Cable crossover exercise apparatus

Details Cable crossover exercise apparatus Cable crossover exercise apparatus

2007-01-25

2009-12-01

Thanh, Loan H (Department: 3764)

Exercise devices

User manipulated force resisting apparatus, component...

Utilizing weight resistance

C482S138000

Reexamination Certificate

active

07625321

ABSTRACT:
A highly versatile exercise apparatuses is disclosed. More particularly, the invention relates to an exercise apparatus including a central weight stack and opposed extension arms. Upper and lower pulleys direct a cable into the opposed extension arms such that variations in the cable reaction and tension are minimized when either arm is moved.

REFERENCES:
patent: 321388 (1885-06-01), Ruesbam
patent: 353089 (1886-11-01), Smith
patent: 372272 (1887-10-01), Murphy
patent: 374496 (1887-12-01), Reach
patent: 457400 (1891-08-01), Dowd
patent: 722462 (1903-03-01), Smith
patent: 776824 (1904-12-01), Bryon, Jr.
patent: 807670 (1905-12-01), Grabner
patent: 1928089 (1933-09-01), Blickman
patent: 2436987 (1948-03-01), Bailleaux
patent: 2472391 (1949-06-01), Alzibu
patent: 2977120 (1961-03-01), Morris
patent: 3708166 (1973-01-01), Annas
patent: 4154441 (1979-05-01), Gaida
patent: 4372553 (1983-02-01), Hatfield
patent: 4402504 (1983-09-01), Christian
patent: 4474370 (1984-10-01), Oman
patent: 4531727 (1985-07-01), Pitre
patent: 4603855 (1986-08-01), Sebelle
patent: 4632388 (1986-12-01), Schleffendorf
patent: 4635926 (1987-01-01), Minkow
patent: 4657246 (1987-04-01), Salyer
patent: 4666151 (1987-05-01), Chillier
patent: 4685670 (1987-08-01), Zinkin
patent: 4697809 (1987-10-01), Rockwell
patent: 4721301 (1988-01-01), Drake
patent: 4721303 (1988-01-01), Fitzpatrick
patent: 4733860 (1988-03-01), Steffee
patent: 4763897 (1988-08-01), Yakata
patent: 4784384 (1988-11-01), Deola
patent: 4826157 (1989-05-01), Fitzpatrick
patent: 4834365 (1989-05-01), Jones
patent: 4898381 (1990-02-01), Gordon
patent: 4900018 (1990-02-01), Ish, III et al.
patent: 4907798 (1990-03-01), Burchatz
patent: 4913423 (1990-04-01), Farran et al.
patent: 4974838 (1990-12-01), Sollenberger
patent: 4990838 (1991-02-01), Kawato et al.
patent: 5044629 (1991-09-01), Ryan et al.
patent: 5064191 (1991-11-01), Johnson
patent: 5090694 (1992-02-01), Pauls et al.
patent: 5102121 (1992-04-01), Solow et al.
patent: 5102122 (1992-04-01), Paine, Jr. et al.
patent: 5211614 (1993-05-01), Henes
patent: 5236406 (1993-08-01), Webber
patent: 5242344 (1993-09-01), Hundley
patent: 5250013 (1993-10-01), Brangi
patent: D342106 (1993-12-01), Campbell et al.
patent: 5267930 (1993-12-01), Henes
patent: 5348524 (1994-09-01), Grant
patent: 5356360 (1994-10-01), Johns
patent: 5362290 (1994-11-01), Huang
patent: 5362296 (1994-11-01), Wang et al.
patent: 5417634 (1995-05-01), Habing
patent: 5429569 (1995-07-01), Gunnari
patent: 5549530 (1996-08-01), Fulks
patent: 5569138 (1996-10-01), Wang et al.
patent: 5667465 (1997-09-01), McCollum et al.
patent: 5674167 (1997-10-01), Piaget et al.
patent: 5709638 (1998-01-01), Mackert
patent: 5722921 (1998-03-01), Simonson
patent: 5738616 (1998-04-01), Robertson
patent: 5800321 (1998-09-01), Webber
patent: 5897467 (1999-04-01), Habing et al.
patent: 5906566 (1999-05-01), Whitcomb
patent: 5931767 (1999-08-01), Morales
patent: 5941807 (1999-08-01), Cassidy et al.
patent: 5951444 (1999-09-01), Webber
patent: 5961428 (1999-10-01), Webber
patent: 5989165 (1999-11-01), Giannelli et al.
patent: 6036622 (2000-03-01), Gordon
patent: 6217493 (2001-04-01), Spletzer
patent: 6238323 (2001-05-01), Simonson
patent: 6267711 (2001-07-01), Hinds
patent: 6443877 (2002-09-01), Hoecht et al.
patent: 6458061 (2002-10-01), Simonson
patent: 6488612 (2002-12-01), Sechrest et al.
patent: 6491610 (2002-12-01), Henn
patent: 6599223 (2003-07-01), Wang et al.
patent: 6669607 (2003-12-01), Slawinski et al.
patent: 6705976 (2004-03-01), Piane, Jr.
patent: 7169093 (2007-01-01), Simonson et al.
patent: 7172538 (2007-02-01), Keiser
patent: 7282016 (2007-10-01), Simonson
patent: 7396319 (2008-07-01), Ellis
patent: 7503882 (2009-03-01), Sechrest et al.
patent: 2002/0013200 (2002-01-01), Sechrest et al.
patent: 2003/0017918 (2003-01-01), Webb et al.
patent: 2003/0032530 (2003-02-01), Sechrest et al.
patent: 2003/0032531 (2003-02-01), Simonson
patent: 2003/0060343 (2003-03-01), Sechrest et al.
patent: 2003/0114281 (2003-06-01), Mackert et al.
patent: 2003/0176261 (2003-09-01), Simonson
patent: 2006/0100069 (2006-05-01), Dibble et al.
patent: 2006/0116249 (2006-06-01), Dibble et al.
patent: 2009/0036277 (2009-02-01), Ish et al.
patent: 4410001 (1994-08-01), None
patent: 4331733 (1995-05-01), None
patent: 19704390 (1997-09-01), None
patent: 19801672 (1998-11-01), None
patent: 1743620 (1989-11-01), None
patent: 1586724 (1990-08-01), None
patent: 1725744 (1992-04-01), None
Cybex Expert Report—“Mechanical Engineering Analysis,” 121 pages including tabs, Sep. 29, 2003.
Cybex Expert Report—“Supplemental Mechanical Engineering Analysis,” 137 pages, Oct. 28, 2003.
Defendant Cybex International, Inc.'s Supplemental Responses to Plaintiff's Interrogatories and Document Requests, 46 pages, Sep. 29, 2003.
Defendant's [Nautilus's] Supplemental Responses to Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories, 45 pages, Aug. 8, 2003.
Cybex Expert Report—Letter from Michael W. Starkweather, 4 pages, Dec. 19, 2003.
Plaintiff Free Motion's Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment that Defendant Cybex Cannot, as a Matter of Law, Sustain Its Burden of Proving that the Asserted Claims of the Patents-in-Suit are Invalid, 229 pages including tabs, Aug. 29, 2003 [filed under seal and redacted accordingly].
Defendant Cybex's Memorandum in Support of Its Motion for Summary Judgment that the Patents-in-Suit are Invalid, and Alternative Request for Time to Do Additional Discovery of Prior Art; and Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment that Cybex Cannot Sustain Its Burden of Proving that the Asserted Claims of the Patents-in-Suit Are Invalid, 694 pages including tabs, Sep. 29, 2003.
Plaintiff Free Motion's Reply Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Further Support of Its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment that Defendant Cybex Cannot, as a Matter of Law, Sustain Its Burden of Proving that the Asserted Claims of the Patents-in-Suit Are Invalid, 36 pages including tabs, Oct. 14, 2003.
Plaintiff Free Motion's Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendant Cybex's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment that the Patents-in-Suit Are Invalid, 47 pages including tabs, Oct. 29, 2003.
Defendant Cybex's Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment that the Patents-in-Suit Are Invalid, 180 pages including tabs, Nov. 14, 2003.
Free Motion Expert Report—“Infringement Analysis,” 32 pages including tabs, Aug. 21, 2003.
Free Motion Expert Report—“Infringement Analysis,” 31 pages including tabs, Dec. 11, 2003.
Plaintiff Free Motion's Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Literal Infringement of Claim 1 of the '061 Patent by Defendant Cybex's FT 360 Device, 140 pages including tabs, May 9, 2003 [filed under seal and redacted accordingly].
Corrigendum to Plaintiff Free Motion's Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Literal Infringement of Claim 1 of the '061 Patent by Defendant Cybex's FT 360 Device, 6 pages including tabs, May 12, 2003 [filed under seal and redacted accordingly].
Plaintiff Free Motion's (1) Reply Memorandum in Further Support of Its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Literal Infringement of Claim 1 of the '061 Patent by Defendant Cybex's FT 360 Device and (2) Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendant Cybex's Cross-Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of No Literal Infringement of Claim 1 of the '061 Patent by Cybex's FT 360 Device, 15 pages, Jul. 2, 2003 [filed under seal and redacted accordingly].
Defendant Cybex's Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of No Infringement, 18 pages, Jul. 8, 2003.
Plaintiff Free Motion's Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Its Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Literal Infringrment of Claim 1 of the '061 Patent by Defendent's Freedom Trainer Device, 172 pages including tabs, Aug. 1,

Affiliated with

Also associated with

Rating

Cable crossover exercise apparatus does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.

If you have personal experience with Cable crossover exercise apparatus, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Cable crossover exercise apparatus will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

Comments { 0 }

Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-4083461