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 .
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 9 has been canceled.
Claims 1-8 and 10-20 have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues:
The patient's body weight on the lumbar bolster, anchored through the adjustable strap to the front cap of the base, prevents the lightweight base from sliding away during the leg-press exercise. See Specification, ADVANTAGES OF THE INVENTION ("the device base is secured to the patient's body via a lumbar bolster and adjustable strap to prevent the base from sliding away during exercise"). The strap secures the base; it does not transmit traction force into the user…Graham '104 does not teach attaching the lumbar bolster to the support base. Graham '104 teaches attaching the bolster, via a strap, to the tension cord…Graham '104's strap is therefore part of the resistance and decompression circuit. It runs from the bolster to the tension cord so that the cord's tension is transmitted through the strap into the user's pelvis, separating the spine. Substituting that arrangement onto Graham '523 would produce a bolster connected through a strap to a tension cord; it would not produce a bolster connected through a strap to the front cap of the support base
Examiner initially notes that, similar to the device of the instant application, the inelastic strap as shown in Figure 14 inherently prevents relative movement between the base against which foot pressure is applied and the lumbar bolster against which a user’s back is placed.
Further, the adjustable strap (140) of Graham ‘104 runs from the bolster via strap (170) to a front cap (204) of a support base (200) against which foot pressure is applied by a user as is instantly claimed.
Applicant further argues:
Graham '104 teaches away from the claimed structural relationship. The whole point of Graham '104's strap arrangement is to transmit pulling force along the user's spine, which requires that the strap be loaded by the tension cord rather than anchored to a stationary frame element. A bolster strap anchored to the front cap of the base, as claimed, would defeat Graham '104's spinal-decompression objective because the strap would be loaded by the patient's body weight, not by the resistance cord.
Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that simply that there are differences between two references is insufficient to establish that such references "teach away" from any combination thereof. In re Beattie, 974 F.2d 1309, 1312-13, 24 USPQ2d 1040, 1042 (Fed. Cir. 1992). “We will not read into a reference a teaching away from a [proposed modification when] no such language exists” See Dystar Textilfarben GmbH& Co. Deutschland KG v. C.H. Patrick Co., 464 F.3d 1356,1364 (Fed Cir. 2006). In this case the combination of Graham ‘523 and Graham ‘104, teach the structural features as instantly claimed (e.g. Connecting a bolster via a strap to a support base against which a force is applied by feet of a user).
Applicant further argues:
Graham '104 is directed to a fundamentally different problem in a different field of endeavor. Graham '104 addresses spinal decompression: its bolster, strap, stirrup, and tension-cord arrangement is engineered to pull the user's legs and feet away from the spine in order to "decompress, urge, and align the spinal vertebrae." The present invention, by contrast, is directed to lower-limb muscle-strength rehabilitation for patients recovering from prolonged bedrest, and the lumbar bolster serves the entirely different function of anchoring a lightweight portable base against the patient's pelvis so that the base does not slide away during a leg-press exercise.
Examiner respectfully disagrees and also notes that a prior art reference is analogous if the reference is in the field of applicant’s endeavor or, if not, the reference is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned. In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 1446, 24 USPQ2d 1443, 1445 (Fed. Cir. 1992). The references are in the field of applicant’s endeavor (e.g. fitness devices) and is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned (e.g. a fitness apparatus capable of exercising, decompressing, and aligning the lower body and leg muscles by providing resistance to a support base; Par. 0013)
Applicant finally argues:
Absent a teaching in the references themselves of attaching a lumbar bolster to the base of a leg-press exercise device, the Examiner's proposed combination relies on Applicant's own disclosure as the roadmap. Reviewing Graham '523 and Graham '104 independently, a person of ordinary skill would either: (a) not add any bolster to Graham '523, because Graham '523 already discloses use in concert with a chair or while lying down without any pelvic anchorage, or (b) if adding a bolster, would replicate Graham '104's decompression arrangement by routing the strap to the tension cord. Neither path leads to the claimed strap-to-front-cap arrangement.
Examiner respectfully disagrees and again notes that Graham ‘104 teaches a foot engagement portion (204) which is tensioned by an adjustable strap (180; adjustable via 188) that extends between a lumbar bolster (110 via strap attachment 170) to a front cap (204) of a support base (200) as a user extends their feet away from their torso under tension for “creating aligned decompression forces between the leg muscles and lower abdominal muscles by pulling the stirruped legs/feet in a direction away from the spine away from the spine to decompress, urge, and align the spinal vertebrae” (Par. 0027). The strongest rationale for combining references is a recognition, expressly or impliedly in the prior art or drawn from a convincing line of reasoning based on established scientific principles or legal precedent, that some advantage or expected beneficial result would have been produced by their combination. In re Sernaker, 702 F.2d 989, 994-95, 217 USPQ 1, 5-6 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1, 5-7, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graham (US Patent 6,042,523; Herein referred to as “Graham ‘523”) in view of Graham (US Patent Application Publication 2020/0094104; Herein referred to as “Graham ‘104”).
1. Graham ‘523 discloses a portable rehabilitation device comprising:
a support base (12) having a front end, a rear end, and a longitudinal axis (Fig 2), the support base having two longitudinally extending rails (16);
a moving carriage (14) mounted on the support base and engaging the rails for back and forth travel along the longitudinal axis (Fig 2);
at least one tension cord (46) adjustably attached between the moving carriage (@162) and the front end of the support base (@ 30); and
a footplate (38) mounted on the moving carriage.
While Graham ‘523 teaches the therapeutic exercise apparatus being used in concert with a chair (Figs 15-16) or while lying down (Fig 14), Graham ‘523 does not explicitly disclose the apparatus comprising a lumbar bolster connected to the support base via an adjustable strap that extends between the lumbar bolster and a front cap attached to the front end of the support base.
Graham ‘104 teaches a similar lower leg exercise device having a foot engagement portion (204) which is tensioned by an adjustable strap (180; adjustable via 188) that extends between a lumbar bolster (110 via strap attachment 170) to a front cap (204) of a support base (200) as a user extends their feet away from their torso under tension for “creating aligned decompression forces between the leg muscles and lower abdominal muscles by pulling the stirruped legs/feet in a direction away from the spine away from the spine to decompress, urge, and align the spinal vertebrae” (Par. 0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Graham ‘523 to include a lumbar bolster connected to the support base via an adjustable strap as taught by Graham ‘104 to impart curvature to the lumbar or sacral spine of a user and for manipulating the spine and intervertebral discs with decompression force while the user applies a force to the support base (Par. 0077).
5. Graham ‘523 discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the at least one tension cord includes a cord holder (50) configured to engage with a cord notch (86) on a front cap (90) attached to the front end of the support base (Fig 11).
6. Graham ‘523 discloses the device of claim 1, further comprising an ankle support cushion (98) connected to the footplate (Fig 5).
7. Graham ‘523 discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the footplate is adjustable at various angular positions via a kickstand (110; Fig 5).
13. Graham ‘523 discloses a method of providing rehabilitation exercise, comprising:
positioning a support base (12) with longitudinal rails (16) adjacent to a patient's extended leg;
positioning a moving carriage (14) mounted on the rails for engagement with the patient's foot (Fig 14); and
allowing the moving carriage to move along the rails against resistance (46) during exercise.
While Graham ‘523 teaches the therapeutic exercise apparatus being used in concert with a chair (Figs 15-16) or while lying down (Fig 14), Graham ‘523 does not explicitly disclose the apparatus comprising a lumbar bolster adjustably attached to the support base.
Graham ‘104 teaches a similar lower leg exercise device having a foot engagement portion (204) which is tensioned by a tension cord (210) as a user extends their feet away from their torso under tension (Figs 15-16) and further comprising a lumbar bolster (110) connected to the tension cod via an adjustable strap (180) for “creating aligned decompression forces between the leg muscles and lower abdominal muscles by pulling the stirruped legs/feet in a direction away from the spine away from the spine to decompress, urge, and align the spinal vertebrae” (Par. 0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Graham ‘523 to include a lumbar bolster as taught by Graham ‘104 to impart curvature to the lumbar or sacral spine of a user and for manipulating the spine and intervertebral discs with decompression force (Par. 0077).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graham ‘523 and Graham ‘104 as applied to claims 1, 5-7, and 13 above, and further in view of Endelman et al (US Patent Application Publication 2001/0056011).
2-3. Graham ‘523 and Graham ‘104 disclose the device significantly as claimed, including a plurality of vertical wheels (70,72,76) which include at least two top rail wheels (7) controlling vertical motion of the moving carriage, but do not disclose a plurality of horizontal wheels controlling lateral motion of the moving carriage or wherein the vertical wheels wherein each top rail wheel includes an eccentric spacer nut for adjusting wheel axle placement.
Endelman et al teach a similar exercise device having a mobile carriage (20) which translates along rails (18) of a base member (14) against the force of a resistance member (24) further comprising the mobile carriage having a plurality of vertical wheels (122) as well as horizontal wheels (124) that “roll along the vertical longitudinal rib 92 of the extrusion 88 thus aligning the carriage 20 side to side on the rail members 18. These guide rollers 124 ensure that minimal friction is exerted between the carriage 20 and the rail members 18 for an exceptionally smooth back and forth movement of the carriage 20 on the rail members 16 of the apparatus 10 during use” (Par. 0057). With regards to the use of an eccentric spacer nut, Examiner takes Official Notice that fastening features such as elongated slots and eccentric fasteners, such as spacer nuts, are well known in the art to allow for a directional adjustment of two members to be connected together to remove any play therebetween. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Graham ‘523 and Graham ‘104 to have horizontal wheels as taught by Endelman et al and an eccentric spacer nut as these features allow for an adjustable engagement of the mobile carriage along the rails of the base member to facilitate a smooth movement therebetween.
Claims 4 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graham ‘523 and Graham ‘104 as applied to claims 1, 5-7, and 13 above, and further in view of Lagree et al (US Patent Application Publication 2023/0191190).
4, 14, and 19. Graham ‘523 and Graham ‘104 disclose the device significantly as claimed, but do not disclose a distance sensor mounted on the support base and configured to detect position of the moving carriage, and a microcontroller unit connected to the distance sensor wherein the microcontroller unit is configured to transmit carriage position data to a mobile device and display interactive exercise feedback based on movement of the moving carriage.
Lagree et al each a similar exercise device having a mobile carriage (203) which translates along rails (201) of a base member (202) against the force of a resistance member (205) further comprising a distance sensor mounted on the support base and configured to detect position of the moving carriage (Abstract: “a sensor that detects a real-time position of the movable element”), and a microcontroller unit connected to the distance sensor wherein the microcontroller unit is configured to transmit carriage position data to a mobile device (Abstract: “a processor in communication with the sensor to receive the real-time position data from the sensor related to a position of the movable element and a feedback device in communication with the processor”) “that provides real-time instructions to the exerciser on how to adjust their workout to achieve a desired result” (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the exercise device of Graham to include the sensor and controller as taught by Lagree et al which provides for instructional information with regards to speed, carriage travel distance, cyclic rate, or workload levels to be communicated to an exerciser with regards to the exercise being performed.
15. Graham ‘523 discloses the method of claim 14, further comprising attaching at least one tension cord (46) between the moving carriage and the support base to provide resistance (Abstract).
16. Graham ‘523 discloses the method of claim 14, further comprising adjusting an angle of a footplate mounted on the moving carriage (via 110; Fig 5).
17. Graham ‘523 discloses the method of claim 16, further comprising supporting the patient's ankle with a cushion (98) mounted on the footplate.
18.The method of claim 16, further comprising securing the patient's foot to the footplate with a foot strap (126).
Claims 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graham ‘523 in view of Lagree et al and Graham ‘104.
8. Graham ‘523 discloses a rehabilitation exercise system comprising:
a support base (12) with longitudinal rails (16);
a moving carriage (14) mounted on the rails (Fig 2); and
an adjustable footplate (38) mounted on the moving carriage.
However, Graham ‘523 does not disclose a distance sensor mounted on the support base and configured to detect position of the moving carriage, and a microcontroller unit connected to the distance sensor wherein the microcontroller unit is configured to transmit carriage position data to a mobile device to display interactive exercise feedback.
Lagree et al each a similar exercise device having a mobile carriage (203) which translates along rails (201) of a base member (202) against the force of a resistance member (205) further comprising a distance sensor mounted on the support base and configured to detect position of the moving carriage (Abstract: “a sensor that detects a real-time position of the movable element”), and a microcontroller unit connected to the distance sensor wherein the microcontroller unit is configured to transmit carriage position data to a display (30) on a mobile device (Abstract: “a processor in communication with the sensor to receive the real-time position data from the sensor related to a position of the movable element and a feedback device in communication with the processor”) “that provides real-time instructions to the exerciser on how to adjust their workout to achieve a desired result” (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the exercise device of Graham to include the sensor and controller as taught by Lagree et al which provides for instructional information with regards to speed, carriage travel distance, cyclic rate, or workload levels to be communicated to an exerciser with regards to the exercise being performed.
Further, while Graham ‘523 teaches the therapeutic exercise apparatus being used in concert with a chair (Figs 15-16) or while lying down (Fig 14), Graham ‘523 does not explicitly disclose the apparatus comprising a lumbar bolster connected to the support base via an adjustable strap that extends between the lumbar bolster and a front cap attached to the front end of the support base.
Graham ‘104 teaches a similar lower leg exercise device having a foot engagement portion (204) which is tensioned by an adjustable strap (180; adjustable via 188) that extends between a lumbar bolster (110 via strap attachment 170) to a front cap (204) of a support base (200) as a user extends their feet away from their torso under tension for “creating aligned decompression forces between the leg muscles and lower abdominal muscles by pulling the stirruped legs/feet in a direction away from the spine away from the spine to decompress, urge, and align the spinal vertebrae” (Par. 0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Graham ‘523 to include a lumbar bolster connected to the support base via an adjustable strap as taught by Graham ‘104 to impart curvature to the lumbar or sacral spine of a user and for manipulating the spine and intervertebral discs with decompression force while the user applies a force to the support base (Par. 0077).
10. Graham ‘523 discloses the system of claim 8, wherein the moving carriage further comprises: an ankle support cushion (98) mounted on the adjustable footplate (Fig 5); and a plurality of bearing wheels (70,72,76) engaging the rails (Fig 7).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graham ‘523 in view of Lagree et al and Graham ‘104 as applied to claims 8 and 10 above, and further in view of Yanev et al (US Patent Application Publication 2016/0184634).
11-12. Graham ‘523 in view of Lagree et al and Graham ‘104 disclose a system significantly as claimed, but do not disclose wherein the displayed interactive exercise feedback occurs within a mobile application game environment or wherein the footplate further comprises a load cell configured to measure force applied by a user during exercise.
Yanev et al disclose a similar exercise apparatus (Fig 7) wherein the feet of a user engage a footplate (708) while a user is in a sitting position and wherein the footplate comprises sensors comprising load cells (710; Par. 0038) “configured to measure force exerted by a user via their foot and/or ankle” (Par. 0111). Furthermore, the apparatus of Yanev et al discloses that the forces exerted and measured by the footplate sensors may be incorporated into gameplay based on the exercise in that users may exert forces on one or more physical components of an exercise apparatus to provide control inputs for a corresponding game entity (Par. 0033). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the interactive feedback display of Graham ‘523 in view of Lagree et al and Graham ‘104 to incorporate a gaming application as taught by Yanev et al to increase the interaction, fun, and engagement of the user while performing exercises.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graham ‘523, Graham ‘104, and Lagree et al as applied to claims 4 and 14-19 above, and further in view of Yanev et al.
20. Graham ‘523, Graham ‘104, and Lagree et al disclose the method significantly as claimed, but do not disclose wherein the displayed interactive exercise feedback occurs within a mobile application game environment.
Yanev et al disclose a similar exercise apparatus (Fig 7) wherein the feet of a user engage a footplate (708) while a user is in a sitting position and wherein the footplate comprises sensors comprising load cells (710; Par. 0038) “configured to measure force exerted by a user via their foot and/or ankle” (Par. 0111). Furthermore, the apparatus of Yanev et al discloses that the forces exerted and measured by the footplate sensors may be incorporated into gameplay based on the exercise in that users may exert forces on one or more physical components of an exercise apparatus to provide control inputs for a corresponding game entity (Par. 0033). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the interactive feedback display of Graham ‘523 in view of Lagree et al to incorporate a gaming application as taught by Yanev et al to increase the interaction, fun, and engagement of the user while performing exercises.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA T KENNEDY whose telephone number is (571)272-8297. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7a-4:30p MST.
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.
/JOSHUA T KENNEDY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784 6/22/2026
Prosecution Insights