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 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 6 and 20 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.
Regarding claim 6, there is no antecedent basis for “the first weight” and “the second weight”. It is assumed that claim 6 is intended to depend from claim 5.
Regarding claim 20, “the first and second inner weight brackets” lack antecedent basis and have been interpreted as “the first and second plate brackets’’.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9, 11-13, 15, 17, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Speyer (US 3,913,908).
Regarding claim 1, Speyer discloses an adjustable weight dumbbell (“Barbell having a detachably mounted weight supporting bar”) comprising a handle assembly including a handle having a first end and an opposite second end (handle, rod 11 and rod members 13, having opposite ends, Figs. 8, 9); a first plate mounted to the first end of the handle, the first plate having a first inner side adjacent to the handle, a first outer side, and a first inner weight mounting structure positioned on the first inner side (first plate, left weight 38 in Fig. 9, relatively at one end of the handle, having inner and outer sides and a mounting structure, radial protuberances 39, Fig. 9); and a second plate mounted to the second end of the handle, the second plate having a second inner side adjacent to the handle and facing the first inner side, a second outer side, and a second inner weight mounting structure positioned on the second inner side (second plate, weight 38 on the opposite end of the handle having identical inner and outer sides and mounting structure, Fig. 8, 9); and a first inner weight configured to removably couple to the first inner weight mounting structure (first inner weight, flange 31, removably coupled to left weight 38 via protuberances 33 engaging protuberances 39, Fig. 9); and a second inner weight configured to removably couple to the second inner weight mounting structure (second inner weight, flange 31 on the opposite end of the handle, also removably coupled to right weight 38 via protuberances 33 engaging protuberances 39, Figs. 8, 9).
Regarding claim 2, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 1 further comprising a first outer weight mounting structure positioned on the first outer side of the first plate (the outer, right side of left weight 38 in Fig. 9 has protuberances); a second outer weight mounting structure positioned on the second outer side of the second plate (the outer, left side of the right weight 38 has protuberances, identical to that of Fig. 9); one or more first outer weights each configured to removably couple to the first outer weight mounting structure (first outer weights, weights 38 interlocked with left weight 38 via protuberances 39, Fig. 9); and one or more second outer weights each configured to removably couple to the second outer weight mounting structure (second outer weights, identical weights 38 on the other end of the handle interlocked with right, inner weight 38 via protuberances 39, Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 3, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 2, wherein each of the first outer weights is configured to removably attach to another adjacent one of the first outer weights (there are multiple weights 38 to the right of left weight 38 removably attached via protuberances 39, Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 4, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 2, wherein each of the second outer weights is configured to removably attach to another adjacent one of the second outer weights (there are multiple weights 38 to the left of right, inner weight 38 on the other end of the handle, also removably attached via protuberances 39, Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 5, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 2, wherein a first weight of either of the first inner weight or the second inner weight is different than a second weight of any of the one or more first outer weights or of the one or more second outer weights (flange 31 has a weight different than the weight of the adjacent weight 38, Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 6, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 5, wherein the first weight is less than the second weight (flange 31 has a weight less than the weight of the adjacent weight 38, Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 9, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 1, wherein the first and second inner weight mounting structures each comprise a locking structure configured to selectively engage with and disengage with the first inner weight mounting structure and the second inner weight mounting structure, respectively (protuberances 33 and 39 constitute locking structures that selectively engage and disengage, Fig. 9; “By providing mating protuberances 33 and 39, weights 38 are held in locking and antirotational relationship upon the clamping of weights 38 between flanges 31 and 14.”, Col. 4, Lns. 56-59).
Regarding claim 11, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 1, wherein the first and second inner weights each have a body that defines a notch shaped and sized to at least partially receive the handle when coupled to the first and second inner weight mounting structures, respectively (notches defined by walls 24, Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 12, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 11, wherein a center of mass of each of the first and second inner weights is disposed within the notch (“Walls 24 preferably unite centrally of weight 23 to form an aperture at the axis of weight 23 corresponding in configuration and slightly larger than the periphery of bar member 13.”, Col. 3, Lns. 26-29).
Regarding claim 13, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 12, wherein the center of mass of each of the first and second inner weights is aligned with a longitudinal axis of the handle when the first and second inner weights are coupled to the first and second inner weight mounting structures, respectively (“Walls 24 preferably unite centrally of weight 23 to form an aperture at the axis of weight 23 corresponding in configuration and slightly larger than the periphery of bar member 13.”, Col. 3, Lns. 26-29).
Regarding claim 15, Speyer discloses an adjustable weight dumbbell (“Barbell having a detachably mounted weight supporting bar’, title) comprising a handle assembly including a handle having a first end and an opposite second end (handle, rod 11 and rod members 13, having opposite ends, Figs. 8, 9); a first plate mounted to the first end of the handle, the first plate having a first inner side and a first outer side, a first inner weight bracket disposed on the first inner side, and a first outer weight bracket disposed on the first outer side (first plate, left weight 38 in Fig. 9, relatively at one end of the handle, having inner and outer sides and brackets, radial protuberances 39, on each side, Fig. 9); and a second plate mounted to the second end of the handle, the second plate having a second inner side facing the first inner side of the first plate and a second outer side, a second inner weight bracket disposed on the second inner side, and a second outer weight bracket disposed on the second outer side (second plate, weight 38 on the opposite end of the handle having identical inner and outer sides and brackets, Fig. 8, 9); a first inner weight configured to removably couple to the first inner weight bracket (first inner weight, flange 31, removably coupled to left weight 38 via protuberances 33 engaging bracket 39, Fig. 9); a second inner weight configured to removably couple to the second inner weight bracket, wherein the first and second inner weights at least partially surround the handle when coupled to the handle assembly (second inner weight, flange 31 on the opposite end of the handle, also removably coupled to right weight 38 via protuberances 33 engaging protuberances 39, Figs. 8, 9); and a plurality of outer weights configured to removably couple to the first and second outer weight brackets and to each other so as to adjust weight of the adjustable weight dumbbell (outer weights, weights 38 interlocked with left and right inner weights 38 via mating protuberances 39, Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 17, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 15, wherein the first and second inner weights slidingly engage with the first and second inner weight brackets along a first direction (outwardly from the center of the handle toward the ends of the handle, Fig. 8), and the plurality of outer weights slidingly engage with the first and second outer weight brackets along a second direction (inwardly from the ends of the handle toward the center of the handle, Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 19, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 15, wherein the first inner weight is a mirror form of the second inner weight (flanges 31 are mirror images, Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 20, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 15, wherein each of the first and second inner weights have a locking mechanism configured to engage and disengage with the first and second plate brackets, respectively (protuberances 33 engage and disengage with protuberances 39, Fig. 9; “By providing mating protuberances 33 and 39, weights 38 are held in locking and antirotational relationship upon the clamping of weights 38 between flanges 31 and 14.”, Col. 4, Lns. 56-59).
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(s) 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Speyer.
Regarding claim 14, Speyer discloses the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 1. Speyer fails to explicitly disclose the first and second inner weights each have a body that defines an oblique surface at a top end of the first and second inner weights, respectively. However, it has long been held to be well within the abilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to make various modifications that result in a product or process that is more desirable, for example because it is stronger, cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable, more efficient, or otherwise advantageous. Because the desire to enhance commercial opportunities by improving a product or process is universal—and even common-sensical—it has been held that there exists in these situations a motivation to modify a prior art invention. Here, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the first and second inner weights to each have a body that defines an oblique surface at a top end of the first and second inner weights, respectively, since a change in shape of an element is a matter of obvious design choice when such modification would yield the advantage of a surface that would discourage the barbell/ dumbbell from rolling across the floor.
Regarding claim 16, Speyer teaches the adjustable weight dumbbell of claim 15, but does not teach the above wherein the first and second inner sides are formed from a different material than the first and second outer sides. However, it has long been held to be well within the abilities of one of ordinary skill in the art to make various modifications that result in a product or process that is more desirable, for example because it is stronger, cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable, more efficient, or otherwise advantageous. Because the desire to enhance commercial opportunities by improving a product or process is universal—and even common-sensical—it has been held that there exists in these situations a motivation to modify a prior art invention. Here, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the inner sides of a different material, such as a reduced friction material, since material choice is a matter of obvious design choice when such modification would yield the advantage of a surface that reduces wear.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7, 8, 10, and 18 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARRETT K ATKINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8117. The examiner can normally be reached 0800-1800 M-F.
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.
/GARRETT K ATKINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784