DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed 11/07/2025. Claims 1-10 and 12-14 are acknowledged as pending in this application with claims 1, 7, and 8 being currently amended.
The previous interpretation of claim elements under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is moot due to the removal of the invoking language. The rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 are withdrawn as having been overcome by the amendment. New rejections necessitated by the amendment are presented below.
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) 1-6, 9-10, and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuhaus (US 2023/0105920) in view of Schliep (US 4,383,684).
Regarding claim 1, Neuhaus teaches a muscle strength training device with electrically provided resistance (abstract, [0006]), comprising:
a bed frame (132) comprising at least one rail (long side rails of frame 132) extending in a longitudinal direction, wherein the bed frame has a first end and a second end in the longitudinal direction, the first end has two lateral sides each provided with a guide wheel (114, 116), and the second end is provided with a bed-foot frame (108);
a sliding board (136) coupled to the rail and slidable on a bed plane of the bed frame in the longitudinal direction;
two pulling cables (118, 122) each having a connecting end and a force application end, wherein the two connecting ends are connected to the sliding board separately (see Fig. 1, [0022]), and each of the two pulling cables is looped around a corresponding one of the two guide wheels such that the two force application ends are usable to drive the sliding board to move in a first direction (via handles 120 and 124, [0027]); and
an electric resistance unit (electric motor 144) fixed on the bed frame, wherein the electric resistance unit generates resistance by using an electrical source, and the resistance is transmitted to a pulling cord (148, see Fig. 2) connected to the sliding board such that the resistance gives the sliding board a potential to move in a second direction, wherein the second direction and the first direction are opposite directions [0027, 0029].
Neuhaus is silent to the rail/track configuration of the device and does not specifically disclose a rail with an I-shaped cross section and two lateral sides each provided with a rolling portion, wherein the sliding board has a bottom portion provided with a plurality of rollers arranged along the longitudinal direction, the rollers being collectively configured to roll in the rolling portion on each lateral side of the rail.
Schliep teaches an analogous training device comprising a rail (13) with an I-shaped cross section and two lateral sides each provided with a rolling portion (best shown in Fig. 2), wherein the sliding board has a bottom portion provided with a plurality of rollers arranged along the longitudinal direction (see roller assemblies 49 arranged longitudinally, best shown in Fig. 1), the rollers being collectively configured to roll in the rolling portion on each lateral side of the rail (as shown in Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Neuhaus by incorporating the rail and rollers taught by Schliep in order to provide a suitable movement mechanism for the desired uses disclosed by Neuhaus. Such a modification involves the mere combining of known elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, and therefore fails to distinguish the invention over the prior art.
Regarding claim 2, Neuhaus teaches the electric resistance unit is a motor (electric motor 144).
Regarding claim 3, Neuhaus teaches a control unit (202), wherein the control unit is connected to the electric resistance unit through wired or wireless signal transmission (the controller 202 must inherently be connected either with or without a wire) in order to change a magnitude of the resistance [0038].
Regarding claim 4, Neuhaus teaches while the sliding board moves in the second direction, the resistance is output in one, or a combination, of the following modes: constant resistance, decreasing resistance, and increasing resistance [0048-0049].
Regarding claim 5, Neuhaus teaches the control unit is a mobile phone or a control panel (the control unit includes display consol 126, which is a control panel).
Regarding claim 6, Neuhaus teaches a bed-head frame (110, 112) is vertically provided at the first end of the bed frame.
Regarding claim 9, Neuhaus teaches the bed-foot frame (108) is an inverted square-U shaped frame
Regarding claim 10, Neuhaus teaches two detachable shoulder-rest plates (138, 140; [0025]) are vertically provided on the sliding board and are arranged along a transverse direction.
Regarding claim 12, Neuhaus teaches each of the force application ends is fixedly provided with a gripping member (handles 120, 124).
Regarding claim 13, Neuhaus teaches each of the gripping members is a gripping ring, a handle, a gripping loop, or a gripping strap (Neuhaus describes elements 120 and 124 as handles).
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuhaus (US 2023/0105920) in view of Schliep (US 4,383,684) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Endelman (US 2004/0176227).
Regarding claims 7-8, Neuhaus is silent as to the connection between the bed-foot frame and the bed frame.
Endelman teaches an analogous strength training device wherein an accessory frame is connected at an end of a bed frame at two sides each provided with fastening bolts (148, 150, paragraph [0031]), each of the two lateral sides of the second end of the bed frame is provided with a slot (110), each of the fastening bolts is provided in a corresponding one of the slots, and the fastening bolts are securely tightened after the bed-foot frame is adjusted by being rotated through an angle, and moved for a distance, with respect to the bed frame [0035].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Neuhaus by providing the connection taught by Endelman in order to allow the position of the bed-foot frame to be easily adjusted. Such a modification involves the mere substitution of one connection with another to yield predictable results which fail to distinguish the invention over the prior art.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuhaus (US 2023/0105920) in view of Schliep (US 4,383,684) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lagree (US 20160059061)
Neuhaus fails to teach the electric resistance unit has a power output shaft connected to a reduction drive in order to generate the resistance.
Lagree teaches an teaches an analogous strength training device wherein the electric resistance unit (58) has a power output shaft (51) connected to a reduction drive in order to generate the resistance [0097-0098].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Neuhaus by providing the reduction drive as taught by Lagree in order to increase the torque that may be provided by the motor while maintaining an appropriate size for the device (see Lagree [0098]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 JENNIFER ROBERTSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5001. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am to 4pm PST.
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, Jonathan Moffat can be reached at 571-272-4390. 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.
JENNIFER ROBERTSON
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3791
/JENNIFER ROBERTSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
