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 .
Response to Amendment
The following Office Action is in response to amendments filed on 08/26/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application. Claims 1-20 have been rejected as set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 6-16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Johnson (US 3,687,257).
Regarding claim 6, Johnson discloses an assembly for a treadmill/conveyor, comprising: a deck (Figs. 1-2, as part of the frame of the conveyor); a moving surface (1) that moves around the deck (col. 3 lines 4-17); a guard assembly (i.e. 8) that is disposed at a rear area of the deck (col. 3 lines 18-20) and configured to partially cover the moving surface as it moves around the deck (Fig. 1, as shown in Fig. 1 below, the guard assembly (8), shown in darker shade of color, is configured to/does partially cover the moving surface (1), the part shown in the lighter shade of color, as it moves around the deck); and a comb guard (10) that is disposed between a front edge of the guard assembly and the moving surface (Figs. 1-2, col. 3 lines 27-30).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Guard assembly 8
(shown in darker shade of color))]
[AltContent: textbox (Portion of the moving surface 1, as it moves around the deck
(shown in lighter shade of color))][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
433
956
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Johnson discloses wherein the moving surface is a slat-based belt that moves into the guard assembly as the moving surface moves towards the rear area of the deck (Figs. 1-2, col. 3 lines 4-17, stairway plates can be considered slats).
Regarding claim 8, Johnson discloses wherein the comb guard includes multiple channels (channels formed between the rib portions 21 of teeth 11) that receive multiple ridges (i.e. ribs 3) of a top surface of the moving surface (Figs. 3, 5 and 7, col. 3 lines 4-67).
Regarding claim 9, Johnson discloses wherein the comb guard includes multiple protrusions (rib portions 21) that are disposed within channels of a top surface (i.e. grooves 2) of the moving surface when the moving surface moves towards the rear area of the deck (Figs. 2-3, 5, col. 3 lines 4-67).
Regarding claim 10, Johnson discloses wherein the moving surface includes channels (i.e. grooves 2) that receive angled protrusions (rib portions 21) of the comb guard when the moving surface moves towards the rear area of the deck (Figs. 1-7, col. 4 lines 1-27).
Regarding claim 11, Johnson discloses a guard for a treadmill/conveyor, the guard comprising: a cover (i.e. 8) that protects a rear area of a deck (part of the frame of the conveyor) of the treadmill (Figs. 1-2); and a comb interface (11) that is disposed between the cover and a moving surface (1) of the treadmill (Figs. 1-5, col. 3 lines 4-67).
Regarding claim 12, Johnson discloses wherein the moving surface is a slat-based belt that moves around the deck of the treadmill (Figs. 1-2, col. 3 lines 4-17, stairway plates can be considered slats).
Regarding claim 13, Johnson discloses wherein the moving surface includes ridges (i.e. ribs 3) that move through channels of the comb interface (channels formed between the rib portions 21 of teeth 11) during operation of the treadmill (Figs. 3, 5 and 7, col. 3 lines 4-67).
Regarding claim 14, Johnson discloses wherein the moving surface includes channels (i.e. grooves 2) that surround protrusions (rib portions 21) of the comb interface during operation of the treadmill (Figs. 2-3, 5, col. 3 lines 4-67).
Regarding claim 15, Johnson discloses wherein the comb interface included protrusions (rib portions 21) that are surrounded by channels (i.e. grooves 2) of the moving surface during operation of the treadmill (Figs. 2-3, and 5, col. 3 lines 4-67).
Regarding claim 16, Johnson discloses wherein the comb interface included channels (channels formed between the rib portions 21 of teeth 11) that surround ridges (i.e. ribs 3) of the moving surface during operation of the treadmill (Figs. 3, 5 and 7, col. 3 lines 4-67).
Regarding claim 18, Johnson discloses wherein the comb interface (11) is part of a comb guard (10) that is disposed between the cover (i.e. 8) and the moving surface (1) of the treadmill (Figs. 1-2 and 4).
Regarding claim 19, Johnson discloses wherein the comb interface includes multiple angled protrusions (rib portions 21) and multiple channels (channels formed between the rib portions 21 of teeth 11) disposed between the angled protrusions (Figs. 4 and 6-7, col. 4 lines 1-27).
Claims 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Conover (US 3,137,382).
Regarding claim 11, Conover discloses a guard for a treadmill/moving sidewalk, the guard comprising: a cover (22) that protects a rear area of a deck (part of the frame of the moving sidewalk) of the treadmill (Figs. 1 and 4); and a comb interface (21) that is disposed between the cover and a moving surface (10) of the treadmill (Figs. 1-2 and 4).
Regarding claim 20, Conover discloses wherein the guard is removably fixed to the deck of the treadmill (Figs. 1-2 and 4, it appears from the figures that the guard is connected to the deck of the treadmill via screws therefore, it can be removed, and is thereby removably fixed).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 3,687,257).
Regarding claim 17, Although Johnson is silent about wherein the comb interface is integrated into a front edge of the guard, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Johnson’s invention wherein the comb interface is integrated into a front edge of the guard in order to provide a more secure and stable attachment, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weinstein et al. (US 10,010,748 B1) in view of Johnson (US 3,687,257).
Regarding claim 1, Weinstein teaches a treadmill, comprising: a moving surface (70) including a plurality of slats (18) coupled to one another (Figs. 1-2), each slat comprising: an outer surface (i.e. cover 50, 350) that comprises: a plurality of ridges (i.e. 352), and a plurality of first channels disposed between adjacent ridges (Figs. 9-10, col. 7 lines 16-22, a plurality of channels would be formed between the adjacent ridges); and an inner surface (i.e. 40) comprising a material with a higher tensile modulus than a material of the outer surface (abstract, col. 1 line 60 – col. 2 line 3, col. 4 lines 51-62); and a deck (i.e. at 19).
Weinstein teaches that the outer surface (i.e. cover) can have one or more combination of textures, including ridges of grooves (col. 5 lines 36-40). Weinstein is silent about the plurality of ridges being longitudinally oriented in a direction of travel of the moving surface, a rear assembly including a comb guard, wherein the rear assembly is disposed at a rear end of the deck of the treadmill and configured to partially cover the moving surface as it travels around the deck, wherein the comb guard comprising comprises multiple protrusions, and wherein each of the multiple protrusions being are separated by a second channel and oriented within a respective first channel, and wherein each of the ridges is oriented within a respective second channel.
Regarding claim 1, Johnson teaches a treadmill/conveyor comprising: a moving surface including a plurality of slats coupled to one another (1, col. 3 lines 4-17, stairway plates can be considered slats), each slat comprising: an outer surface that comprises: a plurality of ridges (i.e. ribs 3) longitudinally oriented in a direction of travel of the moving surface (Figs. 2-3), and a plurality of first channels (i.e. grooves 2) disposed between adjacent ridges (Figs. 2-3); a deck (Figs. 1-2, as part of the frame of the conveyor); a rear assembly (8 with 10) including a comb guard (10), wherein the rear assembly (8) is disposed at a rear end of the deck of the treadmill/conveyor (Figs. 1-2, col. 1 lines 17-25, col. 3 lines 18-20) and configured to partially cover the moving surface as it travels around the deck (Fig. 1, as shown in Fig. 1 above, the rear assembly (8), shown in darker shade of color, is configured to/does partially cover the moving surface (1), the part shown in the lighter shade of color, as it travels around the deck), wherein the comb guard comprising comprises multiple protrusions (rib portions 21 of teeth 11), and wherein each of the multiple protrusions being are separated by a second channel (Figs. 3, 5 and 7, channels formed between the rib portions 21) and oriented within a respective first channel, and wherein each of the ridges is oriented within a respective second channel (Figs. 3 and 5, col. 3 lines 4-67).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Weinstein’s invention wherein the plurality of ridges are longitudinally oriented in a direction of travel of the moving surface, a rear assembly including a comb guard, wherein the rear assembly is disposed at a rear end of the deck of the treadmill and configured to partially cover the moving surface as it travels around the deck, wherein the comb guard comprising comprises multiple protrusions, and wherein each of the multiple protrusions being are separated by a second channel and oriented within a respective first channel, and wherein each of the ridges is oriented within a respective second channel, as taught by Johnson in order to remove foreign objects of various sizes from the moving surface, and thereby prevent the user from being potentially harmed and prevent the treadmill from damage.
Regarding claim 2, Weinstein in view of Johnson teaches wherein the protrusions include a first leading edge (Johnson: i.e. 27, Figs. 4 and 6-7) that is disposed at an angle with respect to a base of the first channel in which it is disposed so that objects are lifted from the first channel by the protrusions when the moving surface is in motion (Johnson: Figs. 4 and 6-7, col. 4 lines 1-27).
Regarding claim 3, Weinstein in view of Johnson teaches wherein portions of the comb guard (Johnson: i.e. 29) disposed above the tops of the ridges (Johnson: ribs 3) have second leading edges that are disposed at an angle with respect to a top surface of the ridges so that objects lying on the ridges are lifted by the protrusions when the moving surface is in motion (Johnson: Figs. 3-7, col. 4 lines 1-27, col. 5 lines 30-50).
Regarding claim 4, Weinstein in view of Johnson teaches wherein gaps between the protrusions and the first channels and between the ridges and second channels have a size that is 2 millimeters or less (Johnson: col. 4 lines 33-38, i.e. approximately between 0.39 mm – 0.79 mm).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weinstein in view of Johnson as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yoo (US 2018/0133544 A1).
Weinstein in view of Johnson is silent about wherein each slat further comprises: a middle layer disposed between the outer surface and the inner surface.
Regarding claim 5, Yoo teaches a treadmill comprising: a plurality of slats, wherein each slat (50) further comprises: a middle layer (200) disposed between the outer surface (300) and the inner surface (100).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Weinstein’s invention in view of Johnson wherein each slat further comprises: a middle layer disposed between the outer surface and the inner surface as taught by Yoo in order to provide for a desired shock absorbency.
Although neither Weinstein nor Johnson and Yoo teach the middle layer comprising a material with a durometer that is lower than a durometer of the material of the outer surface and a durometer of the material of the inner surface, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Weinstein’s invention in view of Johnson and Yoo in order to provide for a desired shock absorbency for various exercise or rehabilitation purposes, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice (see MPEP 2144.07) (Claim 5).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments regarding claim 6, currently reciting: “An assembly for a treadmill, comprising…a guard assembly that is disposed at a rear area of the deck and configured to partially cover the moving surface as it moves around the deck; and a comb guard that is disposed between a front edge of the guard assembly and the moving surface”, that the cited references do not disclose such features, that Johnson does not disclose a treadmill and instead discloses a passenger conveyor and threshold comb, thus Johnson does not disclose a guard assembly configured to partially cover a moving surface around a deck of the treadmill and a comb guard disposed between the moving surface and the guard assembly, as claimed, and that similar to Johnson, Conover discloses a moving sidewalk, and thus does not disclose a guard assembly configured to partially cover a moving surface around a deck of the treadmill and a comb guard disposed between the moving surface and the guard assembly, as claimed, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and would like to mention the followings.
As shown above, Johnson still teaches the limitations of claim 6 as claimed. Claim 6, as currently presented and as shown above, recites “An assembly for a treadmill, comprising: a deck; a moving surface that moves around the deck; a guard assembly…and a comb guard…”. It is implied that a deck and a moving surface that moves around the deck, are parts of the treadmill, and not the “assembly”. No other specifics/specific structure has been recited in the claim regarding the treadmill. As such, as much as applicant has recited specific structures regarding a treadmill, Johnson is also teaching such (see above for details). Furthermore, as shown above, Johnson also teaches an assembly for a treadmill/conveyor, comprising…a guard assembly (i.e. 8) that is disposed at a rear area of the deck (col. 3 lines 18-20) and configured to partially cover the moving surface as it moves around the deck (Fig. 1, as shown in Fig. 1 above, the guard assembly (8), shown in darker shade of color, is configured to/does partially cover the moving surface (1), the part shown in the lighter shade of color, as it moves around the deck); and a comb guard (10) that is disposed between a front edge of the guard assembly (8) and the moving surface (1) (Figs. 1-2, col. 3 lines 27-30).
Applicant’s similar arguments regarding Conover failing to teach limitations of claim 6, are moot, as Conover has not been relied upon for teaching the limitations of claim 6.
In response to applicant’s arguments stating that claims 11-20 recite features similar to those recited in claim 6 and are therefore allowable over the cited refences for least the same reasons, as well as for the additional features recited by the claims, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and would like to mention the followings. Claim 11, as currently presented, recites: “A guard for a treadmill, the guard comprising: a cover that protects a rear area of a deck of the treadmill; and a comb interface that is disposed between the cover and a moving surface of the treadmill”. Although claim 11, does not recite the same features as that of claim 6, each of Johnson and Conover still teach the limitations of claim 11. Similar to claim 6, as much as applicant has recited specific structures regarding a treadmill (i.e., a deck, a moving surface), each of Johnson and Conover is also teaching such (see above for details). Similar to claim 6, Johnson still teaches a guard for a treadmill/conveyor, the guard comprising: a cover (i.e. 8) that protects a rear area of a deck (part of the frame of the conveyor) of the treadmill (Figs. 1-2); and a comb interface (11) that is disposed between the cover and a moving surface (1) of the treadmill (Figs. 1-5, col. 3 lines 4-67). Conover teaches a guard for a treadmill/moving sidewalk, the guard comprising: a cover (22) that protects a rear area of a deck (part of the frame of the moving sidewalk) of the treadmill (Figs. 1 and 4); and a comb interface (21) that is disposed between the cover (22) and a moving surface (10) of the treadmill (Figs. 1-2 and 4).
In response to applicant’s arguments regarding claim 1, that similar to claims 6 and 11, Johnson does not disclose a treadmill, and thud does not disclose a rear assembly that includes a com guard and is disposed at a rear end of a deck of a treadmill and configured to partially cover the moving surface as it travels around the deck as claimed, that Weinstein does not provide what is absent in Johnson, that Weinstein is directed to a treadmill having textured tread surfaces, but similarly lacks any disclosure directed to a rear assembly and associated comp guard, as claimed, therefore, combination of Johnson and Weinstein does not disclose each and every feature of the claim, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and would like to mention the followings.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually (Weinstein, Johnson), one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Claim 1, has been rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weinstein in view of Johnson. As shown above, Weinstein teaches a treadmill, comprising: a moving surface (70) including a plurality of slats (18) coupled to one another (Figs. 1-2), each slat comprising: an outer surface (i.e. cover 50, 350) that comprises: a plurality of ridges (i.e. 352), and a plurality of first channels disposed between adjacent ridges (Figs. 9-10, col. 7 lines 16-22, a plurality of channels would be formed between the adjacent ridges); and an inner surface (i.e. 40) comprising a material with a higher tensile modulus than a material of the outer surface (abstract, col. 1 line 60 – col. 2 line 3, col. 4 lines 51-62); and a deck (i.e. at 19). Weinstein teaches that the outer surface (i.e. cover) can have one or more combination of textures, including ridges of grooves (col. 5 lines 36-40). Although Weinstein is silent about the plurality of ridges being longitudinally oriented in a direction of travel of the moving surface, a rear assembly including a comb guard, wherein the rear assembly is disposed at a rear end of the deck of the treadmill and configured to partially cover the moving surface as it travels around the deck, wherein the comb guard comprising comprises multiple protrusions, and wherein each of the multiple protrusions being are separated by a second channel and oriented within a respective first channel, and wherein each of the ridges is oriented within a respective second channel, Johnson teaches such features of claim 1. Johnson teaches a treadmill/conveyor comprising: a moving surface including a plurality of slats coupled to one another (1, col. 3 lines 4-17, stairway plates can be considered slats), each slat comprising: an outer surface that comprises: a plurality of ridges (i.e. ribs 3) longitudinally oriented in a direction of travel of the moving surface (Figs. 2-3), and a plurality of first channels (i.e. grooves 2) disposed between adjacent ridges (Figs. 2-3); a deck (Figs. 1-2, as part of the frame of the conveyor); a rear assembly (8 with 10) including a comb guard (10), wherein the rear assembly (8) is disposed at a rear end of the deck of the treadmill/conveyor (Figs. 1-2, col. 1 lines 17-25, col. 3 lines 18-20) and configured to partially cover the moving surface as it travels around the deck (Fig. 1, as shown in Fig. 1 above, the rear assembly (8), shown in darker shade of color, is configured to/does partially cover the moving surface (1), the part shown in the lighter shade of color, as it travels around the deck), wherein the comb guard comprising comprises multiple protrusions (rib portions 21 of teeth 11), and wherein each of the multiple protrusions being are separated by a second channel (Figs. 3, 5 and 7, channels formed between the rib portions 21) and oriented within a respective first channel, and wherein each of the ridges is oriented within a respective second channel (Figs. 3 and 5, col. 3 lines 4-67). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to modify Weinstein’s invention with features of Johnson in order to remove foreign objects of various sizes from the moving surface, and thereby prevent the user from being potentially harmed and prevent the treadmill from damage.
In response to applicant’s disagreement with the Office’s motivation statement to combine Weinstein with Johnson, and that Weinstein appears to disclose a treadmill without any rear component, and thus any “foreign objects of various sizes” would simply move off of the treadmill as they travel to the rear of the treadmill, wherein Weinstein is concerned with improvement in the moving surface, disclosing that “a cover of each slat is non-structural and presents to a user’s foot one of several surface textures, such as simulated turf grass, simulated outdoor track cobbles, or gym mat, thus one ordinary skill would not be motivated to combine Johnson and Weinstein, as neither references provide any disclosure leading to such combination of features, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and would like to mention the followings.
Weinstein, in col. 5 lines 36-40, recites: “In the present invention, as elaborated on below, the surface presented to a runner by the top surface of a slat may be one or a combination of (a) simulated turf, (b) simulated cobbled stone or pebbles, (c) ridges of grooves, or (d) surfaces which has a Durometer of less than 80 A…”. Upon modification of Weinstein’s invention such that the ridges are longitudinally oriented in a direction of travel of the moving surface, as taught by Johnson, and further to include such a rear assembly including a comb guard, wherein the rear assembly is disposed at a rear end of the deck of the treadmill and configured to partially cover the moving surface as it travels around the deck, wherein the comb guard comprising comprises multiple protrusions, and wherein each of the multiple protrusions being are separated by a second channel and oriented within a respective first channel, and wherein each of the ridges is oriented within a respective second channel, also taught by Johnson, in order to remove foreign objects of various sizes from the moving surface, and thereby prevent the user from being potentially harmed and prevent the treadmill from damage, would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, since depending on the size and shape of the foreign object(s), such foreign object(s) can get caught in the ridges and potentially cause harm to the user and further cause damage to the treadmill.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, such motivation is found in both Johnson (see col. 1 lines 6-16) as well as knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Applicant’s similar arguments regarding Yoo, are moot in view of the above provided explanations.
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 SHILA JALALZADEH ABYANEH whose telephone number is (571)270-7403. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 am - 3:00 pm.
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.
/SHILA JALALZADEH ABYANEH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784