Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/943,883

ERGONOMIC JUMP ROPE HANDLE AND SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Nov 11, 2024
Examiner
NGUYEN, NYCA T
Art Unit
3784
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
454 granted / 676 resolved
-2.8% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
704
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
§103
34.8%
-5.2% vs TC avg
§102
28.5%
-11.5% vs TC avg
§112
30.1%
-9.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 676 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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) 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cook (US 6595900 B1) in view of Pasquini (US 20110094062 A1). Regarding Claim 15, Cook teaches a handle for receiving an end of a jump rope and configured to be grasped by a user's hand, the handle comprising: a gripping portion 100 having a proximal end and a distal end, the gripping portion defining a first longitudinal axis; an extension member 101 having a first end fixed to the distal end of the gripping portion and terminating at a second end, the extension member defining a second longitudinal axis that forms a first angle of less than 90 degrees with the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion 100 (Refer to annotated Fig. 17 below); and PNG media_image1.png 520 576 media_image1.png Greyscale a rotation mechanism housing 107 fixed to the second end of the extension member 101, the housing having a proximal side and an opposing distal side and implementing a rotation mechanism 103 such that the end of the jump rope retained by the rotation mechanism 103 at the distal side of the rotation mechanism housing is freely rotatable, with an axis of rotation of the rope defining a third longitudinal axis (Refer to 17 Cols 5-6 lines 56-14:” The rope is maintained in place in the rubber handle 100 with the bearing 103 through which the rope extends. On the rope is a stop 104 which is squeezed onto the rope and prevents the rope from passing back out of the bearing 103 and separate from the bearing 103. The bearing 103 with the rope passing through it fits into the holder 101 and snaps into a snap flange 107 at the front of the holder 101. The snap flange 107 holds the bearing 103 in the holder 101.”). Cook teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to teach wherein the third longitudinal axis forms a second angle of greater than 90 degrees with the second longitudinal axis of the extension member and is substantially parallel to the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion. Pasquini teaches a handle comprising a gripping portion 9 having a proximal end and a distal end, the gripping portion defining a first longitudinal axis; an extension member 4 having a first end fixed to the distal end of the gripping portion and terminating at a second end, the extension member 4 defining a second longitudinal axis that forms a first angle of less than 90 degrees with the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion; and a housing fixed to the second end of the extension member, wherein the third longitudinal axis forms a second angle of greater than 90 degrees with the second longitudinal axis of the extension member and is substantially parallel to the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion (Refer to annotated Fig. 1 below). PNG media_image2.png 361 671 media_image2.png Greyscale The Office takes the position that although the extension member 4 and the hand gripping portion 9 of Pasquini would appear to be an integrated piece, it has been held that merely forming multiple pieces from a single piece to form the same invention would have been obvious as a matter of routine skill in the art for purpose of manufacture/assembly or transport and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over the prior arts to provide the extension member to be separate with a first end fixed to the distal end of the gripping portion and terminating at a second end. Refer to MPEP 2144.04 V. MAKING PORTABLE, INTEGRAL, SEPARABLE, ADJUSTABLE, OR CONTINUOUS. Pasquini is analogous with Applicants invention in that they both teach ergonomic handles for gripping and therefore it would have been obvious to modify the device of Cook to comprise the handle of Pasquini and further such that the rotation mechanism housing has a longitudinal axis, wherein the third longitudinal axis forms a second angle of greater than 90 degrees with the second longitudinal axis of the extension member and is substantially parallel to the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion, in which the rotation mechanism would have the same longitudinal axis for the purpose of further distancing the rope from the users grip to reduce tangling of the rope around the grip while in use. Pasquini teaches that such ergonomic handles are known in the art and such modification would have been obvious to produce expected results and does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. Regarding Claim 16, Cook in view of Pasquini teaches the claimed invention as noted above wherein a perpendicular distance between the first and the third longitudinal axes has a length, and wherein a distal offset distance between the proximal side of the rotation mechanism housing and the distal end of the gripping portion has a length (Refer to Pasquini Fig. 1 below), PNG media_image3.png 360 665 media_image3.png Greyscale but fails to expressly disclose wherein the length is at least 1 inch. However, the Office takes the position that such that it would have been obvious to modify the perpendicular distance and the distal offset distance be at least 1 inch since it has been held that such optimization of ranges would have been obvious through routine experimentation to provide a dimension which is comfortable for a user to grasp the handle and maintain distance from the rope while providing for a ergonomic feel without imparting injury to the wrist and therefore such modification would have been obvious and does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. Refer to MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions [R-01.2024]. Regarding Claim 17, Cook in view of Pasquini continues to teach wherein the extension member includes a top surface that is concave in transverse cross-section to receive the thumb of the user (Refer to annotated Fig. 17 of Pasquini below). PNG media_image4.png 316 512 media_image4.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 18, Cook teaches a handle for receiving an end of a jump rope and configured to be grasped by a user's hand, the handle comprising: a gripping portion 100 having a proximal end and a distal end, the gripping portion defining a first longitudinal axis; an extension member 101 having a first end fixed to the distal end of the gripping portion and terminating at a second end, the extension member defining a second longitudinal axis that forms a first angle of less than 90 degrees with the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion 100 (Refer to annotated Fig. 17 below); and PNG media_image1.png 520 576 media_image1.png Greyscale a rotation mechanism housing 107 fixed to the second end of the extension member 101, the housing having a proximal side and an opposing distal side and implementing a rotation mechanism 103 such that the end of the jump rope retained by the rotation mechanism 103 at the distal side of the rotation mechanism housing is freely rotatable, with an axis of rotation of the rope defining a third longitudinal axis (Refer to 17 Cols 5-6 lines 56-14:” The rope is maintained in place in the rubber handle 100 with the bearing 103 through which the rope extends. On the rope is a stop 104 which is squeezed onto the rope and prevents the rope from passing back out of the bearing 103 and separate from the bearing 103. The bearing 103 with the rope passing through it fits into the holder 101 and snaps into a snap flange 107 at the front of the holder 101. The snap flange 107 holds the bearing 103 in the holder 101.”). Cook teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to teach wherein the third longitudinal axis forms a second angle of greater than 90 degrees with the second longitudinal axis of the extension member and is substantially parallel to the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion, the extension member comprising a top surface that is concave in transverse cross-section to receive the thumb of the user. Pasquini teaches a handle comprising a gripping portion 9 having a proximal end and a distal end, the gripping portion defining a first longitudinal axis; an extension member 4 having a first end fixed to the distal end of the gripping portion and terminating at a second end, the extension member defining a second longitudinal axis that forms a first angle of less than 90 degrees with the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion; and a housing fixed to the second end of the extension member, wherein the third longitudinal axis forms a second angle of greater than 90 degrees with the second longitudinal axis of the extension member and is substantially parallel to the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion (Refer to annotated Fig. 1 below). PNG media_image2.png 361 671 media_image2.png Greyscale The Office takes the position that although the extension member 4 and the hand gripping portion 9 of Pasquini would appear to be an integrated piece, it has been held that merely forming multiple pieces from a single piece to form the same invention would have been obvious as a matter of routine skill in the art for purpose of manufacture/assembly or transport and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over the prior arts to provide the extension member to be separate with a first end fixed to the distal end of the gripping portion and terminating at a second end. Refer to MPEP 2144.04 V. MAKING PORTABLE, INTEGRAL, SEPARABLE, ADJUSTABLE, OR CONTINUOUS. Pasquini is analogous with Applicants invention in that they both teach ergonomic handles for gripping and therefore it would have been obvious to modify the device of Cook to comprise the handle of Pasquini and further such that the rotation mechanism housing has a longitudinal axis, wherein the third longitudinal axis forms a second angle of greater than 90 degrees with the second longitudinal axis of the extension member and is substantially parallel to the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion, in which the rotation mechanism would have the same longitudinal axis for the purpose of further distancing the rope from the users grip to reduce tangling of the rope around the grip while in use. Since Pasquini teaches that such ergonomic handles are known in the art and such modification would have been obvious to produce expected results and does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. Pasquini continues to teach wherein the extension member includes a top surface that is concave in transverse cross-section to receive the thumb of the user (Refer to annotated Fig. 17 of Pasquini below). PNG media_image4.png 316 512 media_image4.png Greyscale Cook in view of Pasquini teaches the claimed invention as noted above wherein a perpendicular distance between the first and the third longitudinal axes has a length, and wherein a distal offset distance between the proximal side of the rotation mechanism housing and the distal end of the gripping portion has a length (Refer to Pasquini Fig. 1 below), PNG media_image3.png 360 665 media_image3.png Greyscale but fails to expressly disclose wherein the length is at least 1 inch. However, the Office takes the position that such that it would have been obvious to modify the perpendicular distance and the distal offset distance be at least 1 inch since it has been held that such optimization of ranges would have been obvious through routine experimentation to provide a dimension which is comfortable for a user to grasp the handle and maintain distance from the rope while providing for a ergonomic feel without imparting injury to the wrist and therefore such modification would have been obvious and does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. Refer to MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions [R-01.2024]. Regarding Claim 19, Cook teaches a jump rope system comprising: an elongated rope 3 having opposing first and second ends (Refer to Fig. 1 Col 1 Lines 56-62:” The method comprises the steps of gripping a first handle of a jump rope with a right hand of the user. Then there is the step of gripping a second handle of the jump rope with a left hand of the user. Next there is the step of jumping the jump rope by the user while the user does not bend the wrist of either the right or left hand.”); a pair of handles (Refer to Fig. 1 Col 1 Lines 56-62:” The method comprises the steps of gripping a first handle of a jump rope with a right hand of the user. Then there is the step of gripping a second handle of the jump rope with a left hand of the user. Next there is the step of jumping the jump rope by the user while the user does not bend the wrist of either the right or left hand.”);), each handle comprising: a gripping portion 100 having a proximal end and a distal end, the gripping portion defining a first longitudinal axis; an extension member 101 having a first end fixed to the distal end of the gripping portion and terminating at a second end, the extension member defining a second longitudinal axis that forms a first angle of less than 90 degrees with the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion 100 (Refer to annotated Fig. 17 below); and PNG media_image1.png 520 576 media_image1.png Greyscale a rotation mechanism housing 107 fixed to the second end of the extension member 101, the housing having a proximal side and an opposing distal side and implementing a rotation mechanism 103 such that the end of the jump rope retained by the rotation mechanism 103 at the distal side of the rotation mechanism housing is freely rotatable, with an axis of rotation of the rope defining a third longitudinal axis (Refer to 17 Cols 5-6 lines 56-14:” The rope is maintained in place in the rubber handle 100 with the bearing 103 through which the rope extends. On the rope is a stop 104 which is squeezed onto the rope and prevents the rope from passing back out of the bearing 103 and separate from the bearing 103. The bearing 103 with the rope passing through it fits into the holder 101 and snaps into a snap flange 107 at the front of the holder 101. The snap flange 107 holds the bearing 103 in the holder 101.”). Cook teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to teach wherein the third longitudinal axis forms a second angle of greater than 90 degrees with the second longitudinal axis of the extension member and is substantially parallel to the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion. Pasquini teaches a handle comprising a gripping portion 9 having a proximal end and a distal end, the gripping portion defining a first longitudinal axis; an extension member having a first end fixed to the distal end of the gripping portion and terminating at a second end, the extension member 4 defining a second longitudinal axis that forms a first angle of less than 90 degrees with the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion; and a housing fixed to the second end of the extension member, wherein the third longitudinal axis forms a second angle of greater than 90 degrees with the second longitudinal axis of the extension member and is substantially parallel to the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion (Refer to annotated Fig. 1 below). PNG media_image2.png 361 671 media_image2.png Greyscale The Office takes the position that although the extension member 4 and the hand gripping portion 9 of Pasquini would appear to be an integrated piece, it has been held that merely forming multiple pieces from a single piece to form the same invention would have been obvious as a matter of routine skill in the art for purpose of manufacture/assembly or transport and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over the prior arts to provide the extension member to be separate with a first end fixed to the distal end of the gripping portion and terminating at a second end. Refer to MPEP 2144.04 V. MAKING PORTABLE, INTEGRAL, SEPARABLE, ADJUSTABLE, OR CONTINUOUS. Pasquini is analogous with Applicants invention in that they both teach ergonomic handles for gripping and therefore it would have been obvious to modify the device of Cook to be in view of Pasquini such that the rotation mechanism housing has a longitudinal axis, wherein the third longitudinal axis forms a second angle of greater than 90 degrees with the second longitudinal axis of the extension member and is substantially parallel to the first longitudinal axis of the gripping portion, in which the rotation mechanism would have the same longitudinal axis for the purpose of further distancing the rope from the users grip to reduce tangling of the rope around the grip while in use. Since Pasquini teaches that such ergonomic handles are known in the art such modification would have been obvious to produce expected results and does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 11, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 30, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594455
ELASTIC SUPPORT DEVICE AND OPTIONAL POWER SHIRT AND METHOD OF USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589275
Multifunctional and Adjustable Resistance Training Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576312
Device for training human's motor skills and in particular the adaptation to instability, the strength and mobility
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576298
FITNESS SYSTEM, FITNESS ASSEMBLY ARRANGEMENT AND FUNCTIONAL FITNESS ELEMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569709
DUAL MOTOR EXERCISE MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+25.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 676 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month