DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claim 2-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101).
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “…is located above an upper part of a gluteus maximus of the human body…” and “…is located adjacent to a lower part of a rear part of the gluteus maximus of the human body…” is directed to or encompasses a human organism. While it may be unintended by applicant, the phrasing of the limitations recites and claims a gluteus maximus of a human body and thus is ineligible subject matter. Applicant is advised to amend the claim to recite “…is configured to be located above an upper part of a gluteus maximus of the human body…” and “…is configured to be located adjacent to a lower part of a rear part of the gluteus maximus of the human body…” in order to avoid claiming the gluteus maximus/human body itself.
Similar arguments can be made for claim 5. The limitations should recite that the exoskeleton device is configured to be positioned on the body with a particular orientation to the body parts, rather than phrasing which may also claim the body part.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (WO 2018117243 A1) in view of Polygerinos (U.S 2020/0376650 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kobayashi discloses a human body supporting exoskeleton device (Paragraphs 0001-0008) comprising:
a pair of left and right base sections that have a first axis corresponding to a leg axis of a human body and a second axis corresponding to a hip axis of the human body, respectively, and have a wire guide at each of the first axis and the second axis (Paragraph 0016, 0018 and Figs. 1-2, 5; the exoskeleton device 10 includes a pair of left and right base portions 12 that are positioned at the hip and extend along the leg; The base portions correspond to the axis of the hips and the axis extending down through the legs; also see Paragraph 0018-0021, 0025, the base sections include pulleys 28 and 30 which guide a wire to provide assistive motive forces);
an upper body mounting section that supports the pair of left and right base sections, is located along the upper body of the user at a back of the user, and is tiltably attached to the base sections (Paragraph 0016 and Figs. 1-2, 5; Upper body side frame 18 includes mounting sections 42 which engage the shoulders and are arranged at the back of the user and supports the left and right base portions 12 at the sides of the waist; The upper body side frame and the straps are tiltably attached to the base parts 12);
leg mounting sections that are mounted on legs of the user and tiltably attached to the pair of left and right base sections (thigh arms 16, see Paragraph 0016 and Figs. 1-2, 5; the thigh arms 16 engage the legs and are tiltably attached to the base parts 12 to allow movement and assistive motion through the pulling of the artificial muscles/wires);
a hip belt that is connected to the base sections and mounted to a site near a pelvis of the human body (Paragraph 0016 and Figs. 1-2, 5; waist belt 14 is connected to the base portions 12 and is worn around the waist);
a pair of left and right actuator containers that are located in the upper body mounting section and contain respective actuators (Paragraph 0024-0029, the upper body side frame 18 includes a pair of artificial muscle mounting parts 38 with artificial muscles 20; Air supplied into tube 44 of the muscles allows for contraction of the muscle and thus actuation of the pulleys to assist in movement of the legs/torso);
the actuators contained in the actuator containers (see Paragraph 0024-0029, the artificial muscles are location within the mounting portions); and
a pair of left and right wires that are each provided between the corresponding actuator and the corresponding leg mounting section, the left and right wires being guided by the wire guides to pull the leg mounting sections toward the actuators by driving of the actuators so that the upper body mounting section is tilted toward the base sections and the leg mounting sections are tilted toward the base sections, thereby propagating an urging force in a direction in which the human body is heaved upright to the human body via the upper body mounting section and the leg mounting sections (Paragraph 0018-0020, 0026-0031, 0035; left and right wires are provided between the actuators and the leg mounting sections, which are guided by the pulleys to direct driving of the forces generated by the actuators to move the thigh arms and body portion relative to each other and thus can be driven towards each other), wherein
the upper body mounting section has an upper body frame that includes one component located in an upper part of the human body supporting exoskeleton device (Figs. 1-2, 5; the upper body straps are attached to the upper body side frame 18 which includes the actuator components in the upper part of the frame), has the actuator containers, and is directly connected to the pair of left and right base sections (see Figs. 1-2, 5 and Paragraphs 0016-0030, the actuators are contained within the frame 18, and directly connect to the base sections 12 to allow tilting of the two relative to each other),
Kobayashi is silent regarding specifically wherein a ratio of weight of the human body supporting exoskeleton device to the urging force in a direction in which the user is heaved upright is 6 kgf/kg or more.
However, Polygerinos teaches that exosuits and exoskeleton lifting devices should have a high assistance/urging force to weight ratio, and that the actuators are provided to have a high ratio of 211.5 N/g (Paragraph 0004, 0042, 0057, the exosuit actuators are provided to have a high assistive force of 550N for a 2.6g actuator; 211.5 N is approximately 21.56 kgf for a 1 kg mass). Polygerinos additionally teaches a lightweight construction of the rest of the device to provide minimal load on the user (Paragraph 0036, 0047).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the prior art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Kobayashi to have included making the assist force to weight ratio of the device high and greater than 6kgf/kg, such as that taught by Polygerinos, in order to provide a high degree of assistance to the user in lifts/mobility while burdening the user with minimal load from the device (0002-0004).
Regarding claim 4, the modified device of Kobayashi discloses the device of claim 1.
Kobayashi further discloses wherein the upper body frame has an inverted V-shape with an apex in the center, and ends of upper body mounting belts to be mounted to left and right shoulders of the human body, respectively, are engaged on the apex (see Fig. 1 and 5-6; The upper body frame has an inverted V-shape formed of mounting parts 38 that meet at an apex portion in the center, connected by wire; Belts/straps 42L/R are to be placed on the left and right shoulders the support the frame and are engaged/attached at the apex).
Regarding claim 7, the modified device of Kobayashi discloses the device of claim 1.
Kobayashi further discloses an adjuster capable of adjusting the urging force from the actuators (Paragraph 0016, 0032; Control device 60 controls the supply of air to the artificial muscles 20 and thus adjusts the urging force of the actuators; Switches 64A-C activate solenoid valves which allow for inflation/deflation of the muscles and thus adjustment of the force exterted).
Claims 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (WO 2018117243 A1) in view of Polygerinos (U.S 2020/0376650 A1), as applied to claim 1, in further view of Grenier (U.S 10,766,134 B2) and Hisataka (JP 2018199209).
Regarding claim 2, the modified device of Kobayashi discloses the device of claim 1.
Kobayashi is silent regarding wherein the hip belt comprises: an upper hip belt that connects upper parts of target fixation parts respectively fixed to the pair of left and right base sections and is located above an upper part of a gluteus maximus of the human body and a lower hip belt that connects lower parts of the target fixation parts and is located adjacent to a lower part of a rear part of the gluteus maximus of the human body.
However, Misataka teaches an exoskeleton device which includes a hip belt with an upper hip belt that connects upper parts of target fixation parts respectively fixed to the pair of left and right base sections and is located above an upper part of a gluteus maximus of the human body and a lower belt portion which is connected to lower parts of fixation adjacent a lower part of a rear part of the gluteus maximus of the human body (see Paragraph 0026, 0037-0038, 0040; The exoskeleton device has a waist belt 13 which has an upper and lower strap sections of the hip belt which are positioned above and below the gluteus maximus of the body; see Figs. 1-10, the hip belt has strap segments 16A-C which span across the lower back and across the gluteus maximus).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the prior art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Kobayashi to have included a hip belt with upper and lower portions about the gluteus maximus of the body, such as that taught by Misataka, in order to provide a known attachment layout for better engagement of the exoskeleton to the user (Paragraph 0026, 0037-0038, 0040).
Regarding claim 5, the modified device of Kobayashi discloses the device of claim 2.
Kobayashi further discloses wherein in an initial state where the human body supporting exoskeleton device is mounted to the human body, settings for the actuators are made so that the upper body mounting section is inclined with respect to the base sections, from a position of a hip of the human body upwardly and away from the back of the human body (see Fig. 7 and Paragraph 0040; In an initial state of the exoskeleton worn by the user before contraction of the artificial muscles, the upper body mounting section is inclined with respect to the base sections upwardly and away from the back of the human body; Fig. 7, the upper body mounting portion extends backward away from the back of the user with respect to the base sections at the hips).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (WO 2018117243 A1) in view of Polygerinos (U.S 2020/0376650 A1), as applied to claim 1, in further view of Sodeyama (U.S 2017/03060645 A1).
Regarding claim 6, the modified device of Kobayashi discloses the device of claim 1.
Kobayashi is silent regarding wherein the upper body frame is integrally molded with resin.
However, Sodeyama teaches wherein frame portions of an exoskeleton device is configured to have an integral structure and can be made with resin (Paragraph 0094; also see Paragraph 0110, 0165, 0174, 0189; The frame can be made integral with resin or resin members).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the prior art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Kobayashi to include integrally molding the upper body frame with resin, such as that taught by Sodeyama, in order to provide a known method and material for connecting frame portions of the device (Paragraph 0094).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and with the overcoming of the 101 rejection of claim 2.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 3, the modified device of Kobayashi discloses the device of claim 2.
The closest prior art is Kobayashi (WO 2018117243 A1) and Grenier (U.S 10,766,134 B2) and Hisataka (JP 2018199209) and Carvey (U.S 2005/0251079 A1) and Sugar (U.S 2014/0200715 A1) and Hollander (U.S 2014/0330431 A1).
None of the prior art teaches or suggest the combination of limitations of claim 3. The prior art teaches several configurations of hip straps and/or hip engagement portions but do not teach or suggest wherein the upper hip belt has a fixed length while a lower hip belt has an adjustable length. The strap arrangements of Hisataka and Grenier for example have straps which are all adjustable, rather than a mix of fixed length and adjustable length straps. Arbitrarily making one of such straps fixed length would inhibit the adjustability to fit the exosuit to the user and would not be obvious without impermissible hindsight.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS WILLIAM GREIG whose telephone number is (571)272-5378. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday: 7:30AM - 5:00PM.
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, Kendra Carter can be reached at 571-272-9034. 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.
/THOMAS W GREIG/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/JOSEPH D. BOECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785