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 .
This action is in response to the filing on 11/9/2025. Since the previous filing, claims 11, 15 and 16 have been amended, claims 20 and 22 have been cancelled and no claims have been added. Thus, claims 1-3, 5-12, 14-19, 23, 25 and 29-31 are pending in the application.
In regards to the previous 112 Rejections, Applicant has cancelled the relevant claims, rendering these rejections moot and they are therefore withdrawn.
In regards to the previous 102 and 103 Rejections, Applicant’s amendments and arguments are not sufficient to overcome the previous art and these rejections are maintained, modified for the amendments when necessary, below.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5-12, 14-16, 19, 25 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by de Panisse (US 2018/0266820).
In regards to claim 1, de Panisse discloses a tremor stabilization apparatus (Fig 1) comprising: a housing that is attachable to a part of a user's body (gyroscopic device 11 mounted on back of user’s hand 12, paragraph 40, Fig 1), and a rotatable flywheel assembly mounted to the housing, the rotatable flywheel assembly comprising: a rotatable flywheel (gyroscopic disc 20); a prime mover arranged to rotate the flywheel about a flywheel rotation axis (DC motor 21); and a gimbal to which the flywheel is attached (gyroscopic table 24), the gimbal being pivotally mounted to the housing at a hinge formed between the gimbal and the housing (hinge 25) and defining a precession axis such that the flywheel can precess with respect to the housing about the precession axis, the precession axis being fixed relative to the housing (Fig 3b); wherein the tremor stabilization apparatus further comprises a biasing member arranged to oppose precession of the rotatable flywheel assembly and urge the rotatable flywheel assembly to an equilibrium position (paragraph 44-45).
In regards to claim 3, de Panisse teaches the device of claim 2 and de Panisse further discloses wherein the housing comprises a stop arranged to contact the gimbal when the gimbal is rotated to the maximum angle of precession (dampers limit precession angle, paragraph 44-45).
In regards to claim 5, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 1 and de Panisse further discloses wherein the biasing member is arranged between the gimbal and the housing, and wherein the tremor stabilization apparatus further comprises an elastomeric damper disposed between the biasing member and the housing (paragraph 44).
In regards to claim 6, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 1 and de Panisse discloses wherein the biasing member is configured to increase a biasing force provided by the biasing member as the angle of precession increases (paragraph 45).
In regards to claim 7, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 1 and de Panisse further discloses wherein the biasing member comprises a spring (paragraph 45).
In regards to claim 8, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 1 and de Panisse further discloses wherein the biasing member is arranged between the gimbal and the housing, and wherein the biasing member comprises a magnetic assembly comprising: a first magnet attached to the gimbal, and a second magnet attached to the housing such that the first and second magnets repel each other (paragraph 45).
In regards to claim 9, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 1 and de Panisse further discloses wherein a side of the housing comprises a mount for attachment of the tremor stabilization apparatus to the part of the user's body (Fig 1), the side of the housing defining a plane that is approximately parallel to a surface of the part of the user's body, and wherein in the equilibrium position an angle between the flywheel rotational axis and a normal line from the plane of the side of the housing is between about +45 degrees and about -45 degrees (see Annotated Fig 3a-c).
PNG
media_image1.png
416
572
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 3a-c
In regards to claim 10, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 1 and de Panisse further discloses wherein the biasing member comprises an adjustable force biasing member comprising an actuator for adjusting the biasing force provided by the adjustable force biasing member, and wherein the tremor stabilization apparatus further comprises a controller arranged to control the actuator to adjust the biasing force (control circuit 23 controls motor 21, paragraph 41, and motor may be used to control precession, paragraph 45).
In regards to claim 11, de Panisse discloses a tremor stabilization apparatus (Fig 1) comprising: a housing that is attachable to a part of a user's body (gyroscopic device 11 mounted on back of user’s hand 12, paragraph 40, Fig 1), and a rotatable flywheel assembly mounted to the housing, the rotatable flywheel assembly comprising: a rotatable flywheel (gyroscopic disc 20); a prime mover arranged to rotate the flywheel about a flywheel rotation axis (DC motor 21); and a gimbal to which the flywheel is attached (gyroscopic table 24), the gimbal being pivotally mounted to the housing at a hinge formed between the gimbal and the housing (hinge 25) and defining a precession axis such that the flywheel can precess with respect to the housing about the precession axis, the precession axis being fixed relative to the housing (Fig 3b); wherein the tremor stabilization apparatus further comprises an adjustable force biasing member arranged to oppose precession of the rotatable flywheel assembly and urge the rotatable flywheel assembly to an equilibrium position (paragraph 44-45); wherein the adjustable force biasing member comprises an actuator for adjusting the biasing force provided by the adjustable force biasing member; and wherein the tremor stabilization apparatus further comprises a controller arranged to control the actuator to adjust the biasing force (control circuit 23 controls motor 21, paragraph 41, and motor may be used to control precession, paragraph 45).
In regards to claim 12, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 11 and de Panisse further discloses further comprising a sensor arranged to detect a characteristic of a movement of the part of the user's body to which the tremor stabilization apparatus is attached in use, and wherein the controller is configured to receive a signal from the sensor and control the biasing force of the adjustable force biasing member based on the detected characteristic (paragraph 19).
In regards to claim 14, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 11 and de Panisse further discloses further comprising a sensor arranged to detect rotation of the flywheel about the precession axis, and wherein the controller is configured to receive a signal from the sensor and control the biasing force of the adjustable force biasing member based on the detected rotation of the flywheel about the precession axis (paragraph 95).
In regards to claim 15, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 11 and de Panisse further discloses further comprising: a prime mover controller configured to control the prime mover and the rotational speed of the flywheel about the flywheel rotation axis (control circuit 23 controls motor 21, paragraph 41, and motor may be used to control precession, paragraph 45), and a sensor arranged to detect one or both of: a characteristic of a movement of the part of the user's body to which the tremor stabilization apparatus is attached in use (paragraph 19); and/or, rotation of the flywheel about the precession axis (paragraph 95); wherein the prime mover controller is configured to receive a signal from the sensor or sensors and control the rotational speed of the flywheel based on one or both of: the detected characteristic of a movement of the part of the user's body; and rotation of the flywheel about the precession axis (paragraph 41 and 69 and 95).
In regards to claim 16, de Panisse discloses a tremor stabilization apparatus (Fig 1) comprising: a housing that is attachable to a part of a user's body (gyroscopic device 11 mounted on back of user’s hand 12, paragraph 40, Fig 1), and a rotatable flywheel assembly mounted to the housing, the rotatable flywheel assembly comprising: a rotatable flywheel (gyroscopic disc 20); a prime mover arranged to rotate the flywheel about a flywheel rotation axis (DC motor 21); a gimbal to which the flywheel is attached (gyroscopic table 24), the gimbal being pivotally mounted to the housing at a hinge formed between the gimbal and the housing (hinge 25) and defining a precession axis such that the flywheel can precess with respect to the housing about the precession axis, the precession axis being fixed relative to the housing (Fig 3b); a controller configured to control the prime mover and the rotational speed of the flywheel about the flywheel rotation axis (control circuit 23 controls motor 21, paragraph 41, and motor may be used to control precession, paragraph 45); and a sensor arranged to detect one or both of: a characteristic of a movement of the part of the user's body to which the tremor stabilization apparatus is attached in use (paragraph 19); and/or rotation of the flywheel about the precession axis (paragraph 95); wherein the controller is configured to receive a signal from the sensor and control the rotational speed of the flywheel based on the detected characteristic of a movement of the part of the user's body; and rotation of the flywheel about the precession axis (paragraph 41 and 69 and 95).
In regards to claim 19, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 16 and de Panisse further discloses wherein the gimbal comprises a mounting portion for attachment of the flywheel, and a hinge portion (hinge plate 30) extending radially of the mounting portion to cooperate with a hinge seat of the housing (turntable 31) to form the hinge defining the precession axis (paragraph 42).
In regards to claim 25, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 16 and de Panisse further discloses wherein the flywheel comprises a central disc portion and a circumferential skirt extending in an axial direction of the flywheel rotation axis, the circumferential skirt defining a recessed cavity (see Annotated Fig 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
153
307
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 2
In regards to claim 29, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 16 and de Panisse further discloses wherein the prime mover comprises an electric motor having one or more of: a brushless electric motor; a brushless DC motor (paragraph 41).
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) 2, 18 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over de Panisse (US 2018/0266820).
In regards to claim 2, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 1.
While de Panisse does not explicitly disclose wherein the housing and the gimbal are arranged to provide a maximum angle of precession about the precession axis from the equilibrium position of about 60 degrees or less, preferably about 30 degrees or less, more preferably about 10 degrees, most preferably about 5 degrees, it does show wherein the precession about the precession axis is about 30 degrees (Fig 3b). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify de Panisse wherein the maximum angle of precession about the precession axis from the equilibrium position of about 30 degrees or less as taught by de Panisse as figures may be relied upon for what they may reasonably teach one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2125).
In regards to claim 18, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 16 and de Panisse further discloses wherein the prime mover controller is configured to control an acceleration and/or deceleration of the flywheel (paragraph 41 and 69).
While de Panisse does not explicitly disclose that acceleration and/or deceleration of the flywheel is based on the detected characteristic, it does teach that precession of the flywheel is based on the tremor (paragraph 43).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify de Panisse wherein acceleration and/or deceleration of the flywheel is based on the detected characteristic as taught by de Panisse as this would allow the device to most effectively provide support for the patient according to their needs.
In regards to claim 31, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 16 and de Panisse further discloses wherein the prime mover comprises an electric motor, preferably a DC motor (paragraph 41), and the tremor stabilization apparatus comprises a controller configured to control the electric motor (control circuitry 23, paragraph 41).
While de Panisse does not explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to brake the electric motor in pulses to reduce braking torque generated by the flywheel during braking, it does teach the controller is configured to control the speed of the flywheel in order to control the torque of the flywheel (paragraph 69). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify de Panisse wherein the controller is configured to brake the electric motor in pulses to reduce braking torque generated by the flywheel during braking as taught by de Panisse as this would allow the precise control of the flywheel torque in order to ensure that the applied treatment is accurate to the needs of the user.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over de Panisse (US 2018/0266820) in view of Rosenbluth (US 2015/0321000).
In regards to claim 17, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 16.
de Panisse does not disclose wherein the characteristic of a movement of the part of the user's body comprises a tremor characteristic of the part of the user's body, for example a tremor amplitude, a tremor frequency, and/or a tremor acceleration.
However, Rosenbluth teaches wherein the characteristic of a movement of the part of the user's body comprises a tremor characteristic of the part of the user's body, for example a tremor amplitude, a tremor frequency, and/or a tremor acceleration (paragraph 178 and 205).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify de Panisse wherein the characteristic of a movement of the part of the user's body comprises a tremor characteristic of the part of the user's body, for example a tremor amplitude, a tremor frequency, and/or a tremor acceleration as taught by Rosenbluth as this would allow the device to respond to the needs of the user to provide the best support.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over de Panisse (US 2018/0266820) in view of Quermann (US 4838099).
In regards to claim 23, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 16.
de Panisse does not disclose wherein one of the gimbal and the housing comprises a ball, and the other of the gimbal and the housing comprises a socket adapted to receive the ball, and wherein the ball is configured to rotate within the socket to define the precession axis.
However, Quermann teaches wherein one of the gimbal and the housing comprises a ball (ball 13), and the other of the gimbal and the housing comprises a socket adapted to receive the ball (Fig 1), and wherein the ball is configured to rotate within the socket to define the precession axis (column 1 line 64-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify de Panisse wherein one of the gimbal and the housing comprises a ball, and the other of the gimbal and the housing comprises a socket adapted to receive the ball, and wherein the ball is configured to rotate within the socket to define the precession axis as taught by Quermann as this is a known configuration by which to provide a gimbal freedom of movement to respond to the motion of the device which contains it.
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over de Panisse (US 2018/0266820) in view of Hoffman (US 2007/0247009).
In regards to claim 30, de Panisse discloses the device of claim 16 and de Panisse further discloses wherein the prime mover comprises a motor (DC motor 21, paragraph 41).
de Panisse does not disclose wherein the motor includes a motor housing and a motor mount wherein the motor housing is mounted within the motor mount; wherein the motor housing is generally axially cylindrical about an output shaft of the motor and includes a plurality of co-planar tabs extending radially therefrom and substantially uniformly spaced; wherein each tab is located within a corresponding slot formed in a correspondingly cylindrical inner surface of the motor mount; wherein each slot has a dimension greater than that of the corresponding tab in a circumferential direction, wherein a biasing member is provided between a corresponding face of each tab and an adjacent wall of the cylindrical surface of the motor mount.
However, Hoffman teaches wherein the motor includes a motor housing (housing 12) and a motor mount (mounting frame 120) wherein the motor housing is mounted within the motor mount (Fig 9-10); wherein the motor housing is generally axially cylindrical about an output shaft of the motor (Fig 6) and includes a plurality of co-planar tabs extending radially therefrom and substantially uniformly spaced (suspension mounts 108); wherein each tab is located within a corresponding slot formed in a correspondingly cylindrical inner surface of the motor mount (mounting frame 120 has mounting slots 122 into which terminus end 112 of suspension mounts 108 may be engaged, paragraph 67); wherein each slot has a dimension greater than that of the corresponding tab in a circumferential direction (Fig 9-10).
While Hoffman does not teach wherein a biasing member is provided between a corresponding face of each tab and an adjacent wall of the cylindrical surface of the motor mount, it does teach a biasing member between a corresponding face of each tab and an adjacent wall of the motor housing (spring members 110 of suspension mounts 108 between terminus ends 112 and housing, paragraph 67, Fig 5 and 9-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify de Panisse wherein the motor includes a motor housing and a motor mount wherein the motor housing is mounted within the motor mount; wherein the motor housing is generally axially cylindrical about an output shaft of the motor and includes a plurality of co-planar tabs extending radially therefrom and substantially uniformly spaced; wherein each tab is located within a corresponding slot formed in a correspondingly cylindrical inner surface of the motor mount; wherein each slot has a dimension greater than that of the corresponding tab in a circumferential direction, wherein a biasing member is provided between a corresponding face of each tab and an adjacent wall of the cylindrical surface of the motor mount as taught by Hoffman as this would provide a structure wherein any incidental movement of the motor would be buffered in order to prevent interference with the functionality of the device when providing treatment and the change in position of the biasing member is considered an obvious modification of a mere reversal of parts and holds no patentable weight (MPEP 2144.04 VI A).
Response to Arguments
In regards to the arguments concerning the independent claims, these arguments are not persuasive. Applicant argues that de Panisse does not teach wherein the precession axis is fixed relative to the housing. Based on the arguments, it appears that the Applicant’s intention is that the term “fixed” to mean that zero movement/translation/tilting of the precession axis are allowed. As Examiner understands, precession is a change in the orientation of the rotational axis, so if it is fixed, it would never change which would prevent any motion of the flywheel at all. Examiner’s interpretation of de Panisse has the precession axis being of a fixed height, but allowed to rotate along with the flywheel.
In regards to the arguments concerning the dependent claims, these arguments are in regards to the dependency on above argued independent claims and are addressed in the response above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Arielle Wolff whose telephone number is (571)272-8727. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-4:00.
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, 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.
/ARIELLE WOLFF/ Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/KENDRA D CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785