DETAILED ACTION
This is the First Office Action on the Merits based on the 18/432,167 application filed on 02/05/2024 and which claims as originally filed have been considered in the ensuing 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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 01/09/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of CN2024100334576 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 2, “the fixing means” should be corrected to ---the plurality of fixing means---
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Plurality of fixing means in claim 1; a first set of fixing means in claim 1; a second set of fixing means in claim 1; the fixing means has been disclosed as solid or hollow support blocks or support pillars in paragraph [0040]
Cushioning means in claim 1; cushioning means has been disclosed as can be made of elastic materials such as silicone, rubber, PVC in paragraph [0044]
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends 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 remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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.
Claim 4 is 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 4, the limitation “two limiting members” on line 2 lacks clarity, as it is unclear if the “two limiting members” include the previously claimed limiting member of claim 1.
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 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Corbalis et al (US 11,465,012).
Regarding claim 1:
Corbalis et al disclose a running belt (belt 102); a running deck (flexible deck 104); a base frame assembly including a base frame (frame 202), an upright member (see annotated Fig. below) extending upward from the base frame, a limiting member (roller fixed to the upright member) and a plurality of fixing means (suspension connectors 204; please see the 35 USC 112(f) interpretation above; the suspension connectors have been interpreted as equivalents of support blocks or pillars); and a cushioning means (intermediate supports 206; please see 35 USC 112(f) interpretation above; the intermediate supports have been interpreted as being equivalent of the elastic materials disclosed in the specification, as Corbalis et al discloses that the intermediate supports dampen movement of the flexible belt and are comprised of a polymer material, see columns 2-3, lines 65-67 and 1-5) arranged between the running deck and the base frame of the base frame assembly (see Fig. 2), wherein the plurality of fixing means includes a first set of fixing means (front intermediate supports) and a second set of fixing means (rear intermediate supports), wherein the first set of fixing means is located at a first end of the running deck (see Fig. 2) and the second set of fixing means is located at a second end of the running deck opposite the first end (see Fig. 2), and wherein the first set of fixing means and the second set of fixing means are spaced apart by a first predetermined distance (see Fig. 1-2).
[AltContent: textbox (Upright member)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
511
555
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5:
Corbalis et al disclose the first set of fixing means includes a fixing means on a first side of the running deck (see Fig. 2) and a fixing means on a second side of the running deck opposite the first side (see Fig. 2), and the second set of fixing means includes a fixing means on the first side of the running deck (see Fig. 2)and a fixing means on the second side of the running deck opposite the first side (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6:
Corbalis et al disclose the fixing means are distributed near four corners of the treadmill (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7:
Corbalis et al disclose a central region of the running deck is unsupported when viewed along the length of the treadmill (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8:
Corbalis et al disclose the base frame assembly further includes a base plate (shown in Fig. 3 the fixing means can be connected to both a flexible component 304 and a wear surface 312, wherein the flexible component is the base plate and wear surface is the running deck), and the fixing means of the base frame assembly is secured to the base plate.
Regarding claim 9:
Corbalis et al disclose the cushioning means includes a supporting surface and a plurality of positioning portions extending from the supporting surface (the intermediate supports are adjustable along the flexible deck, the position portions are where the intermediate supports can be placed and the supporting surface is the intermediate supports themselves).
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.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Corbalis et al (US 11,465,012). Corbalis et al disclose the device as substantially claimed above.
Regarding claim 2:
Corbalis et al discloses that the first predetermined distance appears to be 70%-95% of the length of the running deck, but fails to specifically disclose the limitation.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the first predetermined distance to be 70-95% of the length of the running deck, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). Further, the limitation lacks criticality.
Regarding claim 3:
Corbalis et al fails to disclose that the running deck is inclined at a predetermined angle relative to the base frame of the base frame assembly, and the predetermined angle is in a range of 2 to 30 degrees.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the base frame angled 2-30 degrees, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). Further, the limitation lacks criticality. The Examiner also notes it is common to have adjustable angles in decks of treadmills.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEGAN M ANDERSON whose telephone number is (313)446-6531. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6 a.m. -4 p.m. (Arizona).
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.
/Megan Anderson/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784