DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to applicant’s amendments filed 10/29/2025. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . The effective filing date of the present application is 02/23/2023. In applicant’s amendments filed 10/29/2025, claims 3, 4, and 7 were withdrawn. Claims 1-10, as filed on 10/29/2025, are currently pending.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A (Figures 1-6) and claims 1, 2, 5, 6, and 8-10 in the reply filed on 10/29/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, and 8-10, as filed on 10/29/2025, are considered below.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02/22/2024 and 09/12/2024 were in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of informalities and the use of legal phraseology often used in patent claims, see below. Applicant is suggested to amend the abstract of the disclosure as follows:
--- A gymnastic machine includes a frame, a movable lever, pivoted to the frame, so as to assume a lowered position and a raised position, and at least one weight, which can be coupled to the movable lever. The gymnastic machine comprises at least one elastic element, which connects the movable lever to the frame, so as to oppose an elastic force aimed at compensating a force of the at least one weight when the movable lever is close to the lowered position. ---.
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 for an abstract of the disclosure.
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 6, and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 7-8, “the force of said at least one weight” should be --- a force of said at least one weight ---.
In claim 2, lines 1-5,
“The machine according to claim 1, wherein said frame further comprises at least one first fixing pin, and
said movable lever comprises at least one second fixing pin,
wherein said elastic element is connected between said at least one first fixing pin and said at least one second fixing pin” should be
--- The machine according to claim 1, wherein said frame further comprises at least one first fixing pin,
wherein said movable lever comprises at least one second fixing pin, and
wherein said at least one elastic element is connected between said at least one first fixing pin and said at least one second fixing pin. ---.
In claim 6, lines 1-13,
“The machine according to claim 5, wherein
said frame comprises a support element having a framework comprising a rotation pin at a top of the framework, and
said movable lever comprises a pair of beams arranged parallel and coupled to each other,
wherein each beam is rotatably coupled at a first end to said rotation pin, so as to assume a lowered position and a raised position,
wherein said movable lever further comprises one or more weight pins, each of the weight pins arranged coupled to a respective beam, for the arrangement of at least one respective weight,
wherein said movable lever comprises a coupling element of said pair of beams, and
wherein said one or more hooks are disposed on said coupling element.” should be
--- The machine according to claim 5, wherein said frame comprises a support element having a framework comprising a rotation pin at a top of the framework,
wherein said movable lever comprises a pair of beams arranged in parallel and coupled to each other, wherein:
each beam of said pair of beams is rotatably coupled at a first end thereof to said rotation pin, so as to assume said lowered position and said raised position;
said movable lever further comprises one or more weight pins, each of the one or more weight pins arranged coupled to a respective beam, for an arrangement of at least one respective weight of said at least one weight; and
said movable lever comprises a coupling element of said pair of beams, and
wherein said one or more hooks are disposed on said coupling element. ---.
In claim 8, line 3, “a column fixed at a first end to the base” should be --- a column fixed at a first end thereof to the base ---.
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, 2, 5, 6, and 8-10 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.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “the at least one elastic element configured to oppose an elastic force for compensating the force of said at least one weight when said movable lever is near the lowered position” is recited in lines 6-8. The limitation renders the claim indefinite because the meaning of the recited expression “to oppose an elastic force for compensating the force of said at least one weight” in the limitation is unclear. Specifically, the metes and bounds of the expression and thereby the claim are not clearly defined, and a person having ordinary skill in the art would therefore not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Applicant is suggested to amend the limitation to --- the at least one elastic element configured to exert an elastic and assistive force in an opposite direction with respect to a force due to gravity, and therefore of said at least one weight, when said movable lever is near the lowered position ---. Refer to the specification, paragraphs 0053-0056, and Figures 5 and 6.
Claims 2, 5, 6, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, by virtue of their dependency on claim 1, which is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, see above.
Regarding claim 10, which depends from claims 1 and 9, the limitation “wherein said elastic band is of a closed type or is of an open type and comprises two eyelets at ends of the elastic band” is recited in lines 1-2. The phrases “a closed type” and “an open type” render the claim indefinite because the claim includes elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by “type”), thereby rendering the scope of the claim unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). In addition, the limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether or not the closed type form and/or the open type form of the elastic band comprise(s) two eyelets at ends of the elastic band.
Applicant is suggested to amend the limitation to --- wherein said elastic band is one of a closed elastic band which is foldable in use in the gymnastic equipment or an open elastic band comprising two eyelets at ends of said open elastic band ---. Refer to the specification, as originally filed, paragraphs 0054 and 0071, and Figures 5, 6, and 10.
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, 2, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Telle (US 4,357,010).
Regarding claim 1, as can best be understood (refer to the 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), rejection of claim 1, see above), Telle discloses a gymnastic machine (Figures 1-4) comprising:
a frame (the base 10 together with the upright support 11; Figures 1-4);
a movable lever (the “beam 17 which is pivotally mounted for rotation about a horizontal shaft 18 secured between the columns 13 of the upright structure”; column 2, lines 58-61; Figures 1-4) pivoted to said frame so as to assume a lowered position (the lowered position of the distal end of the beam 17; Figures 1-4) and a raised position (raising the distal end of the beam 17 via raising the distal end of the beam 23 at the lateral extensions 26, 27 and/or the shoulder pads 28; Figures 1-4);
at least one weight (the weight discs placed on the rod 19 at the distal end of the beam 17; Figures 1-4) coupled to said movable lever; and
at least one elastic element (the isokinetic device 38; column 3, lines 33-54; Figures 1-4) connecting said movable lever to said frame (column 3, lines 33-54; Figures 1-4), the at least one elastic element configured to exert an elastic and assistive force in an opposite direction with respect to a force due to gravity, and therefore of said at least one weight, when said movable lever is near the lowered position (“The hydraulic isokinetic device is arranged to limit the rate of movement and thus control the momentum factor of weights traveling at different speeds in one direction. The device as shown in FIG. 1 allows free return movement; these devices may be made to act to limit the rate of movement in either direction depending upon the requirements of the mechanism with which they are used.”; column 3, lines 33-54; Figures 1-4).
Regarding claim 2, Telle further discloses wherein said frame further comprises at least one first fixing pin (the lug 40; column 3, lines 33-54; Figures 1-4), and
said movable lever comprises at least one second fixing pin (the rod or bolt 42; column 3, lines 33-54; Figures 1-4),
wherein said elastic element is connected between said at least one first fixing pin and said at least one second fixing pin (column 3, lines 33-54; Figures 1-4).
Regarding claim 8, Telle further discloses wherein said frame further comprises:
a base (the base 10; Figures 1-4); and
a handlebar (the upright support 11 together with the beam 23 and the base unit 25; Figures 1-4) comprising a column (the upright support 11; Figures 1-4) fixed at a first end to the base (Figures 1-4) and handles (the base unit 25; Figures 1-4) fixed to a second end of said column (via the beam 23; Figures 1-4).
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 1, 2, 5, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gibson (US 4,674,160) in view of Lapcevic (US 2004/0058790).
Regarding claim 1, as can best be understood (refer to the 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), rejection of claim 1, see above), Gibson discloses a gymnastic machine (the weight lifting apparatus 10; Figures 1-4) comprising:
a frame (the elevated rack 12 together with the structural extension 50; Figures 1-4);
a movable lever (the elongated lever 72 comprising the front section 74 and the rear section 76; Figures 1-4) pivoted to said frame (via the fulcrum 70; Figures 1-3) so as to assume a lowered position (Figure 2) and a raised position (Figure 3);
at least one weight (the weighted disks 90; Figures 2 and 3) coupled to said movable lever; and
at least one tension element (the tension member 98 in the form of a link chain; column 4, lines 24-40; Figures 2 and 3) connecting said movable lever to said frame (column 4, lines 24-40; Figures 2 and 3), the at least one tension element configured to exert an assistive force in an opposite direction with respect to a force due to gravity, and therefore of said at least one weight, when said movable lever is near the lowered position (via the tension member 98 working in concert with the pivoted lever arm 86; column 4, lines 33-40; column 5, line 62, through column 6, line 2; Figures 2 and 3).
However, Gibson fails to disclose: wherein the at least one tension element is at least one elastic element.
Lapcevic teaches an analogous gymnastic machine (Figures 1, 2, and 8) comprising at least one elastic element (the elastic resistance element 50; Figures 1 and 2; paragraphs 0051 and 0055) connecting a movable lever (the resistance lever arm 26; Figures 1 and 2; paragraph 0055) to a frame (the outrigger frame portion 44; paragraphs 0055-0056; Figures 1 and 2), the at least one elastic element configured to exert an assistive force in an opposite direction with respect to a force due to gravity, and therefore of at least one weight (the counterweight 30 in the form of a disc shaped “barbell” weight together with the additional weight 144 placed on the rod 32 of the resistance lever arm 26; paragraph 0081; Figures 1 and 8), when the movable lever is near a lowered position (“During a training motion in which the resistance lever arm 26 is moved toward the extreme limit of its range of motion (i.e., when the resistance lever arm 26 passes 90° from its original or rest position), the counter torque that it exerts begins to diminish. At such time, the elastic resistance element 50 is approaching its maximum degree of elongation. Thus, at this point, the elastic resistance element 50 furnishes additional counter torque to compensate for the decreased counter torque provided by the weighted resistance lever arm 26.”; paragraph 0055).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the at least one tension element of Gibson’s invention with at least one elastic element, as taught by Lapcevic, in order to provide a resilient support for the movable lever in a raised position off of the floor for the advantage of enabling a dynamic counter torque to the at least one weight coupled to the movable lever during use of the gymnastic machine (Gibson: column 4, lines 24-40; Lapcevic: paragraph 0055).
Regarding claim 2, Gibson in view of Lapcevic teaches the invention as substantially claimed, see above, and further teaches wherein said frame further comprises at least one first fixing pin (Gibson: 100 (column 4, lines 24-40; Figures 2 and 3); Lapcevic: 48 (paragraph 0051; Figures 1 and 2)), and
said movable lever comprises at least one second fixing pin (Gibson: 102 (column 4, lines 24-40; Figures 2 and 3); Lapcevic: 77 (paragraphs 0051 and 0055; Figures 1 and 2)),
wherein said elastic element is connected between said at least one first fixing pin and said at least one second fixing pin (Gibson: Figures 2 and 3; Lapcevic: Figures 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 5, Gibson further discloses one or more hooks (the pulley block 162 together with the adjustable clasp 158; Figures 2, 3, and 5) arranged on said movable lever, the one or more hooks configured to be coupled to a lifting belt worn (the waist harness 108; Figures 3 and 5) by a user.
Regarding claim 8, Gibson further discloses wherein said frame further comprises:
a base (the elevated rack 12; Figures 1-3); and
a handlebar (the vertical corner posts 36, 38 together with the handrailing 30; Figures 1-3) comprising a column (the vertical corner posts 36, 38; Figures 1-3) fixed at a first end to the base and handles (the handrailing 30; Figures 1-3) fixed to a second end of said column.
Regarding claim 9, Gibson in view of Lapcevic teaches the invention as substantially claimed, see above, and further teaches wherein said at least one elastic element is an elastic band (Lapcevic: the elastic resistance element 50; Figures 1 and 2; paragraphs 0051 and 0055).
Regarding claim 10, Gibson in view of Lapcevic teaches the invention as substantially claimed, see above, and further teaches wherein said elastic band is of a closed type or is of an open type and comprises two eyelets at ends of the elastic band (Lapcevic: Figures 1 and 2; paragraphs 0051 and 0055).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record (Gibson (US 4,674,160) in view of Lapcevic (US 2004/0058790); Telle (US 4,357,010)), alone or in combination, fails to teach or render obvious a gymnastic machine in combination with all of the elements and structural and functional relationships as claimed and further including:
wherein said movable lever comprises a pair of beams arranged in parallel and coupled to each other, wherein:
each beam of said pair of beams is rotatably coupled at a first end thereof to said rotation pin, so as to assume said lowered position and said raised position;
said movable lever further comprises one or more weight pins, each of the one or more weight pins arranged coupled to a respective beam, for an arrangement of at least one respective weight of said at least one weight; and
said movable lever comprises a coupling element of said pair of beams, and
wherein said one or more hooks are disposed on said coupling element (claim 6, as suggested to be amended in the objections to claim 6, see above).
A different prior art of record (D'Amico (US 2017/0203149)) discloses and/or teaches the limitations of independent claim 1 and dependent claims 5 and 6, but fails to disclose and/or teach in independent claim 1:
at least one elastic element connecting said movable lever to said frame, the at least one elastic element configured to exert an elastic and assistive force in an opposite direction with respect to a force due to gravity, and therefore of said at least one weight, when said movable lever is near the lowered position (refer to the 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejection of claim 1, see above).
However, a conclusion of obviousness to modify D'Amico’s invention with the at least one elastic element of Gibson’s invention modified in view of Lapcevic would be based only upon improper hindsight reasoning which takes into account knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure. See In re McLaughlin, 443F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). Therefore, the gymnastic machine taught by D'Amico, in view of Gibson, and further in view of Lapcevic, is not considered equivalent to applicant’s invention as claimed in independent claim 1 and dependent claims 5 and 6.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY D URBIEL GOLDNER whose telephone number is (313)446-6554. The examiner can normally be reached between 9AM and 5PM, Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.
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 B 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. Visit https://patentcenter.uspto.gov to file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center. For more information about Patent Center, visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center. For information about filing in DOCX format, visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx. 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.
/GARY D URBIEL GOLDNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784