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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
The Office notes that the claims as recited have an earliest effective filing date of 02/08/2023 to Applicant’s US provisional application 63/483,924.
The claimed subject matter of a barbell including legs having feet arranged on a surface and grip extensions extending under a bridge are not found in Applicant’s US provisional application 63/384,079 filed on 11/16/2022.
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 spring coupled to each grip as recited in claim 19 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7, 9-14, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pizer et al. (US PG Pub. No. 2023/0398398, effectively filed 06/14/2022) (herein “Pizer”)
Regarding claim 1, Pizer teaches a barbell comprising: a first grip (i.e., left handle unit 102 including left interface 110 having a frame 112, see Figs. 1 and 3 below and para. [0015]); a second grip 102 (i.e., right handle unit 102 including left interface 110 having a frame 112, see Fig. 1 and 3 below) aligned with the first grip and separated from the first grip; a first sleeve (i.e., left post 116, see Figs. 1 and 3 below, and para. [0017]) coupled to the first grip 102,110; a second sleeve (i.e., right post 116, see Figs. 1 and 3 below, and para. [0017]) coupled to the second grip 102,110; a bridge (i.e., U-shaped bar 104, see para. [0016], and Fig. 1 below) connecting the first grip to the second grip, the bridge comprising: a first portion 108 (see Fig. 1 below and para. [0016]) parallel to the first grip 102,110 and parallel to the second grip; a second portion 106 coupling the first portion 108 to the first grip 102,110 (see Fig. 5 below); and a third portion 106 coupling the first portion 108 to the second grip 102; a first leg (i.e., left leg 114, see Figs. 1 and 3 below and para. [0019] which may be coupled via bolts, see para. [0016]) coupled to the first grip, the first leg between the first sleeve 116 and the first grip 102; a second leg (i.e., right leg 114, see Fig. 1 below) coupled to the second grip (i.e., right grip 102), the second leg 114 between the second sleeve 116 and the second grip 102.
PNG
media_image1.png
460
723
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
488
612
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
526
359
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Pizer further teaches a first foot 126 (see Fig. 1 above and para. [0019]) connected to the first leg 114; and a second foot 126 connected to the second leg 114; wherein, when the first foot and the second foot 126 are arranged on a surface S (see Fig. 1 above and para. [0019]) and the first leg 114 and the second leg 114 extend upwards from the surface S, the bridge 104 is at a first height relative to the surface, and the first grip 102 and the second grip 102 are at a second height relative to the surface, the first height greater than the second height (see Fig. 1 above).
Regarding claim 2, Pizer teaches the barbell of claim 1, wherein the first sleeve 116 and the second sleeve 116 are configured to hold weight plates (see para. [0017]).
Regarding claim 4, as broadly interpreted, Pizer teaches the barbell of claim 2, wherein the first grip 102,110 has a first end 112b (see Figs. 1 and 5 above) and a second end 112a (see Figs. 1 and 5 above), the second portion 106 of the bridge 104 is coupled to the first end 112b (see Fig. 5 above) of the first grip 102,110, and the first sleeve 116 (i.e., including end 120) is coupled to the second end 112a of the first grip 102,110.
Regarding claim 5, Pizer teaches the barbell of claim 2, wherein the second portion 106 (i.e., left end, see Fig. 1 above) of the bridge 104 is coupled between the first grip 102,110 and the first sleeve (i.e., left post), and the third portion 106 (i.e., right end) of the bridge 104 is coupled between the second grip (i.e., right grip 102,110) and the second sleeve (i.e., right post 116).
Regarding claim 7, as broadly interpreted, Pizer teaches the barbell of claim 1, further comprising a first grip extension (i.e., left handle 138, see Fig. 3 above) coupled to and aligned with the first grip 102,110, the first grip extension 138 extending under the bridge 104 when the first foot 128 and the second foot 128 are arranged on the surface S and the first leg 114 and the second leg 114 extend upwards from the surface S.
Regarding claim 9, Pizer teaches the barbell of claim 7, further comprising a second grip extension (i.e., right handle 138, see Fig. 3 above) coupled to and aligned with the second grip 102,110, wherein the first grip extension 138 is separated from the second grip extension 138.
Regarding claim 10, Pizer teaches the barbell of claim 7, wherein, when the first foot and the second foot are arranged on the surface S and the first leg 114 and the second leg 114 extend upwards from the surface S, a bottom edge of the first grip extension 138 is aligned with a bottom of the first grip 102,110 (i.e., where bottom of 138 is aligned with 136, see Fig. 5 above).
Regarding claim 11, Pizer teaches a barbell comprising: a pair of bars 116 (see Fig. 1 above) arranged along a line; a bridge 104 (see Fig. 1 above) coupled between the pair of bars 116 , the bridge 104 having a portion parallel 108 (see Fig. 1 above) to the line and offset from the line in a first direction (i.e., offset in parallel planes); and a pair of legs 114 (see Fig. 1 and 3 above), each leg 114 coupled to a respective one of the pair of bars 116, each leg 114 extending in a second direction perpendicular to the line (see Fig. 1 and 3 above), the second direction opposite the first direction (i.e., a plane below the plane of the bars 116), wherein each bar 116 comprises a first portion (i.e., securing end 120 including insert 123) and a second portion (i.e., projecting end 118), and the leg 114 is coupled between the first portion 120,123 and the second portion 118 of the respective bar 116 (see Figs. 1, 3, and 5 above).
Regarding claim 12, Pizer teaches the barbell of claim 11, wherein the first portion 120,123 of each of the pair of bars 116 comprises a grip 102,110, the second portion 118 of each of the pair of bars comprises a sleeve 118 (i.e., sleeve to couple to weight plates), and the grip 102,110 is coupled to and aligned with the sleeve 118 (see Figs. 1, 3, and 5 above).
Regarding claim 13, Pizer teaches the barbell of claim 12, wherein ends 106of the bridge 104 are coupled to inner ends of the grips 102,110 (i.e., at 110, see Fig. 3 above).
Regarding claim 14, Pizer teaches the barbell of claim 12, wherein each end 106 of the bridge 104 is coupled to a respective one of the bars 116 at a position between the grip 102,110 and the sleeve 118 (see Fig. 1 and 3 above).
Regarding claim 17, Pizer teaches the barbell of claim 11, further comprising a pair of feet 126 (see para. [0019], and Fig. 3 above), each of the pair of feet 126 coupled to a respective one of the pair of legs 114.
Regarding claim 18, as broadly interpreted, Pizer teaches a barbell comprising: a first grip 118; a second grip 118 arranged in a line with the first grip and separated from the first grip along the line; a bridge 104 coupled between the first grip 118 and the second grip 118, the bridge 104 having a portion 108 parallel to the line, the portion 108 offset from the line; a first grip extension 102,110 coupled to and aligned with the first grip 118, the first grip extension 102,110 extending under the bridge 104; and a second grip extension 102,110 coupled to and aligned with second first grip 118, the second grip extension 102,110 extending under the bridge 104 (see Figs. 1, 3 and 5 above).
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.
Claims 6, 15, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pizer, as applied to claims 1 and 11 above in view of Laird (GB 2589624, 06/09/2021)
Laird was cited in the IDS filed on 05/08/2025.
Regarding claim 6, Pizer is silent in explicitly teaching the barbell of claim 1, wherein the first leg 114 and the second leg 114 are adjustable to change a first distance between the first foot 126 and the first grip 102,110 and a second distance between the second foot 126 and the second grip 102,110.
Laird, however, in an analogous art of barbell exercise devices teaches height adjustable legs 26 (via slide mechanism 20 in Fig. 4 below, see paras. [0059]-[0060]) to change a distance between feet 28 and grips 12,18)
PNG
media_image4.png
542
827
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 device of Pizer wherein the first leg 114 and the second leg 114 are adjustable to change a first distance between the first foot 126 and the first grip 102,110 and a second distance between the second foot 126 and the second grip 102,110 in order to change a center of mass of the exercise device.
Regarding claim 15, Pizer is silent in explicitly teaching the barbell of claim 11, wherein each of the pair of legs 114 has an adjustable length.
Laird, however, in an analogous art of barbell exercise devices teaches height adjustable legs 26 (via slide mechanism 20 in Fig. 4 above, see paras. [0059]-[0060]) to change a distance between feet 28 and grips 12,18)
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 device of Pizer wherein the first leg 114 and the second leg 114 are adjustable to change a first distance between the first foot 126 and the first grip 102,110 and a second distance between the second foot 126 and the second grip 102,110 in order to change a center of mass of the exercise device.
Regarding claim 21, Pizer is silent in explicitly teaching the barbell of claim 11, wherein the first leg 114 and the second leg 114 each have a length of at least 12 inches.
Laird, however, in an analogous art of barbell exercise devices having legs 26 (see Fig. 4 above and para. [0053]), that have a length of about 8 and 45 cm (approx. 3.15 to 17.7 inches).
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 device of Pizer wherein the first leg 114 and the second leg 114 each have a length of at least 12 inches as taught by Laird in order to provide sufficient height of the bar from a ground surface to not impede coupling weight plates. Furthermore, it has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges ‘overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art’ a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Claims 8, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pizer, as applied to claims 1, 11 and 18 above in view of Orakwusi (US PG Pub. No. 2014/0094347, April 3, 2014).
Pizer teaches the invention as substantially claimed.
Regarding claim 8, Pizer is silent in explicitly teaching the barbell of claim 7, wherein the first grip extension 138 comprises a flexible material.
Orakwusi, however, in an analogous art teaches an exercise device including a barbell 100 having grips 78, 80, 82, 84, 86, 88, 90, 92, 94, 96, 98, and/or 99 with made of a flexible material (i.e., foam, see para. [0041] and Fig. 4 below)
PNG
media_image5.png
403
669
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 device of Pizer such that the first grip extension 138 comprises a flexible material (i.e., made of foam) as taught by Orakwusi to provide a cushioned grip.
Regarding claim 16, Pizer teaches a first and second extension 138 coupled to and aligned with a first and second bar 116, but is silent in explicitly teaching the first and second extension 138 are flexible.
Orakwusi, however, in an analogous art teaches an exercise device including a barbell 100 having grips 78, 80, 82, 84, 86, 88, 90, 92, 94, 96, 98, and/or 99 with made of a flexible material (i.e., foam, see para. [0041] and Fig. 4 above)
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 device of Pizer such that the the first and second extension 138 are flexible (i.e., made of foam) as taught by Orakwusi to provide a cushioned grip.
Regarding claim 20, Pizer is silent in explicitly teaching the barbell of claim 18, wherein the first grip extension 102,110 and the second grip extension 102,110 each comprise a flexible material.
Orakwusi, however, in an analogous art teaches an exercise device including a barbell 100 having grips 78, 80, 82, 84, 86, 88, 90, 92, 94, 96, 98, and/or 99 with made of a flexible material (i.e., foam, see para. [0041] and Fig. 4 above)
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 device of Pizer such that the first grip extension 102,110 (i.e., such as handle 138) comprises a flexible material (i.e., made of foam) as taught by Orakwusi to provide a cushioned grip.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 19 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.
Regarding claim 19, none of the prior art either alone or combination teach of suggest the barbell of claim 18, wherein the first grip extension and the second grip extension each comprise a spring coupled to the respective grip.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW S LO whose telephone number is (571)270-1702. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. (9:30 am - 5:30 pm EST).
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.
/ANDREW S LO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
Prosecution Insights