DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the filing of amendments to the claims on 9/16/2025. As per the amendments, claims 1-3, 5-13, and 15-20 have been amended, claims 4 and 14 have been cancelled, and claims 21-22 have been added. Thus, claims 1-3, 5-13, and 15-22 are pending in the application.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 11-13, 15-16, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takenaka et al. (US Pub. 2016/0338897).
Regarding claim 1, Takenaka discloses a control method of a walking assistance apparatus (see abstract), the control method comprising: during a gait of a user wearing the walking assistance apparatus, repeatedly obtaining an angle related to a hip joint of the user using a sensor of the walking assistance apparatus (see [0012] and [0094]-[0095] where left and right hip angles are measured (via angular position sensors 6 in Fig. 1) to compute a differential angle between them); controlling a driver of the walking assistance apparatus to adjust a torque (see [0090] and Fig. 1 where powers units 4L/4R are drivers for producing the assist force (torque) and controlled by the control unit) the torque being determined based on the obtained angle (see [0023] and [0085]-[0089] where the outputted torque is based on the assist force phase, which is determined by the differential angle of the hip joint), wherein the torque is output with a delay after the angle is obtained (see [0015] and [0078]-[0079] and [0084] where a phase delay is determined, the phase delay used to adjust the outputted torque timing to better match the motion of the user (as seen in [0006] and [0016])), wherein the delay is based on a time value in relation to a torque output time (see [0006] and [0015]-[0016] where the phase delay is a timing related to the outputted assist force, to align the assist force with the proper phase of the gait cycle), and wherein the torque that is output with the delay is transmitted to a supporting member of the walking assistance apparatus (see Fig. 1 femoral retainers 13L/13R and [0047] where the outputted torque from power units 4L/4R assist movement of the femoral part of the user by femoral retainer 13) via a force transmitting member of the walking assistance apparatus (see Fig. 1 arm members 14L/14R and see [0046]-[0047]), the supporting member provided on a thigh of the user (see Fig. 1 femoral retainer 13, which supports the femur, which is the bone of the thigh).
Regarding claim 2, Takenaka discloses filtering information related to the gait of the user (see [0015] and [0061] and [0068] where a low pass filter is applied to the differential angle of the hip joints of the gait).
Regarding claim 3, Takenaka discloses wherein the filtering of the information related to the gait of the user comprises: performing low-pass filtering on the information related to the gait of the user using a low-pass filter (LPF) (see [0015] and [0061] and [0068] where a low pass filter is applied to the differential angle of the hip joints of the gait).
Regarding claim 5, Takenaka discloses wherein obtaining the angle related to the hip joint of the user (see [0012] and [0094]-[0095] where left and right hip angles are measured to compute a differential angle between them) comprises; obtaining a first angle related to a left hip joint (see [0094] where a left hip joint angle is obtained) and obtaining a second angle related to a right hip joint (see [0094] where a left hip joint angle is obtained).
Regarding claim 6, Takenaka discloses obtaining a state variable based on a difference between the first angle related to the left hip joint and the second angle related to the right hip joint (see [0094] where a differential angle is a state variable that is calculated based on the different between the left and right hip joints).
Regarding claim 11, Takenaka discloses a walking assistance apparatus (see abstract) comprising: a driver (see [0090] and Fig. 1 where powers units 4L/4R are drivers for producing the assist force (torque)); at least one sensor (angular position sensors 6 in Fig. 1); a supporting member configured to be provided on a thigh of a user wearing the walking assistance apparatus (see Fig. 1 femoral retainers 13L/13R and [0047], which supports the femur, which is the bone of the thigh); a force transmitting member comprising a frame (see Fig. 1 arm members 14L/14R and see [0046]-[0047]); and a processor (control unit 5 in Fig. 3) configured to: during a gait of the user, repeatedly obtain an angle related to a hip joint of the user using the at least one sensor (see [0012] and [0094]-[0095] where left and right hip angles are measured (via angular position sensors 6 in Fig. 1) to compute a differential angle between them), and, control the driver to adjust a torque (see [0090] and Fig. 1 where powers units 4L/4R are drivers for producing the assist force (torque) and controlled by the control unit), the torque being determined based on the obtained angle (see [0023] and [0085]-[0089] where the outputted torque is based on the assist force phase, which is determined by the differential angle of the hip joint), wherein the torque is output with a delay after the angle is obtained (see [0015] and [0078]-[0079] and [0084] where a phase delay is determined, the phase delay used to adjust the outputted torque timing to better match the motion of the user (as seen in [0006] and [0016])), wherein the delay is based on a time value in relation to a torque output time (see [0006] and [0015]-[0016] where the phase delay is a timing related to the outputted assist force, to align the assist force with the proper phase of the gait cycle), and wherein the torque that is output with the delay is transmitted to the supporting member via the force transmitting member (see Fig. 1 femoral retainers 13L/13R and [0047] where the outputted torque from power units 4L/4R assist movement of the femoral part of the user by femoral retainer 13).
Regarding claim 12, Takenaka discloses filtering information related to the gait of the user (see [0015] and [0061] and [0068] where a low pass filter is applied to the differential angle of the hip joints of the gait).
Regarding claim 13, Takenaka discloses wherein the filtering of the information related to the gait of the user comprises: performing low-pass filtering on the information related to the gait of the user using a low-pass filter (LPF) (see [0015] and [0061] and [0068] where a low pass filter is applied to the differential angle of the hip joints of the gait).
Regarding claim 15, Takenaka discloses wherein the processor is further configured to obtain a state variable based on a difference between the first angle related to the left hip joint and the second angle related to the right hip joint (see [0012] and [0094]-[0095] where left and right hip angles are measured to compute a differential angle between them, via the angular position sensors 6).
Regarding claim 16, Takenaka discloses the processor is further configured to obtain a state variable based on a difference between the first angle related to the left hip joint and the second angle related to the right hip joint (see [0094] where a differential angle is a state variable that is calculated based on the different between the left and right hip joints).
Regarding claim 21, Takenaka discloses wherein the time value is set before the torque is output with the delay (see [0006] and [0015]-[0016] where the time value is a time during the gait of the walking cycle before the torque is applied, so that the time value can be adjusted via the phase delay in order to delay the timing of the applied torque).
Regarding claim 22, Takenaka discloses wherein the time value is set before the torque is output with the delay (see [0006] and [0015]-[0016] where the time value is a time during the gait of the walking cycle before the torque is applied, so that the time value can be adjusted via the phase delay in order to delay the timing of the applied torque).
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.
Claims 7-9, and 17-19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takenaka as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, respectively, and further in view of Endo (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0366738).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Takenaka discloses the walking assistance method of claims 1 and 11 respectively.
Takenaka lacks a detailed description of wherein the defining of the state variable defines the state variable such that the state variable is expressed in a form of a trigonometric function.
However, Endo teaches a similar walking assistance system, wherein the defining of the state variable defines the state variable such that the state variable is expressed in a form of a trigonometric function (at least paragraphs 0045-0054 disclose wherein the hip angle measurement data can computed or expressed in a form of a trigonometric function; and further see [0123]-[0126] where the phase angle difference between right and left hip angles is expressed via trigonometric function).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Takenaka to incorporate wherein the defining of the state variable defines the state variable such that the state variable is expressed in a form of a trigonometric function, as taught by Endo, in order to account for the oscillatory component of computing gait cycle parameters.
Regarding claims 8 and 18, the modified Takenaka device has the walking assistance method of claims 7 and 17 respectively.
The modified Takenaka device lacks a detailed description of expressing a first angle related to a left hip joint of the user based on a first trigonometric function; expressing a second angle related to a right hip joint of the user based on a second trigonometric function; and obtaining the state variable based on a difference between the first trigonometric function and the second trigonometric function.
However, Endo further teaches a similar walking assistance system wherein the defining of the state variable comprises: expressing a left hip joint angle of the user based on a first trigonometric function (at least paragraph 0047 and figure 5A disclose wherein the left hip angle is represented by a trigonometric function); expressing a right hip joint angle of the user based on a second trigonometric function (at least paragraph 0063 discloses wherein the right hip angle is expressed as a trigonometric function); and defining the state variable based on a difference between the first trigonometric function and the second trigonometric function (at least paragraphs 0123-0126 disclose wherein the system determines the difference between the trigonometric function representation of the left and right hip angles).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the modified Takenaka device to incorporate wherein the defining of the state variable comprises: expressing a left hip joint angle of the user based on a first trigonometric function; expressing a right hip joint angle of the user based on a second trigonometric function; and defining the state variable based on a difference between the first trigonometric function and the second trigonometric function, as taught by Endo, in order to accurately determine abnormal gait characteristics by analyzing the cyclic angle measurements data between the left and right hip movements.
Regarding claims 9 and 19, the modified Takenaka device has wherein the state variable comprises the time value and a gain associated with the torque (see [0088] where a gain is applied to the assist force, which includes the assist force phase, determined via an assist target phase difference as seen in [0086])
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takenaka, as applied to claims 1 and 11, respectively, and further in view of Rudolph et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2010/0125229).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Takenaka has the walking assistance method of claims 1 and 11 respectively.
Takenaka lacks a detailed description of wherein the defining of the state variable comprises: determining the delay based on a gait velocity of the user.
However, Rudolph teaches a similar walking assistance system, wherein the defining of the state variable comprises: determining the delay based on a gait velocity of the user (paragraph 0080 discloses wherein the delay is calculated based on the knee velocity and paragraph 0073 discloses wherein knee velocity is related to gait events and paragraph 0068-0069 discloses wherein knee velocity is used to determine stride).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Takenaka to incorporate wherein the defining of the state variable comprises: determining the delay based on a gait velocity of the user, as taught by Rudolph, in order to accurately determine the gait characteristics of the user so as to accurately assist the user’s movement.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record. Specifically, the rejections have been changed such that the Takenaka reference is now the primary reference.
Thus, the rejections hold.
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 MATTHEW D ZIEGLER whose telephone number is (571)272-3349. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00-6:00.
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, Justine Yu can be reached at (571)272-4835. 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.
/MATTHEW D ZIEGLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/JUSTINE R YU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785