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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in the instant Application on 5/22/2024.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/11/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract exceeds the maximum word length of 150 words in length. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because FIGS. 1-17B each contains reference characters that are blurry and insufficiently dense and dark. See 37 C.F.R. 1.84 (l) and (p).
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 3-17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 3-8 line 1 of each, “An exercise device” should be changed to --The exercise device--.
In claim 5 line 1, “the buckle” should be changed to --the glide buckle--.
In claim 6 line 2, “the distal end” should be changed to --the distal weighted end--.
In claim 8 line 2, “within a about” should be changed to --within about--.
In claim 9 line 4, “(iiii)” should be changed to --(iii)--.
In claim 9 line 7, “wherein;” should be changed to --wherein:--.
In claims 10-17 line 1 of each, “An exercise device” should be changed to --The exercise device--.
In claim 10 lines 3-4, “the general shape” has been changed to --a general shape--.
In claim 10 lines 5-6, “the outer forearm” should be changed to --the forearm--.
In claim 11 line 4, “the slot” should be changed to --the longitudinal slot--.
In claim 16 line 1, “wherein carriage” should be changed to --wherein the carriage assembly--.
In claim 16 line 2, “at end” should be changed to --at an end--.
In claim 16 line 2, “at the other end” should be changed to --at an other end--.
In claim 16 line 3, “arm band support” should be changed to --arm support band--.
In claim 16 line 3, “carriage to” should be changed to --carriage assembly to--.
In claim 16 lines 3-4, “arm band support” should be changed to --arm support band--.
In claim 17 lines 2-3, “wherein the securing portion may comprise a recess within the arm support portion” is redundant as parent claim 11 recites substantially the same in lines 1-2. This limitation should be deleted. The Office suggests changing the claim limitation to read --The exercise device as claimed in claim 15, wherein the recess incorporates a releasable locking assembly to lock the terminal head within the slotted opening--.
Appropriate corrections are 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 and 3-17 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 recites the limitation "the forearm" in lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the hand" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the contour" in line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the arms" in line 21. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “imposed on the wrist by holding the baton this” in lines 4-5, which is vague and indefinite. It is unclear if there should be words following the emphasized portion to complete the sentence. Based on the specification in para [0074], the word “this” should be deleted. The limitation should be changed to --imposed on the wrist by holding the baton--.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the baton end" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the range of flexibility" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Furthermore, it is unclear what structure is associated with having the “range of flexibility.” This limitation can be corrected by changing “the range of flexibility” to --a range of flexibility of the baton--.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the vertical axis" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the forearm" in lines 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the hand" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the contour" in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the arms" in line 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the slot arrangement" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears that this limitation can be corrected by changing “the slot arrangement” to --the longitudinal slot--.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the transverse extent of the slotted opening" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the slotted opening" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the distal end" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the transverse extent of the slot" in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the slot" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Furthermore, it is unclear if “the slot” refers back to the longitudinal slot as claimed in parent claim 11, to the slotted opening as claimed in claim 15, or to an entirely different slot.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the transverse extent of the recess" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the underside" in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the terminal" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This limitation can be corrected by changing “the terminal” to --the terminal head--.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the slot" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Furthermore, it is unclear if “the slot” refers back to the longitudinal slot as claimed in parent claim 11 or to an entirely different slot.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claims 1 and 3-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101).
Claim 1 recites the limitations “the arm supporting portion is of sufficient longitudinal extend to provide support to the forearm and adjacent wrist of the user to resist angular movement therebetween” in lines 9-10, “the securing portion is disposed for attachment to an arm band connector for fixed attachment to an arm of a user of the exercise device” in lines 11-12, “the handle portion is… for gripping by the hand, fingers and thumb of the user” in lines 13-15, “the handle portion is… of lesser transverse extend than the arm supporting portion so that the arm, wrist and hand follow the contour of the arm supporting portion and the handle supporting portion” in lines 16-18, “wherein the distal weighted end is flexible relative to the arm support portion and the handle portion to establish an inertial resistance force to the arms when torque is applied from rapid reciprocating hand movement” in the last three lines. These limitations encompass a human organism as these limitations can only be met with the presence of the human organism, i.e., the user. To overcome this rejection, the Office suggests amending the claim to incorporate --configured to-- or --adapted to-- language. Claims 3-8 are similarly rejected by virtue of dependency on claim 1.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the arm supporting portion has an intermediate tapered portion or stepped portion… to support the wrist of a user in position mitigating the stressed imposed on the wrist by holding the baton” in lines 1-5. This limitation encompasses a human organism as these limitations can only be met with the presence of the human organism, i.e., the user. To overcome this rejection, the Office suggests amending the claim to incorporate --configured to-- or --adapted to-- language.
Claim 9 recites the limitations “the arm supporting portion is of sufficient longitudinal extend to provide support to the forearm and adjacent wrist of the user to resist angular movement therebetween” in lines 8-9, “the handle portion is… for gripping by the hand, fingers and thumb of the user” in lines 11-13, “the handle portion is… of lesser transverse extend than the arm supporting portion so that the arm, wrist and hand follow the contour of the arm supporting portion and the handle supporting portion” in lines 14-16, “wherein the distal weighted end is flexible relative to the arm support portion and the handle portion to establish an inertial resistance force to the arms when torque is applied from rapid reciprocating hand movement” in the last three lines. These limitations encompass a human organism as these limitations can only be met with the presence of the human organism, i.e., the user. To overcome this rejection, the Office suggests amending the claim to incorporate --configured to-- or --adapted to-- language. Claims 10-17 are similarly rejected by virtue of dependency on claim 9.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the arm band connector comprises a forearm and wrist brace moulded to conform to the general shape of a user’s outer forearm adjoining the wrist, and webbing forming a strap having a fastener at terminal ends to positively engage and bind the brace to the outer forearm and wrist of the user” in lines 2-6. This limitation encompasses a human organism as these limitations can only be met with the presence of the human organism, i.e., the user. To overcome this rejection, the Office suggests amending the claim to incorporate --configured to-- or --adapted to-- language.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 1, 3-4, and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5,599,021 (Lary et al., hereinafter “Lary”) in view of US 10,894,178 (Spillman et al., hereinafter “Spillman”).
Regarding claim 1, Lary discloses an exercise device (abstract, FIGS. 1-4) comprising:
a baton 10 having a distal weighted end 11,22 and a proximal support end 12,13 (FIGS. 1-2);
the proximal support end 12,13 comprising:
an arm supporting portion 13 at the support end (FIGS. 1-4); and
a handle portion 12 contiguous and adjacent to:
the arm supporting portion 13 at a proximal end of the handle portion 12 (FIGS. 1-4); and
the distal weighted end 11,22 at a distal end of the handle portion 12 (FIGS. 1-4);
wherein:
the arm supporting portion 13 is of sufficient longitudinal extent to provide support to the forearm and adjacent wrist of the user to resist angular movement therebetween (the grip 13 can be interpreted as the arm supporting portion since a user can support their forearm and wrist against the grip 13 as shown in FIG. 4); and
the handle portion 12 is:
disposed axially relative to the arm supporting portion 13 for gripping by the hand, fingers and thumb of the user (the shaft 12 can be interpreted as the handle portion since a user is capable of gripping the shaft with their hand, fingers and thumb - FIG. 4); and
of lesser transverse extent than the arm supporting portion 13 so that the arm, wrist and hand follow the contour of the arm supporting portion 13 and the handle portion 12 in locking engagement therewith to resist angular movement therebetween (the grip 13 is tapered from a greater transverse extent to a lesser transverse extent towards the tranverse extent of the shaft 12 as best shown in FIG. 2; FIG. 4 shows the user’s right arm, wrist and hand following the contour of the grip 13 and shaft 12 in locking engagement therewith); and
wherein the distal weighted end 11,22 is flexible relative to the arm supporting portion 13 and the handle portion 12 to establish an inertial resistant force to the arms when torque is applied from rapid reciprocating hand movement (spring 11 is inherently flexible causing the weight 22 to establish an inertial resistance force to the arms of the user when torque is applied from rapid reciprocating hand movement as shown in FIG. 4).
Lary teaches the invention as substantially claimed, but does not disclose the arm supporting portion having a securing portion, wherein the securing portion is disposed for attachment to an arm band connector for fixed attachment to an arm of a user of the exercise device.
Spillman teaches an analogous exercise device having a distal weighted end 120 and a proximal support end 110 (FIG. 1), the proximal support end 110 comprising an arm supporting portion 114 having a securing portion 118 (FIG. 1, Col 8:28-37), wherein the securing portion 118 is disposed for attachment to an arm band connector 150 for fixed attachment to an arm of a user of the exercise device (FIG. 1, Col 8:28-37).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lary’s invention with the securing portion and arm band connector as taught by Spillman in order to securely attach the exercise device to the user while the user is exercising.
Regarding claim 3, modified Lary teaches the exercise device as claimed in claim 1, and Lary further discloses wherein the arm supporting portion 13 has an intermediate tapered portion or stepped portion to gradually reduce the peripheral surface of the baton from the arm supporting portion 13 to the handle portion 12 and support the wrist of a user in position mitigating the stress imposed on the wrist by holding the baton this (the grip 13 is tapered from a greater transverse extent to a lesser transverse extent towards the tranverse extent of the shaft 12 as best shown in FIG. 2; FIG. 4 shows the user’s wrist being supported by the grip 13 in a position that would mitigate the stressed imposed on the wrist by the user holding the baton).
Regarding claim 4, modified Lary teaches the exercise device as claimed in claim 1, and Spillman further discloses wherein the securing portion 114 comprises a recess within the arm supporting portion incorporating a glide buckle 118 (Spillman: the handle loop 118 can be interpreted as a glide buckle since the handle loop 118 has a slot allowing a wrist strap to “glide” through and be secured thereto - Col 8:28-32).
Regarding claim 6, modified Lary teaches the exercise device as claimed in claim 1, and Lary further discloses wherein the distal end of the baton comprises a detachable weight 22 to be fixedly and releasable secured by a securing arrangement to the baton end (the weight 22 is fixedly and releasably secured to one end of the spring 11 by a pin 14, and other means of attachment of the spring 11 to the weight 22 may be accomplished by many other methods than a straight pin - Col 3:53-66 and 4:46-53, FIGS. 2 and 3A).
Regarding claim 7, modified Lary teaches the exercise device as claimed in claim 1, and Lary further discloses wherein the baton is formed of resiliently flexible material (a portion of the baton, i.e., the spring 11, is formed of resiliently flexible material).
Regarding claim 8, modified Lary teaches the exercise device as claimed in claim 7, and Lary further discloses wherein the range of flexibility is within a about 1 degree to 45 degrees as measured from the vertical axis of the baton when torque is applied from rapid reciprocating hand movement (the range of flexibility of the weight 22 relative to the shaft 12 and grip 13 can be limited to between 1 degree and 45 degrees depending on the amount of torque that is applied from rapid reciprocating hand movement - FIG. 4).
Regarding claim 9, Lary discloses an exercise device (abstract, FIGS. 1-4) comprising:
a baton 10 having a distal weighted end 11,22 and a proximal support end 12,13 (FIGS. 1-2);
an arm supporting portion 13 at the support end (FIGS. 1-4);
a handle portion 12 adjacent to the arm supporting portion 13 (FIGS. 1-4);
wherein;
the arm supporting portion 13 is of sufficient longitudinal extent to provide support to the forearm and adjacent wrist of the user to resist angular movement therebetween (the grip 13 can be interpreted as the arm supporting portion since a user can support their forearm and wrist against the grip 13 as shown in FIG. 4); and
the handle portion 12 is:
disposed axially relative to the arm supporting portion 13 for gripping by the hand, fingers and thumb of the user (the shaft 12 can be interpreted as the handle portion since a user is capable of gripping the shaft with their hand, fingers and thumb - FIG. 4); and
of lesser transverse extent than the arm supporting portion 13 so that the arm, wrist and hand follow the contour of the arm supporting portion 13 and the handle portion 12 in locking engagement therewith to resist angular movement therebetween (the grip 13 is tapered from a greater transverse extent to a lesser transverse extent towards the tranverse extent of the shaft 12 as best shown in FIG. 2; FIG. 4 shows the user’s right arm, wrist and hand following the contour of the grip 13 and shaft 12 in locking engagement therewith); and
wherein the distal weighted end 11,22 is flexible relative to the arm supporting portion 13 and the handle portion 12 to establish an inertial resistant force to the arms when torque is applied from rapid reciprocating hand movement (spring 11 is inherently flexible causing the weight 22 to establish an inertial resistance force to the arms of the user when torque is applied from rapid reciprocating hand movement as shown in FIG. 4).
Lary teaches the invention as substantially claimed, but does not disclose the arm supporting portion having a securing portion, the device further comprising an arm band connector adapted for fixed attachment to an arm of a user of the exercise device, wherein the securing portion is disposed for attachment to the arm band connector.
Spillman teaches an analogous exercise device having a distal weighted end 120 and a proximal support end 110 (FIG. 1), the proximal support end 110 comprising an arm supporting portion 114 having a securing portion 118 (FIG. 1, Col 8:28-37), the device further comprising an arm band connector 150 adapted for fixed attachment to an arm of a user of the exercise device (FIG. 1, Col 8:28-37), wherein the securing portion 118 is disposed for attachment to the arm band connector 150 (FIG. 1, Col 8:28-37).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lary’s invention with the securing portion and arm band connector as taught by Spillman in order to securely attach the exercise device to the user while the user is exercising.
Regarding claim 10, modified Lary teaches the exercise device as claimed in claim 9, and Spillman further discloses wherein the securing portion 118 comprises a recess within the arm supporting portion incorporating a glide buckle (Spillman: the handle loop 118 comprises a recess and can be interpreted as a glide buckle since the handle loop 118 has the recess which allows a wrist strap to “glide” through and be secured thereto - Col 8:28-32); and the arm band connector 150 comprises a forearm and wrist brace moulded to conform to the general shape of a user's outer forearm adjoining the wrist, and webbing forming a strap 150 having a fastener at terminal ends to positively engage and bind the brace to the outer forearm and wrist of the user (Spillman: the wrist strap 150 is capable of conforming to the general shape of a user’s outer forearm adjoining the wrist and be fastened to the outer forearm and wrist of the user - Col 8:28-37, FIG. 1).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 11-17 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, and the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101 set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art of record are: US 5,599,021 (Lary et al.) in view of US 10,894,178 (Spillman et al.).
Regarding dependent claim 5, Lary et al. in view of Spillman et al. teaches the exercise device as claimed in claim 4 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection above). However, modified Lary et al. fails to disclose wherein the buckle is a tri-glide buckle having a pair of slots and a bar through which webbing that forms part of a webbing strap of the arm band connector may repose. There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art of record that would have made it obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Lary et al. to arrive at the claimed invention. The Office notes that it is impermissible to modify the teaching reference (i.e., Spillman et al.) to substitute the handle loop for a tri-glide buckle as only the primary reference is permitted to be modified.
Regarding dependent claim 11, Lary et al. in view of Spillman et al. teaches the exercise device as claimed in claim 9 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection above). However, modified Lary et al. fails to disclose wherein the securing portion comprises a recess within the arm supporting portion defining a longitudinal slot extending axially along a portion of the arm supporting portion periphery and an expanded opening at one end of the slot. There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art of record that would have made it obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Lary et al. to arrive at the claimed invention. Claims 12-17 depend on claim 11 and are allowable for the same reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to whose telephone number is (571)270-1661. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7pm Eastern.
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.
/Joshua Lee/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784