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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/13/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 6-7 regarding prior art rejections Applicant argues neither reference cited for claim 1 discloses all elements of claim 1.
The Examiner respectfully agrees and points out that the rejection is made under 35 U.S.C. 103, meaning multiple references should be considered as teaching the whole of the invention.
On pages 7-9 Applicant discusses how Nan’s system is different from the instant invention.
The Examiner respectfully maintains Nan’s relevance as a teaching reference for modifying Koltzi, despite differences.
On page 11 Applicant argues amendments overcome the rejection of record.
The Examiner respectfully refers to the rejection below regarding amended claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koltzi et al. (US 20190336381 A1) hereinafter known as Koltzi in view of Gill (US 20180064563 A1), further in view of Vigano et al. (US 20170086519 A1) hereinafter known as Vigano, and further in view of Nan et al. (CN 106618948 A) hereinafter known as Nan.
Regarding claim 1 Koltzi discloses a robotic mirror therapy system (abstract) for providing therapy to a user having an impaired hand (the applicant is advised that, while the features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In addition, it has been held by the courts that apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does. See MPEP 2144 (I). In this case, the patented apparatus of Koltzi discloses (as detailed above) all the structural limitations required to perform the recited functional language of “providing therapy”, therefore was considered to anticipate the claimed apparatus. See [0005]) the system comprising:
a motion command glove (Figure 2 item 204) configured to be worn on a healthy hand of the user or another person (This is stated as an “intended use” of the claimed glove. The applicant is advised that a recitation of the intended use of an invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. See MPEP 2111.02 (II). In this case, the patented structure of Koltzi was considered capable of performing the cited intended use of being worn on a healthy hand of some person (e.g. see Figure 2; [0007]), and comprising position sensors (Figure 2 item 209; [0047]) configured to determine the position of the healthy hand and its fingers (this is likewise stated as a “functional limitation” of the position sensors (see explanation above). The sensors are understood capable of this: see Koltzi [0054]) and measure information from the fingers and palm of the healthy hand (this is stated as a “functional limitation” (see explanation above). See also Koltzi [0043] sensors can extend along the top of each finger and thumb and along the palm of each hand), and provide said data to the control unit ([0043])
wherein one sensor is provided for each finger (Figure 2 items 208, 209 show one sensor for each finger) and for the palm of the healthy hand (See also Koltzi [0043] sensors can extend along the top of each finger and thumb and along the palm of each hand),
a motion actuator glove (Figure 2 item 202) configured to be worn on the user’s impaired hand (this is stated as an “intended use” of the glove (see explanation above). The glove of Koltzi is understood to be capable of being worn on an impaired hand. See Figure 2 and also [0007]), the motion actuator glove comprising actuators (Figure 2 item 212; Figure 6 item 504) configured to actuate the impaired hand and its fingers (this is stated as a “functional limitation” of the actuators. See explanation above. See also Koltzi [0012]), and position sensors (Figure 2 item 208; [0047]) configured to determine the position of the impaired hand and its fingers (this is stated as a “functional limitation” (see explanation above). See also Koltzi [0050]), and are capable of measuring information about the fingers and palms of the impaired hand (this is stated as a “functional limitation” (see explanation above). See also Koltzi [0043] sensors can extend along the top of each finger and thumb and along the palm of each hand) and provide said data to the control unit ([0043]), wherein one sensor is provided for each finger (Figure 2 items 208, 209 show one sensor for each finger) and for the palm of the impaired hand (See also Koltzi [0043] sensors can extend along the top of each finger and thumb and along the palm of each hand),
a control unit (Figure 2 item 216) configured to receive data from both the motion command glove and the motion actuator glove, and to control the actuators of the motion actuator glove so as to move the impaired hand in a manner that mirrors the motion of the healthy hand (This is stated as a “functional limitation” of the control unit, which the control unit is understood to be capable of. See Koltzi [0012], [0043], [0047], [0023], and [0058]), wherein the control unit executes an adaptive control algorithm that determines required motion and forces for the impaired hand from the desired trajectories of the healthy hand, wherein the algorithm includes a position control loop configured to compare desired joint trajectory inputs for the motion actuator glove with joint trajectories determined from data sensed by the sensors of the command glove and to use any differences to determine a control action for the motion actuator glove (this simply further defining the algorithm the control unit is intended to execute (see the explanation regarding intended uses in the rejection to claim 1 above). See also Koltzi [0012], [0017], [0058] and [0047] the control unit utilizes an algorithm to determine the position of the healthy hand, so that after a period of time, if the impaired hand is not mirroring the position of the healthy hand, the actuators provide force to the impaired hand),
but is silent with regards to the sensors on the motion command glove and the motion actuator glove including force sensors, and there being force sensors on the palm of the gloves,
the position sensors comprising IMUs and so determining orientation,
one sensor being provided for each segment of each finger,
and so the force sensor and IMU information (orientation and force data) being used within the control algorithm.
However, regarding claim 1 Gill teaches that control of hands/fingers via an actuator is known to incorporate IMUs (Abstract) which are able to determine orientation (Abstract). Koltzi and Gill are involved in the same field of endeavor, namely the sensing of the position of fingers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of Koltzi by including IMU sensors in order to provide additional information to the system regarding the position of each of the fingers in the glove. The incorporation of more than one type of sensor within the system of Koltzi would provide a greater level of certainty in the control of the actuators.
Further, regarding claim 1 Koltzi teaches their system includes actuators 212 which attach to the damaged hand ([0043]), which is structured and positioned to apply “appropriate force to the hand” ([0043]).
Nan, who is involved in the same field of endeavor, namely gloved rehabilitation systems for hands, teaches that therapy systems which rely on actuators to apply force to a hand (page 1 paragraph 3: “power-assisted rehabilitation glove”) to desirably include force sensors within the glove of the disabled hand (Figure 1 items 13) so this force information can be utilized by and incorporated into the control algorithm (page 1 paragraph 4: “the electronic control unit is configured to receive a…pressure output by each sensor, control the power box according to the signal by using a specific algorithm, and control movement of the finger by pulling the artificial muscle to achieve an intelligent power-assisted function”).
Since Koltzi’s system is designed on the principles of mimicking the function of a healthy hand, by taking sensor input from a healthy hand (Abstract) and helping the user complete the desired movement in a disabled hand (Abstract), the person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood it is obvious to modify the system of the Koltzi Gill Combination to incorporate both the force sensors on the disabled hand (e.g. Koltzi’s motion control glove) as is taught by Nan, as well as including force sensors on the healthy hand (e.g. Koltzi’s motion actuator glove). This would maintain the underlying control algorithm of Koltzi while allowing the additional force control over the actuators in the glove of the disabled hand.
Further, regarding claim 1 Nan further teaches a motion actuator glove that includes both position sensors (Figure 1 item 12) on each segment of each finger (Figure 1; page 1 paragraph 6: fourteen bend sensors), and force sensors (Figure 1 item 13) on each segment of each finger (Figure 1; see also page 1 paragraph 8; fourteen pressure sensors). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of the Combination so that the sensors are discrete as is taught by Nan in order to ensure the sensor information is coming from each segment of each finger, as opposed to generally providing information from the entire finger, which allows for more precise and accurate control. Considering this, along with the Combination set forth above (wherein the motion control glove of Koltzi is changed so that it includes force sensors that correspond to the force sensors of the damaged hand (e.g. the motion actuator glove)), the Combination is understood to teach both gloves including position sensors that are discretely positioned at finger segment and palm, as well as force sensors for each finger segment (and palm).
Further, regarding the requirement that the algorithm further includes a force control loop configured to compare desired contact forces for the motion actuator glove with forces sensed by the force sensors of the motion command glove an use any differences to determine a control action for the motion actuator glove, the Examiner notes again that this is stated as an “intended use” of the control unit which does not further describe the system, but rather an algorithm the system is intended to execute. See the explanation above, as well as the modifications made in the rejection above. See also See also Koltzi [0012], [0017] regarding how the system is desirably functioning to take sensor information from a healthy hand and mirror what the healthy hand is doing on the disabled hand, along with Nan page 1 paragraph 4 which indicates that the pressure change against the fingers is measured by the force (pressure) sensors and the actuators are controlled by the control system based on that applied force and if it meets the expected threshold (page 2 paragraph 2)).
Further, regarding claim 1 Vigano teaches that sensing and controlling gloves can include force sensors on the palm ([0019]; Figures 2a-b). Koltzi and Vigano are involved in the same field of endeavor, namely sensing and controlling gloves ([0001]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of the Koltzi Gill Nan Combination, which utilizes force sensors on a command glove to control an actuator glove, so that the gloves include force sensors on the palms in addition to the fingers in order to provide the necessary control and feedback for the entire hand, and not just the fingers. This makes the glove more useful for a wider range of disorders or therapy.
Regarding claim 6 the Koltzi Gill Nan Vigano Combination teaches the system of claim 1 substantially as is claimed,
wherein Koltzi further discloses the actuators are fluidic ([0053] pneumatic).
Regarding claim 7 the Koltzi Gill Nan Vigano Combination teaches the system of claim 6 substantially as is claimed,
wherein Koltzi further discloses the actuators are pneumatic ([0053]).
Regarding claim 8 the Koltzi Gill Nan Vigano Combination teaches the system of claim 7 substantially as is claimed,
wherein Koltzi further discloses the control unit comprises a pneumatic system ([0053]) configured to alter a pressure of a drive fluid used to drive the fluidic actuators (this is stated as a “functional limitation” of the pneumatic system. See the explanation above, along with Koltzi [0053]), the pneumatic system including a pump ([0053] “pneumatic pump”), valves ([0053] solenoid valves), and pressure sensors ([0053] pressure sensors).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jacqueline Woznicki whose telephone number is (571)270-5603. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10am-6pm EST.
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, Jerrah Edwards can be reached on 408-918-7557. 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.
/Jacqueline Woznicki/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3774 06/03/26
Prosecution Insights