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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/18/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Rejection on 3/13/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment to the claims, filed on 6/15/2026, is acceptable. No new matter was added.
Claim 2 is newly canceled.
Claims 11-43 were previously canceled.
Claims 44-48 have been added. No new matter was added.
Claims 1, 3-10, and 44-48 are currently pending. An action on the merits follows.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-6, 8-10, and 44-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0214734 (Lammers) in view of US 2018/0056117 (Hamilton).
Regarding claim 1, Lammers discloses a rowing device 1 for exercise (exercise device 1 is a rowing simulator or rowing machine - para 0065, FIGS. 1-5), the device comprising:
a lower or base portion 10,20 configured to be positioned along a ground surface, the lower or base portion configured to remain stationary during use (first elongated structural member 10 and second elongated structural member 20 can be interpreted collectively as the lower or base portion and are positioned along a ground surface via vertically arranged legs 12,12’ and horizontal beams 13,13’ - para 0065, FIGS. 1-5; see annotated FIG. 2 below), the lower or base portion 10,20 comprising a rail system (structural members 10,20 can comprise guiding rails - para 0010);
an upper portion 81 configured to slidably move relative to and on the rail system of the lower or base portion 10,20 during use (housing 81 is moveably attached to the two structural members 10,20 such that the housing 81 may be moved along at least a part of the length of the two structural members 10,20 - para 0065, FIGS. 1-5; see annotated FIG. 2 below);
wherein the upper portion 81 comprises a resistance device 40, a handle assembly 61 and a footrest assembly 80 (resistance element 40 is at least partly accommodated in housing 81 - para 0065; handle 61 is attached to free outer end of second drive 60, which is at least partly accommodated in housing 81 - paras 0065 and 0067; housing 81 includes a foot support or footstretcher 80 - para 0067; see annotated FIG. 2 below); and
a seat assembly 30 coupled to the lower or base portion 10,20 (FIGS. 1-5).
PNG
media_image1.png
499
943
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Lammers does not disclose wherein the seat assembly is configured to not slidably move on the rail system and not directly contact components of the lower or base portion that are part of the rail system
Hamilton teaches an analogous rowing device (see Figure 1A below) having a seat assembly 108 (seat portion 108 slides on separate rail system 147 - see Figure 1A below) configured to not slidably move on a rail system 145 of a lower or base portion 132 and not directly contact components of the lower or base portion that are part of the rail system (see Figure 1A below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lammers’ invention with the separate rail system for the seat assembly as taught by Hamilton in order to provide an alternate arrangement for a movable seat and movable footrest/resistance device/handle assembly combination allowing a user to simulate a rowing motion (Hamilton: para 0005).
PNG
media_image2.png
492
817
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 1, and Lammers further discloses wherein the upper portion 81 is configured to slidably move relative to the rail system of lower or base portion using at least one wheel or other movable member (housing 81 is moveably attached to the two structural members 10,20 such that the housing 81 may be moved along at least a part of the length of the two structural members 10,20 - para 0065, FIGS. 1-5; guiding wheels may be part of the resistance element and may be arranged in a guiding rails of the structural member or vice versa - para 0010; see annotated FIG. 5 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
594
701
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 3, and Lammers further discloses wherein the at least one wheel or other movable member is configured to be positioned along the upper portion 81 (housing 81 is moveably attached to the two structural members 10,20 such that the housing 81 may be moved along at least a part of the length of the two structural members 10,20 - para 0065, FIGS. 1-5; guiding wheels may be part of the resistance element and may be arranged in a guiding rails of the structural member or vice versa - para 0010; see annotated FIG. 5 above).
Regarding claim 6, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 5, and Lammers further discloses wherein the at least one wheel or other movable member is configured to at least partially mate with a corresponding element or feature of the rail system of the lower or base portion 10,20 (housing 81 is moveably attached to the two structural members 10,20 such that the housing 81 may be moved along at least a part of the length of the two structural members 10,20 - para 0065, FIGS. 1-5; guiding wheels may be part of the resistance element and may be arranged in a guiding rails of the structural member or vice versa - para 0010; see annotated FIG. 5 above).
Regarding claim 8, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 1, and Lammers further discloses wherein the seat assembly 30 is directly coupled to the lower or base portion 10,20 (seat may be directly connected to the first structure member and may be in a fixed position relative to the first structural member - para 0010).
Regarding claim 9, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 1, and Lammers further discloses wherein the seat assembly 30 is coupled to the lower or base portion 10,20 using at least one hinge, joint or other movable connection (the seat may be moveably attached to the two structural members 10,20 - para 0065; the seat may be moveably connected to the structural member, for example by means of guiding wheels or any other suitable means, which can be interpreted as the movable connection - para 0010).
Regarding claim 10, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 1, and Lammers further discloses wherein the resistance device 40 comprises a flywheel or other mechanical resistance device (resistance element is a flywheel 40 - para 0065).
Regarding claim 44, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 1, and Lammers further discloses wherein the resistance device comprises a fluid-based resistance device, a hydraulic resistance device or a magnetic resistance device (resistance element may be a fluid-filled container comprising a rotatable element that is rotated by the drive when said drive is extended by the user - para 0012).
Regarding claim 45, Lammers discloses a rowing device 1 for exercise (exercise device 1 is a rowing simulator or rowing machine - para 0065, FIGS. 1-5), the device comprising:
a base 10,20 configured to be positioned along a ground surface, the base configured to remain stationary during use (first elongated structural member 10 and second elongated structural member 20 can be interpreted collectively as the base and are positioned along a ground surface via vertically arranged legs 12,12’ and horizontal beams 13,13’ - para 0065, FIGS. 1-5; see annotated FIG. 2 below);
a resistance device 40 configured to slidably move on at least one component of the base 10,20 during use (resistance element 40 is at least partly accommodated in housing 81 - para 0065; housing 81 is moveably attached to the two structural members 10,20 such that the housing 81 may be moved along at least a part of the length of the two structural members 10,20 - para 0065, FIGS. 1-5; see annotated FIG. 2 below); and
a seat assembly 30 for receiving a user in a seated portion during use, wherein the seat assembly is coupled to the base 10,20 (FIGS. 1-5).
PNG
media_image1.png
499
943
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Lammers does not disclose wherein the seat assembly is directly coupled to a portion of the base other than the at least one component of the base on which the resistance device is configured to slidably move.
Hamilton teaches an analogous rowing device (see Figure 1A below) having a seat assembly 108 (seat portion 108 slides on separate rail system 147 - see Figure 1A below) directly coupled to a portion 147 of the base 102 other than the at least one component 145 of the base on which the resistance device (resistance device is operatively connected to footplate assembly 132 - see Figure 1A below) is configured to slidably move (see Figure 1A below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lammers’ invention with the separate rail system for the seat assembly as taught by Hamilton in order to provide an alternate arrangement for a movable seat and movable footrest/resistance device/handle assembly combination allowing a user to simulate a rowing motion (Hamilton: para 0005).
PNG
media_image2.png
492
817
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 46, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 45, and Lammers further discloses wherein the at least one component of the base 10,20 on which the resistance device 40 is configured to slidably move comprises a rail system (structural members 10,20 can comprise guiding rails - para 0010).
Regarding claim 47, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 45, and Lammers further discloses wherein the resistance device 40 comprises a flywheel or other mechanical resistance element (resistance element is a flywheel 40 - para 0065).
Regarding claim 48, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 45, and Lammers further discloses wherein the resistance device 40 comprises a fluid-based resistance device, a hydraulic resistance device or a magnetic resistance device (resistance element may be a fluid-filled container comprising a rotatable element that is rotated by the drive when said drive is extended by the user - para 0012).
Claims 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lammers in view of Hamilton as applied to claims 3 and 6 respectively above, and further in view of US 2,714,507 (Goodrich).
Regarding claim 4, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 3 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection above), but Lammers does not disclose wherein the at least one wheel or other movable member comprises at least one grooved or recessed wheel.
Goodrich teaches an analogous rowing device for exercise (Col 1:15-16, FIGS. 1-2), wherein a structure 34 is configured to slidably move relative to a lower or base portion 15 using at least one wheel 37 or other movable member, wherein the at least one wheel or other movable member comprises at least one grooved or recessed wheel 37 (grooved wheels 37 rest on the rails 15 and side plates are also connected by tie rods 38 which extend between the plates and under the rails 15 to prevent wheels 37 from accidentally becoming disengaged from said rails - Col 2:41-50, see annotated FIG. 1 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lammers’ invention with the grooved wheels and side plates as taught by Goodrich in order to prevent wheels from accidentally becoming disengaged from the rails (Goodrich: Col 2:41-50).
PNG
media_image4.png
683
708
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, modified Lammers teaches the device of Claim 6 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection above), but Lammers does not disclose wherein the corresponding element or feature comprises an elongated member with a rounded or curved surface.
Goodrich teaches an analogous rowing device for exercise (Col 1:15-16, FIGS. 1-2), wherein a structure 34 is configured to slidably move relative to a lower or base portion 15 using at least one wheel 37 or other movable member, wherein the at least one wheel or other movable member 37 is configured to at least partially mate with a corresponding element or feature of the lower or base portion 15, wherein the corresponding element or feature 15 comprises an elongated member with a rounded or curved surface (grooved wheels 37 rest on the rails 15, which are cylindrical rails inherently elongated and inherently comprising a rounded or curved surface, and side plates are also connected by tie rods 38 which extend between the plates and under the rails 15 to prevent wheels 37 from accidentally becoming disengaged from said rails - Col 2:41-50, see annotated FIG. 1 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lammers’ invention with the cylindrical rails and grooved wheels and side plates as taught by Goodrich in order to prevent wheels from accidentally becoming disengaged from the rails (Goodrich: Col 2:41-50).
PNG
media_image5.png
685
731
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 5, filed on 6/15/2026, with respect to the claim interpretation of “resistance element” have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim interpretation has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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 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.
/Joshua Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
Prosecution Insights