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 5/29/2024.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/25/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“engaging structures” in claim 1 line 4, which uses generic placeholder “structures” coupled with functional language “[for] engaging” and “configured for connection with an attachment location” and “configured like an attachment location of the carrier, for connection with the first engaging structure of another ballast element” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited functions and the term “engaging” preceding the generic placeholder “structures” is not a structural modifier.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The limitation “engaging structures” in claim 1 has been interpreted to cover a threaded stem 20a, 22a as the first one of the engaging structures and a threaded recess 20b, 22b as the second one of the engaging structures, as described on page 8 lines 6-24 of the specification. and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objection
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informality:
In claim 18 line 4, “such the axis of the attachment location” should be changed to --such that an axis of one of the attachment locations--.
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 1-19 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 carrier" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Does the limitation “the carrier” refer back to the previously recited “carrier structure”, to the previously recited “carrier body”, or to another structure?
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the first engaging structure" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Does the limitation “the first engaging structure” refer back to the previously recited “first one of the engaging structures”?
Claim 10 recites the limitation “one or more attachment locations extending in a direction other than an extension of the carrier structure” in lines 2-3, which is vague and indefinite. It is unclear which direction is associated with the extension of the carrier structure and it is unclear how that direction differs from the direction the one or more attachment locations extend.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the through hole" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation “the through hole” should be changed to --each through hole-- or --each of the through holes-- in order to correct this issue.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 8-12, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 8,979,721 (Cavaliere).
Regarding claim 1, Cavaliere discloses an exercise device 20 comprising a kit of parts comprising a carrier structure 1 and a plurality of ballast elements 9 (see annotated FIG. 1 below), wherein the carrier structure 1 comprises a carrier body with at least two attachment locations 26 (see annotated FIGS. 3-3B below), and wherein the ballast elements 9 comprise two engaging structures 11,12 (see annotated FIGS. 3-3B below), a first one 11 of the engaging structures being configured for connection with an attachment location 26 and a second one of the engaging structures 12 being configured like an attachment location 26 of the carrier 1, for connection with the first engaging structure 11 of another ballast element 9 (see annotated FIGS. 3-3B below, Col 4:20-53 and 5:34-38).
PNG
media_image1.png
558
888
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
692
674
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein each ballast element 9 is repeatably attachable and detachable from the carrier structure 1 (Col 4:20-23).
Regarding claim 3, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein each ballast element 9 is repeatably attachable and detachable from another one of the ballast elements 9 (Col 5:34-38, see FIGS. 5-6 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
666
513
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses a free structure 5 accessible as a handle when the ballast elements 9 are attached (see annotated FIG. 1 above).
Regarding claim 5, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the carrier structure 1 is of unitary form (see annotated FIG. 1 above, Col 3:50-66).
Regarding claim 8, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses a plurality of radially extending attachment locations 26 (see annotated FIG. 2 below and FIG. 3 above).
PNG
media_image4.png
815
1156
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses a plurality of attachment locations 26 for attachment of a ballast element 9 perpendicular to an extension 3 of the carrier structure 1 (see annotated FIGS. 1 and 3 above), wherein at least one of the attachment locations 26 is oriented at a different angle perpendicularly to the extension than at least another one of the attachment locations 26 (see annotated FIG. 2 above).
Regarding claim 10, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses one or more attachment locations 26 extending in a direction other than an extension 3 of the carrier structure 1 (see annotated FIGS. 2 and 3 above).
Regarding claim 11, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses a plurality of attachment locations 26 spaced apart along the carrier structure 1 (see annotated FIG. 2 above).
Regarding claim 12, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses two attachment locations 26 at opposite ends of the carrier structure 1 (see annotated FIG. 2 above).
Regarding claim 15, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the attachment locations 26 are threaded (see annotated FIG. 3 above).
Regarding claim 16, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the carrier structure 1 comprises an elongate body (see annotated FIG. 1 above).
Regarding claim 17, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein one or more of the ballast elements 9 comprise an elongate body (see annotated FIG. 1 above).
Regarding claim 18, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the carrier structure 1 comprises a generally cylindrical body having an elongate extension 3 (see annotated FIG. 1 above), comprising at one end thereof one of the engaging structures 11 and at an opposite end thereof one of the attachment locations 26, the opposite end being slanted such the axis of the attachment location 26 is angled at an oblique angle relative to the elongate extension 3 (see annotated FIG. 2 below).
PNG
media_image5.png
808
934
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19, Cavaliere teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the carrier structure 1 comprises a generally cylindrical body having an elongate extension 3 (see annotated FIG. 1 above), comprising at one end thereof one of the engaging structures 11 and at an opposite end thereof attachment locations 26, the attachment locations 26 extending transversely to an axis of the cylindrical body and open to both sides of the cylindrical body.
PNG
media_image6.png
955
912
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claims 1, 6-7, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2014/0031177 (Wang).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses an exercise device comprising a kit of parts comprising a carrier structure and a plurality of ballast elements (see annotated FIGS. 3 and 4 below), wherein the carrier structure comprises a carrier body with at least two attachment locations, and wherein the ballast elements comprise two engaging structures (see annotated FIGS. 3 and 4 below), a first one of the engaging structures being configured for connection with an attachment location and a second one of the engaging structures being configured like an attachment location of the carrier, for connection with the first engaging structure of another ballast element (see annotated FIGS. 3 and 4 below).
PNG
media_image7.png
652
908
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
662
949
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Wang teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the carrier structure is of general annular form selected from one of such as a ring, an obround shape, an oval shape and an ovoid shape (see annotated FIG. 3 above).
Regarding claim 7, Wang teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the carrier structure is of open hoop form (see annotated FIG. 3 above).
Regarding claim 14, Wang teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses through holes extending through a thickness of the carrier structure and providing two attachment locations, one at each end of the through hole (see annotated FIG. 4 above).
Claims 1 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 5,171,199 (Panagos).
Regarding claim 1, Panagos discloses an exercise device comprising a kit of parts comprising a carrier structure and a plurality of ballast elements (plurality of exercise devices 8 can be connected together, one being interpreted as the carrier structure and the others being interpreted as the ballast elements - see annotated FIGS. 1-3 below), wherein the carrier structure 8 comprises a carrier body with at least two attachment locations 22,22,24,26,26, and wherein the ballast elements comprise two engaging structures 22,24,28 (see annotated FIGS. 2-3 below), a first one of the engaging structures being configured for connection with an attachment location and a second one of the engaging structures being configured like an attachment location of the carrier, for connection with the first engaging structure of another ballast element (see annotated FIGS. 2-3 below).
PNG
media_image9.png
424
578
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
479
649
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Panagos teaches the exercise device according to claim 1, and further discloses four attachment locations at 90-degrees angularly offset positions relative to each other (see annotated FIG. 1 above).
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 JOSHUA S LEE 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