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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on December 24, 2025, has been entered.
Status of Claims
This Action is in response to the amendment filed on November 26, 2025.
As directed by the amendment: Claims 22-24 and 27-29 were amended. Claims 22-24, 27-29, and 31-32 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Claim Objections
Claim 22 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 22, line 9 recites “any one of walking states including in a gait cycle” and Examiner suggests --any one of walking states included in a gait cycle-- to clarify that the walking states are from a gait cycle, and to conform with the language used in claim 27, line 8.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 24, 26, 29, and 31 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 24, line 2 recites “a torque” and it is unclear if this is referring to the same torque as the “assistive torque” recited already in claim 22.
Claim 26, line 3 recites “a transition between consecutive walking states” which is confusing because “a transition … between consecutive walking states” has already been recited in claim 22, line 12. Examiner suggests clarifying whether this is referring to the same transition, or a different transition.
Claim 29, line 2 recites “a torque” and it is unclear if this is referring to the same torque as the “assistive torque” recited already in claim 27.
Claim 31, lines 2-3 recite “a transition between consecutive walking states” which is confusing because “a transition … between consecutive walking states” has already been recited in claim 27, line 11. Examiner suggests clarifying whether this is referring to the same transition, or a different transition.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 22-24, 26-29, and 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sankai (2006/0211956) in view of Aoki et al. (2012/0071797).
Regarding claim 22, Sankai discloses a walking assistance apparatus (Figs. 1-2, Fig. 15) comprising:
a torque generator (driving current generating unit 5, Fig. 15 and hip actuator(s) 201a, Fig. 2; see the last sentence of [0095]) configured to generate an assistive torque for assisting a walk of a user wearing the walking assistance apparatus (“actuator 201 generates a torque … [and] is driven in accordance with the wearer’s intention” see para. [0105] and Fig. 10-11 showing the device assist with a walking task A);
a sensor (physical quantity sensor 13, Fig. 15) configured to measure a right and left hip joint angle information of the user (sensor 13 “detects rotation angle and angular velocity of each joint,” see the second sentence of [0134] and see Fig. 11b which shows that the hip (waist) joint angles θ are measured, see the second sentence of [0134] and see Fig. 11b which shows that the hip (waist) joint angles are measured), and
a processor, including a processing circuit (computer executing the program of control device 20C, Fig. 15; thus performing processing functions as part of a circuit by receiving sensor signals, communicating with database 6, and generating command signals to drive the walking assist device, and the computer will execute the method of Fig. 16, see lines 1-7 of [0017], the first sentence of [0119], and the last sentence of [0119]) configured to:
control the torque generator (driving current generating unit 5, Fig. 15 and hip actuator(s) 201a, Fig. 2) to generate the assistive torque based on the right and left hip joint angle information (see control device 20C in Fig. 15 and see steps ST803-ST811, Fig. 16; the control device 20C detects physical quantities from sensor 13, which includes measurements of right and left hip joint angle information in ST803, compares the measured physical quantities to a standard parameter of a task/phase such as a walking task/phase in the database 6 in ST805, and once a number of matches reaches a reference number in ST806-ST807, corresponding hybrid ratio and power assist rate(s) are determined in ST808, an autonomous command signal is generated in ST809, the total command signal is generated by combining optional command signal 24, d1, Fig. 15, and autonomous command signal 17, d2, Fig. 15 and ST810, and the driving of the actuator is performed by supplying current according to the total command signal in ST811. Thus, the controller controls the torque based at least partially on the right and left hip joint angle information indicating a match with a given walking task/phase),
determine a walking state of the user based at least on the right and left hip joint angle information (see steps ST803-ST808, Fig. 16; the measured physical quantity from sensor 13, which detects rotation angle of each joint including waist angle θ as seen in Fig. 11b, and the joint angles are compared to database 6 of standard task/phase data to determine a walking state of the user such as phase A1, phase A2, phase A3, phase A4, see Figs. 10-11 and paragraphs [0124], [0131]), the walking state being any one of walking states including in a gait cycle (such as phase A1, phase A2, phase A3, phase A4, see Figs. 10-11 and para. [0124]),
update, in response to the walking state being determined to be changed, a current walking state of the user to a changed walking state (the measured joint angles are repeatedly measured and compared to the database 6 such as at times t1, t2, t3, Fig. 11b, see ST806-ST807, Fig. 16, and this comparison continues so that the controller will update the identified walking state as the user proceeds through phases A1, A2, A3, A4, see para. [0124]. As the user moves through each phase of the walking cycle, this will be detected and a current walking state of the user will be changed/updated).
Sankai is silent regarding determining whether a transition occurs between consecutive walking states within the gait cycle, determining, in response to the changed walking state not being an exceptional walking state and in response to the transition not occurring, not to apply the assistive torque to a corresponding step, and determine, for a next step of the corresponding step, whether the walking state is changed.
Aoki teaches a related walking assistance device (Fig. 1) including a processor and processing circuit (controller 40, Fig. 5, which is a CPU that executes software functions, see para. [0042]) configured to determine whether a transition occurs between consecutive walking states within the gait cycle (“Is Lower Link Swinging” see S202, Fig. 9 and para. [0054]; the swing phase is a transition that occurs between consecutive stance phases within a gait cycle, as seen in Figure 3). Aoki is also configured to determine whether there is an exceptional walking state (“Exceptional” is interpreted to mean deviating from the norm. Aoki’s safety module 46 in Fig. 5 detects an abnormality, see S52 in Fig. 7: “safety module 46 determines an occurrence of abnormality from sensor data of the sensors 54” see lines 1-2 of [0047]. For example, an abnormality such as if the motor is overheating, see lines 5-10 of [0051]. A walking state in which a serious “abnormality” is detected such as the motor overheating is considered an exceptional walking state). Aoki determining, in response to a changed walking state not being an exceptional walking state (an “abnormality” in the walking state is detected at S52, and in response to the abnormality not being an exceptional state, see “NO” at S56, then the safety module 46 proceeds to the “First Abnormality Management Process,” and then to the “Second Abnormality Management Process” see Figs. 7-9) and in response to the transition not occurring (“Is Lower Link Swinging” S202, Fig. 9), not to apply assistive torque to a corresponding step (“Shut Off Torque Transmission” S204, Fig. 9), and determining, for a next step of the corresponding step, whether the walking state is changed (“The safety module 46 repeatedly executes the above processes for every predetermined cycle” see the last sentence of [0050]. Thus, the controller of the modified device will repeat the determination of walking state(s) and evaluate whether each walking state has an abnormality when the user takes another step). The safety module (46) thus detects abnormalities and shuts off torque “immediately” for abnormalities related to the control system or power supply system (S56, S58, Fig. 7; see also lines 5-10 of [0051], and the first two sentences of [0052]), while allowing the device to finish certain movements if the abnormality is less significant (see the First through Fourth abnormality management processes, see Figs. 7-11 and para. [0051]-[0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the processor and processing circuit of Sankai to determine whether a transition occurs between consecutive walking states, determine, in response to the changed walking state not being an exceptional walking state and in response to the transition not occurring, not to apply the assistive torque to a corresponding step, and determine, for a next step of the corresponding step, whether the walking state is changed as taught by Aoki because this provides a safety protocol that detects abnormalities, and prioritizes whether to immediately shut off torque (such as for overheating motor, see lines 5-10 of [0051], and the first two sentences of [0052] of Aoki), or determine if the abnormality would allow the walking assistance device to complete a movement that is already in progress (via the First through Fourth abnormality management processes, see Figs. 7-11 and para. [0051]-[0057] of Aoki).
Regarding claim 23, the modified Sankai/Aoki device discloses wherein the processor (computer executing program of 20C of Sankai, as modified by controller 40 of Aoki) is further configured to reset a gait parameter for the changed walking state (the torque for the changed walking state is “reset” to zero by shutting off torque transmission, see Figs. 7-11 of Aoki), in response to the changed walking state being not a normal walking state (if there is an abnormality detected relating to the control system, or relating to the power supply system as seen in S56-S60 in Fig. 7 of Aoki, or another abnormality that triggers the First through Fourth abnormality management processes in Figs. 7-11 of Aoki. Detecting any of these abnormalities would be considered a walking state that is not “normal”).
Regarding claim 24, the modified Sankai/Aoki device discloses wherein the processor (computer executing program of 20C of Sankai, as modified by controller 40 of Aoki) is further configured to determine a torque in a following walking step of a current walking step without using a gait parameter for the changed walking state, in response to the changed walking state being not a normal walking state (if there is an abnormality detected relating to the control system, or relating to the power supply system as seen in S56-S60 in Fig. 7 of Aoki, or another abnormality that triggers the First through Fourth abnormality management processes in Figs. 7-11 of Aoki. Detecting any of these abnormalities would be considered a walking state that is not “normal”, and result in an applied torque of zero. A following walking step would not rely on the applied torque of zero because the safety module “repeatedly executes the above processes for every predetermined cycle” see the last sentence of [0050]. Thus, the following walking step of a current walking step would no0t use the gait parameter of zero torque from the changed walking state).
Regarding claim 26, the modified Sankai/Aoki device discloses wherein the processor (computer executing the program of 20C of Sankai, as modified by controller 40 of Aoki) is further configured to reset a gait parameter for the changed walking state (the control system resets the applied torque to zero when Aoki determines there is an abnormality. See Figs. 7-11 of Aoki, and the claim 22 rejection statement above), in response to a transition between consecutive walking states being determined not to be performed (“Is Lower Link Swinging” S202, Fig. 9 of Aoki).
Regarding claim 27, Sankai discloses a method (Fig. 16) of controlling a walking assistance apparatus (Figs. 1-2, Fig. 15), the method comprising:
measuring (ST803, Fig. 16), using a sensor (physical quantity sensor 13, Fig. 15), right and left hip joint angle information of a user wearing the walking assistance apparatus (sensor 13 detects “rotation angle and angular velocity of each joint,” see the second sentence of [0134] and see Fig. 11b which shows that the hip (waist) joint angles θ are measured);
controlling (by control computer executing the program of control device 20C, Fig. 15; thus performing processing functions as part of a circuit by receiving sensor signals, communicating with database 6, and generating command signals to drive the walking assist device, and the computer will execute the method of Fig. 16, see lines 1-7 of [0017], the first sentence of [0119], and the last sentence of [0119]) a torque generator (driving current generating unit 5, Fig. 15 and hip actuator(s) 201a, Fig. 2; see the last sentence of [0095]) to generate an assistive torque for assisting a walk of the user (assist torque is generated by actuator(s) such as 201a, Fig. 2 driven by driving current generating unit 5, Fig. 15, as seen in steps ST808-ST811, Fig. 16) based on the right and left hip joint angle information (see control device 20C in Fig. 15 and see steps ST803-ST811, Fig. 16; the control device 20C detects physical quantities from sensor 13, which includes measurements of right and left hip joint angle information in ST803, compares the measured physical quantities to a standard parameter of a task/phase such as a walking task/phase in the database 6 in ST805, and once a number of matches reaches a reference number in ST806-ST807, corresponding hybrid ratio and power assist rate(s) are determined in ST808, an autonomous command signal is generated in ST809, the total command signal is generated by combining optional command signal 24, d1, Fig. 15, and autonomous command signal 17, d2, Fig. 15 and ST810, and the driving of the actuator is performed by supplying current according to the total command signal in ST811. Thus, the controller controls the torque based at least partially on the right and left hip joint angle information indicating a match with a given walking task/phase),
determining a walking state of the user based at least on the right and left hip joint angle information (see steps ST803-ST808, Fig. 16; the measured physical quantity from sensor 13, which detects rotation angle of each joint including waist angle θ as seen in Fig. 11b, and the joint angles are compared to database 6 of standard task/phase data to determine a walking state of the user such as phase A1, phase A2, phase A3, phase A4, see Figs. 10-11 and paragraphs [0124], [0131]), the walking state being any one of walking states included in a gait cycle (such as phase A1, phase A2, phase A3, phase A4, see Figs. 10-11 and para. [0124]),
updating, in response to the walking state being determined to be changed, a current walking state of the user to a changed walking state (the measured joint angles are repeatedly measured and compared to the database 6 such as at times t1, t2, t3, Fig. 11b, see ST806-ST807, Fig. 16, and this comparison continues so that the controller will update the identified walking state as the user proceeds through phases A1, A2, A3, A4, see para. [0124]. As the user moves through each phase of the walking cycle, this will be detected and a current walking state of the user will be changed/updated).
Sankai is silent regarding determining whether a transition occurs between consecutive walking states within the gait cycle, determining, in response to the changed walking state not being an exceptional walking state and in response to the transition not occurring, not to apply the assistive torque to a corresponding step, and determining, for a next step of the corresponding step, whether the walking state is changed.
Aoki teaches a related walking assistance device (Fig. 1) including a processor and processing circuit (controller 40, Fig. 5, which is a CPU that executes software functions, see para. [0042]) configured to determine whether a transition occurs between consecutive walking states within the gait cycle (“Is Lower Link Swinging” see S202, Fig. 9 and para. [0054]; the swing phase is a transition that occurs between consecutive stance phases within a gait cycle, as seen in Figure 3). Aoki is also configured to determine whether there is an exceptional walking state (“Exceptional” is interpreted to mean deviating from the norm. Aoki’s safety module 46 in Fig. 5 detects an abnormality, see S52 in Fig. 7: “safety module 46 determines an occurrence of abnormality from sensor data of the sensors 54” see lines 1-2 of [0047]. For example, an abnormality such as if the motor is overheating, see lines 5-10 of [0051]. A walking state in which a serious “abnormality” is detected such as the motor overheating is considered an exceptional walking state). Aoki determining, in response to a changed walking state not being an exceptional walking state (an “abnormality” in the walking state is detected at S52, and in response to the abnormality not being an exceptional state, see “NO” at S56, then the safety module 46 proceeds to the “First Abnormality Management Process,” and then to the “Second Abnormality Management Process” see Figs. 7-9) and in response to the transition not occurring (“Is Lower Link Swinging” S202, Fig. 9), not to apply assistive torque to a corresponding step (“Shut Off Torque Transmission” S204, Fig. 9), and determining, for a next step of the corresponding step, whether the walking state is changed (“The safety module 46 repeatedly executes the above processes for every predetermined cycle” see the last sentence of [0050]. Thus, the controller of the modified device will repeat the determination of walking state(s) and evaluate whether each walking state has an abnormality when the user takes another step). The safety module (46) thus detects abnormalities and shuts off torque “immediately” for abnormalities related to the control system or power supply system (S56, S58, Fig. 7; see also lines 5-10 of [0051], and the first two sentences of [0052]), while allowing the device to finish certain movements if the abnormality is less significant (see the First through Fourth abnormality management processes, see Figs. 7-11 and para. [0051]-[0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the processor and processing circuit of Sankai to determine whether a transition occurs between consecutive walking states, determine, in response to the changed walking state not being an exceptional walking state and in response to the transition not occurring, not to apply the assistive torque to a corresponding step, and determine, for a next step of the corresponding step, whether the walking state is changed as taught by Aoki because this provides a safety protocol that detects abnormalities, and prioritizes whether to immediately shut off torque (such as for overheating motor, see lines 5-10 of [0051], and the first two sentences of [0052] of Aoki), or determine if the abnormality would allow the walking assistance device to complete a movement that is already in progress (via the First through Fourth abnormality management processes, see Figs. 7-11 and para. [0051]-[0057] of Aoki).
Regarding claim 28, the modified Sankai/Aoki method discloses wherein the controlling further comprises resetting a gait parameter for the changed walking state (the torque for the changed walking state is “reset” to zero by shutting off torque transmission, see Figs. 7-11 of Aoki) in response to the changed walking state being not a normal walking state (if there is an abnormality detected relating to the control system, or relating to the power supply system as seen in S56-S60 in Fig. 7 of Aoki, or another abnormality that triggers the First through Fourth abnormality management processes in Figs. 7-11 of Aoki. Detecting any of these abnormalities would be considered a walking state that is not “normal”).
Regarding claim 29, the modified Sankai/Aoki method discloses wherein the controlling further comprises determining a torque in a following walking step of a current walking step without using a gait parameter for the changed walking state, in response to the changed walking state being not a normal walking state (if there is an abnormality detected relating to the control system, or relating to the power supply system as seen in S56-S60 in Fig. 7 of Aoki, or another abnormality that triggers the First through Fourth abnormality management processes in Figs. 7-11 of Aoki. Detecting any of these abnormalities would be considered a walking state that is not “normal”, and result in an applied torque of zero. A following walking step would not rely on the applied torque of zero because the safety module “repeatedly executes the above processes for every predetermined cycle” see the last sentence of [0050]. Thus, the following walking step of a current walking step would no0t use the gait parameter of zero torque from the changed walking state).
Regarding claim 31, the modified Sankai/Aoki method discloses wherein the controlling (by the computer executing the program of control device 20C of Sankai, as modified by controller 40 of Aoki) further comprises resetting a gait parameter for the changed walking state (the control system resets the applied torque to zero when Aoki determines there is an abnormality. See Figs. 7-11 of Aoki, and the claim 27 rejection statement above), in response to a transition (gait-cycle phase transition, see lines 3-8 of [0069] of Han) between consecutive walking states being determined not to be performed (“Is Lower Link Swinging” S202, Fig. 9 of Aoki).
Regarding claim 32, the modified Sankai/Aoki method discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processor (computer executing the program of control device 20C of Sankai, as modified by controller 40 of Aoki in the claim 27 rejection statement above), cause the processor to perform the method of claim 27 (a controlling program for causing the computer to execute the method is stored in a storage device of the control device, see the first sentence of [0119] of Sankai).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 26, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the argument that the Sankai/Caires/Han device in the 103 rejection(s) fails to disclose the invention as recited in the amended claims (see pages 6-7 of the Remarks), this argument has been considered but it is moot because the claims are currently rejected as being unpatentable over Sankai in view of Aoki.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Seto et al. (2001/0029343) discloses a related wearable muscular-force supplementing device that has a sensor to detect the attitude of the user, and stop generation of assistive torque when it is detected that the user is in a dangerous attitude, such as falling down.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1473. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:30 (Eastern).
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER E MILLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785