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 .
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 3 and 10-12 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.
Regarding claims 3 and 10-12, A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, the above indicated claim(s) recites the broad recitation of dimensional limitations that fall within each other The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Furthermore, these claims indicate a lower limit without specifying a corresponding upper limit. This renders the metes and bounds of the claim unclear as there is no upper limit.
Claim 5 is 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 "the second track position" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 is 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 14 recites the limitation "the second joint " in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 is 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 "the second joint" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 3-7 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Huber (US PGPub. 2024/0009522). Huber describes the same invention as claimed, including:
Regarding claim 1, An exercise machine, comprising: a frame (7); one or more actuators (driving means 2), coupled to one or more cables to exert a load on the one or more cables (para. 152: “The connection between the driving means 2′, 2″ to the exercise equipment 1 is achieved using connection means 5. In this embodiment, the connection means comprise a rope, having essentially non-elastic properties,”); one or more tracks (guide rail 10) attached to the frame; and a trolley (11) mounted on each of the one or more tracks, wherein the trolley slides unrestricted along a length of the one or more tracks (para. 163: “The device is additionally equipped with a trolley 11, which is freely movable along the guide rail 10 so that the connection means 5 between the trolley 11 and the exercise equipment 1 is in an essentially vertical position.”), and wherein the trolley is configured to be coupled to the one or more cables (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, wherein a total length of each of the one or more tracks comprises at least 38" (as estimated relative to the size of the bench 22 depicted in Fig. 4, Examiner is presuming the length of each of the tracks to be at least 38”), or at least 42", or at least 60".
PNG
media_image1.png
355
541
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, wherein each trolley comprises a first loop (pulley on trolley 11) arranged at a surface of the trolley facing away from the ground when the one or more tracks are in the first track position, the first loop configured to pass a respective one of the one or more cables (see Fig. 3, annotated by Examiner).
PNG
media_image2.png
355
541
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, wherein each trolley comprises a second loop arranged at a second surface opposite of the first surface on the trolley, wherein in the second track position, the second surface faces a horizontal direction relative to the ground (see Fig. 3 annotated above).
Regarding claim 6, wherein the one or more tracks comprise two tracks that are parallel to each other, wherein the respective trolley of the two tracks slide parallel to each other along the length of the two tracks (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, wherein each of the two tracks are fixed at opposite sides of the frame (Fig. 4, here the frame is rack 21).
Regarding claim 16, further comprising a computing device, wherein the computing device comprises one or processors configured to perform the following operations: displaying a user interface; receiving a user input; and controlling the one or more actuators to exert the load on the one or more cables, based on the user input (paras. 64-65: “[0064] The invention optionally relates to a device for applying a load to an exercise equipment. The device optionally comprises driving means, control means adapted to control the driving means, attachment means adapted to attach the device to the exercise equipment, and connection means connecting the driving means to the attachment means. [0065] Optionally it is provided that the device comprises a load sensor, wherein the load sensor is adapted to measure the load applied to the exercise equipment by the driving means, and wherein the load sensor is connected to the control means.”).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Huber (US PGPub. 2024/0009522). Huber describes the same invention as claimed, including:
Regarding claim 19, A method for manufacturing an exercise machine, comprising: providing a frame (7); attaching one or more actuators (driving means 2) to the frame, coupled to one or more cables to exert a load on the one or more cables (para. 152: “The connection between the driving means 2′, 2″ to the exercise equipment 1 is achieved using connection means 5. In this embodiment, the connection means comprise a rope, having essentially non-elastic properties,”); attaching one or more tracks (guide rail 10) to the frame; and mounting a trolley (11) on each of the one or more tracks, wherein the trolley slides unrestricted along a length of the one or more tracks (para. 163: “The device is additionally equipped with a trolley 11, which is freely movable along the guide rail 10 so that the connection means 5 between the trolley 11 and the exercise equipment 1 is in an essentially vertical position.”), and wherein the trolley is configured to be coupled to the one or more cables (Fig. 3).
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) 8, 10-15, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huber (US PGPub. 2024/0009522) in view of Harwerth et al. (US PGPub. 2024/0252874).
Regarding claim 8, Huber describes the invention substantially as claimed, but does not show: further comprising a platform fixed to the frame, wherein the platform serves as a floor surface located between the two tracks.
Harwerth et al., from the same field of endeavor, teaches a similar exercise machine with a track (Harweth et al. Fig. 1, track 56), including a platform (53) fixed to the frame, wherein the platform serves as a floor surface located between the two tracks (Fig. 1).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to include the platform taught by Harweth et al. on the device of Huber, to provide a floor surface on which a user can brace their feet for lifting exercises. Therefore it would have been prima facie obvious to modify Huber as taught by Harweth et al. to obtain the invention as claimed.
Regarding claim 10, Harweth et al. teaches wherein the platform comprises a width between the two tracks of at least 20", or at least 28", or between 24" and 42" (Figure 2, depicts a bench width of at least 20” as claimed). See rationale in claim 10 above for combining Harweth et al. and Huber.
Regarding claim 11, Harweth et al. teaches wherein the platform comprises a platform length of at least 38", or at least 42", or at least 60" (Harweth Fig. 2.). See rationale in claim 10 above for combining Harweth et al. and Huber.
Regarding claim 12, Harweth et al. teaches, wherein the platform comprises a stiff planar surface having a thickness of at least .75", or at least 1", or at least 1.5" (Harweth et al. Fig. 2). See rationale in claim 10 above for combining Harweth et al. and Huber.
Regarding claim 13, Harweth et al. teaches wherein in the first track position, the one or more tracks attach to the platform which locks the one or more tracks fixed in the first track position (fig. 2). See rationale in claim 10 above for combining Harweth et al. and Huber.
Regarding claim 14, Harweth et al. teaches wherein the one or more tracks attach to a bracket (mount 56) that is fixed to an end of the platform that is away from the second joint. See rationale in claim 10 above for combining Harweth et al. and Huber.
Regarding claim 15, Harweth et al. teaches wherein the second joint comprises a first support arm (73) on one side of the platform that is coupled between the platform and the frame, and a second support arm (81) on an opposite side of the platform that is coupled between the platform and the frame. See rationale in claim 10 above for combining Harweth et al. and Huber.
Regarding claim 17, Huber shows further comprising: a rack (21), coupled to or integrated with the frame, the rack comprising one or more vertical members and a shelf that is attached to the rack, the shelf being configured to hold a barbell on the one or more vertical members.
Regarding claim 18, Huber shows wherein the rack comprises a plurality of holding positions for the shelf arranged vertically along different heights of the one or more vertical members (para. 167: “A resting position of the exercise equipment 1 may be referred to as a position in which the barbell is held in the holding rack 21.”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 9 and 20 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 2 and 20, Huber and Harweth are considered the closest prior art of record. Neither shows the tracks pivotally attached to the frame structure as described in the claims. Regarding claim 9, Huber and Harweth do not show the platform is connected to the frame at a second joint that rotates the platform as required by the claim. For at least these reasons, claims 2, 9 and 20 are considered allowable over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892 for cited art of interest.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNDHARA M GANESAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3340. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30AM-5:30PM.
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.
/SUNDHARA M GANESAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784