DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This action is responsive to the amendment filed 08/29/2025. Claims 1 and 3-10 remain pending.
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 1, 3-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Witte (US 2018/0125738 A1) in view of Liu (CN 109730904) as provided in the IDS dated 11/15/2021, Cuban (WO 2018/090047 A1) and Rastegar (US 2006/0046910 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Witte discloses an ankle assisting exoskeleton device (par 0009) comprising: an actuator (#130/120 fig 1) configured to be behind a user's waist (see fig 1); a lower limb support (#320, 350, 360, 310, 330 fig 3, strap placed around calf in fig 3, and foot support see Witte annotated fig 3 below); and a cable (#340 fig 3, par 0034 “Bowden cable 340”) including a first end connected to the actuator (see fig 1 showing one end of cable attached to actuator #130/120, par 0035 discloses a similar actuation connection for the embodiments of fig 3) and a second end (end of cable connected to lower limb support, see fig 1 and fig 3), wherein the lower limb support comprises: a calf ring configured to encircle the user's calf (see strap placed around calf in fig 3, par 0034 “shin strap”); a link assembly attached to the calf ring and extending downwards (#350 fig 3, par 0034 "shank frame"); a foot support (see Witte annotated fig 3 below) configured to at least partially surround the user’s foot, the foot support including a hinge (see Witte annotated fig 3 below) between a front end of the foot support and a rear end of the foot support (see Witte annotated fig 3 below) connecting the foot support to a lower end of the link assembly (see fig 3 showing the hinge as the connection point between the foot support and the link assembly #350), wherein the foot support is connected at the rear end of the foot support to the second end of the cable (see Witte annotated fig 3 below and fig 3 showing the cable connected to rear end through spring 360) so that the actuator can apply an upward pull to the rear end through the cable (par 0033 “the motor 130 is configured to provide a tension to the cable 140” thus disclosing the actuator pulling the rear end of the foot support upward by use of the cable), to drive the user's foot to rotate around an ankle joint through an upward pulling force exerted on the user's sole (par 0037 “the foot section has a lever arm posterior to the ankle that wraps around the heel. The Bowden cable pulls up on this lever while the Bowden cable conduit presses down on the shank section. This results in an upward force beneath the user's heel … generating a plantarflexion torque”); and wherein the rear end of the foot support is configured to be located behind the user's heel (see Witte annotated fig 3 reinserted below); a sole pulling U-shaped loop (#310 fig 3) connected to the foot support, the sole pulling U-shaped loop being configured to pull the user’s sole (par 0034 “contacts the heel 310 using a string”).
PNG
media_image1.png
660
554
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Witte annotated fig 3
Witte is silent to the actuator being configured to be worn behind a user’s waist, and is further silent to the front end of the foot support being configured to clamp the user’s foot in a vertical direction.
Liu teaches a similar assisting exoskeleton (abstract) with an actuator (#2 fig 1-3, 5, par 0012) configured to be worn behind a user's waist (par 0010 ln 3-5 discloses the waist, fig 1-3 show the actuator behind where a user’s waist would be/on the backside of the body); a lower limb support (#9-11 fig 1-3); a cable (#6 fig 1-3, par 0033 ln 2-3 “ankle joint flexible shaft 6”) and a strap (#1104 fig 10) attached to the front end of the foot support configured to clamp the user's foot in a vertical direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize a waist worn actuator as taught by Liu instead of a tethered actuation system of Witte, as having the actuator worn on a user’s waist allows for the exoskeleton to be portable to assist a user’s ankle in a variety of locations/situations. It would have further been obvious to incorporate the strap of Liu onto the front ends of the foot support of Witte in order to better secure a user’s foot to the foot support.
Modified Witte remains silent to the sole pulling U-shaped loop being connected to the foot support between the rear end of the foot support and the hinge instead showing the sole pulling U-shaped loop being connected to the foot support in the vicinity of the hinge.
Cuban teaches a leg support exoskeleton device (abstract) the device having a foot support (#221/223 fig 56-57) having a front end (#223 fig 56-57) and a rear end (#221 fig 56-57) connected to a link assembly (#180 fig 56-57) via a hinge (#503 fig 56-57) and a sole pulling component (#224 fig 56-57) connected to the foot support between the rear end of the foot support and the hinge (see fig 56-57 showing the sole pulling component being connected to the foot support between the hinge and the rear end behind the heel).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the sole pulling U-shaped loop of Witte be connected to the foot support between the rear end and the hinge as taught by Cuban as doing so produces the predictable results of allowing the sole pulling component to provide contact with the user’s heel and further as a simple rearrangement of parts involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04.VI.C).
Modified Witte is lastly silent to a torsion spring disposed between the lower end of the link assembly and the foot sport at the hinge, the torsion spring being configured to apply a first torque to the foot support causing the front end to be lifted upwards.
Rastegar teaches a device for rehabilitation a joint (abstract) such as the ankle (par 0022) that includes a link assembly (#133 fig 9-10), a foot support (#134 fig 9-10), and a torsion spring (#136 fig 10, par 0078 torsional spring) disposed between the lower end of the link assembly and the foot support at the hinge (at hinge connection 135 fig 9-10).
It is unclear from the disclosure of Rastegar the direction the torsion spring is configured to apply a toque to the foot support. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the torsional spring of Rastegar onto the device of modified Witte in order to apply a torque to the foot support causing the front end to be lifted upwards, as a torsional spring acting in this direction can prevent drop foot thus preventing the front of the foot/foot support from scraping or colliding with the ground when walking.
Modified Witte does not expressly disclose the link assembly only receives a second torque that makes the link assembly rotate around the foot support such the link assembly will only exert normal forces perpendicular to a skin surface of the user's calf without applying tangential forces to the skin surface of the user's calf. However, modified Witte discloses the same structure as the instant invention (note specifically that modified Witte has the sole-pulling loop between the hinge and the rear as taught by Cuban), thus the claimed only normal forces are viewed as inherent of modified Witte.
Further, where … the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, the PTO can require an applicant to prove that the prior art products do not necessarily or inherently possess the characteristics of his claimed product. Whether the rejection is based on “inherency” under 35 USC § 102, on prima facie obviousness” under 35 USC § 103, jointly or alternatively, the burden of proof is the same, and its fairness is evidenced by the PTO’s inability to manufacture products or to obtain and compare prior art products.” In re Best, 562 F2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433-4 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding claim 3, modified Witte discloses the device of claim 1. Witte further discloses the foot support comprises a pair of support arms (fig 3 shows one side of the foot with a foot support arm, fig 5 shows the foot support component is present on both the medial side of the foot and the lateral side of the foot thus disclosing two support arms) connecting the rear end of the foot support to the front end of the foot support on left and right sides (Witte annotated fig 3, reinserted below, shows a connection between the rear and front ends, as fig 5 shows foot supporting arms both medially and laterally the connection is on both the left and right sides of the foot), the front end being composed of support arm front ends (see Witte annotated fig 3 reinserted below) of the pair of support arms.
PNG
media_image1.png
660
554
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Reinserted Witte annotated fig 3
Witte is silent to an instep strap attached to the support arm front ends; the instep strap being configured to partially cover the user's instep.
Liu teaches an instep strap (#1104 fig 10) attached to the front end of the foot support; the instep strap being configured to at least partially cover the user’s instep (due to the location of the instep strap on the foot support the strap is seen as being configured to partially cover a user’s instep).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the instep strap of Liu onto the front ends of the supporting arms of Witte in order to better secure a user’s foot to the foot support.
Regarding claim 4, modified Witte discloses the device of claim 1. Witte further discloses the link assembly comprises a pair of connecting rods arranged on left and right sides of the foot support (#350 fig 3, fig 5 shows the connecting rods are present on both the medial side of the foot support and the lateral side of the foot support thus disclosing two connecting rods on left and right sides of the foot support), each of the connecting rods including an upper end and a lower end (upper end is end connected to element 320, lower end connected to the hinge), the pair of connecting rods being respectively attached to left and right sides of the calf ring (#320 fig 3 shows the connecting rods being attached to the calf ring 320) at the upper ends and respectively hinged to the foot support at the lower ends (see hinge of Witte annotated fig 3 reinserted below).
PNG
media_image1.png
660
554
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Reinserted Witte annotated fig 3
Regarding claim 5, modified Witte discloses the device of claim 4. Witte further discloses the link assembly comprises a support block (see Witte annotated fig 3 above) connecting the pair of connecting rods with each other along a partial height of the link assembly.
Regarding claim 6, modified Witte discloses the device of claim 1. Witte further discloses a sleeve around the cable allowing the cable to slide therein (par 0034 discloses cable 340 as Bowden cables thus disclosing an outer sleeve that the cable slides within), the sleeve being fixed to the actuator at an upper end of the sleeve (fig 1 shows the cable being connected to the motor at its upper end thus disclosing that the cable sleeve of the embodiments of fig 3 would connect to the motor/actuator at its upper end as well in order to function as intended) and connected to the lower limb support at a lower end of the sleeve (par 0034 “Bowden cable 340 conduit attaches to the shank frame 350”).
Regarding claim 7, modified Witte discloses the device of claim 6. Witte further discloses the link assembly comprises a support block (see Witte annotated fig 3 reinserted below) connecting a pair of connecting rods with each other along a partial height of the link assembly, the lower limb support further comprises a sleeve base (#380 fig 3) hinged to the support block, and the sleeve is fixed to the sleeve base at the lower end of the sleeve (par 0034 “Bowden cable 340 conduit attaches to the shank frame 350” “a hollow carbon fiber Bowden cable support 380”).
PNG
media_image1.png
660
554
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Reinserted Witte annotated fig 3
Regarding claim 8, modified Witte discloses the device of claim 1. Witte further discloses one or more sensors configured to detect the user's biological signal (par 0043 discloses sensing ankle angle and foot contact, Examiner notes instant spec pg 8 discloses biological signals as “for example foot movement, foot angle, foot acceleration”) and the pulling force applied by the cable to the foot support (par 0011 discloses a torque sensor to measure second force, par 0010 discloses the second force is force from cable on frame) in real time (par 0012 discloses real-time); and a controller configured to use a detected data from the sensors to control the pulling force applied by the cable to the foot support in real time (par 0012, 0033 “the motor 130 is controlled by the motor controller 120, which receives data from the one or more sensors (e.g., torque sensors, not shown) that are attached to the exoskeleton end-effector 150. The motor controller 120 uses the data that is received to control the motor 130 to apply tension to the cable 140 at specific times and thus apply torque to the joint of the exoskeleton end-effector 150 and assist the user”).
Regarding claim 10, modified Witte discloses the device of claim 1. Witte is silent to one actuator, two independent lower limb supports that are configured to be respectively worn on the user's left and right legs, and two cables respectively correlated to the two lower limb supports.
Liu teaches one actuator (#2 fig 1-3, 5, par 0012), two independent lower limb supports that are configured to be respectively worn on the user's left and right legs (#9-11 fig 1-3), and two cables respectively correlated to the two lower limb supports (#6 fig 1-3, par 0033 ln 2-3 “ankle joint flexible shaft 6”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate additional lower limb supports and cables as taught by Liu onto the device of modified Witte as having a second limb support and cable allows the device to assist both the left and right ankle rather than only one ankle.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Witte as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Geffard (US 2020/0281799 A1).
Regarding claim 9, modified Witte discloses the device of claim 1. Modified Witte is silent to the actuator is provided with a roller around which the cable is wound, a motor configured to drive the roller to rotate, and a transmission that transmits power between the motor and the roller, and the ankle assisting exoskeleton device further comprises a power supply configured to be worn in front of the user's waist for supplying power to various power-consuming components.
Geffard teaches a similar cable exoskeleton device (abstract, par 0026 “cable 44”) that includes an actuator (#41, 50, 40, 42, 43 fig 1, par 0026 “motor 40”) wherein the actuator is provided with a roller (#43 fig 1,3) around which the cable is wound (par 0026 winding pulley), a motor (#40 fig 1, 4, par 0026 “electric geared motor 40”) configured to drive the roller to rotate (par 0033 “a rotation of the geared motor 40, which acts on the cable 44 in order to adapt the length of deployed cable”), and a transmission (#42 fig 3) that transmits power between the motor and the roller (par 0026 “output shaft 42 carries a winding pulley 43”), and the device further comprises a power supply (#41 fig 1, par 0026 “motor 40, which is powered by accumulators 41”) configured to be worn in front of the user's waist (see fig 1 showing power supply 41 in front of a user’s waist) for supplying power to various power-consuming components (par 0026 “motor 40, which is powered by accumulators 41”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the roller actuation system of Geffard to apply the tension/pulling on the cable of modified Witte as the system of Geffard allows for the device to consume little power in some configurations (Geffard par 0034).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Applicant asserts that the device of Witte does not achieve the amended limitations regarding normal forces (see pages 7-14 of the response filed 08/29/2025). However, applicant’s arguments rely on Witte without the incorporation of the modifications as taught by Cuban, Rastegar and Liu. Applicant’s assertions appear to be dependent upon Witte’s disclosure of the sole pulling loop being connected at the hinge point. However, modified Witte has the sole pulling loop relocated to a point between the hinge and the rear. Applicant’s assertions and force diagrams fail to make arguments regarding this modified Witte device and thus it is seen that modified Witte achieves the claimed torque/normal forces.
Applicant further makes specific assertions regarding each of the references individually but fails to show that reference combined fail to achieve the claimed device (see pg 15-19 of the response filed 08/29/2025)
Additionally, applicant makes assertions reliant on the embodiment of fig 13 of Rastegar. However, the rejections rely on the embodiment of fig 9-10 of Rastegar NOT fig 13.
Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the examiner upholds the rejections.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wiggin (US 2013/0046218 A1) discloses an ankle apparatus with a pulling force exerted behind the heel
(KR 20170000928 A) discloses an ankle apparatus with a pulling force behind the heel
Chang (CN 107126348 A) discloses an ankle apparatus with a cable connected behind the heel
Asbeck (US 2018/0008502 A1) discloses a similar cable actuated ankle assistance device
Zhang (US 2017/0340506 A1) discloses a similar cable actuated ankle assistance device
De Rossi (US 2017/0202724 A1) discloses a similar cable actuated ankle assistance device
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 KIRA B DAHER whose telephone number is (571)270-0190. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Brandy Lee can be reached on (571) 270-7410. 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.
/K.B.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785