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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20, as filed on 11/12/2024, are currently pending and considered below.
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 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) 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):
(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). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) 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). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) 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) 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) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim 3: “plurality of hinges fitted with locking means. “means” is the generic placeholder (A). “Locking” is the functional language modifying the generic placeholder (B). The generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function (C). In the present case the hinges are a separate structure.
Pages 9-10 recite: “Arms (101,102) can be opened depending on the exercise to be performed at the time. In fact, to open or close the arms (101,102), the arms (101,102) are simply lifted, folded or unfolded, and then dropped downwards so that they engage the locking lugs (106) and are retained in position. Finally, a clamping nut or pin (a retainer, 107) secures the locking position at the chosen angle of the power cage (100).”
Said locking means is interpreted to include locking lugs and clamping nut/pin and equivalence thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because the claim limitations recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitations are:
Claim 1: “power transmission means comprising a plurality of pulleys and transmission cables”. Cables and Pulleys are sufficient structure to perform the recited function of power transmission.
Claim 1: “means for positioning a guided rod… …such that [collapsible] power cage is configured as the main structure of the lower body training aids, as well as the means for positioning [the] guided [rod]” (see 112(b) below). Foldable power cage is sufficient structure
Because these claim limitation(s) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) they are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112:
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.
Claims 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor.
Claim 1, line 17-18 recite: “the means for positioning a guided bar”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation within the claim. The guide bar seems to be the guided rod from line 7. Applicant is suggested to amend the limitation to ---the means for positioning the guided bar---.
Claim 1, line 16 recite: “the foldable power cage”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation within the claims. Applicant is suggested to amend the limitation to ---the collapsible power cage---.
Claim 1, line 22 recite: “the guided barbell”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation within the claims. Applicant is suggested to amend the limitation to ---a guided barbell---.
Claim 10 recites: “the aforementioned means”. The claim is rendered indefinite as it is unclear to what previously mentioned means is being referred to: the means of hinges, locking means, means for positioning the guided rod, or the transmission means. As best understood applicant is suggested to amend the limitation to ---the means for positioning the guided rod---.
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 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.
Claims 1-2, 7, 9, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by US 20020091043 A1 (Rexach).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Rexach discloses the foldable multifunctional training equipment comprising
a collapsible power cage (cover panels 109A, 109B, housings 128, 129; see Figure 6 wherein the panels are folded inward into a collapsed position closing the structure);
lower body training aids (removable ankle pads 157, 158) which are foldable and transformable for performing an exercise of leg press at 45 degrees, leg extensions and/or lying femoral curl (said ankle pad mechanisms are capable of allowing a user to perform leg presses, leg extensions, and lying femoral curls);
PNG
media_image1.png
510
611
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 7
means for positioning a guided rod (structural housing 128, 129 with smith bearings 119, 120 for housing barbell 118);
at least two parallel towers of guided weights (“each moveable resistance unit (e.g., weight stack)” Paragraph 52; each housing has a symmetrical weight stack, the weight stacks being parallel across the centerline);
and power transmission means comprising a plurality of pulleys and transmission cables and configured to enable folding of the training equipment (A pair of rollers 138 and pulleys 139 and left and right resistance cables 131; said rollers, pulleys, and cables are configured to fold with the structure);
such that the foldable power cage is configured as the main structure of the lower body training aids (see Figures 6-8 wherein the folding frame is a main structure of the lower body training aid), as well as the means for positioning a guided bar (see Figure 7 wherein the folding frame is the means of which the barbell is positioned), using the weights arranged in the parallel towers of guided weights to configure a load of each exercise (said weight stacks are attached to said barbell and said ankle pads via the cables and pulleys therebetween, said weight stack configured to allow for select weight loads on each);
and wherein, in addition, the lower body training aids means and the guided barbell are connected via the power transmission means to the guided weight towers (each of said ankle pads and barbell are attached via selectively attaching the cables).
Regarding Claim 2, Rexach further discloses the training equipment of claim wherein the power transmission means comprise at least two height adjustable pulleys; and at least two central lower pulleys (Figure 8: Annotated).
PNG
media_image2.png
385
459
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 8: Annotated
Regarding Claim 18, Rexach further discloses the equipment according to claim 2 wherein the means for positioning a guided rod (“FIG. 13 is a detailed perspective view of a barbell connection to a Smith bearing [119,120] in the apparatus of FIG. 6” Paragraph 31) comprises:
a clamp with bearings (bearing connector assembly 132) configured for different profile sizes (bearing connector 132; see Figure 13 wherein said bearing connector is sized such that a barbell 118 of different sizes is capable of being captured within the connector assembly) and
a latch (hook 126) configured to grasp or anchor the guided rod (“Hooks 126 are welded adjacent each end of the barbell such that the user may drop them into the slots of the Smith safety support 125” Paragraph 50; said hooks are configured to catch into holes in order to anchor the barbell into place).
Regarding Claim 7, Rexach further discloses the equipment according to claim 1 wherein the means for positioning a guided rod (“FIG. 13 is a detailed perspective view of a barbell connection to a Smith bearing [119,120] in the apparatus of FIG. 6” Paragraph 31) comprises:
a clamp with bearings (bearing connector assembly 132) configured for different profile sizes (bearing connector 132; see Figure 13 wherein said bearing connector is sized such that a barbell 118 of different sizes is capable of being captured within the connector assembly) and
a latch (hook 126) configured to grasp or anchor the guided rod (“Hooks 126 are welded adjacent each end of the barbell such that the user may drop them into the slots of the Smith safety support 125” Paragraph 50; said hooks are configured to catch into holes in order to anchor the barbell into place).
Regarding Claim 9, Rexach further discloses the equipment according to claim 1, wherein the power transmission means are configured so that the transmission cables are fed through a conduit (exit location of cable 131 through adjustable pulley blocks 124) located in an opening axis of the arms of the power cage (opening axis is considered to be on an interior side of the arms) by adding a double pulley (pulley block 124; pulley blocks have an upper and lower pulley such that the conduit is the spacing therebetween that the cable 131 passes through), such that a combination between the conduit and the double pulley allows the arms to be folded without untensioning the transmission cables (pulley blocks 124 are attached to said arms such that when the arms are folded into a closed position as shown in Figure 6 the cable 131 is continually tensioned between the weight stack also contained within the arms).
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 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 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 3-5, 10-13, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20020091043 A1 (Rexach) in view of US 20140243174 A1 (Alenaddaf) in further view of US 7972249 B1 (Napalan).
Regarding Claim 3, Rexach further discloses the training equipment of claim 2 wherein the collapsible power cage structure, comprises:
a first arm (extension rail 102B, column 105B) and a second arm (extension rail 101B, column 105B) positioned respectively to a left and right (as shown in Figures 6 and 7), comprising of bars with an L-shaped profile (said rail with respective column creates an upside-down shaped L profile),
the first and second arms being foldable by means of a plurality of hinges (panel hinge plates 112 and 113, Figure 6), and the arms being furthermore configured to support the means for positioning the guided rod and the power transmission means (as shown in Figures 6-9), wherein said arms are provided with a material (smith guides 121, 122 with pulley columns 123) with holes (holes 133) that allow the aforementioned means to be positioned at a height (“Smith bearings are achieved using holes 133 of pulley column 123 (see FIG. 7). The objective is for the user to be able to make smaller adjustments to better position the height of the barbell at an appropriate starting height” Paragraph 53).
and a first central longitudinal member (extension rail 104B) and a second central longitudinal member (extension rail 103B) configured to fix and/or anchor the lower body training aids as well as to guide wheels in the deployment of the lower body training aids.
Rexach teaches the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Rexach does not disclose said longitudinal members with are a U-shaped profile, hinges fitted with locking means, and for which said arms are provided with a square iron or profile, chromium-plated or stainless steel
Alenaddaf teaches an analogous exercise device in the same field of endeavor comprising:
A first and second arm (side walls 16, 18) being foldable by means of a plurality of hinges (upper pivot pins 32, 34 with hinge cross brace 12) fitted with locking means (safety lock 14, Figure 1).
a first central longitudinal member (Figure 4: Annotated) and a second central longitudinal member (Figure 4: Annotated) configured to fix and/or anchor a lower body training aids as well as to guide wheels (wheels 24) in the deployment of the lower body training aids (wheels 24 roll against the floor supporting the structure thereon).
PNG
media_image3.png
304
482
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 4: Annotated
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the longitudinal members with a pair of guide wheels and to modify the hinges with locking means comprising pivot pins and safety locks, as taught by Alenaddaf, in order to support the structure against the floor and prevent sagging and prevent unintended opening, closing of the structure during use.
Rexach as modified teaches the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Rexach does not disclose said longitudinal members with a U-shaped profile, said arms are provided with a square iron or profile, chromium-plated or stainless steel.
Napalan teaches an analogous exercise device in the same field of endeavor comprising;
A frame comprised of steel (“housing 110 is constructed from a material comprising a stainless steel” Col. 3, lines 20-21). It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the structure to be made of stainless steel, as taught by Napalan, in order to provide a solid structure.
Rexach as modified teaches the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Rexach discloses the longitudinal members having square profiles. Rexach does not disclose said longitudinal members with a U-shaped profile.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Rexach to have a U-shaped profile of since it has been held that “A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47”. In the instant case, the device of Rexach would not operate differently with the claimed U-shaped profile. Further, applicant places no criticality on the profile claimed. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the square profile to a u-shaped profile in order to reduce weight.
Regarding Claim 10, Rexach further discloses the training equipment of claim 2 wherein the collapsible power cage structure, comprises:
a first arm (extension rail 102B, column 105B) and a second arm (extension rail 101B, column 105B) positioned respectively to a left and right (as shown in Figures 6 and 7), comprising of bars with an L-shaped profile (said rail with respective column creates an upside-down shaped L profile),
the first and second arms being foldable by means of a plurality of hinges (panel hinge plates 112 and 113, Figure 6), and the arms being furthermore configured to support the means for positioning the guided rod and the power transmission means (as shown in Figures 6-9), wherein said arms are provided with a material (smith guides 121, 122 with pulley columns 123) with holes (holes 133) that allow the aforementioned means to be positioned at a height (“Smith bearings are achieved using holes 133 of pulley column 123 (see FIG. 7). The objective is for the user to be able to make smaller adjustments to better position the height of the barbell at an appropriate starting height” Paragraph 53).
and a first central longitudinal member (extension rail 104B) and a second central longitudinal member (extension rail 103B) configured to fix and/or anchor the lower body training aids as well as to guide wheels in the deployment of the lower body training aids.
Rexach teaches the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Rexach does not disclose said longitudinal members with are a U-shaped profile, hinges fitted with locking means, and for which said arms are provided with a square iron or profile, chromium-plated or stainless steel
Alenaddaf teaches an analogous exercise device in the same field of endeavor comprising:
A first and second arm (side walls 16, 18) being foldable by means of a plurality of hinges (upper pivot pins 32, 34 with hinge cross brace 12) fitted with locking means (safety lock 14, Figure 1; “To fold the exercise apparatus 10 for storage, the quick release safety lock 14 holding the hinged cross brace 12 is retracted to its stop position releasing the second side wall 18” Paragraph 60).
PNG
media_image4.png
352
448
media_image4.png
Greyscale
a first central longitudinal member (Figure 4: Annotated) and a second central longitudinal member (Figure 4: Annotated) configured to fix and/or anchor a lower body training aids as well as to guide wheels (wheels 24) in the deployment of the lower body training aids (wheels 24 roll against the floor supporting the structure thereon).
PNG
media_image3.png
304
482
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 4: Annotated
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the longitudinal members with a pair of guide wheels and to modify the hinges with locking means comprising pivot pins and safety locks, as taught by Alenaddaf, in order to support the structure against the floor and prevent sagging and prevent unintended opening, closing of the structure during use.
Rexach as modified teaches the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Rexach does not disclose said longitudinal members with a U-shaped profile, said arms are provided with a square iron or profile, chromium-plated or stainless steel.
Napalan teaches an analogous exercise device in the same field of endeavor comprising;
A frame comprised of steel (“housing 110 is constructed from a material comprising a stainless steel” Col. 3, lines 20-21). It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the structure to be made of stainless steel, as taught by Napalan, in order to provide a solid structure.
Rexach as modified teaches the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Rexach discloses the longitudinal members having square profiles. Rexach does not disclose said longitudinal members with a U-shaped profile.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Rexach to have a U-shaped profile of since it has been held that “A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47”. In the instant case, the device of Rexach would not operate differently with the claimed U-shaped profile. Further, applicant places no criticality on the profile claimed. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the square profile to a u-shaped profile in order to reduce weight.
Regarding Claim 4, Rexach as modified further discloses the equipment according to claim 3 wherein the hinge locking means comprise locking lugs (quick release safety lock 14; said safety lock 14 is a spring loaded pin which is a locking lug) and retainers (aperture within the frame that the safety lock selectively engages) configured to secure the locking position of the arms at a given opening angle (“To fold the exercise apparatus 10 for storage, the quick release safety lock 14 holding the hinged cross brace 12 is retracted to its stop position releasing the second side wall” Paragraph 60: Alenaddaf; said safety pin is selectively retractable to lock and unlock said frame from rotation from an open position to a closed position).
Regarding Claim 11, Rexach as modified further discloses the equipment according to claim 10 wherein the hinge locking means comprise locking lugs (quick release safety lock 14; said safety lock 14 is a spring loaded pin which is a locking lug) and retainers (aperture within the frame that the safety lock selectively engages) configured to secure the locking position of the arms at a given opening angle (“To fold the exercise apparatus 10 for storage, the quick release safety lock 14 holding the hinged cross brace 12 is retracted to its stop position releasing the second side wall” Paragraph 60: Alenaddaf; said safety pin is selectively retractable to lock and unlock said frame from rotation from an open position to a closed position).
Regarding Claim 5, Rexach as modified further discloses the equipment according to claim 3, wherein the hinge locking means comprises a pin (pins 32).
Regarding Claim 13, Rexach as modified further discloses the equipment according to claim 11, wherein the hinge locking means comprises a pin (pins 32).
Regarding Claim 12, Rexach as modified further discloses the equipment according to claim 10, wherein the hinge locking means comprises a pin (pins 32).
Regarding Claim 19, Rexach as modified further discloses the equipment according to claim 3 wherein the means for positioning a guided rod (“FIG. 13 is a detailed perspective view of a barbell connection to a Smith bearing [119,120] in the apparatus of FIG. 6” Paragraph 31) comprises:
a clamp with bearings (bearing connector assembly 132) configured for different profile sizes (bearing connector 132; see Figure 13 wherein said bearing connector is sized such that a barbell 118 of different sizes is capable of being captured within the connector assembly) and
a latch (hook 126) configured to grasp or anchor the guided rod (“Hooks 126 are welded adjacent each end of the barbell such that the user may drop them into the slots of the Smith safety support 125” Paragraph 50; said hooks are configured to catch into holes in order to anchor the barbell into place).
Regarding Claim 20, Rexach as modified further discloses the equipment according to claim 4, wherein the means for positioning a guided rod (“FIG. 13 is a detailed perspective view of a barbell connection to a Smith bearing [119,120] in the apparatus of FIG. 6” Paragraph 31) comprises:
a clamp with bearings (bearing connector assembly 132) configured for different profile sizes (bearing connector 132; see Figure 13 wherein said bearing connector is sized such that a barbell 118 of different sizes is capable of being captured within the connector assembly) and
a latch (hook 126) configured to grasp or anchor the guided rod (“Hooks 126 are welded adjacent each end of the barbell such that the user may drop them into the slots of the Smith safety support 125” Paragraph 50; said hooks are configured to catch into holes in order to anchor the barbell into place).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 8, 14-17 are 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.
Regarding Claim 8, the prior art of record US 20020091043 A1 (Rexach) fails to teach or render obvious the training device in combination with all of the elements and structural and functional relationships as claimed and further including:
Wherein the means for positioning a guided rod comprises: a clamp containing nylon sheets inside, as a sliding element;
The prior art of record teaches a hook, which are not considered equivalent to applicant’s invention. It would not have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the hook to be a clamp with a nylon sheet therein without improper hindsight.
Regarding Claims 6, 14-17, the prior art of record US 20020091043 A1 (Rexach) fails to teach or render obvious the training device in combination with all of the elements and structural and functional relationships as claimed and further including:
Guides with folding legs and with wheels and/or bearings, wherein the guides are configured as a support structure for the lower body training aids; a guided carriage movable between the guides by means of a plurality of wheels and/or bearings; and a second independent fixture that can be attached to the guided carriage and is configured to increase the load on the press when performing the 45-degree leg press exercise with external weight discs.
The prior art of record teaches a pin 136 for attaching the bench which is not equivalent to applicant’s invention as it does not have wheels and is not movable and does not comprise a second independent fixture attachable to said pin. It would not have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the pin to be a guided carriage with heels and to modify said carriage with a second independent fixture without improper hindsight.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY T MOORE whose telephone number is 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 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 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 at 866-217-9197. If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 or 571-272-1000.
/ZACHARY T MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 3784