20/2025, claims 1, 10, and 16 were amended. Claims 1-20, as filed on 10/20/2025, are currently pending.
Applicant’s election with traverse of Inventions I through III (Claims 1-20, as filed on 10/20/2025) in the reply filed on 10/20/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that the “amendments [filed 10/20/2025] have been made to make it clear that the invention of this single apparatus is designed for and has the capability (and we are claiming it) to do both methods of exercises listed in the methods claims and further defend the uniqueness of this art in relation to the prior art by way of explaining how the methods of this invention are specific variants of the specific apparatus in terms of how the user interacts with the apparatus.”
This is found persuasive because applicant’s amendments to claims 1-20, filed 10/20/2025, are drawn to a single grouping of patentably indistinct inventions. The requirement for election/restriction, dated 01/07/2025, is deemed improper and is therefore WITHDRAWN. Claims 1-20, as filed on 10/20/2025, are considered below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/22/2023 was in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84(b)(1). If the invention can be drawn or illustrated then a drawing is required in lieu of black and white photographs. All details in the black and white photographs are not clear. Therefore, black and white line drawings are required in place of the black and white photographs in Figures 2-12, 14-23, 26-29, 32, and 33. No new matter should be entered.
In addition, the drawings are objected to because poor quality and line weight used in the illustrations of Figures 1, 13, 24, 25, 30, and 31 render details in the drawings unclear. No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-5, 7, 10-13, and 16-18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 3, “said apparatus” should be --- the strength training apparatus ---.
In claim 1, line 10, “a user’s upper arms” should be --- upper arms of the user ---.
In claim 1, line 12, “a user’s upper arms” should be --- the upper arms of the user ---.
In claim 1, line 14, “is located” should be --- located ---.
In claim 1, line 16, “couple to the swing arms” should be --- coupled to the first and second swing arms ---.
In claim 1, line 17, “is located” should be --- located ---.
In claim 1, line 19, “the swing arms” should be --- the first and second swing arms ---.
In claim 2, lines 1-2, “wherein lower ends of the swing arms are configured” should be --- wherein lower ends of the first and second swing arms are respectively configured ---.
In claim 2, line 4, “respective ones of the pivot joints” should be --- respective ones of the pivot points ---.
In claim 2, line 6, “the swing arms” should be --- the first and second swing arms ---.
In claim 3, line 1, “coupled” should be --- respectively coupled ---.
In claim 3, line 2, “pulls” should be --- respectively pulls ---.
In claim 3, line 4, “exit” should be --- respectively exit ---.
In claim 4, lines 1-3, “wherein the swing arm levers are located adjacent distal ends of the swing arms and the cables are routed from the swing arm levers, through an interior cavity of the swing arms” should be --- wherein the swing arm levers are respectively located adjacent to distal ends of the first and second swing arms and the cables are respectively routed from the swing arm levers, through an interior cavity of each of the first and second swing arms ---.
In claim 4, lines 4-5, “one of the locking pins” should be --- one of the locking pins, respectively ---.
In claim 5, line 1, “coupled” should be --- respectively coupled ---.
Claim 7 should be amended as follows:
--- The strength training apparatus of claim 1, wherein the user's platform armrest includes a user's platform armrest frame and locking fingers slidably coupled with the user's platform armrest frame, the locking fingers configured to respectively slide in directions toward and away from the first and second swing arms while the user's platform armrest is respectively coupled to the first and second swing arms, wherein sides of the first and second swing arms adjacent to ends of the user's platform armrest frame respectively include locking plates having slots configured to receive lateral ends of the locking fingers, respectively, wherein the user's platform armrest is configured to be releasably locked into position along the first and second swing arms when the lateral ends of the locking fingers are respectively extended toward the first and second swing arms and located within the slots in the locking plates, and the user's platform armrest is configured to be selectively slidable along the first and second swing arms when the lateral ends of the locking fingers are respectively retracted away from the first and second swing arms and not within the slots of the locking plates. ---.
Claim 10 should be amended as follows:
--- A method of performing a triceps extension exercise using the strength training apparatus of Claim 1, the method comprising:
adjusting the angle of the first and second swing arms relative to the frame of the strength training apparatus while the user's platform armrest is coupled to the first and second swing arms by interacting with components of the frame located below the weight bench coupled to the frame;
lying supine on the weight bench below and underneath the user's platform armrest of the strength training apparatus;
adjusting the position of the user's platform armrest along the first and second swing arms downward toward the weight bench while the user's platform armrest is coupled to the first and second swing arms by single-handedly interacting with one or more components located within the user's platform armrest while lying supine on the weight bench below and underneath the user's platform armrest;
holding one of the free weights with one or both hands of the user;
locating and maintaining one or both of the upper arms of the user against a side of the user's platform armrest; and
performing the triceps extension exercise by repeatedly bending and extending the one or both arms at elbows of the user while holding the one of the free weights with the one or both hands of the one or both arms and while the one or both upper arms are against the first side of the user's platform armrest. ---.
In claim 11, line 5, “the swing arms” should be --- the first and second swing arms ---.
In claim 12, lines 3-4, “articulating swing arm levers of the swing arms to remove lock pins of the swing arms” should be --- respectively articulating swing arm levers of the first and second swing arms to respectively remove lock pins of the first and second swing arms ---.
In claim 12, line 7, “the swing arms” should be --- the first and second swing arms ---.
In claim 12, line 8, “insert” should be --- respectively insert ---.
In claim 13, line 4, “disengage locking fingers” should be --- respectively disengage locking fingers ---.
In claim 13, line 7, “along the swing arms” should be --- along the first and second swing arms ---.
In claim 13, line 8, “engage” should be --- respectively engage ---.
In claim 13, line 9, “the swing arms” should be --- the first and second swing arms ---.
Claim 16 should be amended as follows:
--- A method of performing a biceps curling exercise using the strength training apparatus of Claim 1, the method comprising:
adjusting the angle of the first and second swing arms relative to the frame of the strength training apparatus while the user's platform armrest is coupled to the first and second swing arms by interacting with components of the frame located below the weight bench coupled to the frame;
adjusting the position of the user's platform armrest along the first and second swing arms upward away from or downward toward the weight bench while the user's platform armrest is coupled to the first and second swing arms by single-handedly interacting with one or more components located within the user's platform armrest;
holding one of the free weights with a hand of the user while leaning over the user's platform armrest such that the user's platform armrest is between one or both arms of the user and the weight bench; and
performing the biceps curling exercise by repeatedly extending and bending the one or both arms at elbows of the user while holding the one of the free weights and while the one or both arms are against the second side of the user's platform armrest. ---.
In claim 17, line 5, “the swing arms” should be --- the first and second swing arms ---.
In claim 18, lines 3-4, “articulating swing arm levers of the swing arms to remove lock pins of the swing arms” should be --- respectively articulating swing arm levers of the first and second swing arms to respectively remove lock pins of the first and second swing arms ---.
In claim 18, line 7, “the swing arms” should be --- the first and second swing arms ---.
In claim 18, line 8, “insert” should be --- respectively insert ---.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
In claim 1, lines 14-16: “an angular adjusting mechanism is located below a horizontal plane of the weight bench and configured to adjust an angle of the first and second swing arms relative to the frame while the user's platform armrest is couple to the swing arms.” Emphasis added.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof (see MPEP § 2183). However, there is no structure disclosed in the written description corresponding to the angular adjusting mechanism. Refer to the 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejections of claim 1, see below.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “an angular adjusting mechanism,” recited in lines 14-16, invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, see above. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Specifically, there is no structure disclosed in the written description corresponding to the angular adjusting mechanism. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 2-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, by virtue of their dependency on claim 1, which is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, see above.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the horizontal plane of the weight bench selector plates” in lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is suggested to amend the limitation to --- the horizontal plane of the weight bench ---.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the medial sides of the swing arms” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is suggested to amend the limitation to --- medial sides of the first and second swing arms ---.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “the horizontal plane of the weight bench selector plates” in lines 4-5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is suggested to amend the limitation to --- the horizontal plane of the weight bench ---.
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 9 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.
Regarding claim 9, which depends from claim 1, the limitations “wherein the user's platform armrest includes a second side configured to support a user's upper arms while the user is located behind the weight bench and the user's platform armrest is located between the user’s upper arms and the weight bench” are recited in lines 1-4.
Claim 9 is of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of claim 1. Specifically, “the user's platform armrest also having a second side configured to support a user's upper arms while the user is located behind and leaning over the user's platform armrest” is recited in claim 1, lines 11-13. In addition, in claim 1, lines 9-11, the weight bench of applicant’s invention is recited to be located below and underneath the user’s platform armrest. Accordingly, the user’s platform armrest is located between the user's upper arms and the weight bench when the user leans over the user’s platform armrest. In this intended use condition, the user is located behind the user’s platform armrest (claim 1, lines 11-13), which would also locate the user behind the weight bench (claim 1, lines 9-11). Therefore, claim 9 is of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends.
Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 and 10-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record (Smith (US 2019/0314667; US 11,013,948)) fails to teach or render obvious a strength training apparatus for use with free weights in combination with all of the elements and structural and functional relationships as claimed and further including:
an angular adjusting mechanism is located below a horizontal plane of the weight bench and configured to adjust an angle of the first and second swing arms relative to the frame while the user's platform armrest is couple to the swing arms (claim 1).
The prior art of record teaches a strength training apparatus for use with free weights wherein the angular adjusting mechanism is located above a horizontal plane of the weight bench and configured to adjust an angle of the first and second swing arms relative to the frame while the user's platform armrest is coupled to the first and second swing arms, which are not considered equivalent to applicant’s invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY D URBIEL GOLDNER whose telephone number is (313)446-6554. The examiner can normally be reached between 9AM and 5PM, Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.
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 B Jimenez can be reached on (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 Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. Visit https://patentcenter.uspto.gov to file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center. For more information about Patent Center, visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center. For information about filing in DOCX format, visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx. 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.
/GARY D URBIEL GOLDNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784