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 .
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 1-20 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.
Claims 1, 14, 19, and 20 recite “may extend”, it is unclear if the limitation thereafter is required. In order to proceed, the Office will interpret the claim such as --is configured to extend--.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-12, 14-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang (US 20080176718 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Wang teaches a system for adjusting a stiffness of a fitness machine operable by a user, the fitness machine having a base 12 and a mobile portion 20,25 that moves relative to the base 12 during operation of the fitness machine, the system comprising: a resilient body 40 that resists movement of the mobile portion 20,25 towards the base 12 in a height direction, wherein the resilient body has a length defined in a length direction that is perpendicular to the height direction, and wherein the length of the resilient body increases when the mobile portion moves towards the base 12 (Refer to Figs. 2&3 Paragraph [0019]:”A pair of -shaped rigid connection elements 30 and a pair of pivotal rigid cushioning elements 40 are interposed between the bottom surface of both sides of the platform frame 20 and the base bars 12. The pivotal rigid cushioning element 40 includes a guidewheel 41 at one end thereof. In this way, the guidewheel 41 is movable on the surface of the base bar 12 when the platform frame 20 is moved up and down by the external forces applied to it (see FIG. 3 & FIG. 5). Accordingly, the cushioning and restoring effects can be achieved.”); and
PNG
media_image1.png
534
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
an actuator 42 operable to adjust a set maximum for which the length of the resilient body may extend during operation of the fitness machine (Refer to Figs. 4&5 Paragraph [0020] Moreover, a resistance-adjusting element 42 is provided at the bottom of the guidewheel 41. A free adjustment of the cushioning force may be achieved by the inclination of the resistance-adjusting element 42. An auxiliary supporting element 50 is pivotally interposed between both sides of the platform frame 20 and the handle frame assembly 10, respectively. As a result, a complete cushioning and restoring effect can be ensured….[0021] In a few words, the sliding resistance created by the resistance adjusting element 42 and acting on the guidewheel 41 is smaller when the inclination of the resistance adjusting element 42 approaches to the horizontal position, as shown in FIGS. 2 and 3. To the contrary, the sliding resistance acting on the guidewheel 41 will be increased, as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5.”..The set maximum for which the length of the resilient body 40 may extend is less when the actuator is at an angle and extended in Fig. 5 than when the actuator is not extended in Fig. 3), wherein a resistance provided by the resilient body to resist movement of the mobile portion towards the base is unaffected by operation of the actuator when the length of the resilient body is less than the set maximum (The Office takes the position that the resistance is unaffected by operation of the actuator when the length of the resilient body 40 is less than the set maximum until end 41 of the resilient body 40 hits the end wall (the set maximum) and provides a resistance force upwards against the mobile portion in the same manner as Applicants invention).
PNG
media_image2.png
566
476
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3-5, Wang teaches the claimed invention as noted above, wherein Wang teaches an embodiment comprising two resilient members 40 which form a parabolic shape comprising a non-translatable end and a movable end (Refer to annotated Fig. 7), and wherein the mobile portion 20,25 is supported at least in part by a vertex (top) of the parabolic shape of the resilient body 40 (Refer to annotated Fig. 7 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
410
624
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Wang continues to teach wherein a second end 41 of the resilient body 40 is translatable relative to the base 12 in the length direction and non-translatable in the height direction (Refer to Figs. 3,4,&7 where the actuator is not extended and the second end 41 of the resilient body 40 slides lengthwise but not change height).
Regarding Claim 7, Wang continues to teach wherein operating the actuator 42 causes the actuator to linearly extend (Refer to Figs. 3&4).
Regarding Claim 8, Wang continues to teach wherein the actuator 42 and the resilient body 40 are pivotally coupled together (Refer to Paragraph [0019]:” The pivotal rigid cushioning element 40 includes a guidewheel 41 at one end thereof. In this way, the guidewheel 41 is movable on the surface of the base bar 12 when the platform frame 20 is moved up and down by the external forces applied to it (see FIG. 3 & FIG. 5). Accordingly, the cushioning and restoring effects can be achieved.”..The Office takes the position that the resilient body 40 is pivotally moveable on a track that is connected to the actuator 42 (Refer to annotated Fig. 7 below)).
PNG
media_image4.png
378
668
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9, Wang continues to teach wherein the mobile portion is moveable towards the base in a first phase and in a second phase, wherein in the first phase the mobile portion moves towards the base principally via bending of the resilient body 40 (Refer to Fig. 4 to depict that the top of the resilient body 40 is bent), and wherein in the second phase the mobile portion moves towards the base principally via compression of the resilient body (Refer to Fig. 5 to depict that the resilient body is compressed once the second end hits the end wall to stop the resilient body 40 for extending further lengthwise).
PNG
media_image5.png
468
808
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10, Wang continues to teach wherein the fitness machine is a treadmill and the mobile portion 20 is a running deck supporting a belt 25 on which the user runs (Refer to Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 11, Wang continues to teach wherein the resilient body is a first resilient body 40, further comprising at least one additional resilient body 40 functionally equivalent to the first resilient body, and wherein the first resilient body and the at least one additional resilient body both resist the movement of the mobile portion towards the base in the height direction (Refer to Fig. 6 Paragraph [0023] Referring to FIG. 6, which is a schematic drawing of another preferred embodiment of the invention, the pivotal rigid cushioning element 40, may be made of a plurality of arched steel plates for increasing the whole strength. Likewise, the pivotal rigid cushioning elements 40 may be symmetrically designed in .andgate.-form for enhancing the whole effect thereof.”).
Regarding Claim 12, Wang continues to teach wherein the actuator is operable to adjust the set maximums for both the first resilient body 40 and the at least one additional resilient body 40 (Refer to Paragraph [0021]:”In a few words, the sliding resistance created by the resistance adjusting element 42 and acting on the guidewheel 41 is smaller when the inclination of the resistance adjusting element 42 approaches to the horizontal position, as shown in FIGS. 2 and 3. To the contrary, the sliding resistance acting on the guidewheel 41 will be increased, as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5.”).
Regarding Claim 14, Wang teaches a method for adjusting a stiffness of a fitness machine operable by a user, the fitness machine having a base 12 and a mobile portion 20,25 that moves relative to the base 12 during operation of the fitness machine, the method comprising: resisting via a resilient body 40 movement of the mobile portion 20,25 towards the base 12 in a height direction, wherein the resilient body has a length defined in a length direction that is perpendicular to the height direction, and wherein the length of the resilient body increases when the mobile portion moves towards the base 12 (Refer to Figs. 2&3 Paragraph [0019]:”A pair of -shaped rigid connection elements 30 and a pair of pivotal rigid cushioning elements 40 are interposed between the bottom surface of both sides of the platform frame 20 and the base bars 12. The pivotal rigid cushioning element 40 includes a guidewheel 41 at one end thereof. In this way, the guidewheel 41 is movable on the surface of the base bar 12 when the platform frame 20 is moved up and down by the external forces applied to it (see FIG. 3 & FIG. 5). Accordingly, the cushioning and restoring effects can be achieved.”); and
PNG
media_image1.png
534
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
operating an actuator 42 to adjust a set maximum for which the length of the resilient body may extend during operation of the fitness machine (Refer to Figs. 4&5 Paragraph [0020] Moreover, a resistance-adjusting element 42 is provided at the bottom of the guidewheel 41. A free adjustment of the cushioning force may be achieved by the inclination of the resistance-adjusting element 42. An auxiliary supporting element 50 is pivotally interposed between both sides of the platform frame 20 and the handle frame assembly 10, respectively. As a result, a complete cushioning and restoring effect can be ensured….[0021] In a few words, the sliding resistance created by the resistance adjusting element 42 and acting on the guidewheel 41 is smaller when the inclination of the resistance adjusting element 42 approaches to the horizontal position, as shown in FIGS. 2 and 3. To the contrary, the sliding resistance acting on the guidewheel 41 will be increased, as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5.”..The set maximum for which the length of the resilient body 40 may extend is less when the actuator is at an angle and extended in Fig. 5 than when the actuator is not extended in Fig. 3), wherein a resistance provided by the resilient body to resist movement of the mobile portion towards the base is unaffected by operating the actuator when the length of the resilient body is less than the set maximum (The Office takes the position that the resistance is unaffected by operation of the actuator when the length of the resilient body 40 is less than the set maximum until end 41 of the resilient body 40 hits the end wall (the set maximum) and provides a resistance force upwards against the mobile portion in the same manner as Applicants invention).
PNG
media_image2.png
566
476
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 15, Wang continues to teach wherein the resilient body 40 is a first resilient body, further comprising also resisting the movement of the mobile portion towards the base in the height direction via a second resilient body 40 (Refer to Fig. 6 Paragraph [0023] Referring to FIG. 6, which is a schematic drawing of another preferred embodiment of the invention, the pivotal rigid cushioning element 40, may be made of a plurality of arched steel plates for increasing the whole strength. Likewise, the pivotal rigid cushioning elements 40 may be symmetrically designed in .andgate.-form for enhancing the whole effect thereof.”).
Regarding Claim 16, Wang continues to teach wherein operating the actuator adjusts the set maximums of the lengths of the first resilient body and the second body at the same time (Refer to Fig. Paragraph [0021]:”In a few words, the sliding resistance created by the resistance adjusting element 42 and acting on the guidewheel 41 is smaller when the inclination of the resistance adjusting element 42 approaches to the horizontal position, as shown in FIGS. 2 and 3. To the contrary, the sliding resistance acting on the guidewheel 41 will be increased, as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5.”).
Regarding Claim 17, Wang continues to teach wherein operating the actuator 42 causes the actuator to linearly extend (Refer to Figs. 3&4).
Regarding Claim 18, Wang continues to teach wherein the mobile portion is moveable towards the base in a first phase and in a second phase, wherein in the first phase the mobile portion moves towards the base principally via bending of the resilient body 40 (Refer to Fig. 4 to depict that the top of the resilient body 40 is bent), and wherein in the second phase the mobile portion moves towards the base principally via compression of the resilient body (Refer to Fig. 5 to depict that the resilient body is compressed once the second end hits the end wall to stop the resilient body 40 for extending further lengthwise).
PNG
media_image5.png
468
808
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 20, Wang teaches a method for adjusting a stiffness of a fitness machine operable by a user, the fitness machine having a base 12 and a mobile portion 20,25 that moves relative to the base 12 during operation of the fitness machine, the method comprising: resisting via a resilient body 40 movement of the mobile portion 20,25 towards the base 12 in a height direction, wherein the resilient body has a length defined in a length direction that is perpendicular to the height direction, and wherein the length of the resilient body increases when the mobile portion moves towards the base 12 (Refer to Figs. 2&3 Paragraph [0019]:”A pair of -shaped rigid connection elements 30 and a pair of pivotal rigid cushioning elements 40 are interposed between the bottom surface of both sides of the platform frame 20 and the base bars 12. The pivotal rigid cushioning element 40 includes a guidewheel 41 at one end thereof. In this way, the guidewheel 41 is movable on the surface of the base bar 12 when the platform frame 20 is moved up and down by the external forces applied to it (see FIG. 3 & FIG. 5). Accordingly, the cushioning and restoring effects can be achieved.”); and
PNG
media_image1.png
534
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
operating an actuator 42 to adjust a set maximum for which the length of the resilient body may extend during operation of the fitness machine (Refer to Figs. 4&5 Paragraph [0020] Moreover, a resistance-adjusting element 42 is provided at the bottom of the guidewheel 41. A free adjustment of the cushioning force may be achieved by the inclination of the resistance-adjusting element 42. An auxiliary supporting element 50 is pivotally interposed between both sides of the platform frame 20 and the handle frame assembly 10, respectively. As a result, a complete cushioning and restoring effect can be ensured….[0021] In a few words, the sliding resistance created by the resistance adjusting element 42 and acting on the guidewheel 41 is smaller when the inclination of the resistance adjusting element 42 approaches to the horizontal position, as shown in FIGS. 2 and 3. To the contrary, the sliding resistance acting on the guidewheel 41 will be increased, as shown in FIGS. 4 and 5.”..The set maximum for which the length of the resilient body 40 may extend is less when the actuator is at an angle and extended in Fig. 5 than when the actuator is not extended in Fig. 3), wherein a resistance provided by the resilient body to resist movement of the mobile portion towards the base is unaffected by operating the actuator when the length of the resilient body is less than the set maximum (The Office takes the position that the resistance is unaffected by operation of the actuator when the length of the resilient body 40 is less than the set maximum until end 41 of the resilient body 40 hits the end wall (the set maximum) and provides a resistance force upwards against the mobile portion in the same manner as Applicants invention).
PNG
media_image2.png
566
476
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US 20080176718) in view of Molter et al (US 20070015636).
Regarding Claim 2, Wang teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to teach wherein the resilient body 40 is an elastomer. Molter et al teaches a treadmill cushion element 50-56 comprising an elastomeric material (Refer to Fig. 3 Paragraph [0027]:” Normally, the term leaf spring relates to long narrow springs consisting of several layers of metal springs bracketed together. However, here this term will include an elongated, arc shaped spring made of an elastic or elastomeric material.”). Molter et al is from the same field of endeavor as Applicants invention and therefore it would have been obvious to modify the resilient body 40 of Wang to be an elastomer since Molter et al teaches that such material is known to be suitable in the art for cushioning a running deck and does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 is 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.
Claim 19 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Wang is the closest prior art to the claimed invention teaching a system for adjusting a stiffness of a fitness machine operable by a user, the fitness machine having a base and a mobile portion that moves relative to the base during operation of the fitness machine, the system comprising: a resilient body that resists movement of the mobile portion towards the base in a height direction, wherein the resilient body has a length defined in a length direction that is perpendicular to the height direction, and wherein the length of the resilient body increases when the mobile portion moves towards the base; and an actuator operable to adjust a set maximum for which the length of the resilient body may extend during operation of the fitness machine, wherein a resistance provided by the resilient body to resist movement of the mobile portion towards the base is unaffected by operation of the actuator when the length of the resilient body is less than the set maximum and wherein the resilient body is a first resilient body, further comprising at least one additional resilient body functionally equivalent to the first resilient body, and wherein the first resilient body and the at least one additional resilient body both resist the movement of the mobile portion towards the base in the height direction but fails to teach the claim invention as a whole further comprising wherein the set maximum for the first resilient body is adjustable separately than the set maximum for the at least one additional resilient body and/or wherein the actuator is a first actuator and the resilient body is a first resilient body, further comprising also resisting the movement of the mobile portion towards the base in the height direction via a second resilient body, further comprising operating a second actuator to adjust a set maximum for which the length of the second resilient body may extend during operation of the fitness machine, wherein a resistance provided by the second resilient body to resist movement of the mobile portion towards the base is unaffected by operating the second actuator when the length of the second resilient body is less than the set maximum.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to attach list of references cited pertinent to claimed and unclaimed subject matter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NYCA T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7168. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00.
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.
/NYCA T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784