Jump to content

Patent Application 19115549 - TROLLEY ASSEMBLY AND WEIGHT ARM - Rejection

From WikiPatents

Patent Application 19115549 - TROLLEY ASSEMBLY AND WEIGHT ARM

Title: TROLLEY ASSEMBLY AND WEIGHT ARM

Application Information

  • Invention Title: TROLLEY ASSEMBLY AND WEIGHT ARM
  • Application Number: 19115549
  • Submission Date: 2025-05-21T00:00:00.000Z
  • Effective Filing Date: 2025-03-26T00:00:00.000Z
  • Filing Date: 2025-03-26T00:00:00.000Z
  • Examiner Employee Number: 94561
  • Art Unit: 3784
  • Tech Center: 3700

Rejection Summary

  • 102 Rejections: 0
  • 103 Rejections: 7

Cited Patents

The following patents were cited in the rejection:

Office Action Text


    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
This application is a 371 filing of international application PCT/US2023/075350 filed on 09/28/2023 and claims priority to US Provisional Application 63/410,670 filed on 09/28/2022.

Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/26/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.  Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.

Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: 
Claim 13, line 2, the limitation beginning with “a trolley assembly . . .” should be moved down a line underneath “comprising”
Appropriate correction is required.

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b)  CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.


Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “the plurality of apertures” in lines 6-7. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to the plurality of apertures of one of the two side plates or the plurality of apertures of each of the two side plates.

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.  
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary.  Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.

Claims 1-5, 9-10, 12-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nolan (US Pat. 11,517,785) and further in view of Jones et al. (US Pat. 11,173,337).
Regarding independent claim 1, Nolan teaches a trolley assembly for a weight arm (system 201), the trolley assembly comprising 
a trolley member (carriage 209) disposed on a first side (i.e., rear side) of a vertical member (vertical post 207) of a weight rack (frame 203), the vertical member defining a longitudinal axis (i.e., vertical axis), and the trolley member disposed on an opposite, second side (i.e., front side) of the vertical member of the weight rack, such that the trolley member captures the vertical member of the weight rack therebetween, the trolley assembly being selectively slidable along the longitudinal axis (via selective engagement of knob 301 into holes 206 of vertical post 207) ; and 
an arm bracket (bracket at rotation connection 225) further 
configured to rotatably support the weight arm about a first pivot axis (i.e., horizontal axis) axially transverse to the longitudinal axis and in a plane parallel to the first side of the vertical member (the lever arm 208 is rotatable about horizontal axis to perform exercises as described in col. 3 lines 32-67); and 
pivotably coupled to the trolley member about a second pivot axis (i.e., transverse axis; see annotated Fig. 2) that is orthogonal to both the longitudinal axis and the first pivot axis (lever arm 208 pivotable at via first plate 401, second plate 403, and second knob 303; see Figs. 4-5).

    PNG
    media_image1.png
    777
    473
    media_image1.png
    Greyscale

Nolan does not teach a first trolley member configured to be disposed on the first side of the vertical member and a second trolley member configured to be disposed on the opposite, second side of the vertical member, the first trolley member couplable to the second trolley member to capture the vertical member of the weight rack therebetween, the arm bracket being pivotably coupled to the second trolley member.
Jones et al., in the same field of endeavor with regards to trolley assemblies selectively slidable along a longitudinal axis of a vertical member of a weight rack, teaches a trolley assembly (Fig. 77-87) comprising a first trolley member (adjustable bracket 221) configured to be disposed on a first side (i.e., back side) of a vertical member (frame member 211), and a second trolley member (mounting bracket 250) configured to be disposed on an opposite, second side (i.e., front side) of the vertical member, the first trolley member couplable to the second trolley member to capture the vertical member therebetween (col. 38 lines 45-52, “Mounting of the weightlifting assembly 210 of FIGS. 77-87 can be accomplished by separating the adjustable bracket 221 and the mounting bracket 250, which removes the front rollers 225 that are connected to the mounting bracket 250, then sliding the adjustable bracket 221 forward onto the frame member 211 and reconnecting the mounting bracket 250 to engage the frame member 211 with all four rollers 225.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trolley assembly of Nolan to include a first trolley member and a second trolley member couplable to one another, as is similarly taught by Jones et al., for the purpose of providing a “quickly and easily removable and reconnectable” trolley assembly (Jones et al. col. 38 lines 53-57). In view of this modification, the arm bracket of Nolan will be similarly connected to the second trolley member as modified by Jones et al. to maintain its connection with the front side of the vertical member.
Regarding claim 2, Nolan as modified does not teach wherein the second pivot axis does not intersect with the first pivot axis. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to move the location of one of the first and second pivot axes of Nolan such that the second pivot axis does not intersect with the first pivot axis as a matter of obvious design choice by merely rearranging the parts of the invention. It has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, absent criticality or unexpected results. Here, modifying the position of the first and second pivot axes relative to one another will not affect the overall function of the invention. See MPEP 2144.01, Section VI, Subsection C.
Regarding claim 3, Nolan as modified does not teach wherein the second pivot axis is located below the first pivot axis with respect to the longitudinal axis of the vertical member. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to move the location of the first and/or the second pivot axes of Nolan such that the second pivot axis is located below the first pivot axis as a matter of obvious design choice by merely rearranging the parts of the invention. It has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, absent criticality or unexpected results. Here, modifying the position of the first and second pivot axes relative to one another will not affect the overall function of the invention. See MPEP 2144.01, Section VI, Subsection C.
Regarding claim 4, Nolan as modified further teaches a position lock assembly (401, 403, 303) including 
an engagement pin (second knob 303 or knob 501) supported on the arm bracket and spaced apart from the second pivot axis (see Figs. 4-5); and 
a guide plate (second plate 403) coupled to the second trolley member (as modified by Jones et al., see rejection to claim 1 above), the guide plate defining two or more pin receivers (annotated Figs. 4 and 5), wherein 
the position lock assembly is positionable in at least a first configuration (show in Fig. 4) and a second configuration (shown in Fig. 5), such that 
in the first configuration, the engagement pin engages with a first pin receiver to define a first pivot angle (i.e., horizontal, or 0⁰ pivot angle) of the arm bracket around the second pivot axis relative to the longitudinal axis of the vertical member (see Fig. 4), and
in the second configuration, the engagement pin engages with a second pin receiver to define a second pivot angle (angle shown in Fig. 5) of the arm bracket around the second pivot axis relative to the longitudinal axis of the vertical member and the second pivot angle is different than the first pivot angle (see Figs. 4-5).

    PNG
    media_image2.png
    558
    584
    media_image2.png
    Greyscale


    PNG
    media_image3.png
    540
    506
    media_image3.png
    Greyscale

Regarding claim 5, Nolan as modified further teaches wherein the position lock assembly is also positionable in a third configuration (i.e., configuration when engagement pin/knob 303, 501 is disengaged from all pin receivers) such that the engagement pin disengages with the two or more pin receivers and the arm bracket is pivotable around the second pivot axis between at least the first pivot angle and the second pivot angle (first plate 401 is pivotable about second pivot axis relative to second plate 403).
	Regarding claim 9, Nolan as modified further teaches an adjustment pin (knob 301) supported on the first trolley member (as modified by Jones et al., see rejection to claim 1 above) and selectively engageable with the vertical member of the weight rack to lock a position of the trolley assembly along the longitudinal axis (col. 4 lines 6-8, “As shown, the carriage will include a knob 301 that extends through the bracket 211 and into the vertical post 207, thereby securing the carriage at a desired location”).
Regarding claim 10, Nolan as modified further teaches at least one handle (214) coupled to the first trolley member (as modified by Jones et al., see rejection to claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 12, Nolan as modified further teaches wherein the first trolley member and the second trolley member each include at least one roller positionable against the vertical member of the weight rack (as modified by Jones et al., see rejection to claim 1 above; Jones et al. col. 37 lines 9-15, “The carriage assembly 220 in FIGS. 77-87 includes only two rollers 225 on the rear side of the adjustable bracket 221, and the other two rollers 225 are provided on the mounting bracket 250, such that all four rollers 225 engage the frame member 211 only when the mounting bracket 250 is connected to the carriage assembly 220.”).
Regarding independent claim 13, Nolan teaches a weight arm assembly for a weight rack (Fig. 2), the weight arm assembly comprising
a trolley assembly (system 201) configured to couple to a vertical member (vertical post 207) of the weight rack (frame 203), the vertical member defining a longitudinal axis (i.e., vertical axis) and the trolley assembly being selectively slidable along the longitudinal axis on the vertical member (via selective engagement of knob 301 into holes 206 of vertical post 207), the trolley assembly comprising 
an arm bracket (bracket at rotation connection 225) pivotably coupled to the trolley assembly about a pivot point (lever arm 208 pivotable via first plate 401, second plate 403, and second knob 303 and knob 501; see Figs. 4-5), the pivot point defining a pivot axis (i.e., transverse axis) that is orthogonal to the longitudinal axis (see annotated Fig. 2); and 
a weight arm (lever arm 208) rotatably coupled at a first end to the arm bracket around a rotation axis (i.e., horizontal axis) orthogonal to both the longitudinal axis and the pivot axis (see annotated Fig. 2) and configured to couple to a weight bar member (grip system 233).
	
Nolan does not teach the trolley assembly comprising a first trolley member configured to be disposed on a first side of the vertical member of the weight rack and a second trolley member configured to be disposed on an opposite, second side of the vertical member of the weight rack, the first trolley member couplable to the second trolley member to capture the vertical member of the weight rack therebetween, the arm bracket pivotably coupled to the second trolley member.
Jones et al., in the same field of endeavor with regards to trolley assemblies selectively slidable along a longitudinal axis of a vertical member of a weight rack, teaches a trolley assembly (Fig. 77-87) comprising a first trolley member (adjustable bracket 221) configured to be disposed on a first side (i.e., back side) of a vertical member (frame member 211), and a second trolley member (mounting bracket 250) configured to be disposed on an opposite, second side (i.e., front side) of the vertical member, the first trolley member couplable to the second trolley member to capture the vertical member therebetween (col. 38 lines 45-52, “Mounting of the weightlifting assembly 210 of FIGS. 77-87 can be accomplished by separating the adjustable bracket 221 and the mounting bracket 250, which removes the front rollers 225 that are connected to the mounting bracket 250, then sliding the adjustable bracket 221 forward onto the frame member 211 and reconnecting the mounting bracket 250 to engage the frame member 211 with all four rollers 225.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trolley assembly of Nolan to include a first trolley member and a second trolley member couplable to one another, as is similarly taught by Jones et al., for the purpose of providing a “quickly and easily removable and reconnectable” trolley assembly (Jones et al. col. 38 lines 53-57). In view of this modification, the arm bracket of Nolan will be similarly connected to the second trolley member as modified by Jones et al. to maintain its connection with the front side of the vertical member.
Regarding claim 14, Nolan as modified does not teach wherein the pivot axis does not intersect with the rotation axis. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to move the location of one of pivot axis and rotation axis of Nolan such that the pivot axis does not intersect with the rotation axis as a matter of obvious design choice by merely rearranging the parts of the invention. It has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, absent criticality or unexpected results. Here, modifying the position of the pivot and rotation axes relative to one another will not affect the overall function of the invention. See MPEP 2144.01, Section VI, Subsection C.
Regarding claim 15, Nolan as modified does not teach wherein the pivot axis is located below the rotation axis with respect to the longitudinal axis of the vertical member. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to move the location of the pivot axis and/or the rotation axis of Nolan such that the pivot axis is located below the rotation axis as a matter of obvious design choice by merely rearranging the parts of the invention. It has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, absent criticality or unexpected results. Here, modifying the position of the pivot and rotation axes relative to one another will not affect the overall function of the invention. See MPEP 2144.01, Section VI, Subsection C.
Regarding claim 16, Nolan as modified further teaches
an engagement pin (second knob 303 or knob 501) supported on the arm bracket and spaced apart from the pivot point (see Figs. 4-5); and 
a guide plate (second plate 403) coupled to the second trolley member (as modified by Jones et al., see rejection to claim 1 above) and defining two or more pin receivers (annotated Figs. 4 and 5), wherein 
the engagement pin is selectively engageable within a respective pin receiver of the two or more pin receivers to define a respective pivot angle of the arm bracket relative to the second trolley member (see two pivot angle positions in Figs. 4-5 when knobs 303, 501 are engaged with different pin receivers), and
the weight arm is rotatable around the rotation axis at each respective pivot angle of the arm bracket (lever arm 208 remains rotatable about the rotation axis in each of the respective pivot angles as illustrated in Figs. 4-5).
Regarding claim 20, Nolan as modified further teaches an adjustment pin (knob 301) supported on the first trolley member (as modified by Jones et al., see rejection to claim 1 above) and selectively engageable with the vertical member of the weight rack to lock a position of the trolley assembly along the longitudinal axis (col. 4 lines 6-8, “As shown, the carriage will include a knob 301 that extends through the bracket 211 and into the vertical post 207, thereby securing the carriage at a desired location”).

Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nolan (US Pat. 11,517,785) in view of Jones et al. (US Pat. 11,173,337), and further in view of Batca (US Pat. 7,476,184).
Regarding claim 6, Nolan as modified does not teach wherein the position lock assembly further comprises a guide pin extending from the arm bracket; the guide plate further defines an arcuate channel receiving at least a portion of the guide pin; and the arcuate channel defines pivot limits of the arm bracket around the second pivot axis.
Batca, in the same field of endeavor with regards to brackets pivotable relative to a guide plate, teaches a bracket (top plate 312) pivotably connected to a guide plate (locking plate 150, pivotable about pivot axis at shaft 320), wherein the guide plate includes pin receivers (locking holes 154) for selectively locking the bracket at a pivot angle using an engagement pin (locking pin 324), wherein the bracket further comprises a guide pin (limit pin 322) extending from the bracket, the guide plate further defines an arcuate channel (slot 153) receiving at least a portion of the guide pin, and the arcuate channel defines pivot limits of the arm bracket around the pivot axis (col. 4 lines 61-65, “Limit pin 322 extends upward from the top plate 312 of the swivel assembly 310 and is received in a slot 152 in the locking plate 150. The engagement of the limit pin 322 in the slot 152 limits the angular rotation of the swivel assembly 310 as it rotates about the second axis X2”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the position lock assembly of Nolan to further include a guide pin extending from the arm bracket engaged with an arcuate channel on the guide plate to define pivot limits of the arm bracket around the second pivot axis, as is similarly taught by Batca, for the purpose of preventing unlimited pivoting of the arm bracket beyond the desired positions, thereby avoiding potential injury to the user or damage to the trolley assembly.
Regarding claim 7, Nolan as modified by Batca does not teach wherein the pivot limits of the arm brackets are +/- 20⁰ from a center position that is parallel to the longitudinal axis. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adjustability of the arm bracket of Nolan relative to the guide plate such that the pivot limits of the arm brackets are at whatever limits are desired, including +/- 20⁰ from a center position that is parallel to the longitudinal axis, as a matter of obvious design choice to increase the versatility and adjustability of the arm bracket. It has been held that the provision of adjustability involves only routine skill in the art, absent criticality or a showing of unexpected results. Such a modification would not affect the overall functioning of Nolan, as Nolan already teaches limited positioning of the arm bracket relative to the guide plate due to the limited number and configuration of pin receivers. See MPEP 2144.04, Section V, Subsection D.

Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nolan (US Pat. 11,517,785) in view of Jones et al. (US Pat. 11,173,337), and further in view of Sechrest et al. (US Pat. 6,488,612).
Regarding claim 8, Nolan as modified does not teach wherein the engagement pin (303, 501) is spring loaded and biased towards an engaged position with the guide plate.
Sechrest et al., in the same field of endeavor with regards to rotatable arms, teaches an engagement pin (181) that is spring loaded and biased towards an engaged position with a guide plate (flange portion 270; col. 4 lines 44-54, “A pin 181, FIGS. 1, 3, 4, which is spring 282 loaded and mounted on rotatable axle flange 300, FIGS. 1, 4, is manually insertable into any of the apertures (e.g. 149a, 151a) in the flanged portion 270 of cylindrical bushing 272, the apertures in flange 270 corresponding to positions 149 and 151, by manually pulling backwardly on the head of the pin 181, releasing the pin and allowing the pin to be spring 282 force inserted into a selected aperture thus locking the rotation position of the rotatable axle 301 around axis 50 into a selected angular position”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the engagement pin of Nolan to be spring loaded and biased towards an engaged position with the guide plate, as is similarly taught by Sechrest et al., for the purpose of locking the pivot position of the position lock assembly and preventing the accidental release of the position lock assembly.

Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nolan (US Pat. 11,517,785) in view of Jones et al. (US Pat. 11,173,337), and further in view of Hockridge et al. (US Pat. 10,010,740).
Regarding claim 11, Nolan as modified does not teach wherein the adjustment pin (301) includes a lever disposed within the at least one handle (214), connected to the adjustment pin, and operable to engage and disengage the adjustment pin with the vertical member of the weight rack.
Hockridge et al., in the same field of endeavor with regards to adjustment pins, teaches an adjustment pin (locking pin 323) that includes a lever (locking pin handle 324) disposed adjacent to a handle (pivot adjustment handle 325), connected to the adjustment pin (see Fig. 5), and operable to engage and disengage the adjustment pin (col. 7 lines 41-44, “The locking pin 323 is biased towards the holes 322 of the pivot adjustment plate 321 by a spring 329 and retracted using the locking pin handle 324” and col. 7 lines 47-50, “a user may press the locking pin handle 324 laterally toward the pivot adjustment handle 325 in order to retract the locking pin 323 from the hole 322”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adjustment pin of Nolan to further include a lever disposed adjacent to the at least one handle, connected to the adjustment pin, and operable to engage and disengage the adjustment pin, as is similarly taught by Hockridge et al., for the purpose of allowing a user to easily and efficiently adjust the trolley assembly along the vertical member of the weight rack. The Office notes that such a modification would necessarily result in the lever being disposed within the at least one handle in order to achieve the equivalent functionality as taught by Hockridge et al.

Claims 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nolan (US Pat. 11,517,785) in view of Jones et al. (US Pat. 11,173,337), and further in view of Simental et al. (US Pub. 2022/0323815).
Regarding claim 17, Nolan teaches wherein the arm bracket is substantially U-shaped with two side plates (annotated exploded Fig. 2) and a base plate (first plate 201), the base plate is pivotably coupled to the second trolley member (first plate 201 pivotably coupled to second plate 403, which is coupled to the second trolley member as modified by Jones et al., see rejection to claim 1 above), but does not teach the weight arm is rotatably coupled between the two side plates (see Fig. 2, lever arm 208 is rotatably coupled to the outside of the two side plates of the arm bracket).

    PNG
    media_image4.png
    520
    672
    media_image4.png
    Greyscale

Simental et al., in the same field of endeavor with regards to rotating weight arms, teaches a lever arm (annotated Fig. 9) rotatably coupled between two side plates (annotated Fig. 9, side plates of carriage member 200).

    PNG
    media_image5.png
    571
    396
    media_image5.png
    Greyscale

It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trolley assembly of Nolan such that the lever arm is rotatably coupled between the two side plates, as is similarly taught by Simental et al., for the purpose of achieving the same predictable results of providing a rotatable connection of the lever arm to the arm bracket.

Claims 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nolan (US Pat. 11,517,785) in view of Jones et al. (US Pat. 11,173,337), in view of Simental et al. (US Pub. 2022/0323815), and further in view of Simonson (US Pat. 6,238,323).
Regarding claim 18, Nolan as modified by Simental et al. teaches wherein the two side plates each define a plurality of apertures spaced apart relative to the rotation axis (as modified by Simental et al., each side plate comprises a plurality of apertures), and appears to teach wherein the arm bracket further comprises a weight arm pin (as modified by Simental et al., see Fig. 9 of Simental et al. illustrating pin extending through apertures in side plates) such that the weight arm (lever arm 208) is selectively positionable about the rotation axis relative to the arm bracket via engagement between the weight arm pin and the plurality of apertures (as modified by Simental et al., see Figs. 9-14 of Simental et al. showing weight arm pin extending through side plates to selectively position equivalent weight arm relative to equivalent rotation axis). 
If it is determined that Nolan as modified by Simental et al. does not teach a weight arm pin such that the weight arm is selectively positionable about the rotation axis relative to the arm bracket via engagement between the weight arm pin and the plurality of apertures, Simonson, in the same field of endeavor with regards to rotatable weight arms, teaches a rotatable weight arm (extension arm 112) selectively positionable about a rotation axis (at pivot pin 174) via engagement of a weight arm pin (locking pin 180) with one of a plurality of apertures (flange holes 176) in an arm bracket (flange assembly 178).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the arm bracket of Nolan in view of Simental et al. to include a weight arm pin such that the weight arm is selectively positionable about the rotation axis relative to the arm bracket via engagement between the weight arm pin and the plurality of apertures, as is similarly taught by Simonson, for the purpose of allowing a user to selectively lock the weight arm at a desired position to increase the variety of exercises that may be performed with the trolley assembly.

Claims 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nolan (US Pat. 11,517,785) in view of Jones et al. (US Pat. 11,173,337), in view of Simental et al. (US Pub. 2022/0323815), and further in view of Casady (US Pat. 4,355,746).
Regarding claim 19, Nolan as modified does not teach wherein a stop plate extends within the arm bracket, the stop plate at least partially defining a parallel orientation of the weight arm relative to the vertical member of the weight rack.
Casady, in the same field of endeavor with regards to arms rotatable about a rotation axis of an arm bracket, teaches a stop plate (stop 39) extending within an arm bracket (bracket 25), the stop plate at least partially defining a parallel orientation of an arm (29) relative to a vertical member (supporting frame 11) of a frame (10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the arm bracket of Nolan to further include a stop plate extending within the arm bracket, as is similarly taught by Casady, for the purpose of preventing damage to the weight arm when the weight arm is in a parallel orientation relative to the vertical member of the weight rack by keeping the weight arm from hitting the arm bracket directly or the vertical frame member (col. 3 lines 15-17, “A stop 39 is preferably welded in place in bracket 25 to keep arm 29 from hitting frame 10 when in its upright position”).

Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHLEEN FISK whose telephone number is (571)272-1042. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-4PM M-F (Central).
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.




/KATHLEEN M FISK/Examiner, Art Unit 3784


Retrieved from "https://wikipatents.org/index.php?title=Patent_Application_19115549_-_TROLLEY_ASSEMBLY_AND_WEIGHT_ARM_-_Rejection&oldid=623969"
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.