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 Objections
Claims 9-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 9 lines 1-2, “one or more finger loop” should be changed to --one or more finger loops--.
In claim 10 line 1, “claim 6” should be changed to --claim 9--.
In claim 10 line 1, “one or more finger loop” should be changed to --one or more finger loops--.
In claim 11 line 1, “claim 6” should be changed to --claim 9--.
In claim 11 line 1, “one or more finger loop” should be changed to --one or more finger loops--.
In claim 12 lines 1-2, “one or more inner core element” should be changed to --one or more inner core elements--.
In claim 13 line 1, “one or more inner core element” should be changed to --one or more inner core elements--.
In claim 14 line 1, “one or more inner core element” should be changed to --one or more inner core elements--.
In claim 15 line 1, “one or more inner core element” should be changed to --one or more inner core elements--.
Appropriate corrections are 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 1-15 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.
The term “slight” in claim 1 (line 4) is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “slight” 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. Therefore, the degree of “inward torque” has been rendered indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the “inward torque” will be interpreted to be any degree of torque.
The term “natural” in claim 6 (line 1) is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “natural” 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. Therefore, the “finger loop grip” has been rendered indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the “finger loop grip” will be interpreted to be any loop capable of securing one or more fingers.
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 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, 3, and 5-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 9,789,348 (Krull et al., hereinafter “Krull”).
Regarding claim 1, Krull discloses an exercise weight unit 100 adapted to be handheld and palm-centered (abstract, FIGS. 1-15), comprising:
a body having both a first end 120 and a second end 110, a central portion 130 (FIG. 1), and a central axis between the first and second ends (a longitudinal axis passing down the center of the weight such as in the view of FIG. 5 can be interpreted as the central axis); and
a feature at the first end of the body configured to create an inward torque when the weight unit is held in a hand of a user during physical sports training (the hook-like portion of the second segment 120 can be interpreted as the feature and it is capable of creating an inward torque when the weight unit 100 is held in a hand of a user during physical sports training - FIGS. 1-15), wherein the feature is one of a hook shape, a mushroom shape and a fin shape (the feature 120 can be interpreted as having a hook shape or a fin shape, i.e., the segment 120 has an appearance of a dorsal fin as best shown in FIG. 8).
Regarding claim 3, Krull teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the hook shape feature is configured to be positioned over a thumb or an index finger of the hand when the exercise weight unit is held in the hand (see FIGS. 10a-10g).
Regarding claim 5, Krull teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the fin shape feature is configured to follow contours of an open space in a palm of the hand when the exercise weight unit is held in the hand (see FIGS. 10a-10g).
Regarding claim 6, Krull teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 1, and further discloses a secure finger loop grip 350 (hand strap 350 is configured as a loop and can secure a hand to the weight, thus securing each finger to the weight - FIGS. 14-15).
Regarding claim 7, Krull teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 1, and further discloses a wrap 350 (hand strap 350 can be interpreted as a wrap because it performs the function of wrapping around a user’s hand - FIGS. 13-14).
Regarding claim 8, Krull teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 6, and further discloses wherein the wrap is flexible and made of rubber (hand strap 350 is preferably made of rubber, which is inherently flexible - Col 4:54-58).
Regarding claim 9, Krull teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 6, and further discloses wherein the wrap comprises one or more finger loop (the hand strap 350 is a loop configured to receive a person’s hand, including all fingers - Col 4:54-58, FIGS. 13-14).
Regarding claim 10, Krull teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 6, and further discloses wherein the one or more finger loop is configured to receive one finger of the hand (the hand strap 350 is a loop configured to receive a person’s hand, including all fingers - Col 4:54-58, FIGS. 13-14).
Regarding claim 11, Krull teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 6, and further discloses wherein the one or more finger loop is configured to receive more than one finger of the hand (the hand strap 350 is a loop configured to receive a person’s hand, including all fingers - Col 4:54-58, FIGS. 13-14).
Claims 1, 4, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 9,764,182 (Rohanna).
Regarding claim 1, Rohanna discloses an exercise weight unit 10 adapted to be handheld and palm-centered (abstract, FIGS. 24-25), comprising:
a body having both a first end 12 and a second end 16, a central portion (FIGS. 24-25), and a central axis between the first and second ends (a longitudinal axis passing down the center of the weight such as in the view of FIG. 25 can be interpreted as the central axis); and
a feature at the first end 12 of the body configured to create an inward torque when the weight unit is held in a hand of a user during physical sports training (the mushroom-like portion of the top end 12 can be interpreted as the feature and it is capable of creating an inward torque when the weight unit 10 is held in a hand of a user during physical sports training - FIGS. 24-25), wherein the feature is one of a hook shape, a mushroom shape and a fin shape (mushroom shape - FIGS. 24-25).
Regarding claim 4, Rohanna teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the mushroom shape feature is configured to follow contours of an opening of the hand when the exercise weight unit is held in the hand (the ridged grip may be used for a side or barrel grip with the index finger and thumb fitting around the ridge and neck of the weight, thus allowing the mushroom shape feature of the weight 10 to follow contours of an opening of the user’s hand - Col 3:14-17, FIGS. 24-25).
Regarding claim 12, Rohanna teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 1, and further discloses one or more inner core element (the hook 66 within the cavity 20 and any of different weights and chains that may be hooked to the hook 66 can be interpreted as the one or more inner core elements - FIG. 27, Col 4:36-39).
Regarding claim 13, Rohanna teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 12, and further discloses wherein the one or more inner core element is releasable from the exercise weight unit (the different weights and chain are releasable from the hook 66, which is part of the free weight 10 - FIG. 27, Col 4:36-39).
Regarding claim 14, Rohanna teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 12, and further discloses wherein the one or more inner core element is fixed to the exercise weight unit (the hook 66 is fixed to the free weight 10 - FIG. 27, Col 4:36-39).
Regarding claim 15, Rohanna teaches the exercise weight unit of claim 12, and further discloses wherein the one or more inner core element comprises a body and a releasable head element (the different weights and chain that are releasable from the hook 66 can each be interpreted as comprising a body and a releasable head element that releasably attaches to the hook 66 - FIG. 27, Col 4:36-39).
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 on 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