In Re Icon Health And Fitness, Inc.

496 F.3d 1374 (2007)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P owns the '624 patent. P sought reexamination by the PTO. The invention is a treadmill with a folding base, allowing the base to swivel into an upright storage position. The claimed innovation was a gas spring connected between the tread base and the upright structure to assist in retaining in a stable upright position. The examiner rejected P's claims as obvious under 35 §103. This was based on the combination of an advertisement by Damark International, Inc. (Damark) and U.S. Patent '766 to Teague, Jr. (Teague). Damark advertised a folding treadmill. Teague describes a bed that folds up into a cabinet or recess and to improve on prior art counterbalancing mechanisms it uses a novel dual-action spring rather than the prior single-action springs. The dual-action spring reverses its force as the mechanism passes a neutral position. Teague's dual-action spring partially supports the weight of the bed in both the closed and open positions. This reduces the force required to open the bed from the closed position, while still reducing the force required to lift the bed from the open position. The Board affirmed the examiner's determination that the combination of Teague and Damark rendered P's claim 1 obvious. The Board found that Teague and the current application both address the need to stably retain a folding mechanism. It found that discussion of a lifting force in the present application paralleled Teague's mechanism for creating a lifting force. P appealed. challenging both the use of Teague as analogous art and the ultimate conclusion of obviousness.