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 .
Drawings
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 fixed clamp position (claim 5; see 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection below) 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 4, “the rear end” should read ---a rear end---
Claim 1, line 6, “the foot” should read ---a foot of a user---
Claim 1, line 8, “the bottom” should read ---a bottom---
Claim 1, line 9, “a exercising counterweight member” should read ---an exercising counterweight member---
Claim 2, line 3, “the lower ends” should read ---lower ends---
Claim 2, line 6, “the upper end” should read ---an upper end---
Claim 2, line 7, “the upper end” should read ---an upper end---
Claim 3, line 6, “the bottom surface” should read ---a bottom surface---
Claim 3, line 16, “the inner side” should read ---an inner side---
Claim 4, line 3, “the left and right sides” should read ---left and right sides---
Claim 5, line 1, “the top” should read ---a top---
Claim 5, line 2, “the top” should read ---a top---
Claim 6, lines 1-2, “the upper surface” should read ---an upper surface---
Claim 6, lines 2-3, “the inner surfaces” should read ---inner surfaces---
Claim 7, line 3, “the inner side” should read ---an inner side---
Claim 7, line 5, “the left and right sides” should read ---left and right sides---
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 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 do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a counterweight fixing member (claim 1); a locking structure (claim 1).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The counterweight fixing member, with generic placeholder “member” coupled with functional language “counterweight fixing” and not modified by sufficient structure, has been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure(s) of a left clip, a right clip, and a fixed installation portion (par. [0026]).
The locking structure, with generic placeholder “structure” coupled with functional language “locking” and not modified by sufficient structure, has been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure(s) of an adjustable lace (par. [0031]).
If applicant does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 5 is 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.
Claim 5 recites “the buckle and a fixed clamp position are arranged to buckle with each other” in lines 3-4. It is unclear if “a fixed clamp position” is a structure or merely a location. See drawing objection above.
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 (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 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 1-3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Theofilos (US 2023/0330470).
Regarding independent claim 1, Theofilos discloses a foot dumbbell exerciser (Figs. 26A-34), comprising an exerciser body (kettle grab foot exercise accessory device 200) and a counterweight fixing member (dumbbell securing unit 16 including left clip/left wall 100, right clip/right wall 98, and a fixed installation portion/kettlebell grab main body engaging member 94), wherein the exerciser body is composed of a base support member (main body 202), a lateral support member (raised back wall 206), and an outer wrapping fixing member (pad 216); the lateral support member is vertically arranged on the rear end of the base support member and is integrally connected with the base support member (see Fig. 26A); the outer wrapping fixing member locks the foot to the base support member or releases the foot from the base support member through a locking structure (foot securing members 212, equivalent to the adjustable lace of the instant application); the counterweight fixing member is detachably mounted at the bottom of the base support member (via fixed installation portion/kettlebell grab main body engaging member 94); and a exercising counterweight member (dumbbell 120) is detachably mounted on the counterweight fixing member.
PNG
media_image1.png
491
597
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Theofilos further discloses wherein the exercising counterweight member is a dumbbell (dumbbell 120), the counterweight fixing member comprises a left clip (left wall 100), a right clip (right wall 98) and a fixed installation portion (kettlebell grab main body engaging member 94), the lower ends of the left clip and the right clip are hinged with each other (at hinge 102), the left clip and the right clip form a cylindrical structure when closed (see cylindrical interior 96 formed by left wall 100 and right wall 98), a crossbar (bar portion 132) of the dumbbell is clamped and fixed in an inner cavity of the cylindrical structure (see alternate embodiment in Fig. 15 illustrating dumbbell securing unit 16 receiving bar portion 132 of dumbbell 120), the upper end of the left clip and the upper end of the right clip are provided with the fixed installation portion (see Fig. 13), and the left clip and the right clip are detachably connected to the base support member through the fixed installation portion (via receivers 224, openings 233 and screws 232).
PNG
media_image2.png
496
609
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Theofilos further discloses wherein the fixed installation portion comprises a left protruding portion (second half 106 of the kettlebell grab main body engaging member 94), a right protruding portion (first half 104 of the kettlebell grab engaging member 94), and a fixed insert (screw 232); the left protruding portion protrudes from the upper end of the left clip (see Fig. 13), the right protruding portion protrudes from the upper end of the right clip (see Fig. 13), the left protruding portion is provided with a first through slot (opening 118, see Figs. 10-11), the right protruding portion is provided with a second through slot (opening 118, see Figs. 10-11), the bottom surface of the base support member is provided with a fixed installation slot (receiver 224), the left protruding portion and the right protruding portion are arranged to fit together when the left clip and the right clip are brought together (see Figs. 10-12), the fixed installation slot is for the left protruding portion and the right protruding portion to insert (par. [0069], “The foot exercise accessory device attachment member 222 may include a receiver 224 sized and shaped to receive and store therein at least a portion of the kettlebell grab engaging member 94”), a horizontal slot (opening 233) is provided at the bottom of the rear end of the base support member to communicate with the fixed installation slot, the fixed insert is inserted along the horizontal slot and passes through the first through slot of the left protruding portion and the second through slot of the right protruding portion in turn, and a second fixed installation portion (nut 234) for fixing the fixed insert is provided on the inner side of the horizontal slot (par. [0069], “The kettlebell grab engaging member 94 secures to the receiver 224 via screw 232 (through an opening 233 in one of the surfaces of the receiver 224 and/or surfaces of the main body 202, see at least FIGS. 26A, 26B,28, 32), and nut 234, with the screw inserted into a threaded opening within the receiver 224 (extending into and fitting within opening 118 of kettlebell grab engaging member 94). The receivers 224 positioned on the bottom 208 may also contain opening 233, see FIG. 26B”).
Regarding claim 7, Theofilos further discloses wherein the locking structure comprises an adjustable lace (foot securing member strap 212, equivalent to the adjustable lace as disclosed and illustrated by applicant), the outer wrapping fixing member is provided with a lace installation slot (between upper and lower outer portions of pad 216), the inner side of the adjustable lace is fitted and mounted in the lace installation slot (see Fig. 26A), both ends of the adjustable lace are fixedly mounted on the left and right sides of the lateral support member (via buttons 214, see Fig. 32), and the adjustable lace is provided with an adjustment buckle for adjusting the length of the adjustable lace (buckle illustrated in Figs. 32-33, par. [0067], “The foot securing member strap 212 may be a fixed length or may be designed to be length adjustable”).
PNG
media_image3.png
426
492
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
456
541
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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.
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Theofilos (US 2023/0330470) in view of Dickstein et al. (US 2022/0339487)
Regarding claim 5, Theofilos does not teach wherein the top of the left clip (100) is provided with a fixed clamp slot, the top of the right clip (98) is provided with a buckle structure extending in the direction of the left clip, and the buckle structure and a fixed clamp position (for purposes of rejection, the recited “a fixed clamp position” has been interpreted as “the fixed clamp slot”) are arranged to buckle with each other.
Dickstein et al., in the same field of endeavor with regards to exercising counterweight fixing members, teaches an exercising counterweight fixing member (Fig. 21) comprising a left clip (second body 2) wherein the top of the left clip is provided with a fixed clamp slot (indent 14) and a right clip (first body 1) wherein the top of the right clip is provided with a buckle structure (protruding tab 16; as “buckle” is defined by Merriam-Webster dictionary as “a fastening for two loose ends that is attached to one and holds the other by a catch” and the protruding tab 16 of Dickstein et al. includes a catch to attach to indent 14, the protruding tab 16 constitutes a buckle structure) extending in the direction of the left clip (see 21), and the buckle structure and the fixed clamp slot are arranged to buckle with each other (par. [0054], “The first inside face 12 of the first body 1 includes first formed protruding tab 16 constructed and arranged to be releasably engaged with a second formed indent 14 on the second inside face 11 of the second body 2 when the bodies are closed about the axis of the barrel hinge segments 6 and 7”).
PNG
media_image5.png
602
545
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tops of the left clip and the right clip to respectively include a fixed clamp slot and a buckle structure, as is similarly taught by Dickstein et al., for the purpose of providing increased security to the exercising counterweight fixing member when secured around an exercising counterweight member (Dickstein et al. par. [0054], “The function of the adapted formed indents and formed protruding tabs is to distribute the gravity weight of the dumbbell along multiple contact points between the first body 1 and the second body 2.”).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Theofilos (US 2023/0330470) further in view of Swierski et al. (US 7,552,798), and further in view of Donaldson (US 5,169,364).
Regarding claim 6, Theofilos further teaches wherein the inner surfaces of the lateral support member (206) and the outer wrapping fixing member (216) are provided with buffer portions (annotated Fig. 26A), but does not teach wherein the upper surface (204) of the base support member (202) is provided with an anti-slip insole, and the buffer portions are elastic.
PNG
media_image6.png
488
454
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Swierski et al., in the same field of endeavor with regards to foot-worn exercise devices, teaches an upper surface (32) of a base support member (20) is provided with an anti-slip insole (anti-slip layer 52; see Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the upper surface of the base support member of Theofilos to further include an anti-slip insole, as is similarly taught by Swierski et al., for the purpose of preventing unintended movement of the user’s foot when secured to the foot dumbbell exerciser.
Theofilos as modified by Swierski et al. does not teach the buffer portions are elastic.
Donaldson, in the same field of endeavor with regards to foot dumbbell exercisers, teaches a foot dumbbell exerciser (leg exercise device 1; Figs. 1-2) comprising buffer portions (padding 21) that are elastic (col. 5 lines 37-40, “A generous layer of padding 21, preferably constructed of neoprene foam padding approximately 1 in. thick, is provided to the inside surfaces of both the front and back halves 20 and 30 of the ankle boot 10”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the buffer portions of Theofilos to be elastic, as is similarly taught by Donaldson, for the purpose of providing enhanced comfort to a user while wearing the foot dumbbell exerciser.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest a foot dumbbell exerciser in combination with all of the structural and functional limitations, and further comprising a second fixed installation portion comprising a V-shaped elastic piece, elastic piece installation grooves are provided on the left and right sides of the horizontal slot in the bottom surface of the base support member, the V-shaped elastic piece is mounted in the elastic piece installation grooves, the fixed insert is provided with insert grooves on both sides, and when the fixed insert is inserted into the horizontal slot, the V-shaped elastic piece is engaged with the insert grooves.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for additional pertinent prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHLEEN FISK whose telephone number is (571)272-1042. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-4PM M-F (Central).
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.
/KATHLEEN M FISK/Examiner, Art Unit 3784