Detailed Action
This is the Final Rejection based on application 18/466,926 filed on 09/14/2023, and which claims as amended on 08/14/2025 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
There is no claim for an earlier date of priority as such the filing date of 09/14/2023 is being used to establish prior art.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/29/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Rejection on 04/21/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Such claim limitations are “an attachment means” in claims 4 and 5. The specification of the instant application in paragraph [0016] states “As one non-limiting example, the attachment means 136 can be a loop 138, as shown in the figures. The loop 138 can be adapted to receive a carabiner clip, snap hook, or any other suitable connecting element disposed on a handle or any other desired accessory.”
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.
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(s) 1,4-7,9-12, and 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gregory US 20250001232 A, in further view of Perry et al. US 20240108939 A1, and further in view of Ye US 20230201652 A1.
Gregory teaches a fitness device for use by a user (“A fitness training apparatus is disclosed which replaces a variety of free weights and weight-machines.” See paragraph [0007]), comprising: a resistance assembly (The examiner notes that the motors 31, shaft 32, spool/drum 22, cable 20, and handles 24 together comprise the resistance assemblies of the device) including: a spool having a first end and a second end (Spool 22 see figure 6), the first end having a diameter less than a diameter of the second end (“FIG. 6. shows an embodiment where the retractable line 20, and particularly the cable 21, is wound on a cone-shaped spool 22.” See paragraph [0071], and the examiner notes that the spool being stated as cone shaped and shown to be frustoconical as depicted in figure 6 shows that the first end has a smaller diameter than the second end) along a length of the spool (See figure 6 and citation of paragraph [0071] above where the spool being frustoconical shows that the difference in diameter extends along the length of the spool); a motor (motor 31) selectively engageable with the spool (See figure 6 where the motors 31 of the load generators 30 are engaged with the spool through the shaft), the motor configured to generate a resistance force when engaged with the spool (“To this end, each load generator 30 of the fitness training apparatus 100 comprises at least one electric motor 31, such as a torque motor, that is variably operable to generate a range of torques for applying the selectively adjustable load to its respective retractable line 20.” See paragraph [0066]); and a cord (cord 21) configured to be wound and unwound on the spool in a single layer in response to a movement by the user (“The cable is circular in this example (i.e. as before) so there is no problem of inline twisting, as with strap. The cable 21 has a small profile and can be wound side-by-side, with the cone-shape promoting self-alignment of the cable on the spool 22.” See paragraph [0071]).
[AltContent: textbox (2nd end)][AltContent: textbox (1st end)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Frustoconical Shaped Spool)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
357
473
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Gregory fails to teach a gearbox coupling the spool to the motor, the gearbox transferring the resistance force from the motor to the spool when engaged with the spool, and the gearbox altering a rotational ratio between the motor and the spool; and a pully system having a first pulley disposed directly adjacent to the spool and having a fixed angle relative the spool such that the cord remains in a plane perpendicular to the length of the spool while in operation.
The examiner notes that Gregory does teach coupling the spool to the motor through the use of a transmission but not specifically a gearbox, and that Gregory teaches a pulley system having a first pulley (“To this end, a path of travel of each retractable line 20 is guided by one or more pulleys 26 mounted in or on the base 10.” See paragraph [0067]), but does not specifically teach that it is disposed directly adjacent to the spool and having a fixed angle relative the spool such that the cord remains in a plane perpendicular to the length of the spool while in operation.
Perry, however, teaches an improved line-based weight training machine that reduces line jamming, line friction, and/or line wear due to a slack line around a spool, and further teaches a gearbox coupling the spool to the motor (In one embodiment, the motor (106) is coupled to a line spool via a shaft, gearbox, belt, and/or chain, allowing the diameter of the motor (106) and the diameter of the spool to be independent, as well as introducing a stage to add a set-up or step-down ratio if desired.” See paragraph [0049]), the gearbox transferring the resistance force from the motor to the spool when engaged with the spool (“Gearboxes multiply torque and/or friction, divide speed, and/or split power to multiple spools.” See paragraph [0034]. The examiner notes that this limitation is merely a recitation of the function of a gearbox for a motor), and the gearbox altering a rotational ratio between the motor and the spool (As noted above in the citation of paragraph [0049] the gearboxes function is to provide rotation ratios for the motor and spool in order to adjust the load on the motor as it exerts forces on the cable spool).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the resistance assembly of Gregory to include a gearbox as taught by Perry as Gregory already utilizes transmission means in order to couple the motor to the spool and utilizing a gearbox with different gearing ratios as taught by Perry would allow the motors to exert more varied forces on the spool without overexerting the components.
Gregory as modified by Perry still does not teach that the first pulley is disposed directly adjacent to the spool and having a fixed angle relative the spool such that the cord remains in a plane perpendicular to the length of the spool while in operation.
Ye, however, teaches a strength training machine, which can be folded with a single hand and thus convenient for the folding operation (See paragraph [0005]), and further teaches that the first pulley is disposed directly adjacent to the spool (See figure 11 which depicts first guide wheel 4543 disposed directly adjacent to drive wheel 452) and having a fixed angle relative the spool such that the cord remains in a plane perpendicular to the length of the spool while in operation (The examiner notes that the arrangement of the spool/drive wheel and the pulley/guide wheel shown in Ye has the arrangement claimed as when the exercise machine is in use, the length of the spool is perpendicular to the direction the cable is moved out of the whole since the cable is moved/held vertically relative to the length of the spool surface as depicted). Ye further teaches wherein the pulley system includes a cover (housing 460) for directing the cord out of the pulley system (“Specifically, the housing 460 includes an entrance/exit hole 461, and a first end of the pulling piece 441 protrudes out of the housing 460 through the entrance/exit hole 461.” See paragraph [0060] and figure 2)
PNG
media_image2.png
314
544
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
726
792
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the arrangement of the pulleys of Gregory to be directly adjacent to the spool as taught by Ye, as the closer arrangement requires less space in the frame of the device and maintains the functionality of directing the cord through an exit hole, without causing any skips, or tangling of the cord, and would allow the platform to be reduced in size if needed increasing the portability of the device.
Regarding claim 4:
Gregory as modified discloses the fitness device of Claim 1, wherein the pulley system includes an attachment means (“To this end, the free end region 23 of each cable 21 is configured (e.g. with a clip or clasp) for removable attachment of a handle 24 for manual operation by the user.” See paragraph [0065]).
Regarding claim 5:
Gregory as modified discloses the fitness device of Claim 1, further including a pair of handles (handles 24) configured to couple to an attachment means for use by the user (“To this end, the free end region 23 of each cable 21 is configured (e.g. with a clip or clasp) for removable attachment of a handle 24 for manual operation by the user.” See paragraph [0065]).
Regarding claim 6:
Gregory as modified discloses the fitness device of Claim 1, further including an another resistance assembly (See figure 1 which depicts fitness assemblies on the left and right sides of the device).
PNG
media_image4.png
327
508
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7:
Gregory as modified discloses the fitness device of Claim 6, further including a performance unit (control device 40. The examiner notes that the performance unit of the instant application is stated in paragraph [0019] as “The performance unit 146 can relay to the user an exercise setting using an arbitrary scale of resistance which can be displayed to the user on a display 148 and monitor the exercise setting”, and therefore the control unit 40 of Gregory which detects that state of the cords, the motors, and adjusts the load settings thereof, and can connect to remote devices for more control, is a performance unit) for monitoring an exercise setting of the resistance assembly (“Furthermore, the control device 40, and particularly the processor 41, of the apparatus 100 is configured to calculate training performance based on the use of each cable 21 sensed or detected by the sensors 43 of the control device 40 for displaying the performance information on the user device 200.” See paragraph [0076]), the performance unit disposed between the resistance assembly and the another resistance assembly (See figure 1).
Regarding claim 9:
Gregory as modified discloses the fitness device of Claim 7, wherein the performance unit includes a voice capture module configured to run or modify the exercise setting of the resistance assembly specified by the user (“The present invention may include one or more accessory devices for user input (such as a camera and/or a microphone) and/or for output to the user (such as loud-speakers and/or lighting).” See paragraph [0079]. The examiner notes that a microphone that uses the user’s voice as inputs is a voice capture module).
Regarding claim 10:
Gregory as modified discloses the fitness device of Claim 1, further including a programmable device configured for wireless communication with the resistance assembly (“The user device is configured for communication with the apparatus 100, preferably via the control device, for the input of training settings by the user (e.g. via a smart phone or similar device) and/or for displaying training information to the user during training.” See paragraph [0076]).
Regarding claim 11:
Gregory as modified discloses the fitness device of Claim 10, wherein the programmable device includes a processor and a non-transitory computer readable medium (The examiner notes that the smartphone as stated in the rejection of claim 10, which is the programmable device of Gregory, inherently includes a processor and non-transitory computer readable medium as all smartphones require processors and memory to function), the non-transitory computer readable medium including instructions configured to permit the user to remotely run or modify an exercise setting of the resistance assembly specified by the user (“In this regard, a software application installed on the user device for communication with the apparatus 100 for input of training settings and display of training information to the user.” See paragraph [0076]).
Regarding claim 12:
Gregory as modified discloses the fitness device of Claim 1, wherein the spool is frustoconical (See figure 6. The examiner notes that frustoconical is the shape of a frustrum of a cone, and therefore has no end point or tip with one side a circular diameter smaller than the other side of a larger circular diameter and therefore the conical cone discussed in claim 1 and shown above is frustoconical).
Regarding claim 17:
Gregory as modified discloses the fitness device of Claim 1, further including a voice capture module configured to run or modify an exercise setting of the resistance assembly specified by the user (“The present invention may include one or more accessory devices for user input (such as a camera and/or a microphone) and/or for output to the user (such as loud-speakers and/or lighting).” See paragraph [0079]. The examiner notes that a microphone that uses the user’s voice as inputs is a voice capture module).
Regarding claim 18:
(The examiner notes that the motors 31, shaft 32, spool/drum 22, cable 20, and handles 24 together comprise the resistance assemblies of the device) including: a spool having a first end and a second end (Spool 22 see figure 6), the first end having a diameter less than a diameter of the second end (“FIG. 6. shows an embodiment where the retractable line 20, and particularly the cable 21, is wound on a cone-shaped spool 22.” See paragraph [0071], and the examiner notes that the spool being stated as cone shaped and shown to be frustoconical as depicted in figure 6 shows that the first end has a smaller diameter than the second end) along a length of the spool (See figure 6 and citation of paragraph [0071] above where the spool being frustoconical shows that the difference in diameter extends along the length of the spool); a motor (motor 31) selectively engageable with the spool (See figure 6 where the motors 31 of the load generators 30 are engaged with the spool through the shaft), the motor configured to generate a resistance force when engaged with the spool (“To this end, each load generator 30 of the fitness training apparatus 100 comprises at least one electric motor 31, such as a torque motor, that is variably operable to generate a range of torques for applying the selectively adjustable load to its respective retractable line 20.” See paragraph [0066]); and a cord (cord 21) configured to be wound and unwound on the spool in a single layer in response to a movement by the user (“The cable is circular in this example (i.e. as before) so there is no problem of inline twisting, as with strap. The cable 21 has a small profile and can be wound side-by-side, with the cone-shape promoting self-alignment of the cable on the spool 22.” See paragraph [0071]); ); a motor (motor 31) selectively engageable with the spool (See figure 6 where the motors 31 of the load generators 30 are engaged with the spool through the shaft), the motor configured to generate a resistance force when engaged with the spool (“To this end, each load generator 30 of the fitness training apparatus 100 comprises at least one electric motor 31, such as a torque motor, that is variably operable to generate a range of torques for applying the selectively adjustable load to its respective retractable line 20.” See paragraph [0066]); and a cord (cord 21) configured to be wound and unwound on the spool in a single layer in response to a movement by the user (“The cable is circular in this example (i.e. as before) so there is no problem of inline twisting, as with strap. The cable 21 has a small profile and can be wound side-by-side, with the cone-shape promoting self-alignment of the cable on the spool 22.” See paragraph [0071]); and moving the cord by the user so that the cord is one of wound and unwound on the spool (“In this way, each retractable line 20 is configured to be extended from the retracted state in the base 10 to an extended state upon application of a force (i.e. a tension force) to the free end region 23 of the respective retractable line 20 by the user.” See paragraph [0065]).
Gregory fails to teach a gearbox coupling the spool to the motor, the gearbox transferring the resistance force from the motor to the spool when engaged with the spool, and the gearbox altering a rotational ratio between the motor and the spool; and a pully system having a first pulley disposed directly adjacent to the spool and having a fixed angle relative the spool such that the cord remains in a plane perpendicular to the length of the spool while in operation.
The examiner notes that Gregory does teach coupling the spool to the motor through the use of a transmission but not specifically a gearbox, and that Gregory teaches a pulley system having a first pulley (“To this end, a path of travel of each retractable line 20 is guided by one or more pulleys 26 mounted in or on the base 10.” See paragraph [0067]), but does not specifically teach that it is disposed directly adjacent to the spool and having a fixed angle relative the spool such that the cord remains in a plane perpendicular to the length of the spool while in operation.
Perry, however, teaches an improved line-based weight training machine that reduces line jamming, line friction, and/or line wear due to a slack line around a spool, and further teaches a gearbox coupling the spool to the motor (In one embodiment, the motor (106) is coupled to a line spool via a shaft, gearbox, belt, and/or chain, allowing the diameter of the motor (106) and the diameter of the spool to be independent, as well as introducing a stage to add a set-up or step-down ratio if desired.” See paragraph [0049]), the gearbox transferring the resistance force from the motor to the spool when engaged with the spool (“Gearboxes multiply torque and/or friction, divide speed, and/or split power to multiple spools.” See paragraph [0034]. The examiner notes that this limitation is merely a recitation of the function of a gearbox for a motor), and the gearbox altering a rotational ratio between the motor and the spool (As noted above in the citation of paragraph [0049] the gearboxes function is to provide rotation ratios for the motor and spool in order to adjust the load on the motor as it exerts forces on the cable spool).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the resistance assembly of Gregory to include a gearbox as taught by Perry as Gregory already utilizes transmission means in order to couple the motor to the spool and utilizing a gearbox with different gearing ratios as taught by Perry would allow the motors to exert more varied forces on the spool without overexerting the components.
Gregory as modified by Perry still does not teach that the first pulley is disposed directly adjacent to the spool and having a fixed angle relative the spool such that the cord remains in a plane perpendicular to the length of the spool while in operation.
Ye, however, teaches a strength training machine, which can be folded with a single hand and thus convenient for the folding operation (See paragraph [0005]), and further teaches that the first pulley is disposed directly adjacent to the spool (See figure 11 which depicts first guide wheel 4543 disposed directly adjacent to drive wheel 452) and having a fixed angle relative the spool such that the cord remains in a plane perpendicular to the length of the spool while in operation (The examiner notes tat the arrangement of the spool/drive wheel and the pulley/guide wheel shown in Ye has the arrangement claimed as when the exercise machine is in use, the length of the spool is perpendicular to the direction the cable is moved out of the whole since the cable is moved/held vertically relative to the length of the spool surface as depicted).
PNG
media_image2.png
314
544
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
726
792
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the arrangement of the pulleys of Gregory to be directly adjacent to the spool as taught by Ye, as the closer arrangement requires less space in the frame of the device and maintains the functionality of directing the cord through an exit hole, without causing any skips, or tangling of the cord, and would allow the platform to be reduced in size if needed increasing the portability of the device.
Regarding claim 19:
Gregory as modified discloses the method of using a fitness device of Claim 18, further comprising a member selected from a group consisting of: positioning the fitness device in a desired location and orientation (“As noted above, the base 10 in this embodiment is configured as a platform or step upon which the user may stand, sit, or lie while performing training exercises.” See paragraph [0067]. The examiner notes that the platform must be placed in a desired location and the orientation can be adjusted by the user, as the user can move the platform, and its bench configuration as shown in figure 5); securing the fitness device in a selected position; adjusting an exercise setting on the fitness device (“The control device 40 is configured to adjust the load applied to each cable 21 by the motors 31 of the load generators 30 in dependence upon the use or operation of each retractable line 20. That is, the load generators 30 of the apparatus 100 are controlled via the control device 40 to adjust the load applied to cable 21 during extension of the cable 21 to the extended state and/or during retraction of the cable 21 to the retracted state.” See paragraph [0073]); selectively engaging the cord (The examiner notes that if the user is exercising with the machine they are engaging the cord, and this limitation appears to simply be claiming exercising with the device); and combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 20:
Gregory as modified discloses the method of using a fitness device of Claim 18, wherein the fitness device further includes one of (The examiner notes the inclusion of the phrase “one of” means that only one of the possible options from the list are necessary for the invention, however, as noted in the rejection below, Gregory recites more than one of the possible options): a programmable device configured for wireless communication with the resistance assembly and configured to permit the user to remotely run or modify an exercise setting of the resistance assembly specified by the user (“The user device is configured for communication with the apparatus 100, preferably via the control device, for the input of training settings by the user (e.g. via a smart phone or similar device) and/or for displaying training information to the user during training.” See paragraph [0076]); a jog dial configured to run or modify an exercise setting of the resistance assembly specified by the user; and a voice capture module configured to run or modify an exercise setting of the resistance assembly specified by the user (“The present invention may include one or more accessory devices for user input (such as a camera and/or a microphone) and/or for output to the user (such as loud-speakers and/or lighting).” See paragraph [0079]. The examiner notes that a microphone that uses the user’s voice as inputs is a voice capture module).
Regarding claim 21:
Gregory as modified by Ye teaches the fitness device of Claim 1, wherein the pulley system includes a cover for directing the cord out of the pulley system (See rejection of claim 1).
Claim(s) 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gregory US 20250001232 A, in further view of Perry et al. US 20240108939 A1, and further in view of Ye US 20230201652 A1, and further in view of Smith et al. US 20170319941 A1.
Gregory teaches the invention as substantially claimed above.
Regarding claim 8:
Gregory teaches the fitness device of Claim 7, but fails to teach wherein the performance unit includes a jog dial configured to run or modify the exercise setting of the resistance assembly specified by the user.
Smith, however, teaches an exercise machine may include a tower enclosing, at least in part, a cable and pulley system, a base supporting the tower on a surface, and a plurality of handles operatively coupled to the cable and pulley system and configured to extend from the tower, and further teaches a jog dial configured to run or modify the exercise setting of the resistance assembly specified by the user (“The resistance control 520 may be implemented using a mechanical control (e.g., a knob, a dial) or soft control (e.g., a touch sensitive switch), or combinations thereof.” See paragraph [0072]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the performance unit of Gregory to use a dial as an input device as taught by Smith in order to allow the user to make quick, precise adjustments to the load settings of the exercise device without needing to interact with a touchscreen or their mobile phone every time they want to change the resistance.
Regarding claim 16:
Gregory teaches the fitness device of Claim 1, but fails to teach a jog dial configured to run or modify an exercise setting of the resistance assembly specified by the user.
Smith, however, teaches an exercise machine may include a tower enclosing, at least in part, a cable and pulley system, a base supporting the tower on a surface, and a plurality of handles operatively coupled to the cable and pulley system and configured to extend from the tower, and further teaches a jog dial configured to run or modify the exercise setting of the resistance assembly specified by the user (“The resistance control 520 may be implemented using a mechanical control (e.g., a knob, a dial) or soft control (e.g., a touch sensitive switch), or combinations thereof.” See paragraph [0072]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the performance unit of Gregory to use a dial as an input device as taught by Smith in order to allow the user to make quick, precise adjustments to the load settings of the exercise device without needing to interact with a touchscreen or their mobile phone every time they want to change the resistance.
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gregory US 20250001232 A, in further view of Perry et al. US 20240108939 A1, and further in view of Ye US 20230201652 A1, and further in view of Belsham et al. US 20230405404 A1.
Gregory teaches the invention as substantially claimed above.
Regarding claim 13:
Gregory teaches the fitness device of Claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the resistance assembly further includes a battery.
Belsham, however, teaches a personal exercise device with a user interface to be moved by a user in a 3-dimensional space when using the device, a resistance mechanism to generate a force, a cable coupled between the user interface and the resistance mechanism to transmit the force from the resistance mechanism to the user interface, and further teaches a battery (“Preferably the power 12 supply is or comprises a (preferably rechargeable) battery to allow for portability so that the device 1a, 1b can be transported and used for a period of time without requiring an external power supply.” See paragraph [0176]). Belsham further teaches that the battery is recharged by use of the fitness device by the user (“When in the generator or brake mode, the motor 6 generates electrical power. The device 1a, 1b may further comprise a recharging module (not shown) configured to apply the generated electrical power to the power supply 12 to recharge the battery.” See paragraph [0178]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Gregory to use a rechargeable battery as a power source as taught by Belsham, in order to avoid the user having to plug a cable into an external source, and to give the device more flexibility in terms of location placement and orientation in order to fit in a desired space for the user.
Regarding claim 14:
Gregory as modified by Belsham teaches the fitness device of Claim 13, wherein the battery is recharged by use of the fitness device by the user (See rejection of claim 13).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gregory US 20250001232 A, in further view of Perry et al. US 20240108939 A1, and further in view of Ye US 20230201652 A1, and further in view of Drayer et al. US 20240189651 A1.
Gregory as modified teaches the invention as substantially claimed above.
Regarding claim 15:
Gregory teaches the fitness device of Claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the resistance assembly further includes a fan, whereby the fan cools the motor in operation.
Drayer, however, teaches a platform-based strength machine enables users to perform strength or lifting activities or exercises via moveable or configurable pull points, and further teaches wherein the resistance assembly further includes a fan, whereby the fan cools the motor in operation (“Further, the airflow channels 1626 that transfer heat away from a motor can utilize fans or other devices that blow air through the airflow channels 1626 and remove the heat from the heat sink 1414.” See paragraph [0252]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the resistance assembly of Gregory to include a fan as taught by Drayer, in order to prevent overheating and thereby preventing the device from breaking as a result of the motors being overexerted and parts failing.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/14/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the arguments presented in regards to the previous rejection under 35 USC 102 for claims 1 and 18 presented in the previous Non-Final Action the examiner notes that the newly added limitations of a gearbox coupling the spool to the motor, the gearbox transferring the resistance force from the motor to the spool when engaged with the spool, and the gearbox altering a rotational ratio between the motor and the spool, and a pully system having a first pulley disposed directly adjacent to the spool and having a fixed angle relative the spool such that the cord remains in a plane perpendicular to the length of the spool while in operation, were not present in the original claims set and as a result presents the new rejection under 35 USC 103 in view of the combination of Gregory, Perry, and Ye noted above.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN ANGELO DICUIA whose telephone number is (703)756-4713. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
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 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. 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.
/JONATHAN A DICUIA/ Examiner, Art Unit 3784
/Megan Anderson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784