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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “3” has been used to designate both the storing units and what appears to be a handle in Figs. 1a-2b.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “cushion-disposition angle range is from 0° to 270°” of claim 5 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “means of the rotary shaft” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, 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 limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LUIS PALACIO (GB 2580965 A) in view of Teuscher (US 6659923 B2).
Regarding Claim 1, Luis teaches a weight bench for weight training and storing weight training equipment, comprising: a chair body including a backrest 14b,c and a seat 14a, wherein the backrest has a cushion (Refer to Abstract:” The elongate beam provides a rigid mounting structure for the bench 14, particularly where the second pad of the bench 14 comprises more than one panel”..The Office takes the position that the seat and backrest are considered to be cushioned and such cushions are a known teaching in the art) and a rotary member connected to the cushion 14b,c, the cushion is forwardly and backwardly rotatable within a cushion-disposition angle range by means of the rotary member (Refer to annotated Fig. 1 below), and the seat 14a is disposed in front of the backrest with a user space formed between the backrest and the seat (Refer to Figs. 1&2 Pages 4-5:” The bench 14 is moveable between a closed configuration (as shown in figure 1), wherein the bench 14 lies flat on the support structure 12 and an open configuration (as shown in figure2), wherein the bench 14 is angled upwardly relative to the top 12a of the support structure 12. The bench is split into two parts. The first part is retained in a permanent position parallel with the top 12a of the support structure. The second part is permitted to be angled relative to the first part.
The second part of the bench 14 comprises an elongate beam 18 extending along the underside of the second part of the bench 14. The elongate beam 18 comprises a plurality of holes. A curved member 20 connects between the elongate beam 18 and the support structure 12 by way of a quick release fastener 22 at either end. The curved member 20 can be connected to the elongate beam by way of the holes in the elongate beam 18 according to how a user wishes to angle the bench 14. The elongate beam provides a rigid mounting structure for the bench 14, particularly where the second pad of the bench 14 comprises more than one panel.”);
PNG
media_image1.png
498
560
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a supporting foundation connected to a lower portion of the chair body 4a-c and supporting the chair body, a storing space being formed between the lower portion of the chair body 4a-c and the outer surface of the supporting foundation (Refer to annotated Fig. 2 below),
PNG
media_image2.png
554
580
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the supporting foundation includes a base (Refer to annotated Fig. 2 above), a supporting member 20 and a fixing member 22, the base, the supporting member 20 and the fixing member 22 are connected together, the base 12 has a receiving recess for receiving the supporting member, one end of the supporting member is connected to the cushion 14b, the supporting member rotates forwardly and backwardly with the cushion, the supporting member is provided, along a longitudinal direction of the supporting member, with a plurality of fixing holes (Refer to annotated Fig. 2 above) arranged corresponding to a plurality of cushion-disposition angles within the cushion-disposition angle range so that the supporting member 20 and the cushion 4b,c are fixed to a selected cushion-disposition angle of the plurality of cushion-disposition angle by rotating the cushion about the rotary member to the selected cushion-disposition angle and inserting the fixing member 22 into the fixing holes corresponding to the selected cushion-disposition angle, thereby adjusting the user space (Refer to Page 4:” The second part of the bench 14 comprises an elongate beam 18 extending along the underside of the second part of the bench 14. The elongate beam 18 comprises a plurality of holes. A curved member 20 connects between the elongate beam 18 and the support structure 12 by way of a quick release fastener 22 at either end. The curved member 20 can be connected to the elongate beam by way of the holes in the elongate beam 18 according to how a user wishes to angle the bench 14. The elongate beam provides a rigid mounting structure for the bench 14, particularly where the second pad of the bench 14 comprises more than one panel.”); and a plurality of storing units 16 disposed on an outer surface of the base and located in the storing space for storing the weight training equipment (Refer to annotated Fig. 2 above). Luis is silent regarding the rotating member being a rotary shaft. Teuscher teaches that rotating shafts 98 for backrest adjustable benches 10 are known in the art for producing expected results as being a suitable hinge member for pivoting and therefore such modification does not patentably distinguish the invention over the prior arts (Refer to Teuscher Fig. 2 Page 5 Lines 10-13:” As best shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, a horizontal shaft 98 extends through the sleeve 60. The plates 96 are mounted to rotate on the horizontal axis provided by the shaft 98, thereby mounting the back 92 and its frame 94 for pivotal movement about the axis of the shaft 98.”). Refer to MPEP 2144.06 Art Recognized Equivalence for the Same Purpose [R-01.2024].
Regarding Claim 2, Luis in view of Tesucher continues to teach further comprising a plate 12, wherein the plate 12 is arranged to be connected to a lower portion of the supporting foundation, and the storing space is formed among an upper portion of the plate 12, the lower portion of the chair body 4a-c and the outer surface of the supporting foundation (Refer to Luis).
Regarding Claim 3, Luis in view of Tesucher continues to teach further comprising wherein the plate 12 is further provided with a gripping portion and a plurality of rollers 24 for the user to grip the gripping portion and then push or pull the weight bench, thereby moving the weight bench by rolling of the plurality of rollers 24 (Refer to annotated Fig. 2 below. The Office takes the position that the gripping portion is indirectly connected with the plate 12).
PNG
media_image3.png
498
560
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4, Luis in view of Tesucher continues to teach wherein the plurality of storing units 16 are hanging trays (Refer to Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LUIS PALACIO (GB 2580965 A) and Teuscher (US 6659923 B2) further in view of Bowden-Eyre, Thomas (WO 2022194838 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Luis teaches the claimed invention as noted above and continues to teach wherein when the cushion 14b,c rotates backwardly to be horizontal to the seat 14a, the cushion-disposition angle is 0° (Refer to Fig. 1) and when the cushion further rotates forwardly from horizontal level to the seat 14a (Refer to annotated Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
480
691
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Luis fails to teach when the cushion further rotates backwardly from horizontal level to the seat, the cushion-disposition angle is an included angle between a horizontal extension line extending backwardly from the seat 14a and the cushion and is a negative angle below the horizontal. Bowden-Eyre teaches a bench 2 comprising a weight storage area 10 wherein the bench comprises a backrest 4b which rotates backwardly from horizontal level to the seat, the backrest angle is an included angle between a horizontal extension line extending backwardly from the seat 14a and the backrest 4b and is a negative angle below the horizontal , the cushion-disposition angle is an included angle between the horizontal extension line backwardly extending backwardly from the seat and the cushion, and is a positive angle; and the cushion-disposition angle range is from 0° to 270° (Refer to annotated Fig. 2 to depict that the backrest extends below a horizontal line).
PNG
media_image5.png
202
476
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Bowden-Eyre is analogous with Applicants invention and therefore it would have been obvious to modify the bench of Luis to be in view of Bowden-Eyre such that the backrest is capable of rotating backwardly from horizontal level to the seat, the cushion-disposition angle is an included angle between a horizontal extension line extending backwardly from the seat and the cushion and is a negative angle below the horizontal for the purpose of performing exercises where it is desirable for the torso to be below the horizontal such as a declined bench press. Although, Bowden-Eyre does not expressly disclose the cushion-disposition angle range is from 0° to 270° Applicant does not provide criticality to the angle being between from 0° to 270° and further since the angle range of Bowden-Eyre (Figs. 1a-2) appears to be depicted the backrest having the ability to adjust in the same range and more as that of Applicants device (Figs. 2b) the Office takes the position that such angles would have been obvious through routine experimentation to provide different exercise ranges and therefore such modification does not patentably distinguish the invention over the prior arts. Refer to MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions [R-01.2024].
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