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
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s claim for priority as a continuation-in-part of application no. 18/370,341 (now U.S. Patent No. 12,042,685) and for priority to provisional application no. 63/444,671 filed 10 February 2023.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
“one or more contact pockets integrated into one or more interior side walls of the barbell body collar” in claim 1. In view of the filed drawings, it is unclear how the contact pockets are on “one or more interior side walls” of the circular body. That is, Figure 2A of the drawings references “interior side walls 220,” but appears to show only one interior wall that defines the circular shaped cavity. It is unclear how a circular cavity has “one or more interior side walls.”
“one or more contact patches slide out of the one or more contact pockets without needing to unfasten or disassemble the one or more contact patches from the one of more contact pockets in the barbell body collar to remove the one or more contact patches” in claim 1. At least Figure 4 shows wherein the contact patches 150 do need to be disassembled from the barbell body collar by removal of the retention ring 190. The Figures do not appear to show wherein the contact patches slide out of the pockets without unfastening or disassembly.
“wherein a lowermost surface of the attached bottom element is straight edged … or convex shape” in claim 10. The drawings show wherein the surface is concave, but do not show wherein the surface is straight edged or convex.
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 6-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, lines 12-13, “and removable contact patch” should read --removable contact patch--
Claim 6, line 1, “That apparatus” should read --The apparatus--
Claim 7, line 4, “a second pocket” should read --a second pocket of the one or more contact pockets--
Claim 7, line 6, “adjustable fastener holes” should read --fastener holes--
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 5, 6, 10, and 11 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 5 recites the limitation “two dynamic contact patches” in lines 1-2. It is unclear if these two contact patches are part of the “one or more contact patches” recited previously in claim 1, upon which claim 5 depends, or are other, separate structures.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “at least one dynamic contact patch” in lines 1-2. It is unclear if this contact patch is part of the “one or more contact patches” recited previously in claim 1, upon which claim 6 depends, or is another, separate structure.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the contact patch of the one or more contact patches” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to the “first contact patch” or “second contact patch” recited previously in claim 7, upon which claim 9 depends, or to another, separate structure. Antecedent basis for this limitation can be found in claim 8, but claim 9 does not depend on claim 8.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the attached bottom element” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Antecedent basis for this limitation can be found in claim 9, but claim 10 does not depend on claim 9.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “the contact patch” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to the “first contact patch” or “second contact patch” recited previously in claim 7, upon which claim 11 depends, or to another, separate structure. Antecedent basis for this limitation can be found in claim 8, but claim 11 does not depend on claim 8.
The term “approximately” in claim 11 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The limitation “approximately T-shaped” is rendered indefinite by use of the term “approximately.”
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.
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, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baker (US 11,052,276) in view of Coury (US 2019/0046831)
Regarding claim 1, Baker teaches an apparatus comprising:
a barbell body collar (weight plate 1) (Fig. 2: The weight plate l fastens to the barbell bar 19 and can be used as a barbell collar to prevent other weights from sliding off of the barbell bar.), wherein the barbell body collar comprises:
a front surface (Fig. 2);
a cavity (barbell hole 1A) extending through the barbell body collar (Fig. 3);
one or more fastener holes (mounting areas 1E, 1F) integrated into a top outer surface of the barbell body collar (Figs. 4, 5 show the mounting areas 1E, 1F extending from a top outer surface of the weight plate to the barbell hole 1A to accommodate the pull rod tube 8 and pull rod 7.);
one or more contact pockets (mounting area 1C) integrated into one or more interior side walls of the barbell body collar (Fig. 5 shows the mounting area 1C integrated into the inner wall of the barbell hole 1A.);
one or more contact patches (lock plate 13), wherein the one or more contact patches is removably held inside of and retained within the one or more contact pockets integrated into the one or more interior side walls of the barbell body collar (Figs. 4, 5 show the lock plate 13 retained within the mounting area 1C via the lock assembly case 2.), wherein the one or more contact patches is removable (Fig. 5 shows wherein the lock plate 13 is removable.), wherein the one or more contact patches slide out of the one or more contact pockets without needing to unfasten or disassemble the one or more contact patches from the one or more contact pockets in the barbell body collar to remove the one or more contact patches (Fig. 5 shows the lock plate 13 sliding out of the mounting area 1C without unfastening or disassembly of the lock plate 13 directly from the mounting area 1C. That is, the lock plate 13 is inside of the lock assembly case 2 which is unfastened from the mounting area 1C such that the lock plate 13 itself is not unfastened or disassembled from the mounting area 1C. The lock plate 13 is not directly fastened to the mounting area 1C; therefore, it does not require unfastening from the mounting area 1C.); and
one or more adjustable fasteners (rod 7 and lever 6) insertable into the one or more fastener holes integrated into the top outer surface of the barbell body collar (Figs. 4, 5), wherein the one or more adjustable fasteners are configured to adjust a position of the one or more contact patches, wherein the one or more adjustable fasteners is configured to cause one or more of the one or more contact patches to advance forward to bite down onto a barbell and to retract away from the barbell (Col. 5, lines 44-60.).
PNG
media_image1.png
499
569
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
500
632
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Baker does not expressly teach wherein the one or more contact patches are replaceable with another removable contact patch.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Coury teaches a barbell body collar for securing weights on a barbell comprising one or more contact patches (gripper 64) that are removable and replaceable with another removable contact patch (Fig. 4. Para. [0038]: “The gripper 64 could be removed and replaced as necessary.”)
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 locking plate 13 to be replaceable, as taught by Coury, with the predicted result of providing replaceable parts that can be interchanged for maintenance purposes such that the weight plate can be continued to be used when the locking plate is worn down or broken (see MPEP 2141(III)).
Regarding claim 2, Baker in view of Coury teaches the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising, one or more energizers, wherein the one or more energizers are springs (springs 10) (Baker: Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 8, Baker in view of Coury teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein a contact patch of the one or more contact patches comprises a top surface that acts as a load bearing surface and a bottom surface that acts as a contact surface that contacts the barbell (Baker: Annotated Fig. 7 below shows the locking plate 13 having a top surface and a bottom surface that contacts the barbell. While Fig. 7 shows the bottom surface at the top, Fig. 2 shows wherein the weight plate 2 can be in the opposite configuration such that the bottom surface would be at the bottom of the locking plate 13.).
PNG
media_image3.png
508
816
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Baker in view of Coury teaches the apparatus of claim 8, wherein a lowermost surface of the attached bottom element is straight edged, concave shaped, or convex shaped (Baker: Annotated Fig. 7 above with regards to claim 8 shows the bottom surface having a concave shape.).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baker (US 11,052,276) in view of Coury (US 2019/0046831) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Smalley (NPL, a copy of which is provided with this office action).
Regarding claim 3, Baker in view of Coury teaches the apparatus of claim 2.
Baker does not teach wherein the one or more energizers are wave springs.
However, in a similar field of endeavor, Smalley teaches wherein wave springs can be used in place of coil springs (see NPL provided).
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 springs of Baker by replacing them with wave springs as taught by Smalley. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a more compact, light-weight spring, as suggested by Smalley (see NPL provided).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 9 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.
Claims 5-7, and 11 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:
Regarding claim 4, Baker in view of Coury teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more adjustable fasteners comprise a handle (pull lever 6), wherein the handle is accessible from an outer surface of the barbell body collar (Baker: Fig. 2.).
Baker in view of Coury does not teach an attachable rotatable screw, wherein the handle is configured to tighten and release the attachable rotatable screw.
Claim 5 depends directly from claim 4.
Regarding claim 6, Baker in view of Coury teaches [the] apparatus of claim 1, wherein the barbell body collar comprises at least one dynamic contact patch that is configured to be dynamically moveable forward and back using the one or more adjustable fasteners (Baker: Fig. 2).
Baker in view of Coury does not teach another contact patch of the one or more contact patches is static and does not move forward and back.
Regarding claim 7, Baker in view of Coury teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein a first pocket of the one or more contact pockets integrated on the barbell body collar is configured to receive a first contact patch of the one or more contact patches and is aligned with a first fastener hole of the one or more fastener holes (Baker: Figs. 2, 4-5).
Baker in view of Coury does not teach wherein a second pocket on the barbell body collar is configured to receive a second contact patch of the one or more contact patches and is aligned with a second fastener hole of the one or more adjustable fastener holes on the barbell body collar.
Claims 9 and 11 depend directly from claim 7.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Catrina A Letterman whose telephone number is (303)297-4297. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8am - 4pm MT.
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.
/C.A.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3784
/Megan Anderson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784