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
The amendment filed 3/6/2026 has been entered. Claims 56-59 have been added. Claims 1, 12, 52-59 remain pending with claims 12 and 52-55 withdrawn.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 42, 44-46, and 56-58 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr et al. (US 20150209214 A1), hereafter Herr, in view of Tsai (US 20060144986 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Herr discloses a device for assisting motion of a joint (exoskeleton 100; Fig. 1-3, par. 0077), the device comprising: a motor (motor 114; Fig. 4-5, par. 0086); a mandrel operatively coupled to the motor (spool 116 coupled to motor 114 with belt transmission T; Fig. 4-5, par. 0086); a tether operatively coupled to the mandrel (cable 112 coupled to spool 116; Fig. 4) and configured to wind onto the mandrel when the mandrel is rotated by the motor (cable 112 wraps around spool 116 which is driven by motor 114; par. 0086); a guide configured to guide the tether as it is wound onto the mandrel (rollers 117 guide the cable 112; Fig. 4, par. 0086).
Herr does not disclose wherein the guide is configured to move in a direction substantially parallel to an axial length of the mandrel; and at least one spring configured to bias the guide to a neutral position along the length of the mandrel.
Tsai teaches a guide for coiling cables (abstract ln 1-3) wherein the guide (positioning unit 22; Fig. 1, par. 0024) is configured to move in a direction substantially parallel to an axial length of the mandrel (positioning unit 22 is slidably mounted on guide rod 21; Fig. 1, par. 0024); and at least one spring configured to bias the guide to a neutral position along the length of the mandrel (recovery action of springs 23 moves the positioning unit 22 back towards the center; Fig. 1, par. 0024) for the purpose of neat and orderly coiling (par. 0021).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Herr wherein the guide is configured to move in a direction substantially parallel to an axial length of the mandrel; and at least one spring configured to bias the guide to a neutral position along the length of the mandrel as taught by Tsai for the purpose of neat and orderly coiling (Tsai par. 0021).
Regarding claim 42, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 1 (shown above), wherein the guide includes an opening configured to receive the tether (positioning unit 22 has a hose hole; Tsai Fig. 1-2, par. 0024).
Regarding claim 44, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 1 (shown above), wherein the at least one spring includes at least two springs disposed on opposing sides of the guide (springs 23 are disposed on opposing sides of the positioning unit 22; Tsai Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 45, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 1 (shown above), wherein the tether is a string, cable, or ribbon (par. 0086).
The modified Herr does not explicitly disclose wherein the tether is a rope.
However, it would have been obvious to modify the tether of Herr to be a rope as a matter of design choice since Applicant places no criticality on the tether being a rope (see par. 0055 of Applicant’s specification which states the tether can be a type of rope, flexible flat straps, or any other appropriate flexible structure).
Regarding claim 46, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 45 (shown above).
The modified Herr does not disclose wherein the rope is a braided synthetic rope.
However, it would have been obvious to modify the tether of Herr to be a braided synthetic rope as a matter of design choice since Applicant places no criticality on the tether being a braided synthetic rope (see par. 0055 of Applicant’s specification which states the tether can be braided synthetic or natural rope or wire rope).
Regarding claim 56, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 1 (shown above), wherein the at least one spring is in contact with the guide (positioning unit 22 makes temporary contact with the springs 23 at the ends of the guide rod 21; Tsai Fig. 1, par. 0024).
Regarding claim 57, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 1 (shown above), wherein: the guide is movably mounted on one or more rails extending parallel to the axial length of the mandrel (positioning unit 22 is slidably mounted on guide rod 21 which extends parallel to the axial length of the drum 1; Tsai Fig. 1); the at least one spring comprises: a first spring disposed on the at least one rail (left spring 23 on left side of guide rod 21; Tsai Fig. 1), on a first side of the guide (left spring 23 is to the left of positioning unit 22; Tsai Fig. 1); and a second spring disposed on the at least one rail (right spring 23 on right side of guide rod 21; Tsai Fig. 1), on a second side of the guide (right spring 23 is to the right of positioning unit 22; Tsai Fig. 1); and the first and second springs spanning a length of the one or more rails (springs 23 span a length of the ends of the guide rod 21; Tsai Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 58, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 57 (shown above), wherein the neutral position is a center of the one or more rails in a direction parallel to the axial length of the mandrel (recovery action of springs 23 moves the positioning unit 22 back towards the center of the guide rod 21 which is parallel to the drum 1; Tsai Fig. 1, par. 0024).
Claim(s) 43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr in view of Tsai as applied to claim 42 above, and further in view of Schmidt (WO 2020049163 A1).
Regarding claim 43, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 42 (shown above), wherein the opening of the guide is formed from guide wheels (guide wheels 24 and 25; Fig. 2, par. 0025) configured to minimize wear on the tether and a resistance to sliding motion between the tether and the guide (guide wheels prevent damage to the hose and reduce friction between the hose and positioning unit; par. 0012).
The modified Herr does not disclose the opening of the guide is made from a low friction material.
Schmidt teaches low-friction metal rings for guiding cables as an alternative to guide wheels (low friction metals rings providing low friction between the cable and ring can be used instead of pulleys; pg. 16 ln 11-15, pg. 17 ln 5-8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the opening of the guide of the modified Herr to be made from a low friction material as taught by Schmidt since Schmidt teaches a ring or opening of low friction material is an art-recognized equivalent for guide wheels or pulleys for guiding cables (Schmidt pg. 16 ln 11-15, pg. 17 ln 5-8).
Claim(s) 47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr in view of Tsai as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Witte et al. (US 20190015287 A1), hereafter Witte.
Regarding claim 47, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 1 (shown above).
The modified Herr does not disclose a tether enclosure enclosing the tether, wherein the tether enclosure extends and/or retracts as the tether is spooled on and/or off the mandrel.
Witte teaches a tether enclosure enclosing a tether (cable housing enclosing cable 214; Fig. 2, par. 0041), wherein the tether enclosure retracts when the cable is in tension (cable housing retracts from the edge of the cable when the cable is in tension as seen in inset 226 and 228 of Fig. 2; par. 0041). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that a tether enclosure, such as that of Witte, would have provided the benefit of protecting the tether from damage.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the device of Herr to include a tether enclosure which retracts as taught by Witte for the purpose of protecting the tether from damage. This modified Herr discloses the tether enclosure retracts as the tether is spooled on the mandrel since the tether would be in tension while being spooled on the mandrel (spool 116 wraps cable 112 to exert a force at the ends of cable; Herr Fig. 4, par. 0086).
Claim(s) 48-49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr, in view of Tsai, in view of Witte, as applied to claim 47 above, and further in view of Stevenson (US 20100197465 A1).
Regarding claim 48, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 47 (shown above).
The modified Herr does not disclose wherein the tether enclosure is elastic.
Stevenson teaches a tether enclosure which is elastic (suitable cable coverings include soft materials such as rubber, elastomer, textiles, and combinations thereof; par. 0022) for the purpose of preventing injury to the user in the case of a fall (par. 0022).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the tether enclosure of the modified Herr to be elastic as taught by Stevenson for the purpose of preventing injury to the user in the case of a fall (Stevenson par. 0022).
Regarding claim 49, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 48 (shown above), wherein the tether enclosure is a textile (suitable cable coverings include soft materials such as rubber, elastomer, textiles, and combinations thereof; Stevenson par. 0022).
Claim(s) 50 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr in view of Tsai as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Deng et al. (CN 209259557 U, machine translation accessed November 14, 2025 relied upon herein), hereafter Deng.
Regarding claim 50, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 1 (shown above) wherein the guide is configured to wind the tether onto the mandrel in multiple layers (Tsai Fig. 1 shows multiple layers of hose).
The modified Herr does not disclose wherein the guide is configured to wind the tether onto the mandrel in a single layer.
Deng teaches a tether (rope 7; Fig. 1) which is wound onto a mandrel in a single layer (a single layer of rope 7 is wound on the friction drum 3; par. 0007, 0018, 0031, 0040) for the purpose of providing a constant tension output of the tether (par. 0007, 0018, 0040). A single layer of rope also avoids damage to an inner layer by compression from the outer layer (par. 0005).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the device of Herr to wind the tether onto the mandrel in a single layer as taught by Deng for the purpose of providing a constant tension output and avoiding damage to the tether caused by multiple layers (Deng par. 0005, 0007, 0018, 0040).
Claim(s) 51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr, in view of Tsai, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mooney et al. (US 20180104075 A1), hereafter Mooney.
Regarding claim 51, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 1 (shown above).
The modified Herr does not disclose wherein at least the mandrel and the tether are selectively removable from the motor.
Mooney teaches a mandrel (spool 2; Fig. 3) and a tether (belt 3; Fig. 3) which are removable from the motor (motor 1, Fig. 3; the spool is detachable and the cord is replaceable, claim 11). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that a removable mandrel and tether would provide the benefit of easy replacement in the case of damage or wear.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the device of Herr to have the mandrel and the tether selectively removable from the motor as taught by Mooney for the purpose of easy replacement in the case of damage or wear.
Claim(s) 1 and 56-58 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr in view of Molz (US 6182592 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Herr discloses a device for assisting motion of a joint (exoskeleton 100; Fig. 1-3, par. 0077), the device comprising: a motor (motor 114; Fig. 4-5, par. 0086); a mandrel operatively coupled to the motor (spool 116 coupled to motor 114 with belt transmission T; Fig. 4-5, par. 0086); a tether operatively coupled to the mandrel (cable 112 coupled to spool 116; Fig. 4) and configured to wind onto the mandrel when the mandrel is rotated by the motor (cable 112 wraps around spool 116 which is driven by motor 114; par. 0086); a guide configured to guide the tether as it is wound onto the mandrel (rollers 117 guide the cable 112; Fig. 4, par. 0086).
Herr does not disclose wherein the guide is configured to move in a direction substantially parallel to an axial length of the mandrel; and at least one spring configured to bias the guide to a neutral position along the length of the mandrel.
Molz teaches a guide for winding a tether onto a mandrel (docking line onto a rotatable spool, abstract) wherein the guide is configured to move in a direction substantially parallel to an axial length of the mandrel (line alignment device 312, seen in Fig. 9-12 and shown traveling in a direction parallel to the spindle between Figs. 11-12); and at least one spring configured to bias the guide to a neutral position along the length of the mandrel (primary springs 314 and secondary springs 318 on either side of the line alignment device 312 bias the guide towards the center; Fig. 9-12, col. 11 ln 22-30, col. 4 ln 58-60) for the purpose of preventing winding of the line against a sidewall of the spool (col. 5 ln 59-65). One of ordinary skill in the art will also recognize that this arrangement provides for even winding across the spool as seen in Fig. 9, 11, and 12.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Herr wherein the guide is configured to move in a direction substantially parallel to an axial length of the mandrel and at least one spring configured to bias the guide to a neutral position along the length of the mandrel as taught by Molz for the purpose of even winding of the tether across the mandrel (see Molz col. 5 ln 59-65, Fig. 9, 11-12).
Regarding claim 56, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 1 (shown above), wherein the at least one spring is in contact with the guide (spring 314 is in contact with line alignment device 312; Molz Fig. 9-12).
Regarding claim 57, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 1 (shown above), wherein: the guide is movably mounted on one or more rails extending parallel to the axial length of the mandrel (line alignment device 312 moves on support rods extending parallel to the spool 300; Fig. 9-12, col. 10 ln 49-53); the at least one spring comprises: a first spring disposed on the at least one rail, on a first side of the guide (left spring 314 on support rod to the left of line alignment device 312; Fig. 9-12); and a second spring disposed on the at least one rail, on a second side of the guide spring comprises: a first spring disposed on the at least one rail, on a first side of the guide (right spring 314 on support rod to the right of line alignment device 312; Fig. 9-12); and the first and second springs spanning a length of the one or more rails (springs 314 span a length of the support rods, as seen in Fig. 9-12).
Regarding claim 58, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 57 (shown above), wherein the neutral position is a center of the one or more rails in a direction parallel to the axial length of the mandrel (springs 314 provide pressure to maintain line position 312 in a central location; col. 11 ln 22-31, col. 4 ln 58-60).
Claim(s) 59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr in view of Molz, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Deng.
Regarding claim 59, the modified Herr discloses the device of claim 1 (shown above), wherein the at least one spring is configured to bias the guide such that the tether is wound on the mandrel one layer at a time when the mandrel is rotated by the motor (Molz Fig. 9, 11-12 show tether winding onto spool one layer at a time; Molz discloses the line wraps back over the spindle after having laid one layer, col. 11 ln 22-31; motor 212 of Molz rotates the spool to wind the line onto the spool, Fig. 9, col. 10 ln 32-48).
The modified Herr does not disclose the tether is wound on the mandrel in a single layer.
Deng teaches a tether (rope 7; Fig. 1) which is wound onto a mandrel in a single layer (a single layer of rope 7 is wound on the friction drum 3; par. 0007, 0018, 0031, 0040) for the purpose of providing a constant tension output of the tether (par. 0007, 0018, 0040). A single layer of rope also avoids damage to an inner layer by compression from the outer layer (par. 0005).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the device of Herr to wind the tether onto the mandrel in a single layer as taught by Deng for the purpose of providing a constant tension output and avoiding damage to the tether caused by multiple layers (Deng par. 0005, 0007, 0018, 0040).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the springs of Tsai are not configured to bias the guide to a neutral position. However, Tsai states that when the springs 23 are compressed by the positioning unit, the positioning unit is moved in the other direction, back towards the center, by the springs (par. 0024, as cited above). This application of force by the springs on to the positioning unit at the ends of the guide rail can be considered a biasing force. Applicant argues that the springs only contact the positioning unit at the ends of the guide rod, however, the claim limitation does not require constant contact between the positioning unit and the springs.
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 KELSEY RHEE whose telephone number is (703)756-5954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM EST.
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 at (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.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/BRANDY S LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights