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 .
Rejections Maintained
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rubin et al. (US PG Pub. No. 2019/0344123, Nov. 14, 2019) (herein “Rubin”).
Regarding claim 1, as broadly interpreted, Rubin teaches an exercise equipment comprising: a body including a mounting surface 104; a wire 106 having a first end and a second end; a motor (i.e., dynamic force module 300 having a motor 302, see para. [0059]) positioned inside the body and coupled to the first end of the wire 106 (see para. [0012],[0016]), the motor 300 being configured to generate a force pulling the wire 106 (i.e., retraction force, see para. [0059]) into the body; a guide (i.e., defined by rollers 142A,142B, see Fig. 8B,8C below and para. [0074]) provided at the mounting surface 104 and including a guide through-hole (see annotated Fig. 8B,8C below, rectangular space between rollers 142A,142B); and a cover (i.e., defined by rollers 144A,144B, see Fig. 8B,8C below) provided at the guide through-hole (i.e., rectangular space between rollers 144A,144B) and configured to rotate about an axis, the cover including a cover through-hole (i.e., rectangular space between rollers 144A,144B) that guides the second end of the wire to an outside of the body (see para. [0074]), wherein a rotation angle of the cover 144A,144B is limited such that an edge of the cover through-hole does not reach an edge of the guide through-hole (i.e., the rollers are in perpendicular pairs such that the edges of rollers 142A,142B, 144A,144B do not contact).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: rect][AltContent: textbox (guide through-hole)][AltContent: rect][AltContent: rect][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (cover through-hole)][AltContent: textbox (guide through-hole)]
PNG
media_image1.png
447
565
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
506
707
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
425
532
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
409
712
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Rubin teaches wherein the body includes a seating surface to support a user (i.e., where the mounting and seating surface 104 supports a user), and wherein the axis of rotation of the cover 144A,144B extends parallel to a longitudinal direction of the seating surface or parallel to a transverse direction of the seating surface 104 (see Figs. 1A and 6 above).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 10/03/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 12-13 of the response that Rubin teaches that the space between rollers 142A and 142B and the space between rollers 144A and 144B are vertical overlaps to define sides of a rectangular central channel to guide the cable 106 and does not teach or suggest the cover through-hole does not reach the guide through-hole during rotation of the cover.
This is not persuasive because only the central “square” hole portion (i.e., the guide through-hole of guide 142A,142B, annotated in Fig. 8B above) vertically overlaps the central “square” space between rollers 144A and 144B. The cover (i.e., rollers 144A,144B are “provided at the guide through-hole” as recited in claim 1 due to only the “square” hole portion that extends through the guide 142A,142B and cover 144A,144B.
However, the “rectangular” spaces” between the cover (i.e., the cover through-hole of rollers 144A and 144B) do not vertically overlap the “square” guide through-hole (see annotated Fig. 8C above). During rotation of the cover (i.e., rollers 144A and 144B), these rectangular cover through-hole portions do not vertically extend through or overlap the “square” guide through-hole of the guide 142A,142B.
Accordingly, Applicant’s argument is unpersuasive and the rejections are maintained.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-20 are allowed.
Claims 2-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 2, none of the prior art either alone or in combination teach or suggest all the limitations of the preceding and intervening claims and further reciting a first support frame and a second support frame provided inside the body and spaced apart from each other along the axis of rotation of the cover; and a connection axle having a first end rotatably coupled to the first support frame and a second end rotatably coupled to the second support frame, wherein the cover is coupled to the connection axle.
Claims 3-7, and 10-17 depend either directly or indirectly from claim 2.
Regarding claim 8, none of the prior art either alone or in combination teach or suggest all the limitations of the preceding and intervening claims and further reciting a protrusion coupled to one of the cover or the guide; and a stopper wall coupled to another one of the cover or the guide and positioned so as to come into contact with the protrusion when the cover rotates by at least a preset reference angle.
Claim 9 depends from claim 8.
Regarding claim 19, none of the prior art either alone or in combination teach or suggest all the limitations of the claim and more specifically, an exercise equipment comprising: a case having a through-hole; a cover provided inside the case and at the through hole, the cover including an opening; a first support frame and a second support frame provided inside the case and spaced apart from each other; a connection axle rotatably coupled to the first support frame and the second support frame, the cover being coupled to the connection axle to rotate along an extension direction of the connection axle; and a wire extending through the through-hole and the opening of the cover, wherein the opening of the cover does not reach the through-hole during a rotation of the cover.
Regarding claim 20, none of the prior art either alone or in combination teach or suggest all the limitations of the claim and more specifically, an exercise equipment comprising: a body having a through-hole; a first support frame and a second support frame provided inside the body and spaced apart from each other; a dome including an opening and rotatably coupled to the first support frame and the second support frame to at least partially cover the through-hole; a wire extending through the through-hole of the body and the opening of the dome; a protrusion coupled to the dome; and a stopper wall provided in the body and positioned so as to contact the protrusion when the dome rotates by a reference angle.
Conclusion
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 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 ANDREW S LO whose telephone number is (571)270-1702. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. (9:30 am - 5:30 pm EST).
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 Center. 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.
/ANDREW S LO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784