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 14 and 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 14 and 20 recite “wherein at least one of the knob and the shaft is formed from stainless steel.”, it is unclear if Applicant intends to claimed at least one of each a knob and shaft or one of either a knob or shaft. In order to proceed, the Office will interpret the claim such as -- wherein at least one of the knob or the shaft is formed from stainless steel.--.
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(s) 11, 12, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao (US 7131938 B2) in view of Anderson (US 20070298940 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Cao teaches a connector assembly for a weightlifting apparatus, comprising: a shaft comprising a first end, a second end opposite the first end, an elongated cylindrical body extending axially between the first end and the second end, and wherein the first end of the shaft has a reduced diameter portion configured to aid with insertion of the first end into an opening in the weightlifting apparatus (Refer to annotated Fig. 10&11 below..The Office takes the position that the threads on both ends have a reduced diameter portion);
PNG
media_image1.png
648
593
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a knob that includes an axially inward facing front face, an axially outward facing rear face, a cylindrical peripheral exterior surface, and a central aperture extending axially outward into the knob from the axially inward facing front face and receiving a portion of the shaft therein, wherein the central aperture includes a first section having a first width and a second section having a second width, the first width being greater than the second width, and wherein the second section receives the second end of the shaft to connect the knob to the shaft (Refer to Col Lines 43-55); and an annular body with a central passage, wherein the annular body has a third width that is greater than the second width, and wherein a portion of the annular body is received in the first section of the knob and the shaft extends through the central passage and into the central aperture of the knob (Refer to Figs. 9&11 to depict that the annular body would be positioned into the first section and has a greater width than the second threaded section). Cao fails to teach wherein the cylindrical peripheral exterior surface is knurled. Anderson teaches a dumbbell comprising a shaft 13 connected to a knob 20 wherein the cylindrical peripheral exterior surface is knurled 22 (Refer to Fig. 4 Paragraph [0026]:” The weight plate 20 conveniently includes an integrally formed knurled portion 22 of relatively larger diameter that provides a graspable periphery preferably sized to be encompassed by the human hand so that the weight plate 20 can be rotated with one hand in the manner of a jar-top.”). Anderson is analogous with Applicants invention in that they both teach connections for exercise devices and therefore it would have been obvious to modify the knob of Cao to be in view of Anderson such that the cylindrical peripheral exterior surface is knurled for the purpose of allowing the knobs to be easily gripped.
Regarding Claim 12, Cao in view of Anderson does not expressly teach wherein an axially inward facing surface of the annular body is configured to engage an outer surface of a rectangular frame member of a weight rack assembly, however, the Office takes the position that such limitation is considered intended use and the axially inward facing surface of the annular body is capable of being used to engage an outer surface of a rectangular frame when removed from the shaft is desired and fitted on a pin. Such intended use does not structurally define the annular body and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. MPEP 2111.04 “Adapted to,” “Adapted for,” “Wherein,” and “Whereby” Clauses [R-9].
Regarding Claim 17, Cao in view of Anderson continues to teach wherein the shaft further comprises a first threaded portion extending axially along a portion of a length of the shaft at the second end; andwherein the second section of the knob receives the first threaded portion of the shaft and comprises a second threaded portion that engages the first threaded portion of the shaft to connect the knob to the shaft (Refer to annotated Figs. 10&11 of Cao).
PNG
media_image1.png
648
593
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao (US 7131938 B2) in view of Anderson (US 20070298940 A1) as noted above, further in view of Ronnow (US 7097601).
Regarding Claim 13, Cao in view of Anderson teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to teach wherein the annular body has a hardness that is less than a hardness of the shaft. Ronnow teaches a shaft 46 comprising a threaded end attached to a knob 60 (Refer to Figs. 1&2) wherein Ronnow teaches that the device may be made of a variety of materials (Refer to Col 4 Lines 46-61:” Accordingly, the components defining any exercise device implementation may be formed of any of many different types of materials or combinations thereof that can readily be formed into shaped objects provided that the components selected are consistent with the intended operation of an exercise device implementation. For example, the components may be formed of: rubbers (synthetic and/or natural); glasses, such as fiberglass, carbon-fiber, aramid-fiber, and/or other like materials; polymers such as plastic, polycarbonate, PVC plastic, ABS plastic, polystyrene, polypropylene, nylon, any combination thereof, and/or other like materials; metals, such as zinc, magnesium, titanium, copper, iron, steel, stainless steel, any combination thereof, and/or other like materials; alloys, such as aluminum, and/or other like materials; any other suitable material; and/or any combination thereof.”). The Office takes the position that it would have been obvious to modify the material of the annular body to have a hardness that is less than a hardness of the shaft since Ronnow teaches that a variety of different metals and materials are suitable for such shaft and annular devices and since Applicant does not provide criticality to the combination of hardness and/or materials such modification would have been a matter of obvious design choice and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. Refer to MPEP 2144.07 Art Recognized Suitability for an Intended Purpose [R-01.2024].
Regarding Claim 14, Cao in view of Anderson teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to teach wherein at least one of the knob and the shaft is formed from stainless steel. Ronnow teaches a shaft 46 comprising a threaded end attached to a knob 60 (Refer to Figs. 1&2) wherein Ronnow teaches that the device may be made of a variety of materials such as stainless steel (Refer to Col 4 Lines 46-61:” Accordingly, the components defining any exercise device implementation may be formed of any of many different types of materials or combinations thereof that can readily be formed into shaped objects provided that the components selected are consistent with the intended operation of an exercise device implementation. For example, the components may be formed of: rubbers (synthetic and/or natural); glasses, such as fiberglass, carbon-fiber, aramid-fiber, and/or other like materials; polymers such as plastic, polycarbonate, PVC plastic, ABS plastic, polystyrene, polypropylene, nylon, any combination thereof, and/or other like materials; metals, such as zinc, magnesium, titanium, copper, iron, steel, stainless steel, any combination thereof, and/or other like materials; alloys, such as aluminum, and/or other like materials; any other suitable material; and/or any combination thereof.”). The Office takes the position that it would have been obvious to modify the material of at least one of the knob and the shaft is formed from stainless steel since Ronnow teaches stainless steel is a suitable material in the art and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. Refer to MPEP 2144.07 Art Recognized Suitability for an Intended Purpose [R-01.2024].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-10, 18, 19, and 21 are allowed.
Claims 15 & 16 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.
Claim 20 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: Eckmann is the closest prior art to the claimed invention teaching a connector assembly for a weightlifting apparatus, the connector assembly comprising: a shaft 53 comprising a first end, a second end opposite the first end, an elongated cylindrical body extending axially between the first end and the second end, an aperture 57 extending through the shaft proximate the first end, and a first threaded portion 59 extending axially along a portion of a length of the shaft at the second end; a knob 80 that includes an axially inward facing front face, an axially outward facing rear face, a cylindrical peripheral exterior surface, and a central aperture extending axially outward into the knob from the axially inward facing front face and receiving a portion of the shaft therein, wherein the central aperture includes a first section having a first width and a second section having a second width, the first width being greater than the second width, and wherein the second section receives the first threaded portion of the shaft to connect the knob to the shaft 53 (Refer to Fig. 14); and an annular body 82 with a central passage, wherein the annular body has a third width that is greater than the second width, and a portion of the annular body 80 is received in the first section of the knob 80, and the shaft extends through the central passage and into the central aperture of the knob 80 (Refer to Figs. 5-14 Col 3 Lines 54-61:” The threaded end 59 of the throughbolt 53 extends through the hole 22 in the leg 13, and holes 43 and 41 of the case leg pocket 34, a distance far enough to permit the mounting of a nut 80 on the projecting end, and the engagement of the threads at the end of the throughbolt 53 in a holding sleeve 82 mounted in the nut. The nut 80 has an annular seat 83, in which an 0 ring 84 is mounted to facilitate turning the nut by hand.”), but fails to teach the second section comprises a second threaded portion that engages the first threaded portion of the shaft, the knob includes a knurled peripheral exterior surface having a cylindrical shape, and an axially inward facing surface of the annular body is configured to engage an outer surface of the rectangular frame member of the weight rack assembly. Although prior art Ronnow teaches a cylindrical knob 60 threaded onto a threaded shaft 46, Ronnow does not teach the knob having a central aperture which includes a first section having a first width and a second section having a second width, the first width being greater than the second width and an annular body has a third width that is greater than the second width, and a portion of the annular body is received in the first section of the knob. Prior art Cao in view of Anderson is the closest combination to the claimed invention but fails to teach the claimed invention as a whole comprising an aperture extending through the shaft proximate the first end and/or an aperture extending into the shaft proximate the first end, and a component received in the aperture.
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 for prior arts 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