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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“biasing member” in claim 12 to be members that impart resistance force as disclosed on page 13, lines 1-7 of Applicant’s specification, but lack description of any corresponding structure
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 12 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 12 is rejected because the term “biasing member” is unclear and lacks disclosure of any corresponding structure thereof. Although Applicant’s page 13, lines 1-7 describes the biasing member to impart resistance force, no structure is provided.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8-10, 12-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McCarthy (US Pat. No. 3,770,267, Nov. 6, 1973).
Regarding claim 1, McCarthy teaches an exercise machine (see Fig. 2 below), comprising: a frame (i.e., base 12, see Fig. 2 below and col. 2, lines 61-63); a first end platform 50 connected to the frame 12; and a carriage (i.e., platform 22) having a carriage frame (i.e., frame of platform which is attached to rollers 26, see Fig. 2 below) and being movably connected to the frame 12 (see col. 3, lines 1-6), wherein the carriage 22 is movable along a portion of the frame 12 (see col. 3, lines 1-6), wherein the carriage 22 includes a first carriage platform (i.e., pad of platform 22, see Fig. 2 below) adjacent a second carriage platform 56 (see col. 4, lines 11-19), wherein the first carriage platform 22 is in a level position with respect to the carriage frame and wherein the second carriage platform 56 is adjustable between a level position (see col. 4, lines 14-19, platform 56 can be made level when brace 58 is pivotally retracted) with respect to the carriage frame and a raised position (as shown in Fig. 2 below, and col. 4, lines 14-19) with respect to the carriage frame.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (inner end of 56 and 22)]
PNG
media_image1.png
437
734
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 1 wherein the second carriage platform 56 is releasably lockable in a plurality of raised positions (i.e., angle of 56 can be adjusted via rest 56, see col. 4, lines 14-19).
Regarding claim 3, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 1, wherein an inner end (see annotated Fig. 2 above) of the second carriage platform 56, which is proximate an inner end of the first carriage platform (i.e., pad of platform 22), is raised with respect to the inner end of the first carriage platform.
Regarding claim 4, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 1, wherein the first end platform 50 shares a common plane with the first carriage platform 22 (see Fig. 2 above, a common horizontal plane).
Regarding claim 5, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 1, wherein the carriage 22 is movable to position an outer end of the second carriage platform 56 proximate an inner end of the first end platform 50 (i.e., move 56 closer towards platform 50, see col. 3, lines 1-6).
Regarding claim 6, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 1, wherein an angle of an upper surface of the second carriage platform 56 is greater than zero degrees with respect to an upper surface of the first carriage platform 22 when the second carriage platform 56 is in the raised position (see Fig. 2 above).
Regarding claim 8, as broadly interpreted, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 1, wherein a perimeter handle extends around both the first carriage platform 22 and the second carriage platform 56.
Regarding claim 9, as broadly interpreted, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 1, wherein the second carriage platform 56 includes a handle 58 (see Fig. 2 above) to raise and lower the second carriage platform 56.
Regarding claim 10, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 1, wherein the second carriage platform 56 is pivotably connected to the carriage frame (i.e., via a hinge, see Fig. 2 above).
Regarding claim 12, as broadly interpreted, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 1, further comprising a biasing member (i.e., spring 30, since there is no structure disclosed in the Applicant’s specification regarding specific structure) that applies a resistance force against the carriage (see col. 3, lines 7-19, and Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 13, McCarthy teaches a method of using the exercise machine of claim 1, comprising the steps of: pivoting the second carriage platform 56 from the level position to the raised position; and locking the second carriage platform 56 (via rest 58) in the raised position (see col. 4, lines 11-19).
Regarding claim 14, McCarthy teaches an exercise machine (see Fig. 2 above), comprising: a frame (i.e., base 12, see Fig. 2 above and col. 2, lines 61-63); a first end platform 50 connected to the frame, wherein the first end platform 50 is adjustable between a level position with respect to the frame (i.e., horizontal position) and a raised position 50’ (see Fig. 2 above and col. 3, lines 56-64) with respect to the frame 12; and a carriage (i.e., platform 22) having a carriage frame (i.e., frame of platform which is attached to rollers 26, see Fig. 2 above) and being movably connected to the frame 12 (see col. 3, lines 1-6), wherein the carriage 22 is movable along a portion of the frame 12 (see col. 3, lines 1-6), wherein the carriage 22 includes a first carriage platform 22 adjacent a second carriage platform 56 (see Fig. 2 above), wherein the first carriage platform 22 is in a level position with respect to the carriage frame 22 and wherein the second carriage platform 56 is adjustable between a level position with respect to the carriage frame and a raised position with respect to the carriage frame 22 (see col. 4, lines 11-19).
Regarding claim 15, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 14, wherein the first end platform 50 is pivotably connected to the frame 12 and wherein the first end platform 50 is adapted to be releasably locked in a plurality of positions (via chain 52, see col. 3, lines 56-68).
Regarding claim 16, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 15, wherein an upper surface of the first end platform 50 is parallel with respect to an upper surface of the carriage 22 when the first end platform is in the level position (see Fig. 2 above, platform 50 in an horizontal position), and wherein the upper surface of the first end platform 50 is not parallel with respect to the upper surface of the carriage when the first end platform 50 is in the raised position 50’ (see Fig. 2 above).
Regarding claim 17, as broadly interpreted, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 14, further comprising one or more handles 52 (see Fig. 2 and 3) connected to the first end platform 50.
Regarding claim 18, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 14, further comprising a pivot connector (i.e., hinge) connected between the frame 12 and the first end platform 50 (see col. 3, lines 56-64), wherein a first end of the pivot connector is pivotably connected to the frame 12 (see Fig. 12, hinge having a portion coupled to frame 12 and to platform 50), and wherein a second end of the pivot connector (i.e., hinge) is pivotably connected to the first end platform 50 see Fig. 12, hinge having a portion coupled to frame 12 and to platform 50).
Regarding claim 20, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 14, further comprising a second end platform 70 (see Fig. 2 above).
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCarthy, as applied to claim 1.
McCarthy teaches the invention as substantially claimed
Regarding claim 7, McCarthy teaches the exercise machine of claim 1, wherein an angle of an upper surface of the second carriage platform 56 can be inclined relative to the upper surface of the first carriage platform 22 (see col. 4, lines 11-19) when the second carriage platform 56 is in the raised position, but is silent in explicitly teaching where the angle is ninety degrees with respect to an upper surface of the first carriage platform 22 when the second carriage platform 56 is in the raised position.
However, where conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. (See MPEP 2144.05).
In this case, McCarthy teaches wherein an angle of an upper surface of the second carriage platform 56 can be inclined (see col. 4, lines 11-19) and it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to make the incline be ninety degrees with respect to an upper surface of the first carriage platform 22 as a matter of determining workable ranges in order to position a body part of the user at a select angle. Furthermore, Applicant’s claimed ninety degrees lacks criticality because Applicant discloses that other angles can be used. (see Applicant’s, page 17, lines 1-10).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCarthy, as applied to claim 1, in view of Greene et al (US PG Pub. No. 2009/0036274, Feb. 5, 2009) (“Greene”).
McCarthy teaches the invention as substantially claimed.
Regarding claim 11, McCarthy is silent in explicitly teaching further comprising a locking member including a plurality of slots, wherein the locking member releasably locks the second carriage platform 56 in the raised position.
Greene, however, in an analogous art teaches a locking member 170 including a plurality of slots 172, wherein the locking member releasably locks a platform 104 in the raised position (via positioning rod 128 at an incline and insertion of pin 194 through a respective slot 172, see paras. [0069],[0096]).
PNG
media_image2.png
405
580
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of McCarthy to include a locking member 170 including a plurality of slots 172, wherein the locking member 170 releasably locks the second carriage platform 56 in the raised position (i.e., substituting the rest 58 with a rod 128 having a pin 194 insertable into a slot 172) in order to position the second carriage platform 56 at a desired angle of incline.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 19 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.
Regarding claim 19, none of the prior art either alone or in combination teach or suggest all the limitations of claim 14, further comprising a locking member including a plurality of slots, wherein the locking member releasably locks the first end platform in a plurality of positions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW S LO whose telephone number is (571)270-1702. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. (9:30 am - 5:30 pm 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 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.
/ANDREW S LO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784