DETAILED ACTION
This is the first Office Action on the merits based on the 18/674,506 application filed on 05/24/2024. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-19, as originally filed, are currently pending and considered below.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 5, “a standard pommel” should be --- the standard pommel ---
On line 6-7, “said complementary attachment points aligned with said spaced attachment points” should be --- said downwardly exposed complementary attachment points aligned with said pair of upwardly exposed attachment points ---
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On lines 1-2, “the attachment points and the complementary attachment points” should be --- the pair of upwardly exposed attachment points and the downwardly exposed complementary attachment points ---
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 1, “the attachment points” should be --- the downwardly exposed complementary attachment points and the pair of upwardly exposed attachment points ---
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On lines 1-2, “the attachment points and the complementary attachment points” should be --- the pair of upwardly exposed attachment points and the downwardly exposed complementary attachment points ---
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On lines 1-2, “the complementary attachment points are coplanar with respective attachment points” should be --- the downwardly exposed complementary attachment points are coplanar with each respective attachment point of the pair of upwardly exposed attachment points ---
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On lines 1-2, “the attachment points and the complementary attachment points” should be --- the pair of upwardly exposed attachment points and the downwardly exposed complementary attachment points ---
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On lines 2-3, “said aperture” should be --- said elongate aperture ---
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 5, “the aperture” should be --- the elongate aperture ---
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thornley (US Patent No. 941,665; FD: 11/30/1909).
PNG
media_image1.png
246
408
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
444
434
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Thornley discloses a detachable pommel (Handles seen on body 3; Figure 1) for use on a gymnastics pommel horse (Body 3 and base 1; Figure 1) comprising: a base (Cross piece 13; Figure 2) configured to attach in place of one of a standard set of pommels on a gymnastics pommel horse (i.e., the handles are detachable/attachable in the area where typical standard handles are placed on a gymnastic horse), said base including a pair of upwardly exposed attachment points (Upwardly-projecting rims 14; Figures 1 and 2) defined thereon in spaced orientation to one another the approximate width of a standard pommel (i.e., the orientation is at a standard pommel); and a U-shaped handle (i.e., the pommels depicted in Figures 1 and 2 above) sized to match a standard pommel (i.e., the pommels are standard pommels for gymnastics) and terminating at either end in downwardly exposed complementary attachment points (Threaded extension 12; Figures 1 and 2), said complementary attachment points aligned with said spaced attachment points on the base and configured to detachably affix thereon (i.e., the handles are attached to the base by way of the a pair of upwardly exposed attachment points/upwardly-projecting rims 14 and the complementary attachment points/threaded extension 12), wherein the U-shaped handle is configured to easily detach from said base when impacted as by a gymnast’s legs when the gymnast is swinging on the gymnastics pommel horse (i.e., the pommels are attached to the horse body 3 by way of a bolt 19 and nut 20 as seen in Figure 2, a user is capable of removing the bolt 19 allowing for the pommel to detach when impacted by a gymnast’s legs).
Regarding claim 2, Thornley discloses said base includes an aperture (Aperture formed downwardly form the extending boss 18; Figure 2) configured to receive a bolt (Bolt 19; Figure 2) therethrough for attachment of the base to the pommel horse.
Regarding claim 12, Thornley discloses wherein the upwardly exposed attachment points are embedded within depressions formed on the base (i.e., the projecting rims 14 form a depression to hold the ends of the handles/pommels).
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 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thornley (US Patent No. 941,665; FD: 11/30/1909) in view of Hayden (US Patent Pub. 2019/0255373; FD: 02/19/2019).
Regarding claim 10, Thronley discloses a handle (See handles/pommels in Figures 1 and 2).
Thornley does not disclose the U-shaped handle includes an outer foam coating.
Hayden teaches an analogous pommel horse gymnastic device (See Figures 1-71) comprising a handle (Pommel portion 710; Figure 34) that includes an outer foam coating (Outer pad 712; Figure 34).
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 pommel of Thornley to have the padded portion of Hayden for additional stability to the athlete during use, for example, because the athlete's grip can “dig” into the padding material (Para. [0133]).
Regarding claim 11, Thronley discloses a handle (See handles/pommels in Figures 1 and 2).
Thornley does not disclose the U-shaped handle is formed of rigid plastic material.
Hayden teaches an analogous pommel horse gymnastic device (See Figures 1-71) comprising a handle (Pommel segment 122; Figure 1) that is formed of a rigid plastic material (Para. [0059] “The elongate pommel segment 122 can be constructed of hickory, walnut, oak, or other wood, plastic, fiberglass, metal, or any other suitable material.”).
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 pommel of Thronley to be made of the plastic material of Hayden in rode rot have a rigid stable handle that is durable after many uses.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-19 are allowed.
Claims 3-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 13, none of the prior art of record either alone or in combination
teach or suggest all the structural and functional limitations as recited in the claim, and more specifically, a handle magnetically coupled to the base and configured to detach from said base when impacted as by a gymnast’s legs when the gymnast is swinging on the gymnastics pommel horse.
The prior art of record Thornley (US Patent No. 941,665; FD: 11/30/1909), Hayden (US Patent Pub. 2019/0255373; FD: 02/19/2019), Reach (US Patent No. 1,013,685; FD: 05/20/1911), and Winn (US Patent Pub. No. 2014/0011641; FD: 07/08/2013) fail to teach or render obvious the allowable claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW M KOBYLARZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8096. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00.
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.
/ANDREW M KOBYLARZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3784