DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims.
Claim 20 recites: “The muscle stretching and strengthening device according to claim 1, wherein the back range of motion limiter is made from a rigid or semi-rigid material and comprises: a straight portion that extends up from a top side of the base having a semi-circle shape; two curvature pieces that extend away from the straight portion to receive and secure the vertical member within the straight portion; and an angled portion that extends back and away from the straight portion” while Claim 1, upon which claim 20 depends, recites: “wherein the connector comprises: a back range of motion limiter; and a front range of motion limiter”. According to the specification, the reference number “140” designates the “connector”, the reference number “142” designates the “back range of motion limiter”, and the reference number “143” designates the “front range of motion limiter”. Figure 10 of the drawings, shows the specific “back range of motion limiter” (reference number “142”), recited in claim 20. However, as can be seen in Fig.10, the “back range of motion limiter” (142) is not part of the connector (140). In other words, Fig. 10 (which appears to be the only figure that shows the specific “back range of motion limiter” recited in claim 20), shows the “connector” (140) comprising the “front range of motion limiter” (143), however, the “back range of motion limiter” (142) has been shown as a component separate from and not part of the “connector” (140). As such, the “back range of motion limiter” as specified and detailed in claim 20, which depends upon claim 1, has not been shown to be part of the “connector” as recited in claim 1. Therefore, “[wherein] the connector comprises: a back range of motion limiter; and a front range of motion limiter….wherein the back range of motion limiter…comprises : a straight portion that extends up from a top side of the base having a semi-circle shape; two curvature pieces that extend away from the straight portion to receive and secure the vertical member within the straight portion; and an angled portion that extends back and away from the straight portion” claimed in the dependent claim 20 (which depends upon claim 1) 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
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-10, 12-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Juntunen (US 9,498,399 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Juntunen discloses a muscle stretching and strengthening device comprising: a height-adjustable vertical member (52 with 68, Figs. 1-2); a handlebar (64 with 70) connected to a first end (i.e., top end) of the vertical member (Figs. 1-2); a base (12/22, Figs. 1-2); and a connector (42), wherein the connector indirectly connects a second end (i.e., bottom end) of the vertical member to the base (Figs. 1-2), wherein the connector comprises: a back range of motion limiter (as shown in Fig. 1 below, please note that the back range of motion limiter shown below would be on both sides of 42, (also note that 42 in Fig. 2 also includes such back range of motion limiter)); and a front range of motion limiter (as shown in Fig. 1 below, please note that the front range of motion limiter shown below would be on both sides of 42, (please note that 42 in Fig. 2 also includes such front range of motion limiter)), wherein the vertical member and the handlebar arcs forwards and backwards between the back range of motion limiter and the front range of motion limiter to stretch and strengthen the muscles (the vertical member (52 with 68) and the handlebar (64 with 70) is capable of moving (in an arc) forward and backward between the back and the front range of motion limiters).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Front range of motion limiter (hole))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Back range of motion limiter (hole))]
PNG
media_image1.png
498
645
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Juntunen discloses wherein the vertical member comprises: a first vertical segment (68) comprising a first end (i.e., top end) and a second end (i.e., bottom end, Fig. 3); and a second vertical segment (52) comprising a first end (i.e., top end) and a second end (i.e., bottom end, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Juntunen discloses wherein the vertical member is telescoping (Figs. 1-3, col. 2 lines 58-60), wherein the second vertical segment (52) is hollow (Fig. 3, col. 2 lines 58-60), wherein the second end (i.e., bottom end) of the first vertical segment (68) is insertable into the first end (i.e., top end) of the second vertical segment (52, Figs. 1-3), and wherein the first vertical segment (68) is movable up and down within the second vertical segment (52, Figs. 1-3, col. 2 lines 51-60).
Regarding claim 4, Juntunen discloses the device further comprising a locking mechanism (80 with 82) that maintains a length of the vertical member at a desired height after adjustment (Figs. 1-3, col. 2 lines 51-60, col. 3 lines 6-8).
Regarding claim 5, Juntunen discloses wherein the locking mechanism comprises a plurality of holes (80) that penetrate from an outside through to an inside of the second vertical segment (52, Fig. 3) and a depressible locking protrusion (82) extending from an outside of the first vertical segment (68, Fig. 3), wherein the depressible locking protrusion (82) has dimensions such that the depressible locking protrusion fits within any one of the plurality of holes (Figs. 1-3, col. 2 lines 51-60, col. 3 lines 6-8).
Regarding claim 7, Juntunen discloses wherein the second end (i.e., bottom end) of the second vertical segment (52) is indirectly connected to a central location of the base (12/22) via the connector (42, Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 8, Juntunen discloses wherein a middle portion of the handlebar is connected to the first end of the first vertical segment.
Regarding claim 9, Juntunen discloses wherein the handlebar does not tilt or rotate independently around a longitudinal axis of the vertical member (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 10, Juntunen discloses wherein the handlebar (shown in Fig. 2) comprises a first end (as shown in Fig. 2 below), a middle portion (as shown in Fig. 2 below, portion between the first end and the second end is considered middle portion), and a second end (as shown in Fig. 2 below), and wherein the handlebar is straight along a line extending from the first end, through the middle portion, to the second end (Fig. 2).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Middle portion
of the handle
(the portion between the first end and the second end shown within the dashed bracket))][AltContent: ][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First end
of the handle)][AltContent: textbox (Second end
of the handle)]
PNG
media_image2.png
470
669
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Juntunen discloses wherein the handlebar further comprises a padding, a slip-resistant material, or sanding or etching located partially or wholly around the handlebar (padding/foam 70, Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 13, Juntunen discloses wherein the connector (42) comprises a first side and a second side (Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 15, Juntunen discloses wherein both of the first side and the second side comprise one or more matching pairs of holes (84, Fig. 3) defining the back range of motion limiter and the front range of motion limiter (see Fig. 1 shown above).
Claims 1-3, 13 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yakata (US 4,763,897).
Regarding claim 1, Yakata discloses a muscle stretching and strengthening device comprising: a height-adjustable vertical member (16, Fig. 1); a handlebar (18) connected to a first end of the vertical member (Fig. 1); a base (10, Fig. 1); and a connector (a pair of circular plates 13), wherein the connector indirectly connects a second end of the vertical member to the base (Figs. 1-2, plates(13) indirectly connect a second end of the vertical member (16) to the base (10)), wherein the connector comprises: a back range of motion limiter and a front range of motion limiter (for performing the exercises shown in Figs. 3(a)-3(c) and (3e)-3(h), a forward motion has been considered as a motion towards the user’s head (i.e., in the direction of B’ in Fig. 2), and a backward motion has been considered a motion away from the user’s head (i.e., in the direction of B in Fig. 2). As such, except for the holes (14) at the twelve o’clock and six o’clock on the plates (13), any of the holes (14) on the right side half of plates (13) in Fig. 2, towards the user’s head, can be and is considered a front range of motion limiter, and any of the holes (14) on the left side half the plates (13) in Fig. 2), away from the user’s head, can be and is considered a back range of motion limiter), wherein the vertical member (16) and the handlebar (18) arcs forwards and backwards between the back range of motion limiter and the front range of motion limiter to stretch and strengthen the muscles (Figs. 2-3(h), col. 3 lines 35-44 and col. 5 lines 28-39).
Regarding claim 2, Yakata discloses wherein the vertical member comprises: a first vertical segment (16b) comprising a first end (i.e., top end) and a second end (i.e., bottom end, Fig. 1, col. 3 lines 14-16); and a second vertical segment (16c) comprising a first end (i.e., top end) and a second end (i.e., bottom end, Fig. 1, col. 3 lines 14-16).
Regarding claim 3, Yakata discloses wherein the vertical member is telescoping (Fig. 1, col. 3 lines 14-16), wherein the second vertical segment (16c) is hollow (col. 3 lines 14-16), wherein the second end (i.e., bottom end) of the first vertical segment (16b) is insertable into the first end (i.e., top end) of the second vertical segment (16c, Fig. 1, col. 3 lines 14-16), and wherein the first vertical segment is movable up and down within the second vertical segment (col. 3 lines 14-20).
Regarding claim 13, Yakata discloses wherein the connector comprises a first side and a second side (Fig. 1, the pair of circular plates 13, one on each side of the vertical member (16)).
Regarding claim 15, Yakata discloses wherein both of the first side and the second side comprise one or more matching pairs of holes (14) defining the back range of motion limiter and the front range of motion limiter (Fig. 1, col. 3 lines 10-12, also see rejection of claim 1 above regarding the back and the front range of motion limiters).
Regarding claim 16, Yakata discloses the device further comprising: a first pin (29a), wherein the first pin is inserted through the one or more matching pairs of holes defining the back range of motion limiter (Figs. 1-2, col. 5 lines 28-39); and a second pin (29), wherein the second pin is inserted through the one or more matching pairs of holes defining the front range of motion limiter (Figs. 1-2, col. 3 lines 35-44), wherein the first pin and the second pin create a physical stop for the vertical member from arcing beyond the first pin and the second pin (Figs. 1-3(h), col. 3 lines 35-44, col. 5 lines 28-39).
Regarding claim 17, Yakata discloses wherein a distance is created between the first pin (29a) and the second pin (29), wherein the vertical member (16) and the handlebar (18) arc within the distance, and wherein the distance is adjustable (Figs. 1-3(h), col. 3 lines 35-44, col. 5 lines 28-39).
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Juntunen as applied to claims 1-2 and 4 above, and further in view of Nakamura (US 2010/0248918 A1).
Juntunen teaches the invention as substantially claimed. See above. Juntunen is silent about wherein the locking mechanism is a tension screw lock located at the first end of the second vertical segment.
Regarding claim 6, Nakamura teaches an exercise device comprising: a height-adjustable vertical member (2), a base (1), a handlebar (6) connected to a first end of the vertical member (Figs. 1 and 9b), wherein the vertical member comprises: a first vertical segment (2b) having a first end and a second end (Fig. 1), and a second vertical segment (2a) having a first end and a second end (Fig. 1), and a locking mechanism (5) that maintains the length of the vertical member (2) at a desired height after adjustment, wherein the locking mechanism is a tension screw lock (51 with 52) located at the first end of the second vertical segment (Figs. 5 and 7, ¶ [39], [47]).
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 Juntunen’s invention wherein the locking mechanism is a tension screw lock located at the first end of the second vertical segment, as taught by Nakamura in order to allow for easier and more precise adjustment of the height of the vertical member to accommodate various height users better.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Juntunen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Roraff (US 7,559,881B1)
Regarding claim 11, Juntunen teaches wherein the handlebar comprises a first end (as shown in Fig. 2 below), a middle portion (as shown in Fig. 2 below), and a second end (as shown in Fig. 2 below), wherein the handlebar comprises a straight middle portion (Fig. 2).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Middle portion
of the handle
(the portion between the first end and the second end shown within the dashed bracket))][AltContent: ][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First end
of the handle)][AltContent: textbox (Second end
of the handle)]
PNG
media_image2.png
470
669
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Juntunen is silent about wherein the first end and the second end extend from the middle portion at an angle.
Regarding claim 11, Roraff teaches an exercise device comprising: a vertical member (30, Figs. 2 and 4), a handlebar (35/35’, 36/36’) connected to a first end of the vertical member (Fis. 2 and 4) and a base (20/20’, Fig. 1), wherein the handlebar comprises a first end (as shown in Fig. 2 below), a middle portion (the portion between the first and second ends shown in Fig. 2 below), and a second end (as shown in Fig. 2 below), wherein the handlebar comprises a straight middle portion (Figs. 2 and 4), and wherein the first end and the second end extend from the middle portion at an angle (Figs. 2 and 4, 90 degree angle).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Middle portion
of the handle
(portion between the first and second ends))][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First end
of the handle
(shown within the dotted oval))][AltContent: textbox (Second end
of the handle
(shown within the dotted oval))][AltContent: oval][AltContent: oval]
PNG
media_image3.png
703
302
media_image3.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 Juntunen’s invention wherein the first end and the second end extend from the middle portion at an angle, as taught by Roraff in order to provide wider ranges of designs/configurations for the device to attract and accommodate various consumers/users and their fitness and/or rehabilitation needs.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yakata as applied to claims 1, 13 and 15-16 above, and further in view of Roberts (US 2007/0117660 A1).
Yakata teaches the first pin and the second pin (see above for details). Yakata is silent about wherein the first pin and the second pin are a clevis pin, and wherein a second end of the first pin and the second pin comprise a hole that traverses entirely through the second end of the first pin and the second pin, and the device further comprising a cotter pin or a spring cotter pin that is insertable through the hole to prevent the first pin and the second pin from undesirably slipping out of the matching pair of holes during use.
Regarding claims. 18-19, Roberts teaches an adjustable device comprising: a first pin (i.e., 34a, Figs. 1, 3, 5 and 7), and a second pin (i.e., 34b, Figs. 1, 3, 5 and 7), wherein the first pin (34a) and the second pin (34b) are a clevis pin (Figs. 1, 3, 5 and 7, ¶ [25]), and wherein a second end of the first pin (34a) and the second pin (34b) comprise a hole that traverses entirely through the second end of the first pin and the second pin (Figs. 3, 5 and 7, ¶ [25]), the device further comprising a cotter pin or a spring cotter pin (i.e., 36a, 36b) that is insertable through the hole to prevent the first pin and the second pin from undesirably slipping out of the matching pair of holes during use (Figs. 1, 3, 5 and 7, ¶ [25]).
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 Yakata’s invention wherein the first pin and the second pin are a clevis pin, and wherein a second end of the first pin and the second pin comprise a hole that traverses entirely through the second end of the first pin and the second pin, and the device further comprising a cotter pin or a spring cotter pin that is insertable through the hole to prevent the first pin and the second pin from undesirably slipping out of the matching pair of holes during use, as taught by Roberts in order to provide for a more secure and stable connection between the connector and the pins during use to avoid inadvertent movement of the pins out of the holes of the connector while the user is exercising, and prevent the user from potential harm.
Claims 1 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boysen (US 2018/0099186 A1) in view of Brown (US 7,780,583 B2) and Nakamura (US 2010/0248918 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Boysen teaches a muscle stretching and strengthening device comprising: a vertical member (101, Fig. 1); a base (102, Fig. 1); and a connector(104/200 with 203), wherein the connector indirectly connects a second end of the vertical member to the base (Figs. 1-5), wherein the vertical member arcs forwards and backwards (Figs. 2-5).
Boysen is silent about a handlebar connected to a first end of the vertical member and the connector comprising: a back range of motion limiter; and a front range of motion limiter, wherein the vertical member and the handlebar arcs forwards and backwards between the back range of motion limiter and the front range of motion limiter to stretch and strengthen the muscles.
Regarding claim 1, Brown teaches a muscle stretching and strengthening device comprising: a vertical member (18, Figs. 14 and 16-17); a handlebar (20/42) connected to a first end of the vertical member (Figs. 14 and 16-17); a base (22, Figs. 17-18); and a connector (96), wherein the connector indirectly connects a second end (i.e., bottom end) of the vertical member to the base (Fig. 18), wherein the connector comprises: a back range of motion limiter (i.e., the lowest hole 94 in Fig. 18); and a front range of motion limiter (i.e., the highest hole 94 in Fig. 18), wherein the vertical member (18) and the handlebar (20/42) arcs forwards and backwards between the back range of motion limiter and the front range of motion limiter to stretch and strengthen the muscles (Figs. 17-18, the vertical member (18) and the handlebar (20/42) is capable of moving (in an arc) forward and backward between the back and the front range of motion limiters).
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 Boysen’s invention with a handlebar connected to a first end of the vertical member and the connector comprising: a back range of motion limiter; and a front range of motion limiter, wherein the vertical member and the handlebar arcs forwards and backwards between the back range of motion limiter and the front range of motion limiter to stretch and strengthen the muscles, as taught by Brown in order to enable use of the device for rehabilitation purposes/exercises in which a user’s range of motion can be progressively and effectively adjusted according to the user’s rehabilitation needs.
Boysen in view of Brown is silent about the vertical member being height-adjustable.
Regarding claim 1, Nakamura teaches an exercise device comprising: a height-adjustable vertical member (2), a base (1), a handlebar (6) connected to a first end of the vertical member (Figs. 1, 2c and 9b, ¶ [39], [47]).
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 Boysen’s invention in view of Brown such that the vertical member is height-adjustable, as taught by Nakamura in order to accommodate users of various heights and fitness needs.
Regarding claim 13, Boysen in view of Brown and Nakamura teaches wherein the connector comprises a first side and a second side (Boysen: each side of 104, 200 and 203, Figs. 1, 3 and 5; Brown: each side of 96, Fig. 17).
Regarding claim 14, Boysen in view of Brown and Nakamura wherein the first side (Boysen: i.e., 200) and the second side (Boysen: i.e., 203) are rotatable around the base (Boysen: 102, via bearing system 107, Figs. 1-5), and wherein rotation of the first side and the second side causes the vertical member (Boysen: 101) and the handlebar (Brown: 20/40, Figs. 14 and 16-17) to rotate around a longitudinal axis of the vertical member in relation to a plane of the base (Boysen: Figs. 1-5, upon modification of Boysen’s invention with features/handlebar of Brown (see above for motivation), the vertical member and the handlebar would rotate around the longitudinal axis of the vertical member in relation to a plane of the base).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: with respect to claim 20, the prior arts of record, shown above, fail to disclose, teach or render obvious a muscle stretching and strengthening device, with all the structural components and functional limitations as detailed in claim 1 and further comprising: “wherein the back range of motion limiter is made from a rigid or semi-rigid material and comprises: a straight portion that extends up from a top side of the base having a semi-circle shape; two curvature pieces that extend away from the straight portion to receive and secure the vertical member within the straight portion; and an angled portion that extends back and away from the straight portion”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHILA JALALZADEH ABYANEH whose telephone number is (571)270-7403. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 am - 3:00 pm.
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.
/SHILA JALALZADEH ABYANEH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
Prosecution Insights