Detailed Action
This is the Final Rejection based on application 18/934,209 filed on 10/31/2024, and which claims as amended on 05/22/2026 have been considered in the ensuing 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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made to the instant applications claims for priority to provisional application 63/546,867, and as such the earliest date of priority of 11/01/2023 is granted to the instant application.
Response to Amendment
The amendments have been sufficient to overcome the original claim objections, most of the drawing objections, and rejections under 35 USC 112(b) present in the Non-Final Action. The drawing objections not overcome have been maintained below.
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 “elastic member positioned within the continuous edge”, and “elastic material positioned within the continuous edge of said exercising cover” of independent claim 1, and the “ “elastic material positioned within the continuous edge of said exercising cover” of independent claim 12 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. 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
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 4, “into low impact exercising system” should be –into a low impact exercising system--.
On line 11, “edge””, should be –edge--, with the quotation mark removed.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 2, “further comprise” should be –further comprises--.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 3, “into low impact exercising system” should be –into a low impact exercising system--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “an elastic member positioned within the continuous edge” on line 11. There is no mention in the specification, the previous claim set, or the drawings as to what this elastic member is meant to be. Therefore claim 1, and its dependent claims are rejected for introducing new matter.
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 1-16 are 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 1 recites the limitation, “the conventional structure” on line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation, as a conventional structure has not yet been claimed, only a conventional furniture structure has been discussed. The examiner notes however, that the conventional furniture structure was not positively recited and merely mentioned as the function of the exercise cover.
In addition, on line 12, the claim recites “an elastic material positioned within the continuous edge of said exercise cover”. It is unclear if the claimed limitation is meant to mean that there is another structure other than the “elastic member positioned within the continuous edge” claimed on line 11, that is also made from elastic material inserted through the edge of the cover, which neither are depicted as noted in the drawing objection above, or if the edge of the cover is made from an elastic material such as rubber. The specification does recite that the seal of the continuous could create an internal channel through which elastic or other material is contained, however this possible description requires structures not shown or discussed and the claimed limitation allows for the interpretation that the edge could be made from a material containing elastic properties.
Furthermore, on line 14, the limitation “the cover” lacks sufficient antecedent, as a cover has not yet been claimed, only an exercise cover has been claimed thus far.
In addition, on lines 17-18, the limitation “ a users a user’s” is unclear due to the limitation “an exercise user” being claimed previously on line 8. It is unclear if this second instance of “a user” is meant to be the same user as the previously claimed exercise user, or if this is a second separate user. The examiner suggests amending the claim limitation to –the exercise user’s—for grammatical purposes and to overcome the clarity issue noted above.
Claim 5 recites the limitation, “the conventional structure” on lines 1-2. For reasons similar to that of claim 1, which claim 5 depends upon, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation, as a conventional structure has not yet been claimed, only a conventional furniture structure has been discussed.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the table” on line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation as a table has not yet been claimed. The examiner notes that it appears claim 7 is meant to be dependent on claim 5, which is the first introduction of a table.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the table” on line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation as a table has not yet been claimed. The examiner notes that it appears claim 8 is meant to be dependent on claim 5, which is the first introduction of a table.
In addition, claim 8 recites the limitation, “wherein a said connector” on line 1. It is unclear if this is meant to refer to one of the previously claimed connectors which were claimed in independent claim 1, or if this is a new separate connector that must be different from those in claim 1. The examiner suggests amending the claim to be –wherein said connectors further comprise--, OR, – wherein a connector of the connectors further comprises--.
Claim 12 recites the limitation, “a users a user’s” on line 15. This limitation is unclear due to the limitation “an exercise user” being claimed previously on line 7. It is unclear if this second instance of “a user” is meant to be the same user as the previously claimed exercise user, or if this is a second separate user. The examiner suggests amending the claim limitation to –the exercise user’s—for grammatical purposes and to overcome the clarity issue noted above.
Dependent claims 2,4, 6, 9-11, and 13-16 are rejected due to their dependency on a rejected base claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 3, which claim 4 depends upon, has been canceled, and therefore claim 4 has an improper dependent form. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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) 1-2, 4-5,9-13, and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derry US 20180133535 A1 in further view of Knapp US 20240016685 A1.
Regarding claim 1:
Derry teaches a portable exercise system to facilitate low-impact exercising comprising: an exercise cover (cushion 11) for converting a conventional furniture structure having a flat surface and edges into low impact exercising system (“FIG. 8 shows how the cushion 11 can be attached to a chair 23 by means of the bungee 19 wrapped around the first hinge member 21 and the junction of the chair's back and seat” See paragraph [0039]), said exercise cover being of a flexible material (“the exemplary preferred embodiment of the present invention 10 comprises a flexible, foam-filled cushion 11, having a trifold, hingeably segmented structure.” See paragraph [0027]) having an upper and a lower surface (See annotated figure 8. The examiner notes that since the cushion is a physical 3-dimensional object it inherently includes an upper and a lower surface), such that when said exercise cover is placed over the conventional structure with a flat surface (The examiner notes that the chair in the example of figure 8 which the exercise cover slips over has a flat upper surface to allow the user to sit, on the surface of the exercise cover during use as depicted in figure 10.), the upper surface of the exercise structure fits over the flat surface of the conventional structure where the upper surface of said exercise cover is being exposed to an exercise user (See figure 10), said exercise cover having a continuous edge that is sealed to prevent fraying and to provide additional structural integrity for said exercise cover (The examiner notes that as depicted the cushion 11 is a single sealed piece comprised of three segments, 12,13, and 14, each sewn together to create hinge members 21 and 22 between the segments to allow the cushion to move and bend according to the user’s movements which would prevent any damage to the cushion during use.); one or more straps (bungee cord 19) attached to the cover at the edges (See figure 1) to secure said exercise cover to an exercising object being covered by said exercise cover (See figure 8); one or more exercising bands attached to said exercise cover (elastic upper resistance cord 15 and lower resistance cords 16), said exercising bands having elasticity properties for creating tension and provide resistance during a users a user's exercise activities (The examiner notes that as stated in paragraphs [0031] and [0032] both the upper and lower resistance cords consist of elastic cords and are stretched during use to provide resistance to the user during exercises. In addition, the examiner notes that due to the unclear nature of the claim language, see 35 USC 112(b) rejection above, the two instances of a user claimed in the instant limitation, with no further structural or functional limitations, are being considered as the same exercise user previously claimed.); and connectors attached to said exercise for connecting said one or more exercising bands to said exercise cover (See annotated figure 1 which depicts carabiner clips securing the resistance cords to the exercise cover).
[AltContent: textbox (Strap connector on the first end of the elastic resistance band.)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Continuous sealed edge)][AltContent: textbox (Carabiner clip (connector))][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
416
684
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Upper Surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Upper Surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Lower Surface)]
PNG
media_image2.png
568
402
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
552
448
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Derry fails to teach an elastic member positioned within the continuous edge" an elastic material positioned within the continuous edge of said exercise cover to further facilitate securing of said exercise cover to the conventional structure.
Knapp, however, teaches a massage table cover including a rectangular top portion, four rectangular side portions, and two elastics, operable to cover one section of a foldable massage table (See abstract), and further teaches an elastic member positioned within the continuous edge" an elastic material (front elastic 118 and rear elastic 120. The examiner notes that due to the unclear nature of the claim language, and lack of direction from the drawings and the specification, see 35 USC 112(a) and (b) rejections above as well as the drawing objections presented above, that the elastic member and the elastic material, with no further structural or functional limitations, are being considered as the same structure based on the original claims filed in the previous Non-Final action.) positioned within the continuous edge of said exercise cover to further facilitate securing of said exercise cover to the conventional structure (“The cover 100 further comprises a front elastic (not visible in this figure but see FIG. 2 item 118) embedded within an edge of the rectangular front portion 104. The front elastic 118 may extend through a partial length of the rectangular front portion 104. The cover 100 further comprises a rear elastic (not visible in this figure but see FIG. 2 item 120) embedded within an edge of the rectangular rear portion 110. The rear elastic 120 may extend through a partial length of the rectangular rear portion 110. The front elastic 118 and the rear elastic 120 operate to secure the massage table cover 100 to the one section of the foldable massage table.” See paragraph [0031]. The examiner notes that the covers of Knapp having elastic edges made from rubber as stated in paragraph [0006], which is stretched over the framing of the trampoline box to better secure the cover to the table is being considered as the continuous edge containing an elastic material to further facilitate securing of said exercising cover to the exercising element.)
In addition, Knapp teaches wherein tension in said elastic material contained in the continuous edge of said exercising cover can be adjusted (The examiner notes that this limitation is merely claiming the function of elastic material which as stretched inherently adjusts the tension within itself, and therefore the edge of the table cover being tightened or loosened around the table would cause the tension to be adjusted.)
PNG
media_image4.png
526
618
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
430
354
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the edge of the exercise cover of Derry to include an elastic material as taught by Knapp as this would allow the user to better secure the cushion cover to the surface of the external exercise devices such as chairs or tables by allowing the edges to be pulled tight over the structure the cover is being attached to.
Regarding claim 2:
Derry as modified discloses the portable exercise system as described in claim 1 further comprising hand held exercise equipment pieces attached to said one or more exercising bands (The examiner notes that ankle straps 18 could be held by the user to exercise against the tension of resistance cord 17, and further notes that as depicted in figure 3 above, the user can hold resistance cord 15 with their hands to exercise as well).
Regarding claim 4:
Derry as modified by Knapp teaches the portable exercise system as described in claim 3 wherein tension ins aid elastic material contained in the continuous edge of said exercise cover can be adjusted (See the rejection of claim 1 above.)
Regarding claim 5:
Derry teaches the portable exercise system as described in claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the conventional structure is a conventional table having a flat top surface, a bottom surface and vertical legs to support the flat top surface.
Knapp, however, teaches a massage table cover including a rectangular top portion, four rectangular side portions, and two elastics, operable to cover one section of a foldable massage table (See abstract), and further teaches wherein the conventional structure is a conventional table (“FIG. 1 depicts an exploded perspective view of two massage table covers that can be used to cover the entirety of a foldable massage table according to a preferred embodiment.” See paragraph [0030]) having a flat top surface (See annotated figure 1), a bottom surface (The examiner notes that since the table is a 3-dimensional physical structure it inherently includes a bottom surface even if it is not depicted in the figures) and vertical legs to support the flat top surface (See annotated figure 1).
[AltContent: textbox (Vertical legs)][AltContent: textbox (Flat top surface)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image4.png
526
618
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the conventional furniture structure of Derry to be a conventional table as taught by Knapp, as Derry and Knapp both teach covers meant to go over the top surface of a furniture structure, and Derry can be laid flat which would allow the user to use the connectors included in the invention of Derry to attach the cover to the table of Knapp.
Regarding claim 9:
Derry as modified discloses the portable exercise system as described in claim 1further comprising an elastic band with loops on each end of the band, the loops being attached to said connectors to enable a user to perform low impact exercises (“These lower resistance cords 16 consist of an elastic foot strap 17, which extends between the two corners or the two sides of the lower cushion segment 14, and two elastic ankle traps 18, each of which extends from one of the corners or sides of the lower cushion segment 14.” See paragraph [0032]).
Regarding claim 10:
Derry as modified discloses the portable exercise system as described in claim 1 further comprising an elastic band with loops on each end of the band (“These lower resistance cords 16 consist of an elastic foot strap 17, which extends between the two corners or the two sides of the lower cushion segment 14, and two elastic ankle traps 18, each of which extends from one of the corners or sides of the lower cushion segment 14.” See paragraph [0032]), the loops being attached to said connectors to enable a user to perform low impact exercises (See figure 1 which depicts the loops attached to the carabiner/clips of Derry).
Regarding claim 11:
Derry as modified discloses the portable exercise system as described in claim 1 wherein said exercising band having one end attached to said connectors (See annotated figure 1) and a second end free for enabling a user to perform exercises by applying pressure to the band, causing tension in the band and thereby creating resistance to force of the user (See figures 1 and 3 which depicts upper resistance band 15, which as depicted again in figure 3 can be held by the user to pull/stretch the resistance band thus increasing the tension during exercise).
Regarding claim 12:
Derry teaches a portable exercise system to facilitate low-impact exercising comprising: an exercise cover (cushion 11) for converting a conventional table structure having a flat upper and lower surfaces and a continuous edge into low impact exercising system (“FIG. 8 shows how the cushion 11 can be attached to a chair 23 by means of the bungee 19 wrapped around the first hinge member 21 and the junction of the chair's back and seat” See paragraph [0039]. The examiner notes that the conventional table structure has not been positively recited, and that is has only been used to provide a function of the exercise cover, meaning to show that the cover is meant to be placed over another object, and therefore Derry which in the example is meant to be placed over a chair, which has flat upper and lower surfaces satisfies this limitation.) said exercise cover being of a flexible material (“the exemplary preferred embodiment of the present invention 10 comprises a flexible, foam-filled cushion 11, having a trifold, hingeably segmented structure.” See paragraph [0027].) having an upper outer and an inner lower surface (See annotated figure 8. The examiner notes that since the cushion is a physical 3-dimensional object it inherently includes an upper and a lower surface), such that when said exercise cover is placed over the conventional table structure (The examiner notes that the chair in the example of figure 8 which the exercise cover slips over has a flat upper surface to allow the user to sit, on the surface of the exercise cover during use as depicted in figure 10.), with the lower inner surface of the exercise cover is in contact with the upper outer surface of the conventional table structure such that said outer surface of said exercise cover is being exposed to an exercise user (See figure 10), said exercise cover having a continuous edge that is sealed to prevent fraying and to provide additional structural integrity for said exercise cover (The examiner notes that as depicted the cushion 11 is a single sealed piece comprised of three segments, 12,13, and 14, each sewn together to create hinge members 21 and 22 between the segments to allow the cushion to move and bend according to the user’s movements which would prevent any damage to the cushion during use.); one or more straps attached to the cover at the edges to secure said exercise cover to the conventional table structure being covered by said exercise cover; one or more exercising bands attached to said exercise cover, said exercising bands having elasticity properties for creating tension and provide resistance during a users a user's exercise activities; and connectors attached to said exercise cover for connecting said one or more exercising bands to said exercise cover.
Derry fails to specifically teach that the conventional structure is a table, and as mentioned above the claim limitations only recite the table functionally, however, for the purpose of examination the examiner will combine the references of Derry and Knapp to satisfy the conventional table requirement as noted below. In addition, Derry fails to teach an elastic material contained in the continuous edge of said exercise cover to further facilitate securing of said exercise cover to the conventional structure.
Knapp, however, teaches a massage table cover including a rectangular top portion, four rectangular side portions, and two elastics, operable to cover one section of a foldable massage table (See abstract), and further teaches wherein the conventional structure is a conventional table (“FIG. 1 depicts an exploded perspective view of two massage table covers that can be used to cover the entirety of a foldable massage table according to a preferred embodiment.” See paragraph [0030]) having a flat top surface (See annotated figure 1), and bottom surfaces (The examiner notes that since the table is a 3-dimensional physical structure it inherently includes a bottom surface even if it is not depicted in the figures), and an elastic material (front elastic 118 and rear elastic 120) positioned within the continuous edge of said exercise cover to further facilitate securing of said exercise cover to the conventional structure (“The cover 100 further comprises a front elastic (not visible in this figure but see FIG. 2 item 118) embedded within an edge of the rectangular front portion 104. The front elastic 118 may extend through a partial length of the rectangular front portion 104. The cover 100 further comprises a rear elastic (not visible in this figure but see FIG. 2 item 120) embedded within an edge of the rectangular rear portion 110. The rear elastic 120 may extend through a partial length of the rectangular rear portion 110. The front elastic 118 and the rear elastic 120 operate to secure the massage table cover 100 to the one section of the foldable massage table.” See paragraph [0031]. The examiner notes that the covers of Knapp having elastic edges made from rubber as stated in paragraph [0006], which is stretched over the framing of the trampoline box to better secure the cover to the table is being considered as the continuous edge containing an elastic material to further facilitate securing of said exercising cover to the exercising element.).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the edge of the exercise cover of Derry to include an elastic material as taught by Knapp as this would allow the user to better secure the cushion cover to the surface of the external exercise devices such as chairs or tables by allowing the edges to be pulled tight over the structure the cover is being attached to.
Regarding claim 13:
Derry as modified discloses the portable exercise system as described in claim 12 further comprising hand held exercise equipment pieces attached to said one or more exercising bands (The examiner notes that ankle straps 18 could be held by the user to exercise against the tension of resistance cord 17, and further notes that as depicted in figure 3 above, the user can hold resistance cord 15 with their hands to exercise as well).
Regarding claim 15:
Derry as modified discloses the portable exercise system as described in claim 12 further comprising an elastic band with loops on each end of the band(“These lower resistance cords 16 consist of an elastic foot strap 17, which extends between the two corners or the two sides of the lower cushion segment 14, and two elastic ankle traps 18, each of which extends from one of the corners or sides of the lower cushion segment 14.” See paragraph [0032]), the loops being attached to said connectors to enable a user to perform low impact exercises (See figure 1 which depicts the loops attached to the carabiner/clips of Derry).
Regarding claim 16:
Derry as modified discloses the portable exercise system as described in claim 12 further comprising an elastic band with loops on each end of the band(“These lower resistance cords 16 consist of an elastic foot strap 17, which extends between the two corners or the two sides of the lower cushion segment 14, and two elastic ankle traps 18, each of which extends from one of the corners or sides of the lower cushion segment 14.” See paragraph [0032]), the loops being attached to said connectors to enable a user to perform low impact exercises (See figure 1 which depicts the loops attached to the carabiner/clips of Derry).
Claim(s) 6,8, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derry US 20180133535 A1 in view of Knapp US 20240016685 A1, and further in view of Colangelo US 20180290002 A1.
Derry as modified teaches the invention as substantially claimed above.
Regarding claim 6:
Derry The portable exercise system as described in claim 5, but fails to teach wherein said connectors further comprise clips attached to the bottom surface of the table that a user can attach exercise equipment.
The examiner notes that as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Derry does use carabiner style clips to attach the exercise equipment to the exercise cover, but attaching the exercise equipment to the table is not taught.
Colangelo, however, teaches an exercise platform having a base member being a firm, resilient structure having in some aspects an edge member or a surrounding frame (See abstract), and further teaches wherein said connectors further comprise clips attached to the bottom surface of the table that a user can attach exercise equipment (“A cushioned top member 1103 is positioned on and coupled to the top surface of the base member 1100. Capable of being attached to the anchor points are resistance bands, each having a coupler or coupling means, such as, but not limited to a clip, carabiner, spring loaded hook, shackle, metal loop with a spring-loaded gate, bolt, knot (all such couplers or coupling means referred to herein, without limiting the coupler or coupling means, as a “clip”) at one end and a handle on the other end.” See paragraph [0039]).
[AltContent: textbox (an illustration of a fourth preferred embodiment of a base mat)]
PNG
media_image6.png
624
460
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system made from the combination of Derry and Knapp to include clips on the exercise devices to attach to the bottom of the table as taught by Colangelo, as this would allow the user to secure the exercise bands/device to more areas around the cover which will let them configure the system for a wider variety of exercises, or make the system more accessible to different users.
Regarding claim 8:
Derry teaches the portable exercise system as described in claim 1, but fails to teach wherein a said connector further comprise a hook connector attached to the bottom surface of the table that a user can attach exercise equipment to, said hook connector has an attaching section that engages the top and bottom table surfaces and hook section that engages exercise equipment.
The examiner notes however, that the table has not been claimed in claim 1, as noted in the rejection under 35 USC 112(b) above. For the purpose of examination, with no further structural or functional limitations, under the broadest reasonable interpretation the examiner is interpreting the claim limitation to merely require a flat surface with a top and a bottom, that can accept a hook style attachment device to connect exercise devices/bands to.
Colangelo, however, teaches an exercise platform having a base member being a firm, resilient structure having in some aspects an edge member or a surrounding frame (See abstract), and further teaches wherein a said connector further comprise a hook connector attached to the bottom surface of the table that a user can attach exercise equipment to(“A cushioned top member 1103 is positioned on and coupled to the top surface of the base member 1100. Capable of being attached to the anchor points are resistance bands, each having a coupler or coupling means, such as, but not limited to a clip, carabiner, spring loaded hook, shackle, metal loop with a spring-loaded gate, bolt, knot (all such couplers or coupling means referred to herein, without limiting the coupler or coupling means, as a “clip”) at one end and a handle on the other end.” See paragraph [0039]), said hook connector has an attaching section that engages the top and bottom table surfaces and hook section that engages exercise equipment (The examiner notes that in order for the hook connector to function it inherently includes a section to attach to a surface and a section that engages the exercise band similar to a carabiner hook.).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system made from the combination of Derry and Knapp to include clips on the exercise devices to attach to the bottom of the table as taught by Colangelo, as this would allow the user to secure the exercise bands/device to more areas around the cover which will let them configure the system for a wider variety of exercises, or make the system more accessible to different users.
Regarding claim 14:
Derry as modified teaches the portable exercise system as described in claim 12, but fails to teach wherein a said connector further comprise a hook connector attached to the bottom surface of the table that a user can attach exercise equipment to, said hook connector has an attaching section that engages the top and bottom table surfaces and hook section that engages exercise equipment.
Colangelo, however, teaches an exercise platform having a base member being a firm, resilient structure having in some aspects an edge member or a surrounding frame (See abstract), and further teaches wherein a said connector further comprise a hook connector attached to the bottom surface of the table that a user can attach exercise equipment to(“A cushioned top member 1103 is positioned on and coupled to the top surface of the base member 1100. Capable of being attached to the anchor points are resistance bands, each having a coupler or coupling means, such as, but not limited to a clip, carabiner, spring loaded hook, shackle, metal loop with a spring-loaded gate, bolt, knot (all such couplers or coupling means referred to herein, without limiting the coupler or coupling means, as a “clip”) at one end and a handle on the other end.” See paragraph [0039]), said hook connector has an attaching section that engages the top and bottom table surfaces and hook section that engages exercise equipment (The examiner notes that in order for the hook connector to function it inherently includes a section to attach to a surface.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system made from the combination of Derry and Knapp to include clips on the exercise devices to attach to the bottom of the table as taught by Colangelo, as this would allow the user to secure the exercise bands/device to more areas around the cover which will let them configure the system for a wider variety of exercises, or make the system more accessible to different users.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Derry US 20180133535 A1 in view of Knapp US 20240016685 A1, and further in view of Fano US 10610728 B2.
Derry as modified teaches the invention as substantially claimed above.
Regarding claim 7:
Derry as modified teaches the portable exercise system as described in claim 1, but fails to teach wherein said connectors further comprise clamps attached to the bottom surface of the table that a user can attach exercise equipment.
The examiner notes however, that the table has not been claimed in claim 1, as noted in the rejection under 35 USC 112(b) above. For the purpose of examination, with no further structural or functional limitations, under the broadest reasonable interpretation the examiner is interpreting the claim limitation to merely require a flat surface with a bottom, that can accept a clamp style attachment device to connect exercise devices/bands to.
Fano, however, teaches devices and methods for targeting and isolating specific regions of the gluteus muscle groups use a resistive band extending over an exerciser's pelvis region while performing gluteus bridge exercises(See abstract), and further teaches wherein said connectors further comprise clamps attached to the bottom surface of the table that a user can attach exercise equipment. (“The elastic band 74 can be coupled to the exercise board 52 by any suitable coupling mechanism, such as a first clamp 76 and a second clamp 78. The first clamp 76 is located adjacent to the first side edge 70 and the second clamp is located adjacent to the second side edge 72 (opposite the first side edge 70), although it will be appreciated that the first clamp 76 and/or the second clamp 78 can be positioned at any suitable location on the exercise board 52” See col. 7 lines 23-30).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system made from the combination of Derry and Knapp to include clamps on the exercise devices to attach to the bottom of the table as taught by Fano, as this would allow the user to secure the exercise bands/device to more areas around the cover which will let them configure the system for a wider variety of exercises, or make the system more accessible to different users.
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments filed 05/22/2026 have been considered but are not found to be persuasive.
In regards to the previous rejection of independent claim 1 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) in view of Derry, the applicant’s amendments required a new search and consideration of the claim limitations, and since the amendment introduced the subject matter of canceled claim 3 into the independent claim the rejection under 35 USC 103 in view of the combination of Derry and Knapp has been presented above.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In addition, both the Knapp and Derry references discuss covers meant to go over pieces of furniture which convert them to a use for either exercise or therapy which does not make them incompatible to combine, nor negate any rationale to do so.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN ANGELO DICUIA whose telephone number is (703)756-4713. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
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 on (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.
/JONATHAN A DICUIA/ Examiner, Art Unit 3784
/Megan Anderson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
