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 09/24/2025. Claims 1-7 and 9-11 are pending in the application. Claims 1-7 and 9-11 have been examined as set forth below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the figure shown between Fig. 6A and Fig. 6C, is labeled as Fig. 5B. As such, there are two figures that are labeled as “Fig. 5B” in the drawings. Applicant is requested to correct the figure label “Fig. 5B” of the figure shown between Fig. 6A and Fig. 6C, to “Fig. 6B”.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On page 2, the phrase “a rest position” in line 9, needs to be changed to “a basic position”, for language consistency purposes.
On page 3, “rope 2” in line 24, needs to be changed to “rope 3”; and the term “attachment” in line 25, needs to be changed to “fastening”, for language consistency purposes (please note that this term has been recited twice in line 25).
On page 4, the phrase “communication unit” in line 9, needs to be changed to “communication unit 22”; the “Figs. 2A to 7A” in line 16, needs to be changed to “Figs. 2A, 3A, 4A, 5A, 6A and 7A”; the phrase “drawn below (figs. 2A, 2C, 3B, 3C, 4B, 4C, 5B, 5C, 6B, 7B) show values belonging to the respective situations drawn above” in lines 17-18, needs to be changed to “shown in Figs. 2B-2C, 3B-3C, 4B-4C, 5B-5C, 6B-6C, and 7B-7C show values belonging to the respective situations shown in Figs. 2A, 3A, 4A, 5A, 6A and 7A”; and the phrase “the rest position” in line 29, needs to be changed to “the basic position”, for language consistency purposes.
The phrase “box body” throughout the disclosure, needs to be changed to “boxing body”, for language consistency purposes.
The phrase “tension cable” and “tensioning cable”, and the term “cable”, throughout the disclosure, need to be changed to “tensioning rope”, for language consistency purposes.
The phrase “electronic terminal 8” and “mobile terminal 8” have been recited throughout the disclosure. Applicant is requested to amend the specification, whereby either “mobile terminal” is changed to “electronic terminal” throughout the disclosure, OR “electronic terminal” is changed to “mobile terminal” throughout the disclosure, for language consistency purposes.
The disclosure recites the terms: “blow”, “beat”, impact”, “punch” and “stroke” interchangeably throughout its entirety. Applicant is requested to amend the disclosure such that one of the above cited terms is used throughout its entirety, for language consistency purposes (it is highly advised to use terminology that is consistent with that of the claims).
The disclosure recites the terms: “vibration” and “oscillation” interchangeably throughout its entirety. Applicant is requested to amend the disclosure such that the term “vibration” is changed to “oscillation”, throughout its entirety, for language consistency purposes.
Appropriate correction are required.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the user” in line 4, needs to be changed to “a user”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “box body” in line 3, needs to be changed to “boxing body”, and the phrase “acceleration 20g” in line 7, needs to be changed to “acceleration of 20g”. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the extra period “.” in line 10, needs to be removed. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-7 and 9-11 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the following reason. Claim 1, recites: “and measure duration of a period from the oscillation”, and it is unclear the “duration of a period” of “what” is being measured from the oscillation. Further clarification and appropriate corrections are respectfully requested. Claims 2-7 and 9-11 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, by virtue of dependency upon claim 1.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the following reason. Claim 2 recites the limitation "the boxing punch" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Furthermore, it is unclear whether or not “the boxing punch” in lines 2-3 of claim 2, is referring to the same “a punch” recited in line 16 of claim 1, upon which claim 2 depends. Further clarification and appropriate corrections are respectfully requested. Claims 3-4 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, by virtue of dependency upon claim 2.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the following reason. Claim 6 recites: “the trajectory is determined from a first oscillation (t4->t6) movement and/or a second oscillation (t6->t8) movement”. However, it is unclear what the phrases “first oscillation (t4->t6) movement” and “second oscillation (t6->t8) movement” mean or referring to. Further clarification and appropriate corrections are respectfully requested.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the following reason. Claim 7 recites: “wherein the sports apparatus comprises two separate acceleration sensors”, while claim 1, upon which claim 7 depends, recites: “A sports apparatus comprising…a measuring arrangement comprising an acceleration sensor…”. However, it is unclear whether or not “two separate acceleration sensors” recited in claim 7 are in addition to “an acceleration sensor” recited in claim 1. It is unclear how many acceleration sensors does the sports apparatus have. Further clarification and appropriate corrections are respectfully requested.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/24/2025 have been fully considered. Although the amendments have overcome many of the previous rejections, such amendments include limitations that have rendered many of the claimed indefinite (see above for further details).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 and 9-11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the claim objections and 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.
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 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