DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the “AMENDMENT & RESPOSNE UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 1.111” filed 20 April 2026. The Examiner acknowledges the amendments to claims 1, 6, 10-12, 22, and 23. Claims 1, 4-7, 10-15, 18-19, 21-23, and 25 are pending.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 20 April 2026. These drawings are unacceptable. The replacement Fig. 3 includes structure for a “driver of auxiliary device”, which is not supported by the Applicant’s disclosure, which fails to provide sufficient written description support regarding a particular location of a driver of a lower limb auxiliary device and how a driver of a lower limb auxiliary device is controlled by the claimed method, non-transitory machine-readable medium, and data processing system.
Claim Interpretation
Examiner Notes: currently, NO limitation invokes interpretation under § 112(f).
Other Claim Interpretation Considerations: Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein the predefined boundary trajectory comprises at least one of a predefined ellipse in the sensor coordinate system, and the triggering boundary condition is satisfied when the absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage passes through the predefined ellipse in the sensor coordinate system” [lines 21-23], wherein the Applicant’s Specification discloses that the function defining an elliptical boundary condition is “the following equation (2): Axg2 + Byg2 = 1… A and B are constants, and xg and yg are coordinates of the obtained absolute motion trajectory in the x-axis direction and the y-axis direction” [Applicant’s Specification ¶¶0071-0072, Fig. 6]; wherein the Examiner notes that the Applicant has failed to specifically define the constants A and B used in the elliptical boundary condition. For examination purposes, the Examiner has interpreted any arbitrarily defined ellipse of a prior art reference under § 102 or § 103 that is based at least on absolute motion trajectory in the x-direction and y-direction may be considered to define a “boundary condition”, as any threshold defined by absolute motion trajectory in the x-direction and y-direction may be considered to be part of any ellipse defined by arbitrary constants using the equation “Axg2 + Byg2 = 1”. Claims 22 and 23 are considered to recite similar subject matter that are similarly interpreted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 1, 22-23, and those dependent therefrom is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “controlling, according to the motion pattern, a driver of an auxiliary device of the limb to generate a preset auxiliary torque to enable the limb to complete a required preparation during the swing stage, wherein the limb comprises at least one of a lower limb, a lower limb prosthesis, a lower limb orthosis, or a lower limb exoskeleton of a human body” [lines 30-33, emphasis applied], wherein the Applicant’s Specification is considered to fail to provide written description support for the “auxiliary device of the limb” and corresponding “driver”, as the Examiner notes that the Specification merely recites the “lower limb auxiliary device” and “driver” as being known in the art [Recently, there has been a significant increase in the demand for human power aids or medical rehabilitation training equipment in stroke hemiplegia, impaired motion function of lower limb or disabled persons (Applicant’s Specification ¶0003); It has been noted that in different motion patterns, such as upslope, downslope, upstairs or downstairs, the function performed by each joint of the lower limb of human body and the corresponding biomechanical characteristics vary considerably. Therefore, in order to achieve the desired function more accurately, the lower limb auxiliary device firstly should be able to accurately recognize the motion pattern of the user (wearer), and then control a driver to generate a preset auxiliary torque according to the corresponding motion pattern, thereby assisting the wearer to perform the desired action more easily (Applicant’s Specification ¶0004), wherein the Examiner notes that the only recitation of a “driver” or generation of a preset torque is in the Background section of the Specification; In order to be able to recognize the motion pattern of the lower limb, prosthesis, orthosis or exoskeleton before the next foot contacting the ground, thereby enabling the lower limb, prosthesis, orthosis or exoskeleton to complete the required preparation during the swing stage, a predetermined triggering condition may be used to trigger the pattern recognition decision of the classifier or the pattern recognizer (Applicant’s Specification ¶0070), wherein the Examiner notes that ¶0070 only refers to motion pattern recognition of a lower limb, prosthesis, orthosis, or exoskeleton, and fails to provide any disclosure regarding generating a preset torque], but fails to disclose how the Applicant’s invention structurally incorporates and controls the claimed lower limb auxiliary device or the driver. The Examiner notes that while ¶0070 of the Applicant’s Specification is considered to provide written description support for a prosthesis, orthosis, or exoskeleton, as being the limb that motion pattern recognition is applied to, a separate driver of an auxiliary device of the limb is considered to be broader in scope than what is recited in ¶0070. Claims 22 and 23 are considered to recite similar subject matter that do not have written description support [lines 30-33 of claim 22; lines 32-35 of claim 23].
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1, 22-23, and those dependent therefrom is/are 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 1 recites the limitation “performing data processing on the motion data obtained in real time by the sensor to recognize the motion pattern” [line 8], which is considered to lack antecedent basis, as the previously defined step of collecting motion data [lines 3-7] was not defined as being performed in real time. For examination purposes, the Examiner has interpreted the collecting step to be performed in real time. The Examiner notes that claims 22 and 23 each recite similar language that lacks antecedent basis [line 8 in claim 22; line 10 in claim 23] that are similarly rejected and interpreted to the rejection of claim 1 above mutatis mutandis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Examiner’s Note Regarding § 101 Analysis: The Examiner notes that claim(s) 1 and 22-23 each recite a judicial exception [lines 8-29 and 34-52 of claim 1; and similar limitations of claims 22-23 mutatis mutandis] at Step 2A Prong 1, which is considered to be abstract ideas that may be performed in the mind or by hand by merely observing known or collected data and applying known mathematical processes on the data, and further drawing conclusions therefrom based on known or derived relationships [see Step 2A Prong 1 analysis of claim 1 on p. 9-13 of the Non-Final Rejection dated 7 January 2026]. However, the Examiner further notes that claim(s) 1 and 22-23 recites performing data processing on the motion data obtained “in real time by the sensor” to recognize the motion pattern, wherein the detection of the motion pattern to recognize the motion is performed “before a foot of the subject touches the ground” [line 16-18] is considered to prevent the identified abstract idea(s) from being performed in the mind or by hand at Step 2A Prong 2 by imparting sufficiently particular time constraints, such that in combination with the additional elements of the claimed sensor [lines 3-7] and “driver of an auxiliary device” [lines 30-33] integrate the judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A Prong 2 and allow the invention to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception at Step 2B.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 10-11, 21-23, and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr (US-20100179668-A1, previously presented) in view of Yuen (US-20120084054-A1, previously presented).
Regarding claim 1, Herr teaches
A method for recognizing a motion pattern of a limb, comprising:
collecting, by a sensor, motion data of a limb extremity end of a subject during a swing stage of the extremity end in different motion patterns, wherein the motion data comprises an absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage, an absolute velocity to ground, and an absolute acceleration to ground of the limb extremity end during the swing stage in the different motion patterns [The inertial measurement unit 204 includes a three-axis rate gyro for measuring angular rate and a three-axis accelerometer for measuring acceleration. Placing the inertial measurement unit on the lower leg member 220 collocates the measurement of angular rate and acceleration for all three axes of the lower leg member 220. The inertial measurement unit 204 provides a six-degree-of-freedom estimate of the lower leg member 220 pose, inertial (world frame referenced) orientation and ankle-joint 200 (center of rotation of the ankle-foot) location (Herr ¶0177); The inertial measurement unit 204 is used to calculate the orientation, .sub.ankle.sup.wO, position .sub.ankle.sup.w p, and velocity, .sub.ankle.sup.w v, of the lower-extremity prosthetic apparatus in a ground-referenced world frame (Herr ¶0179), wherein the position, velocity, and acceleration of the extremity end being measured relative to a ground-referenced world frame is considered to read on “absolute” motion trajectory, velocity, and acceleration to ground];
performing data processing on the motion data obtained in real time by the sensor to recognize the motion pattern [The stair ramp discriminator provides a real-time prediction of the terrain slope angle (Herr ¶0219)], the data processing comprising:
determining a slope of the ground based on the absolute motion trajectory to ground of the limb extremity end with a triggering boundary condition [The stair ramp discriminator provides a real-time prediction of the terrain slope angle, .PHI.{circumflex over (()}t). If the discriminator detects a step, including level-ground, then .PHI.{circumflex over (()}t)=0. Otherwise, the slope angle is assumed (Herr ¶0219, see EQN. 31 following ¶0219 not presently reproduced)], classifying a corresponding type of terrain from a plurality of types of terrain comprising flat ground, slope, and stairway based on the slope [FIG. 6A shows the shank trajectories that correspond to five different activities, with additional ramp trajectories to distinguish between steep and shallow ramps. The system can use this information to figure out what activity is being performed by mapping the tracked trajectory onto a set of activities (Herr ¶0018); The trajectory of the ankle joint 600 in the y-z plane (referring to FIG. 6A) could be used in an alternative embodiment of the invention for stair-ramp discrimination (Herr ¶0218, Fig. 6A), wherein as depicted in Fig. 6A, the discriminated types of terrain comprise flat ground, ramp (slope), and stairway], determining that the absolute motion trajectory to ground passes through a predefined boundary trajectory in a sensor coordinate system, triggering, in response to the triggering boundary condition being satisfied, recognizing the motion pattern under the classified type of terrain, and detecting, based on a time window, the motion pattern of the subject in real time to recognize the motion pattern performed by the subject before a foot of the subject touches the ground, wherein the motion pattern comprises at least one of upslope, downslope, upstairs, downstairs, walking on flat ground, or turning, wherein the triggering boundary condition is satisfied when, in the sensor coordinate system, the absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage passes through the predefined boundary trajectory [The stair ramp discriminator provides a real-time prediction of the terrain slope angle… This slope angle corresponds to the minimum value possible given that the foot has not struck the ground (Herr ¶0219); wherein the disclosure of Herr ¶¶0018, 0218 regarding the use of ankle trajectory (as depicted in Fig. 6A) to differentiate between each of upslope (up 5° or 10° ramp), downslope (down 5° or 10° ramp), upstairs, downstairs, and flat (level) ground is considered to define satisfying any kind of “triggering boundary condition” of a predefined boundary trajectory as the trajectory itself is used to recognize the motion pattern], wherein the predefined boundary trajectory comprises a predefined ellipse in the sensor coordinate system, and the triggering boundary condition is satisfied when the absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage passes through the predefined ellipse in the sensor coordinate system, wherein the sensor coordinate system is a two-dimensional coordinate system [wherein the disclosure of Herr ¶¶0018, 0218 regarding the use of ankle trajectory (as depicted in Fig. 6A) to recognize the motion pattern may be considered to pass through any arbitrarily predefined ellipse (see Claim Interpretations above); and wherein the ankle trajectory is assessed two-dimensionally along the y-z plane (depicted in Fig. 6A), the predefined boundary condition is considered to be passed in the sensor coordinate system], wherein the slope of the ground is determined by a displacement of the limb extremity end in a forward direction and a displacement of the limb extremity end in a direction vertical to the ground in the sensor coordinate system when the absolute motion trajectory passes through the predefined ellipse in the sensor coordinate system [see Fig. 6A, which depicts displacement of the limb extremity end in a forward direction and a vertical to ground direction as indicative of the slope of the ground]; and
controlling, according to the motion pattern, a driver of an auxiliary device of the limb to generate a preset auxiliary torque to enable the limb to complete a required preparation during the swing stage, wherein the limb comprises at least one of a lower limb, a lower limb prosthesis, a lower limb orthosis, or a lower limb exoskeleton of a human body [In one embodiment of the invention, the discriminator methodology described above is used to control at least one of joint impedance, position or torque of a lower extremity prosthetic, orthotic, or exoskeleton apparatus worn by a wearer (e.g., the apparatus 1700 of FIG. 17A). The method involves estimating a velocity vector attack angle of the ankle joint of the apparatus throughout a late swing (e.g., the y-axis values of the data in FIG. 6C) (Herr ¶0220)];
wherein the method further comprises recognizing one or more different motion patterns by combining one or more of the absolute motion trajectory to ground, the absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground with a rotation angle of a lower limb knee joint or ankle joint [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179, wherein the use of an IMU defined by an accelerometer and a gyroscope is considered to read on the combination of absolute motion trajectory/velocity/acceleration to ground with rotation angle of the ankle joint], and an electroencephalographic signal (EEG) of the subject.
However, while Herr discloses and depicts that ankle trajectory is indicative of different motion patterns [Herr ¶¶0018, 0218, Fig. 6A], Herr fails to explicitly disclose wherein after the recognizing is triggered based on the triggering boundary condition, performing recognizing the motion pattern under the classified type of terrain by: determining that the motion pattern is upslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than a first slope threshold and greater than a second slope threshold; determining that the motion pattern is walking on flat ground in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the second slope threshold and greater than a third slope threshold; or determining that the motion pattern is downslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the third slope threshold and greater than a fourth slope threshold; wherein the first slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upstairs motion pattern from the upslope motion pattern, the second slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upslope motion pattern from the flat ground walking motion pattern, and the third slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the flat ground walking motion pattern from the downslope motion pattern, and the fourth slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the downslope motion pattern from the downstairs motion pattern.
Yuen discloses systems for monitoring and classifying user motion, wherein Yuen discloses determining that a motion pattern is one of upslope, flat ground, or downslope based on the determination that the slope of the ground being within certain thresholds [Notably, in one embodiment, if .DELTA.H-S exceeds a predetermined threshold, the processing circuitry may determine that the user is traversing stairs, in which case, specific stair estimation algorithms may be employed. With reference to FIG. 4R, the processing circuitry may employ an embodiment in which upstairs walking and running are given specific calorie burn algorithms based on .DELTA.H-S. Downstairs logic may be incorporated therein. Likewise, specific equations and/or logic may be employed for different grade hills, both upwards and downwards in accordance with the preceding linear equations, or alternate nonlinear equations and means (e.g., lookup tables, polynomials, transcendentals, interpolations, neural nets, maximum likelihood estimates, expected value estimates, etc.) (Yuen ¶0124), wherein the Examiner notes that ¶0124 of Yuen discloses applying the thresholds as disclosed to downstairs logic, wherein since Yuen describes thresholds for differentiating between flat ground, upstairs, and upslope, the thresholds as applied to downstairs logic are considered to comprise thresholds for differentiating between flat ground, downstairs, and downslope; As intimated above, data which is representative of the altitude and/or changes in altitude and data which is representative of the motion of the user may also be used to determine and/or classify other activity-related metrics such as, for example, user steps, distance and pace (FIG. 4E)...Notably, other activity-related metrics may be determined by the processing circuitry, including, for example, (i) in the context of running/walking on level or substantially level ground, number of steps, also broken down as walking or running, distance traveled and/or pace (ii) in the context of running/walking on stairs, hills or ground having a grade of greater than about 3%, number of stair and/or hill steps, which may be categorized or broken down, correlated or organized/arranged according to, for example, the speed, pace and/or activity state of the user (for example, as walking, jogging or running), number of flights of stairs, ascent/descent distance on stairs and/or hills, pace, ascent/descent on elevators and/or escalators, surface grade, and/or number of calories expended by walking/jogging/running on stairs and/or hills as well as quantify/compare the additional calories burnt from stairs/hills over level ground (Yuen ¶0126); In one embodiment, the processing circuitry may evaluate the output of the altitude sensor to determine, calculate and/or estimate the activity state of the user by evaluating the altitude sensor data based on algorithms or processes based on the flowchart of FIG. 4K. With reference to FIG. 4K, in one embodiment, the processing circuitry determines the type of activity by evaluating the change in altitude of the user on a change in height or altitude per step basis (".DELTA.H-S") or the use of an elevator by a sustained rate of height change pre time period (for example, per second) (".DELTA.H-t") in the absence of steps. The change in height or altitude per step and change in height or altitude per second are evaluated against a plurality of thresholds and/or ranges to determine whether the user is, for example, moving (for example, running or walking) on level ground, on an escalator or in an elevator, traversing stairs and/or traversing a hill or the like. In one embodiment, Threshold 1, Threshold 2, Threshold 3 and Threshold 4 have the relationship Threshold 1>Threshold 2>Threshold 3>Threshold 4 wherein the process seeks to detect and identify the causes of increases in user altitude. In other embodiments, the flow may be modified to detect and classify decreases or both increases and decreases in user altitude. Thus, in these embodiments, the processing circuitry employs data from the motion sensor to assess the user state based on data from the altitude sensor (Yuen ¶0129, Figures 4K-L), wherein the Examiner notes that traversing a hill may be considered to read on the claimed motion pattern of upslope, wherein in light of the Examiner’s interpretation of ¶0124 of Yuen applying the disclosed thresholds to downstairs logic, traversing down a hill may be considered to read on the claimed motion pattern of downslope; the inventions may have functionality that determines the elevation change and/or slope between two points through, for instance, the use of GPS with an altimeter (Yuen ¶0164)], wherein the thresholds distinguish between upstairs and upslope, upslope and flat ground, flat ground and downslope, and downslope and downstairs [see Yuen ¶0124, ¶0126, ¶0129, Figure 4K].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Herr to employ wherein after the recognizing is triggered based on the triggering boundary condition, performing recognizing the motion pattern under the classified type of terrain by: determining that the motion pattern is upslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than a first slope threshold and greater than a second slope threshold; determining that the motion pattern is walking on flat ground in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the second slope threshold and greater than a third slope threshold; or determining that the motion pattern is downslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the third slope threshold and greater than a fourth slope threshold; wherein the first slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upstairs motion pattern from the upslope motion pattern, the second slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upslope motion pattern from the flat ground walking motion pattern, and the third slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the flat ground walking motion pattern from the downslope motion pattern, and the fourth slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the downslope motion pattern from the downstairs motion pattern, so as to allow for distinct differentiation between activity states of the user based on identified thresholds of changes in height per step, allowing for the determination of motion patterns of the user [Yuen ¶0129].
Regarding claim 7, Herr in view of Yuen teaches
The method according to claim 1, wherein the collecting comprises:
extracting the absolute motion trajectory to ground of the limb extremity end in a sagittal plane [Herr ¶0218, Fig. 6A, wherein the y-z plane is considered to be a sagittal plane of the subject], and
deriving terrain slopes corresponding to the different motion patterns from the absolute motion trajectory to ground in the sagittal plane to recognize the motion pattern being performed [Herr ¶¶0218-0219].
Regarding claim 10, Herr in view of Yuen teaches
The method according to claim 1, wherein, the triggering boundary condition comprises one or more of a time threshold trigger, a displacement threshold to ground trigger in a forward direction or a direction vertical to ground [wherein Herr ¶0218 disclosing the use of the motion trajectory to recognize the motion pattern is considered to be read on displacement to ground in a vertical and horizontal direction], or an acceleration threshold or angular velocity threshold trigger in the sensor coordinate system.
Regarding claim 11, Herr in view of Yuen teaches
The method according to claim 1, wherein, the triggering boundary condition comprises: one or more of the angular velocity or acceleration signals of the inertial measurement unit in the sensor coordinate system satisfy a preset trigger condition [wherein the motion trajectory being defined by the IMU measurements of acceleration and angular velocity (Herr ¶0177) is considered to read on the claimed limitation].
Regarding claim 21, Herr in view of Yuen teaches
The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
recognizing one or more different motion patterns by combining one or more of the absolute motion trajectory to ground, the absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground with an angular velocity or an acceleration in the sensor coordinate system measured by an inertial measurement unit fixed at the limb extremity end [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179].
Regarding claim 22, Herr in view of Yuen teaches
A non-transitory machine-readable medium storing instructions executable by a processor to perform operations, the operations comprising:
collecting, by a sensor configured to measure motion data of a limb extremity end of a subject, motion data of the limb extremity end of the subject during a swing stage of the extremity end in different motion patterns, wherein the motion data comprises an absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage, an absolute velocity to ground, and an absolute acceleration to ground of the limb extremity end during the swing stage in the different motion patterns [The inertial measurement unit 204 includes a three-axis rate gyro for measuring angular rate and a three-axis accelerometer for measuring acceleration. Placing the inertial measurement unit on the lower leg member 220 collocates the measurement of angular rate and acceleration for all three axes of the lower leg member 220. The inertial measurement unit 204 provides a six-degree-of-freedom estimate of the lower leg member 220 pose, inertial (world frame referenced) orientation and ankle-joint 200 (center of rotation of the ankle-foot) location (Herr ¶0177); The inertial measurement unit 204 is used to calculate the orientation, .sub.ankle.sup.wO, position .sub.ankle.sup.w p, and velocity, .sub.ankle.sup.w v, of the lower-extremity prosthetic apparatus in a ground-referenced world frame (Herr ¶0179), wherein the position, velocity, and acceleration of the extremity end being measured relative to a ground-referenced world frame is considered to read on “absolute” motion trajectory, velocity, and acceleration to ground];
performing data processing on the motion data obtained in real time by the sensor to recognize the motion pattern [The stair ramp discriminator provides a real-time prediction of the terrain slope angle (Herr ¶0219)], the data processing comprising:
determining a slope of the ground based on the absolute motion trajectory to ground of the limb extremity end with a triggering boundary condition [The stair ramp discriminator provides a real-time prediction of the terrain slope angle, .PHI.{circumflex over (()}t). If the discriminator detects a step, including level-ground, then .PHI.{circumflex over (()}t)=0. Otherwise, the slope angle is assumed (Herr ¶0219, see EQN. 31 following ¶0219 not presently reproduced)], classifying a corresponding type of terrain from a plurality of types of terrain comprising flat ground, slope, and stairway based on the slope [FIG. 6A shows the shank trajectories that correspond to five different activities, with additional ramp trajectories to distinguish between steep and shallow ramps. The system can use this information to figure out what activity is being performed by mapping the tracked trajectory onto a set of activities (Herr ¶0018); The trajectory of the ankle joint 600 in the y-z plane (referring to FIG. 6A) could be used in an alternative embodiment of the invention for stair-ramp discrimination (Herr ¶0218, Fig. 6A), wherein as depicted in Fig. 6A, the discriminated types of terrain comprise flat ground, ramp (slope), and stairway], determining that the absolute motion trajectory to ground passes through a predefined boundary trajectory in a sensor coordinate system, triggering, in response to the triggering boundary condition being satisfied, recognizing the motion pattern under the classified type of terrain, and detecting, based on a time window, the motion pattern of the subject in real time to recognize the motion pattern performed by the subject before a foot of the subject touches the ground, wherein the motion pattern comprises at least one of upslope, downslope, upstairs, downstairs, walking on flat ground, or turning, wherein the triggering boundary condition is satisfied when, in the sensor coordinate system, the absolute motion trajectory during the swing stage to ground passes through the predefined boundary trajectory [The stair ramp discriminator provides a real-time prediction of the terrain slope angle… This slope angle corresponds to the minimum value possible given that the foot has not struck the ground (Herr ¶0219); wherein the disclosure of Herr ¶¶0018, 0218 regarding the use of ankle trajectory (as depicted in Fig. 6A) to differentiate between each of upslope (up 5° or 10° ramp), downslope (down 5° or 10° ramp), upstairs, downstairs, and flat (level) ground is considered to define satisfying any kind of “triggering boundary condition” of a predefined boundary trajectory as the trajectory itself is used to recognize the motion pattern], wherein the predefined boundary trajectory comprises a predefined ellipse in the sensor coordinate system, and the triggering boundary condition is satisfied when the absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage passes through the predefined ellipse in the sensor coordinate system, wherein the sensor coordinate system is a two-dimensional coordinate system [wherein the disclosure of Herr ¶¶0018, 0218 regarding the use of ankle trajectory (as depicted in Fig. 6A) to recognize the motion pattern may be considered to pass through any arbitrarily predefined ellipse (see Claim Interpretations above); and wherein the ankle trajectory is assessed two-dimensionally along the y-z plane (depicted in Fig. 6A), the predefined boundary condition is considered to be passed in the sensor coordinate system], wherein the slope of the ground is determined by a displacement of the limb extremity end in a forward direction and a displacement of the limb extremity end in a direction vertical to the ground in the sensor coordinate system when the absolute motion trajectory passes through the predefined ellipse in the sensor coordinate system [see Fig. 6A, which depicts displacement of the limb extremity end in a forward direction and a vertical to ground direction as indicative of the slope of the ground]; and
controlling, according to the motion pattern, a driver of an auxiliary device of the limb to generate a preset auxiliary torque to enable the limb to complete a required preparation during the swing stage, wherein the limb comprises at least one of a lower limb, a lower limb prosthesis, a lower limb orthosis, or a lower limb exoskeleton of a human body [In one embodiment of the invention, the discriminator methodology described above is used to control at least one of joint impedance, position or torque of a lower extremity prosthetic, orthotic, or exoskeleton apparatus worn by a wearer (e.g., the apparatus 1700 of FIG. 17A). The method involves estimating a velocity vector attack angle of the ankle joint of the apparatus throughout a late swing (e.g., the y-axis values of the data in FIG. 6C) (Herr ¶0220)];
wherein the operations further comprise recognizing one or more different motion patterns by combining one or more of the absolute motion trajectory to ground, the absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground with a rotation angle of a lower limb knee joint or ankle joint [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179, wherein the use of an IMU defined by an accelerometer and a gyroscope is considered to read on the combination of absolute motion trajectory/velocity/acceleration to ground with rotation angle of the ankle joint], and an electroencephalographic signal (EEG) of the subject.
However, while Herr discloses and depicts that ankle trajectory is indicative of different motion patterns [Herr ¶¶0018, 0218, Fig. 6A], Herr fails to explicitly disclose wherein after the recognizing is triggered based on the triggering boundary condition, performing recognizing the motion pattern under the classified type of terrain by: determining that the motion pattern is upslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than a first slope threshold and greater than a second slope threshold; determining that the motion pattern is walking on flat ground in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the second slope threshold and greater than a third slope threshold; or determining that the motion pattern is downslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the third slope threshold and greater than a fourth slope threshold; wherein the first slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upstairs motion pattern from the upslope motion pattern, the second slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upslope motion pattern from the flat ground walking motion pattern, and the third slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the flat ground walking motion pattern from the downslope motion pattern, and the fourth slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the downslope motion pattern from the downstairs motion pattern.
Yuen discloses systems for monitoring and classifying user motion, wherein Yuen discloses determining that a motion pattern is one of upslope, flat ground, or downslope based on the determination that the slope of the ground being within certain thresholds [Notably, in one embodiment, if .DELTA.H-S exceeds a predetermined threshold, the processing circuitry may determine that the user is traversing stairs, in which case, specific stair estimation algorithms may be employed. With reference to FIG. 4R, the processing circuitry may employ an embodiment in which upstairs walking and running are given specific calorie burn algorithms based on .DELTA.H-S. Downstairs logic may be incorporated therein. Likewise, specific equations and/or logic may be employed for different grade hills, both upwards and downwards in accordance with the preceding linear equations, or alternate nonlinear equations and means (e.g., lookup tables, polynomials, transcendentals, interpolations, neural nets, maximum likelihood estimates, expected value estimates, etc.) (Yuen ¶0124), wherein the Examiner notes that ¶0124 of Yuen discloses applying the thresholds as disclosed to downstairs logic, wherein since Yuen describes thresholds for differentiating between flat ground, upstairs, and upslope, the thresholds as applied to downstairs logic are considered to comprise thresholds for differentiating between flat ground, downstairs, and downslope; As intimated above, data which is representative of the altitude and/or changes in altitude and data which is representative of the motion of the user may also be used to determine and/or classify other activity-related metrics such as, for example, user steps, distance and pace (FIG. 4E)...Notably, other activity-related metrics may be determined by the processing circuitry, including, for example, (i) in the context of running/walking on level or substantially level ground, number of steps, also broken down as walking or running, distance traveled and/or pace (ii) in the context of running/walking on stairs, hills or ground having a grade of greater than about 3%, number of stair and/or hill steps, which may be categorized or broken down, correlated or organized/arranged according to, for example, the speed, pace and/or activity state of the user (for example, as walking, jogging or running), number of flights of stairs, ascent/descent distance on stairs and/or hills, pace, ascent/descent on elevators and/or escalators, surface grade, and/or number of calories expended by walking/jogging/running on stairs and/or hills as well as quantify/compare the additional calories burnt from stairs/hills over level ground (Yuen ¶0126); In one embodiment, the processing circuitry may evaluate the output of the altitude sensor to determine, calculate and/or estimate the activity state of the user by evaluating the altitude sensor data based on algorithms or processes based on the flowchart of FIG. 4K. With reference to FIG. 4K, in one embodiment, the processing circuitry determines the type of activity by evaluating the change in altitude of the user on a change in height or altitude per step basis (".DELTA.H-S") or the use of an elevator by a sustained rate of height change pre time period (for example, per second) (".DELTA.H-t") in the absence of steps. The change in height or altitude per step and change in height or altitude per second are evaluated against a plurality of thresholds and/or ranges to determine whether the user is, for example, moving (for example, running or walking) on level ground, on an escalator or in an elevator, traversing stairs and/or traversing a hill or the like. In one embodiment, Threshold 1, Threshold 2, Threshold 3 and Threshold 4 have the relationship Threshold 1>Threshold 2>Threshold 3>Threshold 4 wherein the process seeks to detect and identify the causes of increases in user altitude. In other embodiments, the flow may be modified to detect and classify decreases or both increases and decreases in user altitude. Thus, in these embodiments, the processing circuitry employs data from the motion sensor to assess the user state based on data from the altitude sensor (Yuen ¶0129, Figures 4K-L), wherein the Examiner notes that traversing a hill may be considered to read on the claimed motion pattern of upslope, wherein in light of the Examiner’s interpretation of ¶0124 of Yuen applying the disclosed thresholds to downstairs logic, traversing down a hill may be considered to read on the claimed motion pattern of downslope; the inventions may have functionality that determines the elevation change and/or slope between two points through, for instance, the use of GPS with an altimeter (Yuen ¶0164)], wherein the thresholds distinguish between upstairs and upslope, upslope and flat ground, flat ground and downslope, and downslope and downstairs [see Yuen ¶0124, ¶0126, ¶0129, Figure 4K].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the non-transitory machine-readable medium storing instructions executable by a processor of Herr to employ wherein after the recognizing is triggered based on the triggering boundary condition, performing recognizing the motion pattern under the classified type of terrain by: determining that the motion pattern is upslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than a first slope threshold and greater than a second slope threshold; determining that the motion pattern is walking on flat ground in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the second slope threshold and greater than a third slope threshold; or determining that the motion pattern is downslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the third slope threshold and greater than a fourth slope threshold; wherein the first slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upstairs motion pattern from the upslope motion pattern, the second slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upslope motion pattern from the flat ground walking motion pattern, and the third slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the flat ground walking motion pattern from the downslope motion pattern, and the fourth slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the downslope motion pattern from the downstairs motion pattern, so as to allow for distinct differentiation between activity states of the user based on identified thresholds of changes in height per step, allowing for the determination of motion patterns of the user [Yuen ¶0129].
Regarding claim 23, Herr in view of Yuen teaches
A data processing system comprising:
a processor [the at least one pattern recognition technique is performed using a processor coupled to at least one sensor and one actuator coupled to a lower-extremity prosthetic, orthotic, or exoskeleton apparatus worn by a wearer. In some embodiments, the at least one pattern recognition technique is selected from the group techniques consisting of Bayesian pattern classification, neural nets, fuzzy logic or hierarchical temporal memory (Herr ¶0094)], and
a memory coupled to the processor to store instructions executable by the processor to perform operations [wherein based on ¶0094, a processor capable of perform operations is considered to be coupled to any type of memory], the operations comprising:
collecting, by a sensor configured to measure motion data of a limb extremity end of a subject, motion data of the limb extremity end of the subject during a swing stage of the extremity end in different motion patterns, wherein the motion data comprises an absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage, an absolute velocity to ground, and an absolute acceleration to ground of the limb extremity end during the swing stage in the different motion patterns [The inertial measurement unit 204 includes a three-axis rate gyro for measuring angular rate and a three-axis accelerometer for measuring acceleration. Placing the inertial measurement unit on the lower leg member 220 collocates the measurement of angular rate and acceleration for all three axes of the lower leg member 220. The inertial measurement unit 204 provides a six-degree-of-freedom estimate of the lower leg member 220 pose, inertial (world frame referenced) orientation and ankle-joint 200 (center of rotation of the ankle-foot) location (Herr ¶0177); The inertial measurement unit 204 is used to calculate the orientation, .sub.ankle.sup.wO, position .sub.ankle.sup.w p, and velocity, .sub.ankle.sup.w v, of the lower-extremity prosthetic apparatus in a ground-referenced world frame (Herr ¶0179), wherein the position, velocity, and acceleration of the extremity end being measured relative to a ground-referenced world frame is considered to read on “absolute” motion trajectory, velocity, and acceleration to ground];
performing data processing on the motion data obtained in real time by the sensor to recognize the motion pattern [The stair ramp discriminator provides a real-time prediction of the terrain slope angle (Herr ¶0219)], the data processing comprising:
determining a slope of the ground based on the absolute motion trajectory to ground of the limb extremity end with a triggering boundary condition [The stair ramp discriminator provides a real-time prediction of the terrain slope angle, .PHI.{circumflex over (()}t). If the discriminator detects a step, including level-ground, then .PHI.{circumflex over (()}t)=0. Otherwise, the slope angle is assumed (Herr ¶0219, see EQN. 31 following ¶0219 not presently reproduced)], classifying a corresponding type of terrain from a plurality of types of terrain comprising flat ground, slope, and stairway based on the slope [FIG. 6A shows the shank trajectories that correspond to five different activities, with additional ramp trajectories to distinguish between steep and shallow ramps. The system can use this information to figure out what activity is being performed by mapping the tracked trajectory onto a set of activities (Herr ¶0018); The trajectory of the ankle joint 600 in the y-z plane (referring to FIG. 6A) could be used in an alternative embodiment of the invention for stair-ramp discrimination (Herr ¶0218, Fig. 6A), wherein as depicted in Fig. 6A, the discriminated types of terrain comprise flat ground, ramp (slope), and stairway], determining that the absolute motion trajectory to ground passes through a predefined boundary trajectory in a sensor coordinate system, triggering, in response to the triggering boundary condition being satisfied, recognizing the motion pattern under the classified type of terrain, and detecting, based on a time window, the motion pattern of the subject in real time to recognize the motion pattern performed by the subject before a foot of the subject touches the ground, wherein the motion pattern comprises at least one of upslope, downslope, upstairs, downstairs, walking on flat ground, or turning, wherein the triggering boundary condition is satisfied when, in the sensor coordinate system, the absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage passes through the predefined boundary trajectory [The stair ramp discriminator provides a real-time prediction of the terrain slope angle… This slope angle corresponds to the minimum value possible given that the foot has not struck the ground (Herr ¶0219); wherein the disclosure of Herr ¶¶0018, 0218 regarding the use of ankle trajectory (as depicted in Fig. 6A) to differentiate between each of upslope (up 5° or 10° ramp), downslope (down 5° or 10° ramp), upstairs, downstairs, and flat (level) ground is considered to define satisfying any kind of “triggering boundary condition” of a predefined boundary trajectory as the trajectory itself is used to recognize the motion pattern], wherein the predefined boundary trajectory comprises a predefined ellipse in the sensor coordinate system, and the triggering boundary condition is satisfied when the absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage passes through the predefined ellipse in the sensor coordinate system, wherein the sensor coordinate system is a two-dimensional coordinate system [wherein the disclosure of Herr ¶¶0018, 0218 regarding the use of ankle trajectory (as depicted in Fig. 6A) to recognize the motion pattern may be considered to pass through any arbitrarily predefined ellipse (see Claim Interpretations above); and wherein the ankle trajectory is assessed two-dimensionally along the y-z plane (depicted in Fig. 6A), the predefined boundary condition is considered to be passed in the sensor coordinate system], wherein the slope of the ground is determined by a displacement of the limb extremity end in a forward direction and a displacement of the limb extremity end in a direction vertical to the ground in the sensor coordinate system when the absolute motion trajectory passes through the predefined ellipse in the sensor coordinate system [see Fig. 6A, which depicts displacement of the limb extremity end in a forward direction and a vertical to ground direction as indicative of the slope of the ground]; and
controlling, according to the motion pattern, a driver of an auxiliary device of the limb to generate a preset auxiliary torque to enable the limb to complete a required preparation during the swing stage wherein the limb comprises at least one of a lower limb, a lower limb prosthesis, a lower limb orthosis, or a lower limb exoskeleton of a human body [In one embodiment of the invention, the discriminator methodology described above is used to control at least one of joint impedance, position or torque of a lower extremity prosthetic, orthotic, or exoskeleton apparatus worn by a wearer (e.g., the apparatus 1700 of FIG. 17A). The method involves estimating a velocity vector attack angle of the ankle joint of the apparatus throughout a late swing (e.g., the y-axis values of the data in FIG. 6C) (Herr ¶0220)];
wherein the operations further comprise recognizing one or more different motion patterns by combining one or more of the absolute motion trajectory to ground, the absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground with a rotation angle of a lower limb knee joint or ankle joint [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179, wherein the use of an IMU defined by an accelerometer and a gyroscope is considered to read on the combination of absolute motion trajectory/velocity/acceleration to ground with rotation angle of the ankle joint], and an electroencephalographic signal (EEG) of the subject.
However, while Herr discloses and depicts that ankle trajectory is indicative of different motion patterns [Herr ¶¶0018, 0218, Fig. 6A], Herr fails to explicitly disclose wherein after the recognizing is triggered based on the triggering boundary condition, performing recognizing the motion pattern under the classified type of terrain by: determining that the motion pattern is upslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than a first slope threshold and greater than a second slope threshold; determining that the motion pattern is walking on flat ground in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the second slope threshold and greater than a third slope threshold; or determining that the motion pattern is downslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the third slope threshold and greater than a fourth slope threshold; wherein the first slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upstairs motion pattern from the upslope motion pattern, the second slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upslope motion pattern from the flat ground walking motion pattern, and the third slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the flat ground walking motion pattern from the downslope motion pattern, and the fourth slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the downslope motion pattern from the downstairs motion pattern.
Yuen discloses systems for monitoring and classifying user motion, wherein Yuen discloses determining that a motion pattern is one of upslope, flat ground, or downslope based on the determination that the slope of the ground being within certain thresholds [Notably, in one embodiment, if .DELTA.H-S exceeds a predetermined threshold, the processing circuitry may determine that the user is traversing stairs, in which case, specific stair estimation algorithms may be employed. With reference to FIG. 4R, the processing circuitry may employ an embodiment in which upstairs walking and running are given specific calorie burn algorithms based on .DELTA.H-S. Downstairs logic may be incorporated therein. Likewise, specific equations and/or logic may be employed for different grade hills, both upwards and downwards in accordance with the preceding linear equations, or alternate nonlinear equations and means (e.g., lookup tables, polynomials, transcendentals, interpolations, neural nets, maximum likelihood estimates, expected value estimates, etc.) (Yuen ¶0124), wherein the Examiner notes that ¶0124 of Yuen discloses applying the thresholds as disclosed to downstairs logic, wherein since Yuen describes thresholds for differentiating between flat ground, upstairs, and upslope, the thresholds as applied to downstairs logic are considered to comprise thresholds for differentiating between flat ground, downstairs, and downslope; As intimated above, data which is representative of the altitude and/or changes in altitude and data which is representative of the motion of the user may also be used to determine and/or classify other activity-related metrics such as, for example, user steps, distance and pace (FIG. 4E)...Notably, other activity-related metrics may be determined by the processing circuitry, including, for example, (i) in the context of running/walking on level or substantially level ground, number of steps, also broken down as walking or running, distance traveled and/or pace (ii) in the context of running/walking on stairs, hills or ground having a grade of greater than about 3%, number of stair and/or hill steps, which may be categorized or broken down, correlated or organized/arranged according to, for example, the speed, pace and/or activity state of the user (for example, as walking, jogging or running), number of flights of stairs, ascent/descent distance on stairs and/or hills, pace, ascent/descent on elevators and/or escalators, surface grade, and/or number of calories expended by walking/jogging/running on stairs and/or hills as well as quantify/compare the additional calories burnt from stairs/hills over level ground (Yuen ¶0126); In one embodiment, the processing circuitry may evaluate the output of the altitude sensor to determine, calculate and/or estimate the activity state of the user by evaluating the altitude sensor data based on algorithms or processes based on the flowchart of FIG. 4K. With reference to FIG. 4K, in one embodiment, the processing circuitry determines the type of activity by evaluating the change in altitude of the user on a change in height or altitude per step basis (".DELTA.H-S") or the use of an elevator by a sustained rate of height change pre time period (for example, per second) (".DELTA.H-t") in the absence of steps. The change in height or altitude per step and change in height or altitude per second are evaluated against a plurality of thresholds and/or ranges to determine whether the user is, for example, moving (for example, running or walking) on level ground, on an escalator or in an elevator, traversing stairs and/or traversing a hill or the like. In one embodiment, Threshold 1, Threshold 2, Threshold 3 and Threshold 4 have the relationship Threshold 1>Threshold 2>Threshold 3>Threshold 4 wherein the process seeks to detect and identify the causes of increases in user altitude. In other embodiments, the flow may be modified to detect and classify decreases or both increases and decreases in user altitude. Thus, in these embodiments, the processing circuitry employs data from the motion sensor to assess the user state based on data from the altitude sensor (Yuen ¶0129, Figures 4K-L), wherein the Examiner notes that traversing a hill may be considered to read on the claimed motion pattern of upslope, wherein in light of the Examiner’s interpretation of ¶0124 of Yuen applying the disclosed thresholds to downstairs logic, traversing down a hill may be considered to read on the claimed motion pattern of downslope; the inventions may have functionality that determines the elevation change and/or slope between two points through, for instance, the use of GPS with an altimeter (Yuen ¶0164)], wherein the thresholds distinguish between upstairs and upslope, upslope and flat ground, flat ground and downslope, and downslope and downstairs [see Yuen ¶0124, ¶0126, ¶0129, Figure 4K].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Herr to employ wherein after the recognizing is triggered based on the triggering boundary condition, performing recognizing the motion pattern under the classified type of terrain by: determining that the motion pattern is upslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than a first slope threshold and greater than a second slope threshold; determining that the motion pattern is walking on flat ground in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the second slope threshold and greater than a third slope threshold; or determining that the motion pattern is downslope in response to that the slope of the ground is less than the third slope threshold and greater than a fourth slope threshold; wherein the first slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upstairs motion pattern from the upslope motion pattern, the second slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the upslope motion pattern from the flat ground walking motion pattern, and the third slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the flat ground walking motion pattern from the downslope motion pattern, and the fourth slope threshold is a threshold value for distinguishing the downslope motion pattern from the downstairs motion pattern, so as to allow for distinct differentiation between activity states of the user based on identified thresholds of changes in height per step, allowing for the determination of motion patterns of the user [Yuen ¶0129].
Regarding claim 25, Herr in view of Yuen teaches
The method according to claim 1, wherein the sensor further comprises an inertial measurement unit fixed to the limb extremity end [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179], and the method further comprises:
detecting a standing stage and the swinging stage in a walking process of the subject by using an acceleration signal output from the inertial measurement unit mounted on extremity end [Herr ¶¶0194, 0264, 0358]; and
wherein determining that the lower limb of the subject is in the standing stage in response to that an absolute value of the acceleration signal of the inertial measurement unit obtained by measurement is close to a gravity acceleration for a period of time; or determining that the lower limb of the subject is in the swing stage in response to that the absolute value of the acceleration signal obtained by the measurement is greater than the gravity acceleration [Herr ¶0177, 0179, wherein any movement of the subject that would result in motion of the extremity end of the human lower limb is considered to be greater than the gravity acceleration, such that the swing stage would be determined].
Claim(s) 4 and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr in view of Yuen, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Nishizawa (JP-4277048-B2, previously presented and translation previously attached).
Regarding claim 4, Herr in view of Yuen teaches
The method according to claim 1, wherein, the sensor further comprises an inertial measurement unit fixed to the limb extremity end [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179].
However, Herr in view of Yuen fails to explicitly disclose wherein the method further comprises: obtaining one or more of absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground, through a coordinate transformation and an integration of angular velocity and acceleration data of the inertial measurement unit, which are obtained in the sensor coordinate system.
Nishizawa discloses a system for measuring absolute acceleration, absolute velocity, and absolute position of a subject, wherein Nishizawa discloses obtaining one or more of the absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground, through a coordinate transformation and an integration of angular velocity and acceleration data of the inertial measurement unit, which are obtained in the sensor coordinate system [the acceleration (A .sub.Xn , A .sub.Yn , A .sub.Zn ) of the ground coordinate system is calculated from the output data of the 3-axis acceleration sensor and the 3-axis angular velocity sensor, and this ground coordinate system It is preferable to calculate the position data of the object to be measured based on the acceleration (Translated Nishizawa, Page 4, Paragraph 6); the embodiment of the present invention includes a triaxial acceleration sensor 16 a that measures acceleration (G .sub.xn , G .sub.yn , G .sub.zn ) of an object to be measured and an angular velocity ( A motion capture 10 for detecting the position or orientation of an object to be measured by a six-axis sensor 16 provided with a three-axis angular velocity sensor 16b for measuring (ω .sub.xn , ω .sub.yn , ω .sub.zn ). The acceleration (A .sub.Xn , A .sub.Yn , A .sub.Zn ) of the reference coordinate system is calculated from the output data of 16a and the triaxial angular velocity sensor 16b based on the modified inverse skew matrix (R ′ (n) .sup.−1 ) (Translated Nishizawa, Page 5, Paragraph 8)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Herr in view of Yuen to employ obtaining one or more of the absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground, through a coordinate transformation and an integration of angular velocity and acceleration data of the inertial measurement unit, which are obtained in the sensor coordinate system, and use a coordinate transformation and an integration of angular velocity and acceleration data of the inertial measurement unit to obtain one or more of the absolute motion trajectory to ground, the absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground, so as to rapidly and accurately determine acceleration, speed, and inclination information of the subject relative to ground [By comprising in this way, the position of a to-be-measured object can be detected still more rapidly. Based on the acceleration of the earth coordinate system, not only the position data of the object to be measured but also the speed and inclination angle of the object to be measured can be calculated with high accuracy (Translated Nishizawa, Page 4, Paragraph 7)].
Regarding claim 12, Herr in view of Yuen and Nishizawa teaches
The method according to claim 4,
wherein the motion pattern of the subject is recognized in response to one or more of the absolute velocity to ground, the absolute acceleration to ground or the absolute motion trajectory to ground matching, within the time window, a corresponding data of a particular motion pattern [Herr ¶0218, Fig. 6A].
Regarding claim 13, Herr in view of Yuen and Nishizawa teaches
The method according to claim 4, wherein the collecting comprises:
calculating a rotation angle or angular velocity of the limb extremity end relative to an initial sagittal plane or an initial coronal plane of the subject to recognize turning activity of the subject [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179, Fig. 2A, wherein as depicted in Herr Fig. 2A, the rotation angle of the ankle is calculated relative to an initial coronal plane of the subject (x-z plane of Fig. 2A), wherein the rotation of the foot about the ankle is considered to define turning activity of the subject (turning of the ankle relative to the x-z plane)].
Regarding claim 14, Herr in view of Yuen and Nishizawa teaches
The method according to claim 13, further comprising:
obtaining the rotation angle or angular velocity of the limb extremity end relative to the initial sagittal plane or the initial coronal plane of the subject by converting output data of the inertial measurement unit fixed to the limb extremity end [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179, Fig. 2A], or
recognizing the turning activity of the subject by detecting the rotation angle or angular velocity of other parts of the body of the subject relative to the initial sagittal plane or the initial coronal plane of the subject [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179, Fig. 2A, wherein Herr Fig. 2A further depicts the rotation of the foot relative to the shank and about the ankle, all relative to the x-z plane (coronal plane)].
Regarding claim 15, Herr in view of Yuen and Nishizawa teaches
The method according to claim 14, wherein the other parts of the body comprise one or more of head, upper torso, arms, lower thighs, lower legs, and feet [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179, Fig. 2A].
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr in view of Yuen and Nishizawa, as applied to claim 4 above, in further view of Ly (US-20170258374-A1, previously presented).
Regarding claim 5, Herr in view of Yuen and Nishizawa teaches
The method according to claim 4.
However, while Herr discloses performing steps to correct or minimize the effect of drift of the IMU when the subject is in a standing stage [Herr ¶0193], Herr in view of Yuen and Nishizawa fails to explicitly disclose further comprising: resetting, in response to a human body being in a standing stage, a transformation matrix for the coordinate transformation, the absolute velocity to ground, and an absolute motion displacement to ground, to eliminate or reduce a cumulative drift or cumulative error of the inertial measurement unit.
Ly discloses systems for monitoring user movement using machine learning, wherein Ly discloses recalibrating a kinematic data collection system in response to the user standing [In one preferred operating state, activation of a calibration input triggers the collection of kinematic data used in determining a target (i.e., a reference) posture sample. For example, the user can direct the system on what is considered good posture by standing with good posture and then calibrating the system to recognize this posture by activating a calibration input and holding the posture for a minimum duration (Ly ¶0031)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Herr in view of Yuen and Nishizawa to employ resetting, in response to a human body being in a standing stage, a transformation matrix for the coordinate transformation, the absolute velocity to ground, and an absolute motion displacement to ground, to eliminate or reduce a cumulative drift or cumulative error of the inertial measurement unit, so as to prevent error in the data by recalibrating the system to a known reference, wherein in light of the current combination of Herr in view of Yuen and Nishizawa, the modification by Ly would incorporate resetting the transformation matrix.
Regarding claim 6, Herr in view of Yuen, Nishizawa, and Ly teaches
The method according to claim 5, further comprising:
detecting the standing stage of the subject, by the inertial measurement unit fixed at the limb extremity end [Once the inertial measurement unit offsets have been calculated and corrected (zeroed), the foot-slope (.beta.) (alternatively referred to as heel height) is determined as illustrated in, for example, FIG. 3. From the illustration it is easy to see that when the wearer is standing with her foot flat on the ground that .beta.=-(.theta.+.gamma.). By averaging over a period of about a tenth of a second an accurate estimate of .beta. can be determined (Herr ¶0194); Examples of intrinsic sensors include… measurement of the angular rate and acceleration of the link (e.g., using, for example, an inertial measurement unit) (Herr ¶0264); Sitting, standing up and sitting down behavioral context is identified by the intrinsic sensors of the prosthetic apparatus (Herr ¶0358)] or a load cell mounted on the foot of the subject.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr in view of Yuen, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Elazary (US-20180005446-A1, previously presented).
Regarding claim 18, Herr in view of Yuen teaches
The method according to claim 1, wherein
the sensor further includes an inertial measurement unit mounted to lower legs, thighs, waists, or head of the subject [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179, Fig. 2A], and
wherein the inertial measurement unit is configured to,
measure one or more of the absolute motion trajectory to ground, the absolute velocity to ground, or the acceleration to ground [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179, 0218, Figs. 2A, 6A], or
measure topographic characteristics in the different motion patterns [this limitation is considered optional].
However, Herr fails to explicitly disclose wherein the inertial measurement unit is an inertial measurement unit-combined depth camera.
Elazary discloses systems and methods for monitoring a user’s environment, wherein Elazary discloses the combined use of an inertial sensor and depth camera [The augmented reality devices utilized in the implementation of some embodiments include at least one camera, one or more sensors, a power source, wireless network connectivity, a processor, and a semi-transparent surface or screen layering images or information over a presentation of the real-world that appears before or around the device. In some embodiments, the device sensors include inertial sensors, depth cameras, radio beacon receivers, laser scanners, and range finders as some examples (Elazary ¶0024)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Herr in view of Yuen to employ an inertial measurement unit-combined depth camera, so as to provide additional contextual information regarding the user’s environment.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr in view of Yuen, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of Cortelyou (US-20150338196-A1, previously presented).
Regarding claim 19, Herr in view of Yuen teaches
The method according to claim 1.
However, Herr in view of Yuen fails to explicitly disclose wherein, the sensor further comprises an infrared capture system mounted in an ambient environment of the subject, and an infrared capture marker point is mounted at the limb extremity end of the subject, and wherein the method further comprises: analyzing one or more of the absolute motion trajectory to ground, the absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground of the infrared capture marker point to recognize the motion pattern of the subject.
Cortelyou discloses systems for monitoring user movement [Cortelyou Abstract], wherein Cortelyou discloses a sensor that comprises an infrared capture system mounted in an ambient environment of the subject, and an infrared capture marker point is mounted at the limb extremity end of the subject [The retro-reflective marker 24 may reflect a majority of the electromagnetic radiation (e.g., infrared, ultraviolet, visible wavelengths, or radio waves and so forth) incident from the electromagnetic radiation beam 28 back toward the detector 16 within a relatively well-defined cone having a central axis with substantially the same angle as the angle of incidence. This reflection facilitates identification of a location of the retro-reflective marker 24 by the system 10 (Cortelyou ¶0040)], and analyzing one or more of the absolute motion trajectory to ground, the absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground of the infrared capture marker point to recognize the motion pattern of the subject [For instance, the retro-reflective marker 24 may be applied as a strip of retro-reflective tape applied to an armband, headband, shirt, personal identification feature, or other article… The tracking system 10 may interpret this signal 72 to track the position or path of the person 70 (or object 32) moving about a designated area (i.e., track the person or object in space and time). Again, depending on the number of detectors 16 utilized, the control unit 18 may determine vector magnitude, orientation, and sense of the person and/or object's movement based on the retro-reflected electromagnetic radiation received (Cortelyou ¶0063); The survey equipment 140 may, accordingly, identify a position of these markers 24 relative to a position of a certain environmental feature, such as the ground (Cortelyou ¶0106); Once a particular pattern of retro-reflection has been detected, a determination may be made by the control unit 18 as to whether the pattern correlates to a stored pattern identified by the control unit 18 (Cortelyou ¶0051)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Herr in view of Yuen to employ an infrared capture system mounted in an ambient environment of the subject, and an infrared capture marker point is mounted at the limb extremity end of the subject, and wherein the method further comprises: analyzing one or more of the absolute motion trajectory to ground, the absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground of the infrared capture marker point to recognize the motion pattern of the subject, as this would amount to merely applying a known technique [infrared capture system of Cortelyou] to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results [analyzing one or more of the absolute motion trajectory to ground, the absolute velocity to ground, and the absolute acceleration to ground of the sensor with the similar expected result of recognizing the motion pattern of the subject] [MPEP §2143(I)(B)].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks p. 13, filed 20 April 2026, with respect to the previously presented drawing objections have been fully considered but they are not entirely persuasive.
The Applicant asserts that the “driver of auxiliary device” is supported by the Applicant’s disclosure, particularly citing ¶0099 and Fig. 9, which depicts computing system 600 controlling both the sensor (peripheral 606 and the driver (peripheral 606) via peripheral controllers/interfaces 605. However, the Examiner disagrees that the cited portions of the Applicant’s disclosure are considered to support the argued “driver of auxiliary device”, as the Examiner notes that the cited paragraph ¶0099 does not exist in the Applicant’s Specification, but ¶0090, which references elements of Fig. 9 and is considered to be the correct paragraph referred to by the Applicant, fails to explicitly disclose that the peripherals 606 include the argued “driver of auxiliary device” [The computing system 600 may also include one or more peripheral controllers or interfaces 605 for one or more peripherals 606. Examples of peripherals may include one or more printers, scanners, input devices, output devices, sensors, and the like (Applicant’s Specification ¶0090)], which is not considered to recite or particularly suggest a driver of an auxiliary device or the auxiliary device itself, as a “peripheral”, which is interpreted to refer to a touchscreen or video display as explicitly referred to by the Applicant [Additional components of the computing system may include one or more disk drives, one or more network ports for communicating with external devices as well as various input and output (I/O) devices, such as a keyboard, mouse, stylus, touchscreen and/or video display (Applicant’s Specification ¶0087)]. Furthermore, assuming in arguendo that the cited portions of the Applicant’s Specification did provide support for the inclusion of a driver of the auxiliary device, which the Examiner does not acquiesce as being true, there is no specific support in the Applicant’s disclosure for a driver of an auxiliary device positioned specifically as depicted in Fig. 1.
The drawing objection directed towards reference character(s) not depicted in the Applicant’s Drawings has been overcome.
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks p. 13-14, with respect to the previously presented claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections to claims 1, 10-11, and 22-23 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks p. 14-15, with respect to the previously applied rejections under § 112(a) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant asserts that there is explicit disclosure of “auxiliary device” and “driver” in the specification, including structural and control architecture, wherein the Applicant cites ¶0004 as explicitly stating that the “lower limb auxiliary device” controls a “driver” to generate “preset auxiliary torque” for motion assistance, with target devices including “lower limb, prosthesis, orthosis, or exoskeleton” [which the Applicant notes are tied to the driver’s torque control function]. The Applicant further cites ¶0099 and Fig. 9 as further disclosing the control architecture between the computing system 600 and the lower limb auxiliary device (peripheral 606) and the driver (peripheral 606) via peripheral controllers 605, which confirms the inventor’s possession of the “driver” and “auxiliary device” as integrated components of the claimed system. Regarding the Applicant’s arguments regarding the cited portions of ¶0004, the Examiner disagrees with the Applicant’s arguments as the Applicant’s disclosure in the Background of the Specification that lower limb auxiliary devices are known to those having ordinary skill in the art does not constitute the Applicant’s possession of a lower limb auxiliary device configured to perform the claimed functions and for implementing the claimed method. Regarding the Applicant’s arguments regarding the cited portions of ¶0099 [understood to refer to ¶0090] and Fig. 9, the Examiner directs attention to the Examiner’s response to the Applicant’s arguments with respect to the drawing objections, which are considered similarly applicable regarding the disclosure of ¶0090 and Fig. 9 supporting the argued subject matter.
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks p. 15-18, with respect to the previously applied rejections of claims 1, 22-23, and those dependent therefrom under § 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1, 22-23, and those dependent therefrom have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see Applicant’s Remarks p. 18-21, with respect to the previously applied rejections of claims 1, 22-23, and those dependent therefrom under § 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Herr, the Applicant asserts that Herr does not disclose the claimed ellipse-based triggering or displacement-driven slope calculation of claims 1 and 22-23, wherein the Applicant notes that Herr’s disclosure is limited to qualitative trajectory template matching in the y-z plane to classify terrain (e.g., steep vs shallow curves for stairs vs ramps) [Herr ¶¶0018, 0218, Fig. 6A], wherein the Applicant specifically notes that: Herr does not disclose a “predefined (not arbitrary) ellipse in the sensor coordinate system” as a predefined boundary trajectory for triggering motion pattern recognition and instead relies on comparing overall trajectory shapes to activity templates; Herr does not trigger recognition based on the “absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage passing through the predefined ellipse” and instead defines a trajectory analysis of a post-hoc qualitative comparison, not a real-time spatial intersection with a predefined geometric shape; Herr does not determine “the slope of the ground by a displacement of the limb extremity end in a forward direction and a displacement of the limb extremity end in a direction vertical to the ground” and instead infers the slope from the overall trajectory trend, not from discrete forward/vertical displacements at a boundary intersection. However, the Examiner disagrees with the Applicant’s argument regarding Herr fails to disclose a “predefined (not arbitrary) ellipse in the sensor coordinate system”, as the Examiner notes that the argued ellipse is not particularly defined to encompass any particular values or ranges [merely reciting that the ellipse is “predefined” does not impart any particular definition to the ellipse], such that the absolute motion trajectory to ground as measured by Herr passes through the “predefined” ellipse in the sensor coordinate system. The Examiner further disagrees with the Applicant’s argument that Herr does not trigger recognition based on the “absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage passing through the predefined ellipse”, for reasons similar to the Examiner’s response to arguments above regarding the “predefined” ellipse, as the ankle joint pivot trajectories of different ambulation contexts are still considered to pass through any non-particular “predefined” ellipse as the trajectory of the ankle joint in the y-z plane is used in the recognition of the motion pattern [Herr ¶¶0202, 0218, Fig. 6A]. The Examiner also disagrees with the Applicant’s argument that Herr does not determine “the slope of the ground by a displacement of the limb extremity end in a forward direction and a displacement of the limb extremity end in a direction vertical to the ground”, for reasons similar to the Examiner’s response to arguments above regarding the “predefined” ellipse and as Herr discloses and depicts utilizing the forward/vertical displacement of the limb extremity end to determine the slope of the ground [Herr ¶¶0202, 0218, Fig. 6A].
Regarding Yuen, the Applicant asserts that Yuen fails to supplement Herr’s deficiencies, as Yuen discloses classifying terrain using one-dimensional altitude change thresholds, wherein the Applicant specifically notes that: Yuen uses numerical threshold comparisons rather than the claimed “two-dimensional sensor coordinate system” with a “predefined ellipse” as a triggering boundary; Yuen does not capture or analyze the “absolute motion trajectory to ground during the swing stage” – a spatial parameter – or trigger recognition based on trajectory intersection with an ellipse, and instead focuses on cumulative altitude changes over steps or time, not real-time spatial trajectory boundaries; Yuen does not determine ground slope using “forward and vertical displacements of the limb extremity end” at the moment of ellipse intersection, and instead classifies slope/terrain based on altitude change per step or second, not discrete displacement values tied to a geometric boundary. However, the Examiner notes that Herr is considered to teach the argued subject matter that the Applicant asserts Yuen does not remedy [see Examiner’s responses to arguments above], such that Yuen is not specifically required to remedy any alleged deficiency of Herr. Furthermore, the Examiner disagrees that Yuen does not determine ground slope using “forward and vertical displacements of the limb extremity end”, as Yuen explicitly discloses using forward/vertical displacement to differentiate between different motion patterns [Yuen ¶0124], such that as Herr does explicitly disclose determining slope based on absolute motion trajectory in forward/vertical directions [Herr ¶¶0177, 0179, 0202, 0218, Fig. 6A], the combination of Herr in view of Yuen is considered to render obvious the argued limitations.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 SEVERO ANTONIO P LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7378. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6 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, Charles Marmor II can be reached at (571) 272-4730. 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.
/SEVERO ANTONIO P LOPEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights