Device to promote physical fitness, mental agility, adroitness and dexterity
Kind Code:

A simple, light-weight, hand-held device, which consists of two (2) working parts. FIG. I (the main handle), with firmly attached to it an aluminum guide channel, or rigid plastic which (for very practical purposes), runs nearly the length of the handle, thereby providing the necessary assurance that the hoop (FIG. 4) properly enters the assembly located at the very bottom of the handle, thereby placing FIG. 4 in the (intended) rolling position.

A reasonable viewing of prior art (Exhibits A-B and C), as compared with my invention, confirms that the basic, main feature for “launching” the hoop (found in my invention), is totally lacking in the prior art . . . therefore, making my invention to be a significant improvement.

Also, as my drawings indicate, FIG. 5, with the two (2) “Ls” makes it possible to have full control of the area of hoop “travel”, which would be most beneficial to joggers, as well as other users of my device.

Aside from the fact that the device is designed to promote activity, it is certainly imperative that, in order to function properly, the hoop must arrive at the required “destination: in order to serve the actual purpose for the invention.

Wabeke, Paul Eugene (Holland, MI, US)
Application Number:
Publication Date:
Filing Date:
Primary Class:
International Classes:
View Patent Images:

Primary Examiner:
Attorney, Agent or Firm:
What I claim as my invention is:

1. A device to promote physical fitness, mental agility, adroitness, and dexterity, as shown within my drawings to be my invention which, as indicated by prior art, that mine is a most definite improvement over said prior art.



1. Field of Invention

Although my invention is (properly) titled as A DEVICE TO PROMOTE PHYSICAL FITNESS, MENTAL AGILITY, ADROITNESS AND DEXTERITY, in many respects, it could also be classified as a Rolling Toy For Children . . . safety features built in are equally applicable for young people as well as older.

2. Description of Prior Art

Within this section, USPO instructions state, among other elements.“ . . . including references to specific documents which are related to your invention. . . . ”

In order for me to more easily project my thoughts and facts with regards to “prior art”, I (respectfully) have enclosed herein three (3) exhibits which most dramatically confirm the definite improvements incorporated within my invention over prior art. For it has been said ‘a picture is (often times) better than I000 words.’

For an example: EXHIBIT “A” indicates a long handle (FIG. 2I), with a very short (possibly 3-4″) channel attached at the very bottom of the handle. Since FIG. 2I is a tubular shaft, and the hoop (item #40 in the exhibit) is also made with tubular material, the problem very obviously is that it would appear to be almost impossible to have the hoop roll down the long, tubular shaft and make contact with the short channel located at the very bottom of the shaft.

Indeed, my invention provides for the (necessary) guidance all the way down from the release of the hoop at the top of the handle to the entry of FIG. 4 (the hoop) as shown in my drawings (FIG. 5).

The three (3) exhibits are enhanced by means of the green and red color hites.

Likewise, EXHIBIT “B” indicates a lapse in distance from the top half portion of the handle (item #I2), down half way to where comes in contact with item I4, where item #I4 becomes even smaller in diameter than item #20.

The basic, fundamental problem is that without (proper) guidance, there is very little chance that the hoop will come into (expected) contact with item #I8

Furthermore, as contrasted with my invention, EXHIBIT “B” also indicates a rather complex means of shortening the length of the handle by means of a telescopic handle device. A machining process is involved, with related push botton components, as compared with my simple way of shortening the handle. (Please refer to my specifications above).

Although FIG. 7 (n EXHIBIT “B”) does indicate a concave surface in the upper half of the handle, never the less, at the point the lower half of the handle is lacking as to any reasonable guidance.

With regards to EXHIBIT “C”, there is nothing contained within their descriptions of various facets of their 5 page set of drawings to indicate specifically as to how FIG. 6 (a)-(b)-(c) or (d) are to arrive at the very bottom member which is attached to their main handle.

The five (5) pages making up the various written sections of their patent are presented in such complexity that this inventor elects to not address them any further.


As is indicated within the three (3) exhibits of prior art, as well as my own invention, the sole aim of the four (4) items is to engage a hoop into a rolling position over the ground, pavement, etc.

As EXHIBITS A-B and C indicate, because of their design, it would be very extremely difficult to accomplish their intended, expected goal of the hoop rolling along the ground, pavement, etc.

However, the distinct advantage of my invention solves the problem, which (obviously) exists within their three (3) examples of prior art, i.e.: my invention addresses the necessity of providing guidance for the hoop from its release at the top end of the main handle to the point of entry (FIG. 5) in my invention. (Please refer to Background Of Invention above).


FIG. I (an overall top view of my invention)

FIG. 2 (a side view of the same)

FIG. 3 (Aluminum guide channel or rigid plastic)

FIG. 4 (I2″ diameter hoop)

FIG. 5 (a depiction of the area of hoop “travel”).

Also attached is a brief description of various components making up my invention.


The basic purpose in my addressing this section is to point out actual improvements in my invention over and against that which is contained within prior art. (Please see Exhibits A-B and C enclosed herein).

Clearly, my invention is a device by which to promote physical fitness . . . a subject of increasing concerns in todays' society and culture.

The improvements as claimed within various section above, as well as my drawings, are actually confined to the most important aspects of the entire invention . . . namely, to “deliver” the hoop so as to make contact with the ground, pavement, etc, into a rolling position.

Within the contents of this section will appear evidence of the significant improvements over prior art.

My invention is a simple, light weight, hand-held, inexpensive device with which to promote physical fitness . . . improve hand/eye coordination, as well as to promote mental agility, adroitness, and dexterity.

This is a device which should prove to be very beneficial and popular to many joggers (both young and older), as well as persons of any age group

(*) Being very simple in construction, in the event the main handle is too long for small children to operate, all one would have to do to shorten the handle is to remove the rubber hand grip, which is tightly fitted and needs no adhesive, . . . cut the PVC handle to the desired length, and replace the hand-grip.

One of the examples of prior art indicates a telescopic handle which, in the hands of small children, could be rather difficult to manage and operate, thereby making the item of little use for small children.

As is detailed in the above paragraph (*), my invention in this regard is a definite improvement.

A reasonable and proper viewing of the prior art clearly confirms additional highly desirable features which are incorporated within my invention that are not found in prior art.

For an example, my device is rather in-expensive to produce, since it is made with components easily available in the market place for the most part. Actually, the only machining that is required is to drill 2 small holes for rivets with which to firmly connect FIG. 3 to FIG. 2 . . . contrasted with Exhibit B, which requires rather extensive machining.

For another example, one object of prior art (Exhibit A) indicates a “U” shaped object (channel), which starts at the very top end of the handle, but it does not provide much (if any) guidance in order to meet up with the bottom member

It would be very difficult for anyone (child or adult) to keep the hoop on the narrow, tubular handle once it has left the short, upper channel located at the top end of the handle. This, all by itself, would most likely to become frustrated and soon give up on its operation.

Within this same facet, another example of prior art (Exhibit A) indicates a very short “U” channel (possibly 3″ in length), which is mounted at the very bottom end of the handle . . . making it very difficult to actually get the hoop into motion, let alone to stay on the device.

FIG. 5 (of my drawing) . . . with the full length of the handle not shown, provides for a very convenient 4″ of “free travel” for the hoop (FIG. 4). The 2 end “L's” act as a very easy means of controlling the hoop within (required) bounds.

Furthermore, the length of the guide channel of my invention (FIG. 3) provides the necessary assurance for the proper “down hill” contact with the ground, side-walk . . . pavement, etc.

Previous Patent: Collapsible Sports Goal