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 amendment filed 01/06/2026 has been entered. Applicant’s amendments to the specification and claims have overcome each and every objection and 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 09/04/2025.
No claims have been cancelled.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 11 each recite the limitation “wherein the interior is not tapered to allow the fill to be evenly dispersed through the interior.” The written disclosure as originally filed does not support the subject matter of this limitation. There is no specific disclosure stating the interior of the instant invention is not tapered or that an interior that is not tapered allows the fill to be evenly dispersed throughout the interior. Therefore, this limitation in each of claims 1 and 11 represents new matter. Claims 2-10 and 12-20 are similarly rejected by virtue of dependency on claims 1 and 11, respectively.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 4-12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 11,826,600).
Regarding independent claim 1, Park et al. discloses a ruck plate (exercise weight bag 100, see plate shape in Figs. 3-4) comprising:
a front surface (front panel 102) having a first side edge (right side panel 106), a second side edge (left side panel 106), a top edge (edge formed by closure flap 114) and a bottom edge (top panel 108; see annotated Figs. 3-4);
a back surface (rear panel 104) located opposite of the front surface (Fig. 4); the back surface separated from the front surface by a depth of the first side edge (Fig. 4);
an interior formed between the front surface and the back surface (col. 4 lines 40-42, “The exercise weight bag 100 defines a closable interior space between the front panel 102 and the rear panel 104”); the interior adapted to receive fill to increase weight of the ruck plate (col. 4 lines 10-14, “an exercise weight bag 100, which is configured to be filled with a weight material, such as a granular material (e.g., sand, gravel, pebbles, rice, animal feed, rubber mulch, metal pellets, wood pellets)”); and
an opening (opening of filler funnel arrangement 110 sealed by closure seal 112) adapted to provide access to the interior and through which fill is provided to the interior (col. 4 line 55-59, “The filler funnel arrangement 110 includes an open end defined by terminal ends of the front panel 102 and the rear panel 104 through which weight material or filler material can be introduced into the interior space of the exercise weight bag 100”).
PNG
media_image1.png
477
797
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Park et al. teaches the ruck plate (100) having a “form of a weighted insert that is configured to be received in a pocket or other receptacle of a vest, such as a tactical-style vest” (col. 4 lines 18-20), but does not teach wherein the interior is not tapered to allow the fill to be evenly dispersed throughout the interior.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shape of the ruck plate of Park et al. such that the interior is not tapered, and instead forms a shape such as a rectangle, as a matter of obvious design choice for the purpose of selecting whatever shape was desired or expedient to form a suitable fillable weight capable of being received in a pocket or other receptacle of a vest. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results or criticality. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B). Here, changing the shape of the ruck plate of Park et al. so that the interior is not tapered will not affect the overall function of allowing a user to selectively fill the ruck plate with a desired weight and, absent further structural and/or functional requirements, such a modification of shape satisfies the functionality of allowing the fill to be evenly dispersed throughout the interior.
Regarding claim 2, Park et al. discloses wherein the interior has a plurality of chambers formed by dividers (baffles 120; col. 5 lines 24-26, “the baffle 120 is vertically oriented and is located on a centerline of the exercise weight bag 100 to bisect the interior space into two equal sides or halves”) located in the interior (col. 5 lines 29-30, “Although only a single baffle 120 is illustrated, multiple baffles 120 could be provided if desired”).
Regarding claim 4, Park et al. discloses wherein each of the plurality of chambers is connected to each other of the plurality of chambers (see Fig. 12, upper and lower spaces between baffle 120 and top and lower edges connect the chambers).
Regarding claim 5, Park et al. discloses wherein the interior is adapted to receive fill with a plurality of fill sizes (see examples of fill types in col. 4 lines 10-14).
Regarding claim 6, Park et al. discloses further comprising a funnel device (filler funnel arrangement 110) operably connected to the top edge (edge formed by closure flap 114).
Regarding claim 7, Park et al. discloses wherein the funnel device is adapted to be stored within the interior when not used for filling the interior (by rolling filler funnel arrangement 110 and folding closure flap 114 over rolled filler funnel arrangement 110; see Figs. 4, 8-9).
Regarding claim 8, Park et al. discloses wherein the funnel device is collapsible (by rolling filler funnel arrangement 110; see Figs. 4, 8-9).
Regarding claim 9, Park et al. discloses wherein the interior is adapted to disperse the fill throughout the interior to distribute weight within the ruck plate (see Fig. 12, fill material will disperse and move throughout the interior of the weight bag 100).
Regarding claim 10, Park et al. discloses wherein the fill is sand, and the sand is located in the interior of the fillable ruck plate (col. 4 lines 10-14).
Regarding independent claim 11, Park et al. teaches a plate (exercise weight bag 100, see plate shape in Figs. 3-4) for use when rucking (intended use, weight bag 100 is capable of being used for rucking) comprising:
a front surface (front panel 102) having a first side edge (right side panel 106), a second side edge (left side panel 106), a top edge (edge formed by closure flap 114) and a bottom edge (top panel 108; see annotated Figs. 3-4);
a back surface (rear panel 104) located opposite of the front surface (Fig. 4), the back surface separated from the front surface by an interior (col. 4 lines 40-42, “The exercise weight bag 100 defines a closable interior space between the front panel 102 and the rear panel 104”), the interior adapted to receive fill to increase the weight of the plate (col. 4 lines 10-14, “an exercise weight bag 100, which is configured to be filled with a weight material, such as a granular material (e.g., sand, gravel, pebbles, rice, animal feed, rubber mulch, metal pellets, wood pellets)”); and
an opening (opening of filler funnel arrangement 110 sealed by closure seal 112) adapted to provide access to the interior (col. 4 line 55-59, “The filler funnel arrangement 110 includes an open end defined by terminal ends of the front panel 102 and the rear panel 104 through which weight material or filler material can be introduced into the interior space of the exercise weight bag 100”), the opening located in the top edge (edge formed by closure flap 114) and adapted to be closed with a closing mechanism (closure seal 112; col. 4 lines 66-67, “the seal closure 112 can close the filler funnel arrangement 110”).
Park et al. teaches the plate (100) having a “form of a weighted insert that is configured to be received in a pocket or other receptacle of a vest, such as a tactical-style vest” (col. 4 lines 18-20), but does not teach wherein the first side edge, the second side edge, the top edge and the bottom edge form a rectangular shape, or wherein the interior is not tapered to allow the fill to be evenly dispersed throughout the interior.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shape of the plate of Park et al. such that the first side edge, second side edge, top edge, and bottom edge forms a rectangular shape, and such that the interior is not tapered, and instead forms a shape such as a rectangle to match the exterior shape of the ruck plate, as a matter of obvious design choice for the purpose of selecting whatever shape was desired or expedient to form a suitable fillable weight capable of being received in a pocket or other receptacle of a vest. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results or criticality. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B). Here, changing the shape of the plate of Park et al. so that the edges form a rectangular shape and the interior is not tapered will not affect the overall function of allowing a user to selectively fill the plate with a desired weight and, absent further structural and/or functional requirements, such a modification of shape satisfies the functionality of allowing the fill to be evenly dispersed throughout the interior.
Regarding claim 12, Park et al. further teaches wherein the interior has a plurality of chambers formed by dividers (baffles 120; col. 5 lines 24-26, “the baffle 120 is vertically oriented and is located on a centerline of the exercise weight bag 100 to bisect the interior space into two equal sides or halves”) located in the interior (col. 5 lines 29-30, “Although only a single baffle 120 is illustrated, multiple baffles 120 could be provided if desired”).
Regarding claim 14, Park et al. further teaches wherein each of the plurality of chambers is connected to each other of the plurality of chambers (see Fig. 12, upper and lower spaces between baffle 120 and top and lower edges connect the chambers).
Regarding claim 15, Park et al. further teaches wherein the interior is adapted to receive fill with a plurality of fill sizes (see examples of fill types in col. 4 lines 10-14).
Regarding claim 16, Park et al. further teaches further comprising a funnel device (filler funnel arrangement 110) operably connected to the top edge (edge formed by closure flap 114).
Regarding claim 17, Park et al. further teaches wherein the funnel device is adapted to be stored within the interior when not used for filling the interior (by rolling filler funnel arrangement 110 and folding closure flap 114 over rolled filler funnel arrangement 110; see Figs. 4, 8-9).
Regarding claim 18, Park et al. further teaches wherein the funnel device is collapsible (by rolling filler funnel arrangement 110; see Figs. 4, 8-9).
Regarding claim 19, Park et al. further teaches wherein the interior is adapted to disperse the fill throughout the interior to distribute the weight within the plate (see Fig. 12, fill material will disperse and move throughout the interior of the weight bag 100).
Regarding claim 20, Park et al. further teaches wherein the fill is sand, and the sand is located in the interior of the plate (col. 4 lines 10-14).
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 11,826,600) and further in view of Bury (US 4,686,781).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Park et al. does not teach wherein each of the plurality of chambers (formed by baffles 120) is separably fillable.
Bury, in the same field of endeavor with regards to a weighted fillable structure comprising a plurality of chambers, teaches a weighted fillable structure (Fig. 2) comprising an interior (hollowshoe space 1) configured to receive a fill therein (spherical lead 3), wherein the interior has a plurality of chambers formed by dividers located in the interior (spine 6, 7, 8) and wherein each of the plurality of chambers is separably fillable (see Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
638
410
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plurality of chambers of Park et al. to be separably fillable, as is similarly taught by Bury, through extension of the dividers to the bottom edge of the ruck plate/weight bag, for the purpose of allowing a user to selectively fill different areas of the interior to create a desired dispersal of the fill within the interior.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the prior art to Park et al. does not teach the interior being not tapered to allow the fill to be evenly dispersed throughout the interior. However, a change in shape, absent unexpected results or criticality, has been held to be an obvious matter of design choice to a person having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B). Therefore, the previously applied 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection of claims 1-2 and 4-10 have been withdrawn and a new grounds for rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of Park et al. has been applied above. This argument applies to the previously applied 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection in view of Park et al. of claims 11-12 and 14-20 as well.
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 KATHLEEN FISK whose telephone number is (571)272-1042. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-4PM M-F (Central).
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.
/KATHLEEN M FISK/Examiner, Art Unit 3784
/LOAN B JIMENEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3784