DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20, as filed on 08/27/2024, are currently pending and considered below.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,090,356. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the limitations of the present claims are anticipated by, or obvious over, the patent claims.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,115,405. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the limitations of the present claims are anticipated by, or obvious over, the patent claims.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,590,377. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the limitations of the present claims are anticipated by, or obvious over, the patent claims.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,465,005. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the limitations of the present claims are anticipated by, or obvious over, the patent claims.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 11,179,589. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the limitations of the present claims are anticipated by, or obvious over, the patent claims.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 10,850,150. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the limitations of the present claims are anticipated by, or obvious over, the patent claims.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-27 of U.S. Patent No. 10,799,745. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the limitations of the present claims are anticipated by, or obvious over, the patent claims.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-58 of U.S. Patent No. 10,561,884. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the limitations of the present claims are anticipated by, or obvious over, the patent claims.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-52 of U.S. Patent No. 10,561,883. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all of the limitations of the present claims are anticipated by, or obvious over, the patent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 6-10 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US 5538489 A (Magid) in view of Neil Sclater, Mechanisms and Mechanical Devices Sourcebook 3rd Edition, Published 2001 (henceforth Sclater).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Magid discloses a manually powered treadmill (second embodiment, Figure 8; device does not comprise a motor and therefore is manually powered) comprising:
a frame (base 11);
a front running belt pulley (front rollers 41; considered a wide pulley with a wide face and two adjacent rims) coupled to the frame (via front brackets 12);
PNG
media_image1.png
447
727
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 8
a rear running belt pulley (rear roller 42; considered a wide pulley) coupled to the frame (via rear brackets 13) and spaced apart from the front running belt pulley (front rollers 41 are located at a front of the device with rear rollers 42 located at a rear of the device spaced apart from each other);
a first plurality of bearings coupled to the frame (first four shafts 27 with rollers 26, Figure 8);
a second plurality of bearings coupled to the frame (last four shafts 27 with rollers 26);
a running belt (foot belts 4, 4’) at least partly supported by the first plurality of bearings, the second plurality of bearings (see Figure 8 wherein the belts 4, 4’ are supported on an interior surface by the rollers 27), and at least partly supported by at least one of the front running belt pulley or the rear running belt pulley (belts 4, 4’ are supported at a front and rear by the front and rear rollers 41, 42 respectively as shown in Figure 5), wherein the running belt includes a running surface (top surface of belts 4, 4’), at least a portion of which is a curved running surface (front and rear ends of the top surface about front and rear rollers 41, 42 have an arced curved surface curving downward around the rollers);
and a safety device (unidirectional control means 6, 6’) coupled between the frame and at least one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley (see Figure 8 wherein the control means 6, 6’ are located between the rollers and the brackets and frame),
wherein one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley is restricted from rotation relative to the frame in a first rotational direction, however, in a second rotational direction opposite the first rotational direction, the one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley freely rotate relative to the frame (“control means 6, 6' includes a pair of ratchet gears 61 attached to outer ends of the front rollers 41 and mounted rotatably on the first shaft 411, and a pair of pawls 62 secured to the base 11 and engaging one of the ratchet gears 61 to permit only unidirectional rotation of the front rollers 41, thereby preventing bidirectional movement of the foot belts 4, 4” Col. 4, lines 49-54; said control means 6, 6’ is configured to provide unrestricted rotation in a second direction and preventative rotation in a first direction opposite the second direction).
Magid teaches the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Magid does not disclose
the safety device comprising an inner ring and an outer ring, wherein one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley and one of the inner ring and the outer ring is restricted from rotation relative to the frame in a first rotational direction, however, in a second rotational direction opposite the first rotational direction, the one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley and the one of the inner ring and the outer ring freely rotate relative to the frame.
Sclater teaches an analogous one way belt over rollers device (“conveyor, Fig. 2) solving the same issue of providing a one way clutch to provide single directional rotation comprising:
a front running belt pulley and a rear running belt pulley spaced apart from the front running belt pulley (Figure 2);
PNG
media_image2.png
409
404
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a belt (“belt”, Figure 2) supported by at least one of the front running belt pulley or the rear running belt pulley (supported by both the front and rear running belt pulleys at a top and bottom end thereof)
and a safety device coupled to at least one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley (“backstopping clutch” coupled to the front roller),
the safety device comprising an inner ring and an outer ring (Figure 1: Annotated; said clutch comprises an outer and inner rings),
PNG
media_image3.png
291
493
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Annotated
wherein one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley and one of the inner ring and the outer ring is restricted from rotation relative to the frame in a first rotational direction, however, in a second rotational direction opposite the first rotational direction, the one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley and the one of the inner ring and the outer ring freely rotate relative to the frame (“the back-stopping clutch will prevent the buckets from running backwards” Fig. 2; said safety device is configured to allow for rotation in one direction and prevent rotation in the other direction).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the safety device to be a backstopping clutch with inner and outer rings with sprags therebetween, as taught by Sclater, in order to have a quieter and more precise clutch mechanism.
Regarding Claim 2, Magid as modified further discloses the manually powered treadmill of claim 1, wherein the frame comprises at least one cross-member (shaft 411), a left side member, and a right-side member (left and right front brackets 12);
and wherein the at least one cross-member extends between the left side member and the right-side member (left and right respective ends of shaft 411 and attached to left and right front brackets 12, respectfully).
Regarding Claim 3, Magid as modified further discloses the manually powered treadmill of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first plurality of bearings or the second plurality of bearings are supported by a bearing rail (side brackets 24, 24’; brackets 24 comprise a series of holes and are considered rails for the rollers 27 therebetween).
Regarding Claim 6, Magid as modified further discloses the manually powered treadmill of claim 1, wherein the running belt at least partially contacts at least one of the first plurality of bearings or the second plurality of bearings (said belt 4, 4’ rests upon an upper surface of the rollers 27).
Regarding Claim 7, Magid as modified further discloses the manually powered treadmill of claim 6, wherein the running belt comprises an outer surface opposite an inner surface, and wherein the outer surface comprises the running surface and the inner surface at least partially contacts at least one bearing of the first plurality of bearings or the second plurality of bearings (said belt 4, 4’ forms a continuous loop such that the belts have an exterior outer surface and a interior inner surface wherein the rollers 27 are in contact with the inner surface).
Regarding Claim 8, Magid as modified further discloses the manually powered treadmill of claim 1, wherein the safety device comprises a one-way bearing including the inner ring and the outer ring (the clutch mechanism comprising the inner and outer rings is in the form of a one-way bearing).
Regarding Claim 9, Magid as modified further discloses the manually powered treadmill of claim 8, wherein the one-way bearing further includes a plurality of sprags disposed between the inner ring and outer ring (“sprags”, see Figure 1 wherein there are at least two sprags between the inner and outer rings), wherein the plurality of sprags are shaped to prevent rotation of at least one of the inner ring or the outer ring in the first direction while permitting rotation of the at least one of the inner ring or the outer ring in the second direction (see Figure 1 wherein the sprags have oblong shapes wherein the shapes of the sprags prevent rotation in one direction and allow rotation in the opposite direction).
Regarding Independent Claim 10, Magid discloses a manually powered treadmill (second embodiment, Figure 8; device does not comprise a motor and therefore is manually powered) comprising:
a frame (base 11) having a front end and a rear end opposite the front end (front and opposite rear end respectively);
at least one rotatable element coupled to the frame (front roller 41);
a plurality of bearings coupled to the frame (shafts 27 with rollers 26);
a running belt (belts 4, 4’) at least partly supported by the plurality of bearings (see Figure 8 wherein the belt 4 is supported on top of rollers 26) and the at least one rotatable element (at the front end thereof), wherein the running belt includes a running surface (top surface), at least a portion of which is curved (front and rear ends of belt 4, 4’ are considered part of the top surface and curve downward around the rollers located at the front and rear ends);
and a safety device (unidirectional control means 6, 6’) coupled between the frame and to the rotatable element (see Figure 8),
wherein the safety device is structured to permit the rotatable element to freely rotate in only one rotational direction (“control means 6, 6' includes a pair of ratchet gears 61 attached to outer ends of the front rollers 41 and mounted rotatably on the first shaft 411, and a pair of pawls 62 secured to the base 11 and engaging one of the ratchet gears 61 to permit only unidirectional rotation of the front rollers 41, thereby preventing bidirectional movement of the foot belts 4, 4” Col. 4, lines 49-54; said control means 6, 6’ is configured to provide unrestricted rotation in a second direction and preventative rotation in a first direction opposite the second direction).
Magid does not disclose the safety device comprising an inner race and an outer race, wherein the safety device is structured to permit at least one of the inner race or the outer race to freely rotate in only one rotational direction.
Sclater teaches an analogous one way belt over rollers device (“conveyor, Fig. 2) solving the same issue of providing a one way clutch to provide single directional rotation comprising:
a front running belt pulley and a rear running belt pulley spaced apart from the front running belt pulley (Figure 2: Annotated);
a belt (“belt”, Figure 2: Annotated) supported by at least one of the front running belt pulley or the rear running belt pulley (supported by both the front and rear running belt pulleys at a top and bottom end thereof)
and a safety device coupled to at least one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley (“backstopping clutch” coupled to the front roller),
the safety device comprising an inner and outer race (Figure 1: Annotated; said clutch comprises an outer and inner rings, labelled as races in the Figure description),
PNG
media_image3.png
291
493
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Annotated
wherein one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley and one of the inner ring and the outer ring is restricted from rotation relative to the frame in a first rotational direction, however, in a second rotational direction opposite the first rotational direction, the one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley and the one of the inner ring and the outer ring freely rotate relative to the frame (“the back-stopping clutch will prevent the buckets from running backwards” Fig. 2; said safety device is configured to allow for rotation in one direction and prevent rotation in the other direction).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the safety device to be a backstopping clutch with inner and outer races with sprags therebetween, as taught by Sclater, in order to have a quieter and more precise clutch mechanism.
Regarding Claim 11, Magid as modified further discloses the manually powered treadmill of claim 10, wherein one of the inner race and the outer race is substantially fixed to restrict rotation thereof relative to the other of the one of the inner race and the outer race (“outer race is restrained by torque-arming the stationary frame of the conveyor” Fig. 2; said outer race is fixed with the inner race providing the rotational movement).
Regarding Claim 12, Magid as modified further discloses the manually powered treadmill of claim 10, wherein the at least one rotatable element comprises at least one running belt pulley (said front roller is considered a wide pulley with a wide face between two adjacent rims), the at least one running belt pulley supporting at least a portion of the running belt (front roller supports a front of the belt 4, 4’).
Regarding Claim 13, Magid further discloses the manually powered treadmill of claim 10, wherein the safety device permits the running belt to freely rotate in the only one rotational direction (“the back-stopping clutch will prevent the buckets from running backwards” Fig. 2; said safety device is configured to allow for rotation in one direction and prevent rotation in the other direction).
Regarding Claim 14, Magid further discloses the manually powered treadmill of claim 10, wherein the inner race and the outer race cooperate with one another as elements of a one-way bearing (the clutch mechanism comprising the inner and outer rings is in the form of a one-way bearing as shown in Figure 1 with sprags in between the races providing one directional rotation).
Regarding Claim 17, Magid as modified further discloses the manually powered treadmill of claim 10, wherein the running belt comprises an outer surface opposite an inner surface (the belts 4, 4’ form continuous loops with an exterior outer surface and an opposite inner surface), and wherein the outer surface comprises the running surface and the inner surface at least partially contacts the plurality of bearings (the exterior outer surface comprises the running surface with the rollers 26 are pressed against the inner surface supporting the inner surface on the rollers 26).
Claims 4-5, 15-16, and 18-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over US 5538489 A (Magid) in view of Neil Sclater, Mechanisms and Mechanical Devices Sourcebook 3rd Edition, Published 2001 (henceforth Sclater) in further view of US 5709632 A (Socwell).
Regarding Claim 4, Magid as modified discloses the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Magid does not disclose wherein at least one of the first plurality of bearings or the second plurality of bearings defines in part a curved top profile corresponding to the curved running surface.
Socwell teaches an analogous exercise device in the same field of endeavor solving the same issue of providing bearings to support a running surface comprising:
a frame (support frame 12); at least one running belt pulley coupled to the frame (rollers 86, 88, 78); a plurality of bearings coupled to the frame (rollers 98), wherein the plurality of bearings define a curved top profile (see Figure 2 wherein the rollers 98 define a curved top profile of a belt 16 having a left and right end of the belt higher than a center); a running belt (belt 16) at least partly supported by the at least one running belt pulley and the plurality of bearings (as shown in Figure 2 wherein the belt 16 is fed around the rollers with its curved profile defined by the rollers 98), wherein the running belt comprises a running surface (top surface thereon of belt 16), at least a portion of which comprises a curved running surface corresponding to at least a portion of the curved top profile (a curved portion of the running belt 16 between the rollers is defined by as the curved running surface which corresponds to the curved top profile of the belt 16).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the first and second plurality of bearings to define a curved top profile with the running belt running surface comprising a curved portion corresponding to said curved top profile, as taught by Socwell, in order to reduce impact to the joints and muscles of the user (Col. 3, lines 1-4).
Regarding Claim 5, Magid as modified discloses the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Magid does not disclose wherein at least one of the first plurality of bearings or the second plurality of bearings defines a curved top profile, and wherein the running belt substantially assumes the shape of the curved top profile to form the curved running surface.
Socwell teaches an analogous exercise device in the same field of endeavor solving the same issue of providing bearings to support a running surface comprising:
a frame (support frame 12); at least one running belt pulley coupled to the frame (rollers 86, 88, 78); a plurality of bearings coupled to the frame (rollers 98), wherein the plurality of bearings define a curved top profile (see Figure 2 wherein the rollers 98 define a curved top profile of a belt 16 having a left and right end of the belt higher than a center); a running belt (belt 16) at least partly supported by the at least one running belt pulley and the plurality of bearings (as shown in Figure 2 wherein the belt 16 is fed around the rollers with its curved profile defined by the rollers 98), wherein the running belt comprises a running surface (top surface thereon of belt 16), at least a portion of which comprises a curved running surface corresponding to at least a portion of the curved top profile (a curved portion of the running belt 16 between the rollers is defined by as the curved running surface which corresponds to the curved top profile of the belt 16).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the first and second plurality of bearings to define a curved top profile with the running belt running surface comprising a curved portion corresponding to said curved top profile, as taught by Socwell, in order to reduce impact to the joints and muscles of the user (Col. 3, lines 1-4).
Regarding Claim 15, Magid as modified discloses the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Magid does not disclose manually powered treadmill of claim 10, wherein the plurality of bearings defines a curved top profile corresponding to the curved running surface.
Socwell teaches an analogous exercise device in the same field of endeavor solving the same issue of providing bearings to support a running surface comprising:
a frame (support frame 12); at least one running belt pulley coupled to the frame (rollers 86, 88, 78); a plurality of bearings coupled to the frame (rollers 98), wherein the plurality of bearings define a curved top profile (see Figure 2 wherein the rollers 98 define a curved top profile of a belt 16 having a left and right end of the belt higher than a center); a running belt (belt 16) at least partly supported by the at least one running belt pulley and the plurality of bearings (as shown in Figure 2 wherein the belt 16 is fed around the rollers with its curved profile defined by the rollers 98), wherein the running belt comprises a running surface (top surface thereon of belt 16), at least a portion of which comprises a curved running surface corresponding to at least a portion of the curved top profile (a curved portion of the running belt 16 between the rollers is defined by as the curved running surface which corresponds to the curved top profile of the belt 16).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the plurality of bearings to define a curved top profile with the running belt running surface comprising a curved portion corresponding to said curved top profile, as taught by Socwell, in order to reduce impact to the joints and muscles of the user (Col. 3, lines 1-4).
Regarding Claim 16, Magid as modified discloses the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Magid does not disclose wherein the plurality of bearings defines a curved top profile, and wherein the running belt substantially assumes the shape of the curved top profile to form the running surface.
Socwell teaches an analogous exercise device in the same field of endeavor solving the same issue of providing bearings to support a running surface comprising:
a frame (support frame 12); at least one running belt pulley coupled to the frame (rollers 86, 88, 78); a plurality of bearings coupled to the frame (rollers 98), wherein the plurality of bearings define a curved top profile (see Figure 2 wherein the rollers 98 define a curved top profile of a belt 16 having a left and right end of the belt higher than a center); a running belt (belt 16) at least partly supported by the at least one running belt pulley and the plurality of bearings (as shown in Figure 2 wherein the belt 16 is fed around the rollers with its curved profile defined by the rollers 98), wherein the running belt comprises a running surface (top surface thereon of belt 16), at least a portion of which comprises a curved running surface corresponding to at least a portion of the curved top profile (a curved portion of the running belt 16 between the rollers is defined by as the curved running surface which corresponds to the curved top profile of the belt 16).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the plurality of bearings to define a curved top profile with the running belt running surface comprising a curved portion corresponding to said curved top profile, as taught by Socwell, in order to reduce impact to the joints and muscles of the user (Col. 3, lines 1-4).
Regarding Independent Claim 18, Magid discloses a treadmill (second embodiment, Figure 8 in the form of a treadmill), comprising:
a frame (base 11);
at least one running belt pulley coupled to the frame (front roller 41; considered a wide pulley with a wide face with two adjacent rims forming the pulley track);
a plurality of bearings coupled to the frame (shafts 27 with rollers 26),
a running belt (belts 4, 4’) at least partly supported by the at least one running belt pulley and the plurality of bearings (as shown in Figure 8), wherein the running belt comprises a running surface (top surface),
and a one-way bearing (unidirectional control means 6, 6’) coupled between the frame and the at least one running belt pulley (see Figure 8 wherein the control means is located between the roller and the bracket and frame), wherein the at least one running belt pulley is restricted from rotation relative to the frame in a first rotational direction, however, in a second rotational direction opposite the first rotational direction, the at least one running belt pulley rotates freely relative to the frame (“control means 6, 6' includes a pair of ratchet gears 61 attached to outer ends of the front rollers 41 and mounted rotatably on the first shaft 411, and a pair of pawls 62 secured to the base 11 and engaging one of the ratchet gears 61 to permit only unidirectional rotation of the front rollers 41, thereby preventing bidirectional movement of the foot belts 4, 4” Col. 4, lines 49-54; said control means 6, 6’ is configured to provide unrestricted rotation in a second direction and preventative rotation in a first direction opposite the second direction).
Magid discloses the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Magid does not disclose wherein the plurality of bearings define a curved top profile; at least a portion of the running surface comprises a curved running surface corresponding to at least a portion of the curved top profile; the one-way bearing comprising an inner ring and an outer ring, wherein the one of the inner ring and the outer ring are restricted from rotation relative to the frame in a first rotational direction, however, in a second rotational direction opposite the first rotational direction, the one of the inner ring and the outer ring rotate freely relative to the frame.
Sclater teaches an analogous one way belt over rollers device (“conveyor, Fig. 2) solving the same issue of providing a one way clutch to provide single directional rotation comprising:
a front running belt pulley and a rear running belt pulley spaced apart from the front running belt pulley (Figure 2: Annotated);
a belt (“belt”, Figure 2: Annotated) supported by at least one of the front running belt pulley or the rear running belt pulley (supported by both the front and rear running belt pulleys at a top and bottom end thereof)
and a safety device coupled to at least one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley (“backstopping clutch” coupled to the front roller),
the safety device comprising an inner ring and an outer ring (Figure 1: Annotated; said clutch comprises an outer and inner rings),
PNG
media_image3.png
291
493
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Annotated
wherein one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley and one of the inner ring and the outer ring is restricted from rotation relative to the frame in a first rotational direction, however, in a second rotational direction opposite the first rotational direction, the one of the front running belt pulley and the rear running belt pulley and the one of the inner ring and the outer ring freely rotate relative to the frame (“the back-stopping clutch will prevent the buckets from running backwards” Fig. 2; said safety device is configured to allow for rotation in one direction and prevent rotation in the other direction).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the safety device to be a backstopping clutch with inner and outer rings with sprags therebetween, as taught by Sclater, in order to have a quieter and more precise clutch mechanism.
Magid as modified discloses the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Magid does not disclose wherein the plurality of bearings define a curved top profile; at least a portion of the running surface comprises a curved running surface corresponding to at least a portion of the curved top profile.
Socwell teaches an analogous exercise device in the same field of endeavor solving the same issue of providing bearings to support a running surface comprising:
a frame (support frame 12); at least one running belt pulley coupled to the frame (rollers 86, 88, 78); a plurality of bearings coupled to the frame (rollers 98), wherein the plurality of bearings define a curved top profile (see Figure 2 wherein the rollers 98 define a curved top profile of a belt 16 having a left and right end of the belt higher than a center); a running belt (belt 16) at least partly supported by the at least one running belt pulley and the plurality of bearings (as shown in Figure 2 wherein the belt 16 is fed around the rollers with its curved profile defined by the rollers 98), wherein the running belt comprises a running surface (top surface thereon of belt 16), at least a portion of which comprises a curved running surface corresponding to at least a portion of the curved top profile (a curved portion of the running belt 16 between the rollers is defined by as the curved running surface which corresponds to the curved top profile of the belt 16).
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the plurality of bearings to define a curved top profile with the running belt running surface comprising a curved portion corresponding to said curved top profile, as taught by Socwell, in order to reduce impact to the joints and muscles of the user (Col. 3, lines 1-4).
Regarding Claim 19, Magid as modified further discloses the treadmill of claim 18, wherein a plurality of elements are disposed intermediate the inner ring and the outer ring (sprags).
Regarding Claim 20, Magid as modified further discloses the treadmill of claim 19, wherein the plurality of elements comprises sprag elements (sprags).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY T MOORE whose telephone number is (571)272-0063. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:00am - 4:00pm EST.
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.
/ZACHARY T MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 3784
Prosecution Insights