Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/309,983

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GAMIFICATION OF EXERCISE ROUTINES

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 26, 2025
Examiner
ANDERSON, MEGAN M
Art Unit
3784
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Amp Fit Israel Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
544 granted / 724 resolved
+5.1% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
746
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.8%
-38.2% vs TC avg
§103
33.0%
-7.0% vs TC avg
§102
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
§112
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 724 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION This is the First Office Action on the Merits based on the 19/309,983 application filed on 08/26/2025 and which claims as originally filed have been considered in the ensuing action. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Priority Application 19/309,983 is a continuation of a PCT which claims priority to a provisional filed 02/26/2024. Accordingly, application 19/309,983 has priority to 02/26/2024. Election/Restrictions In the reply filed 01/21/2026, Group I (claims 21-34) directed to an exercise machine was elected without traverse. Claims 35-40 have been withdrawn as being directed to a non-elected group. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/26/2025 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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)(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 21-28 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shavit (US 2017/0368413). Regarding claim 21: Shavit discloses a frame (see annotated Fig. below); a resistance linkage (see annotated Fig. below); a resistance applicator (see annotated Fig. below) mounted to the frame and coupled to the resistance linkage (see annotated Fig .below; the weight stack is mounted to the frame and the cable), wherein the resistance applicator is configured to apply resistance to a user-engaging element (see annotated Fig. below; the weight stack applies resistance to the handle) associated with the resistance linkage; at least one sensor for detecting a first pace of movement of the resistance linkage (paragraph [0181] states that the sensor in the weight stack measures the distance from the pin in the weight stack to determine the speed of the handle); a transmitter (wireless receive transmitter, discussed in at least paragraph [0178]) configured for pairing with the mobile communications device (wearable computing device 190 or a smartphone or tablet, see paragraph [0058]) having a display and running software for causing a graphical element to move on the display (“The wireless receiver transmitter can use any protocol mentioned in this disclosure or known in the art. It can be used to communicate with WCDs or smart phones which may contain some of the systems computing system. For example the I/O devices on a smart-phone like the screen and speaker can be used to display the resistance and or repetitions and/or any other output or function to the user. ” see paragraph [0182]; Shavit further discloses that the system may do a “gamification” which creates real users’ avatars on the display that move with the exercise, see paragraph [0762] ); and at least one processor (paragraph [0170] states that the processor used in previous embodiments can be used in the apparatus present in Fig. 7; paragraph [0176] states the processor is configured to receive the pace of the exercise) configured to receive pace indications from the at least one sensor and to output pacing signals for transmission by the transmitter (“As already mentioned the system may track the user's performance of the exercise. It may issue calls for him to correct his performance on the fly. It may adjust his pace. ” see paragraph [0764]), wherein the pacing signals are configured, upon receipt by the mobile communications device, to cause the graphical element to move at a second pace corresponding to the first pace of movement of the resistance linkage thereby enabling regulation of the pace of movement of the resistance linkage via observation of the graphical element on the display of the mobile communications device paired with the transmitter (paragraphs [0762-0765] discuss the avatar moving corresponding to the user exercising in real time). [AltContent: textbox (Resistance Applicator/Weights)][AltContent: textbox (Rigid bar)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (User-engaging element)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Resistance Linkage)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Frame)][AltContent: arrow] PNG media_image1.png 362 260 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 22: Shavit discloses that the resistance linkage includes a cable, a band, or a chain (see annotated Fig. above; Shavit discloses a cable, please also see at least paragraph [0171]). Regarding claim 23: Shavit discloses that the resistance linkage includes a rigid bar (see annotated Fig. above). Regarding claim 24: Shavit discloses that the resistance applicator includes a resistive motor (Shavit discloses different types of resistances, including a motor or stepper motor in different iterations of the exercise machine, see paragraph [0253, 0262, 0263]). Regarding claim 25: Shavit discloses that the resistance applicator includes weights (see annotated Fig. above). Regarding claim 26: Shavit discloses that the resistance applicator includes at least one of a resistance band, a hydraulic piston, a magnetic resistor, or a fly wheel (Shavit discloses different types of resistances, including bands 3434, see paragraph [0646]). Regarding claim 27: Shavit discloses that the user-engaging element includes at least one of a handle, a ring, a loop, a T-bar, roped-ball, a pedal, or a paddle (see annotated Fig. above, the user-engaging element is a handle). Regarding claim 28: Shavit discloses that the at least one sensor includes an image sensor (“Is an example embodiment of computing device enhanced training environment, enhanced with a plurality of motion and image sensors.” See paragraph [0037]). Regarding claim 34: Shavit discloses that the at least one processor is configured to output a mode signal, and wherein the mode signal is configured to alter a mode of the software (Shavit discloses that the processor can be used to change the type of display that relates exercise regime/mode, see paragraph [072]). 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 32-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shavit (US 2017/0368413) in view of Greenbaum (US 2014/0274564). Shavit discloses the device as substantially claimed above. Regarding claim 32: Shavit discloses that the software is configured to cause pacing elements to move on the display (see rejection of claim 21 above). Shavit fails to disclose that the at least one processor is configured to generate the pacing signals in a form for causing the graphical element to collide with the pacing elements when a pace of the resistance linkage corresponds to a predetermined exercise pace. Greenbaum teaches device and systems for interaction in a virtual environment, where the processor is configured to generate a graphical element that moves with the pace of the exercise and is configured to collide with elements, the elements being controlled by the processor (see paragraph [0023]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the software of Shavit to include the ability for the avatar to collide with items corresponding to the user’s pace, as taught by Greenbaum to gamify the experience of the user. Regarding claim 33: Shavit as modified discloses the at least one processor is configured to output a mode signal, and wherein the mode signal is configured to control the pacing elements (see rejection of claim 32 above). Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shavit (US 2017/0368413) in view of Tan et al (CN 116540878). Shavit discloses the device as substantially claimed above. Regarding claim 31: Shavit fails to disclose that the graphical element is a paddle, and wherein the at least one processor is configured to generate the pacing signals in a form for causing the paddle to move on the display in a manner correlated to movement of the resistance linkage. However, Shavit does disclose that the avatar motion is correlated to the movement of the resistance linkage detected by the sensor and processed by the processor. Tan et al disclose a weight lifting device that has a display that is used to show a paddle-simulating experience, such that the graphical element is a paddle and the graphical element moves according to the exercise of the user (see page 1). It would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the software of Shavit to have a mode of paddle simulation, as taught by Tan et al to allow for different user experiences. Further, Shavit discloses the gamification of the exercise. Claims 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shavit (US 2017/0368413) in view of Valente et al (US 12,145,020). Shavit discloses the device as substantially claimed above. Regarding claim 29: Shavit discloses that the resistance linkage is a cable (see annotated Fig. above), but fails to distinctly disclose that the at least one sensor is configured to determine cable movement by detecting rotation of a spool on which the cable is wound. Valente et al discloses an exercise machine having a motor, spool and cable configuration. More specifically, Valente et al discloses a sensor that detects rotation of the spools (202) to determine the speed of the cable movement, the cable being wound on the spool, wherein the motor, sensor, spool and cable are all integrally connected (see column 16, lines 16-34). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Shavit to have the motor, spool and cable configuration of Valente et al instead of the weight stack, as the means of resistances are well known in the art. Further, Shavit discloses different exercise apparatuses used with the software. Regarding claim 30: Shavit as modified discloses that the sensor is an integral part of a resistance motor connected to the spool (see rejection of claim 29 above). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEGAN M ANDERSON whose telephone number is (313)446-6531. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6 a.m. -4 p.m. (Arizona). 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. /Megan Anderson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 26, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599826
RAGE RELIEVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576299
EXERCISE AND THERAPY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564759
STAIR STEPPER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558584
Resistance adjustment device of exercise apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12558592
TREADMILL CAPABLE OF ADJUSTING SLOPE RISING AND FALLING BY SCREW ROD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.1%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 724 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month