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 following Office Action is in response to amendments filed on 07/10/2025. Claims 1-9, 12 and 14-23 are pending in the application. Claims 1-9, 12 and 14-23 have been rejected as set forth below.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: after each of the terms “transmission” and “apparatus” in line 25, a comma “,” needs to be inserted. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: after the term “transmission” in line 26, and “apparatus” in line 27, a comma “,” needs to be inserted. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: after the term “transmission” in line 28, and “apparatus” in line 29, a comma “,” needs to be inserted. Appropriate corrections are required.
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.
Claims 1-9, 12 and 14-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Each of Claims 1-9, 12 and 14-23 has been analyzed in further details below.
Step 2A, Prong 1
Each of Claims 1-9, 12 and 14-23 recites at least one step or instruction for observation, evaluation, judgement and opinion of biometric data of a user and various performance levels which are grouped as a mental process under the 2019 PEG. The claimed invention involve observing first biometric data of a user for a physical activity for a plurality of performance levels and associating biometric output levels from the biometric data with corresponding performance levels to establish a baseline, observing a performance of the physical activity, observing the second biometric data of the user indicating a biometric output level of the user and obtaining the performance level, evaluating the biometric output level and in response thereto, providing instructions for the user.
A detailed evaluation of each claim has been shown below. Please note that the underlined portions show the abstract idea, the bolded portions show additional elements, and the statement within the parenthesis clarify the specific abstract idea of the specific limitation.
Specifically, the claims recite:
A method comprising:
obtaining, by a processing system including at least one processor, first biometric data of a user from at least one biometric device for a physical activity via at least a first exercise apparatus for a plurality of performance levels, wherein the obtaining includes associating biometric output levels from the first biometric data with corresponding performance levels of the plurality of performance levels as baseline biometric output levels (i.e. visually obtaining/observing or manually determining a heart rate/pulse data of a user; involves observation, which is grouped as a mental process under 2019 PEG);
detecting, by the processing system, a performance of the physical activity by the user via the at least the first exercise apparatus (i.e. visually observing that the user is performing exercise; involves observation, which is grouped as a mental process under 2019 PEG);
obtaining, by the processing system, a first performance level and second biometric data of the user associated with the performance of the physical activity, wherein the second biometric data indicates a first biometric output level (i.e. visually observing the first performance level and determining the second heart rate data of the user; involves observation, which is grouped as a mental process under 2019 PEG);
detecting, by the processing system, that the first biometric output level of the user is an elevated level for the user at the first performance level (i.e. evaluating by comparing the first biometric output level with that of the first performance level and determining/noting such biometric output level being higher; involves evaluation, which is grouped as a mental process under 2019 PEG);
generating, by the processing system, an instruction for at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus to implement a reduced performance level for at least one of: the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus, or a performance of at least a second physical activity via the first exercise apparatus, wherein the reduced performance level is a lesser performance level as compared to the first performance level (i.e. mentally determining a change or adjustment needed for at least one setting of the exercise apparatus to reduce the performance level (i.e. determining a lower speed for the exercise apparatus, or change their exercise intensity or exercise to a less intense one through providing lower resistance, incline, weight, etc., or changing exercise from running to walking; involves judgement and opinion, which are grouped as mental processes under 2019 PEG); and
implementing, by the processing system, the reduced performance level via a transmission over at least one network to the first exercise apparatus of the instruction for the at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus, wherein the first exercise apparatus is to apply the at least one setting according to the instruction to effect the reduced performance level (i.e. aurally or verbally, announcing such instructions to a user or writing, via a pen and paper, such instruction and placing it on the exercise machine for a user to manually change the at least one setting on the exercise apparatus based on the instruction received; involves opinion, which is grouped as a mental process under 2019 PEG).
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: directing the user to engage in the first biometric output level for the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus (i.e. verbally or via writing communicating to the user to stay within their heart rate, involves judgement and opinion, which are grouped as mental processes under 2019 PEG).
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising: directing the user to engage in the first performance level for the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus (i.e. verbally or via writing communicating to the user to continue exercising using the same exertion level, involves judgement and opinion, which are grouped as mental processes under 2019 PEG).
4. The method of claim 3, wherein the directing the user to engage in the first performance level comprises selecting at least a first setting of the first exercise apparatus, wherein the at least the first setting comprises at least one of: a first resistance level; a first weight load; a first distance displacement; a first maximal angle; a first incline level; or a first speed (i.e. verbally or via writing communicating specific speeds or weights to exercise at/against, to the user to continue exercising using the same exertion level, involves judgement and opinion, which are grouped as mental processes under 2019 PEG).
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the generating the instruction for the user to engage in the reduced performance level comprises selecting at least a second setting of the first exercise apparatus, wherein the at least the second setting comprises at least one of: a second resistance level that is less than the first resistance level; a second weight load that is less than the first weight load; a second distance displacement that is less than the first distance displacement; a second maximal angle that is less than the first maximal angle; a second incline level that is less than the first incline level; or a second speed that is less than the first speed (i.e. verbally or via writing communicating another speed or weight to exercise at/against, to the user to reduce their performance intensity (i.e. lower their pace), involves judgement and opinion, which are grouped as mental processes under 2019 PEG).
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the first biometric data and the second biometric data both comprise at least one of: pulse data; breathing rate data; pupil dilation data; perspiration rate data; blood oxygen saturation level data; or temperature data (i.e. visually observing or manually determining the pulse data, temperature data or counting the breathing rate; involves observation, which is grouped as a mental process under 2019 PEG).
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of performance levels comprises: levels of speed; levels of distance; levels of distance displacement; levels of angular contraction; levels of time of performance; levels of repetitions per weight; or levels of repetitions per resistance (i.e. mentally determining various speed levels, or repetitions or observing performance duration; involves judgement and observation, which are grouped as mental processes under 2019 PEG).
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the generating the instruction for the user to engage in the reduced performance level for the performance of the at least the second physical activity via the first exercise apparatus comprises mapping the first performance level for the physical activity to a corresponding first performance level for the at least the second physical activity and wherein the reduced performance level is a lesser performance level as compared to the first performance level for the at least the second physical activity (i.e. mentally evaluating such mapping between physical activities; involves evaluation, which is a grouped as a mental process under 2019 PEG).
9. The method of claim 1, wherein the first physical activity comprises a first type of a resistance exercise or a weightlifting exercise and wherein the at least the second physical activity comprises at least a second type of resistance exercise or a second type of weightlifting exercise (i.e. performing the observation, evaluation, judgement and opinion, when the user is performing various resistance or weight lifting exercises).
12. The method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting an additional instruction to an endpoint device of the user (i.e. verbally communicating an additional instruction or writing an additional instructions on a piece of paper associated with the user; involves opinion, which is grouped as a mental process under 2019 PEG).
14. The method of claim 1, wherein the processing system is a processing system of an endpoint device of the user, wherein the method further comprises: presenting an additional instruction as at least one of: an audio output or a visual output via the endpoint device (i.e., verbally communicating an additional instruction or writing an additional instructions on a piece of paper; involves opinion, which is grouped as a mental process under 2019 PEG).
15. The method of claim 1, further comprising: presenting, in response to the detecting that the first biometric output level of the user is at the elevated level for the user at the first performance level, a query to the user as to whether the user is affected by a physiological limitation; and obtaining an indication from the user that the user is affected by the physiological limitation, wherein the reduced performance level is selected for the user in response to the obtaining of the indication from the user that the user is affected by the physiological limitation (i.e. observing user’s facial and body gestures and verbally ask if the user is feeling pain and if so, tell the user to reduce their performance intensity (i.e. slow down); involves observation, evaluation, judgement and opinion which are grouped as mental processes under 2019 PEG).
16. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which, when executed by a processing system including at least one processor, cause the processing system to:
obtain first biometric data of a user from at least one biometric device for a physical activity via at least a first exercise apparatus for a plurality of performance levels, wherein the obtaining includes associating biometric output levels from the first biometric data with corresponding performance levels of the plurality of performance levels as baseline biometric output levels (same as claim 1 above);
detect a performance of the physical activity by the user via the at least the first exercise apparatus (same as claim 1 above);
obtain a first performance level and second biometric data of the user associated with the performance of the physical activity, wherein the second biometric data indicates a first biometric output level (same as claim 1 above);
detect that the first biometric output level of the user is an elevated level for the user at the first performance level (same as claim 1 above);
generate an instruction for at last one setting of the first exercise apparatus to implement a reduced performance level for at least one of: the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus or a performance of at least a second physical activity via the first exercise apparatus, wherein the reduced performance level is a lesser performance level as compared to the first performance level (same as claim 1 above); and
implement the reduced performance level via a transmission over at least one network to the first exercise apparatus of the instruction for the at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus, wherein the first exercise apparatus is to apply the at least one setting according to the instruction to effect the reduced performance level (same as claim 1 above).
17. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the instructions, when executed by the processing system, further cause the processing system to: direct the user to engage in the first biometric output level for the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus (same as claim 2 above).
18. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the instructions which cause the processing system to direct the user to engage in the first performance level for the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus (same as claim 3 above).
19. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 18, wherein the instructions which cause the processing system to direct the user to engage in the first performance level include instructions which cause the processing system to select at least a first setting of the first exercise apparatus, wherein the at least the first setting comprises at least one of: a first resistance level; a first weight load; a first incline level; or a first speed (same as claim 4 above).
20. An apparatus comprising: a processing system including at least one processor; and a computer-readable medium storing instructions which, when executed by the processing system, cause the processing system to:
obtain first biometric data of a user from at least one biometric device for a physical activity via at least a first exercise apparatus for a plurality of performance levels, wherein the obtaining includes associating biometric output levels from the first biometric data with corresponding performance levels of the plurality of performance levels as baseline biometric output levels (same as claim 1 above);
detect a performance of the physical activity by the user via the at least the first exercise apparatus (same as claim 1 above);
obtain a first performance level and second biometric data of the user associated with the performance of the physical activity, wherein the second biometric data indicates a first biometric output level (same as claim 1 above);
detect that the first biometric output level of the user is an elevated level for the user at the first performance level (same as claim 1 above);
generate an instruction for at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus to implement a reduced performance level for at least one of: the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus or a performance of at least a second physical activity via the first exercise apparatus, wherein the reduced performance level is a lesser performance level as compared to the first performance level (same as claim 1 above); and
implement the reduced performance level via a transmission over at least one network to the first exercise apparatus of the instruction for the at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus, wherein the first exercise apparatus is to apply the at least one setting according to the instruction to effect the reduced performance level (same as claim 1 above).
21. The apparatus of claim 20, wherein the instructions which cause the processing system to generate the instruction for the user to engage in the reduced performance level for the performance of the at least the second physical activity via the first exercise apparatus includes instructions which cause the processing system to map the first performance level for the physical activity to a corresponding first performance level for the at least the second physical activity and wherein the reduced performance level is a lesser performance level as compared to the first performance level for the at least the second physical activity (same as claim 8 above).
22. The apparatus of claim 20, wherein the instructions, when executed by the processing system, further cause the processing system to: direct the user to engage in the first biometric output level for the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus (i.e., verbally communicating or writing on a piece of paper, to the user to engage in the firs biometric output level for the performance of the physical activity; involves opinion, which is grouped as a mental process under 2019 PEG).
23. The apparatus of claim 20, wherein the instructions, when executed by the processing system, further cause the processing system to: direct the user to engage in the first performance level for the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus (i.e., verbally communicating or writing on a piece of paper, to the user to engage in the first performance level for the performance of the physical activity; involves opinion, which is grouped as a mental process under 2019 PEG).
Accordingly, as indicated above, each of the above-identified claims recites an abstract idea.
Further, dependent Claims 2-9, 12, 14-15, 17-19 and 21-23 merely include limitations that either further define the abstract idea (and thus don’t make the abstract idea any less abstract) or amount to no more than generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use because they’re merely incidental or token additions to the claims that do not alter or affect how the process steps are performed.
Step 2A, Prong 2
The above-identified abstract idea in each of independent Claims 1, 16 and 20 (and their respective dependent Claims 2-9, 12, 14-15, 17-19 and 21-23) is not integrated into a practical application under 2019 PEG because the additional elements (identified above in independent Claims 1, 16 and 20), either alone or in combination, generally link the use of the above-identified abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. More specifically, the additional elements of: a processing system comprising a processor, a non-transitory computer-readable medium/a memory, a biometric device, a first exercise device, a network, and a user endpoint device having an audio or visual output, are generically recited computer elements or conventional exercise devices and biometric sensors, in independent claims and their respective dependent claims, which do not improve the functioning of a computer, or any other technology or technical field. Nor do these above-identified additional elements serve to apply the above-identified abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine, effect a transformation or apply or use the above-identified abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use thereof to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. Furthermore, the above-identified additional elements do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. For at least these reasons, the abstract idea identified above in independent Claims 1, 16 and 20 (and their respective dependent claims) is not integrated into a practical application under 2019 PEG.
Moreover, the above-identified abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application under 2019 PEG because the claimed method and system merely implements the above-identified abstract idea (e.g., mental processes) using rules (e.g., computer instructions) executed by a computer (e.g., a processor, as claimed). In other words, these claims are merely directed to an abstract idea with additional generic computer elements which do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. Additionally, Applicant’s specification does not include any discussion of how the claimed invention provides a technical improvement realized by these claims over the prior art or any explanation of a technical problem having an unconventional technical solution that is expressed in these claims. That is, like Affinity Labs of Tex. v. DirecTV, LLC, the specification fails to provide sufficient details regarding the manner in which the claimed invention accomplishes any technical improvement or solution. Thus, for these additional reasons, the abstract idea identified above in independent Claims 1, 16 and 20 (and their respective dependent claims) is not integrated into a practical application under the 2019 PEG.
Accordingly, independent Claims 1, 16 and 20 (and their respective dependent claims) are each directed to an abstract idea under 2019 PEG.
Step 2B
None of Claims 1-9, 12 and 14-23 include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for at least the following reasons.
These claims require the additional elements of: a processing system comprising a processor, a non-transitory computer-readable medium/a memory, a biometric device, a first exercise device, a network, and a user endpoint device having an audio or visual output.
The above-identified additional elements are generically claimed computer components or are conventional exercise device and biometric sensors which enable the above-identified abstract idea(s) to be conducted by performing the basic functions of automating mental tasks in various exercise areas. The courts have recognized such computer functions as well understood, routine, and conventional functions when claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity. See, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc. , 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); and OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
Additionally, in light of Applicant’s specification, at least ¶ [0011], [0013], [0021], [0025]-[0026], the claimed terms processor, a network, endpoint user device having an audio or visual output are reasonably construed as a generic computing devices. Like SAP America vs Investpic, LLC (Federal Circuit 2018), it is clear, from the claims themselves and the specification, that these limitations require no improved computer resources, just already available computers, with their already available basic functions, to use as tools in executing the claimed process.
Furthermore, Applicant’s specification does not describe any special programming or algorithms required for the processor or mobile device. This lack of disclosure is acceptable under 35 U.S.C. §112(a) since this hardware performs non-specialized functions known by those of ordinary skill in the computer arts. By omitting any specialized programming or algorithms, Applicant's specification essentially admits that this hardware is conventional and performs well understood, routine and conventional activities in the computer industry or arts. In other words, Applicant’s specification demonstrates the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of the above-identified additional elements because it describes these additional elements in a manner that indicates that the additional elements are sufficiently well-known that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of such additional elements to satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) (see Berkheimer memo from April 19, 2018, (III)(A)(1) on page 3). Adding hardware that performs “‘well understood, routine, conventional activit[ies]’ previously known to the industry” will not make claims patent-eligible (TLI Communications).
The recitation of the above-identified additional limitations in independent and dependent claims amounts to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. Simply using a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); and TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Moreover, implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer, does not add significantly more, similar to how the recitation of the computer in the claim in Alice amounted to mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer.
A claim that purports to improve computer capabilities or to improve an existing technology may provide significantly more. McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc., 837 F.3d 1299, 1314-15, 120 USPQ2d 1091, 1101-02 (Fed. Cir. 2016); and Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1335-36, 118 USPQ2d 1684, 1688-89 (Fed. Cir. 2016). However, a technical explanation as to how to implement the invention should be present in the specification for any assertion that the invention improves upon conventional functioning of a computer, or upon conventional technology or technological processes. That is, the disclosure must provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. Here, Applicant’s specification does not include any discussion of how the claimed invention provides a technical improvement realized by these claims over the prior art or any explanation of a technical problem having an unconventional technical solution that is expressed in these claims. Instead, as in Affinity Labs of Tex. v. DirecTV, LLC 838 F.3d 1253, 1263-64, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207-08 (Fed. Cir. 2016), the specification fails to provide sufficient details regarding the manner in which the claimed invention accomplishes any technical improvement or solution.
For at least the above reasons, the method, system and a machine-readable storage medium of Claims 1-9, 12 and 14-23 are directed to applying an abstract idea (e.g., mental process) on a general purpose computer without (i) improving the performance of the computer itself (as in McRO, Bascom and Enfish), or (ii) providing a technical solution to a problem in a technical field (as in DDR). In other words, none of Claims 1-9, 12 and 14-23 provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that these claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Taking the additional elements individually and in combination, the additional elements do not provide significantly more. Specifically, when viewed individually, the above-identified additional elements in independent Claims 1, 16 and 20 (and their dependent claims) do not add significantly more because they are simply an attempt to limit the abstract idea to a particular technological environment. That is, neither the general computer elements nor any other additional element adds meaningful limitations to the abstract idea because these additional elements represent insignificant extra-solution activity. When viewed as a combination, these above-identified additional elements simply instruct the practitioner to implement the claimed functions with well-understood, routine and conventional activity specified at a high level of generality in a particular technological environment. As such, there is no inventive concept sufficient to transform the claimed subject matter into a patent-eligible application. As such, the above-identified additional elements, when viewed as whole, do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Thus, Claims 1-9, 12 and 14-23 merely apply an abstract idea to a computer and do not (i) improve the performance of the computer itself (as in Bascom and Enfish), or (ii) provide a technical solution to a problem in a technical field (as in DDR).
Therefore, none of the Claims 1-9, 12 and 14-23 amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Accordingly, Claims 1-9, 12 and 14-23 are not patent eligible and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to abstract ideas implemented on a generic computer in view of the Supreme Court Decision in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al. and 2019 PEG.
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.
Claims 1-9, 12, 14 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang et al. (US 2021/0197023 A1) in view of Jayalath et al. (US 2020/0151595 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 16 and 20, Liang teaches a method/an apparatus/a non-transitory computer-readable medium (i.e. storage device 14/84) storing instructions which, when executed by a processing system including at least one processor (i.e. computing device 16/86, ¶ [21]-[22], [53], [55]-[56]), cause the processing system to:
obtaining/obtain, by a processing system including at least one processor (i.e. computing device 16/86, ¶ [22], [53], [56]), first biometric data (i.e. muscle strength, heart rate) of a user from at least one biometric device (i.e. 12, and/or a heart rate sensor) for a physical activity via at least a first exercise apparatus for a plurality of performance levels (i.e. different intensities of exercises are considered a plurality of performance levels, ¶ [20], [23], [40]-[43], [52]), wherein the obtaining includes associating biometric output levels from the first biometric data with corresponding performance levels of the plurality of performance levels as baseline biometric output levels (¶ [26]-[28], [55], since muscle strength (and/or heart rate)/biometric output levels for various muscle portions performing various exercises can be obtained and stored, such muscle strengths (and/or heart rate)/biometric output levels can be associated with plurality of performance levels as baseline biometric output levels (reference value(s)));
detecting/detect, by the processing system, a performance of the physical activity by the user via the at least the first exercise apparatus (¶ [26]-[28], [40], [52], [54]);
obtaining/obtain, by the processing system, a first performance level (i.e. intensity of current exercise) and second biometric data of the user associated with the performance of the physical activity, wherein the second biometric data indicates a first biometric output level (¶ [26]-[28], [40]-[43], [52], claim 7, i.e. current muscle strength (or heart rate) is considered the first biometric output level);
detecting/detect, by the processing system, that the first biometric output level of the user is an elevated level for the user at the first performance level (Figs. 3-5, ¶ [29]-[33], [40]-[45], [57], claim 7);
generating/generate, by the processing system, an instruction for at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus to implement a reduced performance level for at least one of: the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus or a performance of at least a second physical activity via the first exercise apparatus, wherein the reduced performance level is a lesser performance level as compared to the first performance level (¶ [24], [29]-[33], [40]-[45], [52], the user can be prompted to increase or decrease the exercise intensity or change the machine or training amount by visual, auditory, and/or tactile means. As such, an instruction for at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus to implement a reduced performance level is generated. Also, since the exercise intensity can be directly adjusted by the exercise machine/apparatus itself, it is implied that one or more settings/operating parameter of the first exercise apparatus/machine is being controlled/adjusted to provide the reduced performance level/reduced exercise intensity); and
implementing/implement, by the processing system, the reduced performance level via a transmission to the first exercise apparatus of the instruction for the at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus, wherein the first exercise apparatus is to apply the at least one setting according to the instruction to effect the reduced performance level (¶ [29]-[33], [40]-[45], [52], since the exercise intensity can be directly adjusted by the exercise machine/apparatus itself, it is implied that the reduced performance level is implemented through transmission of the instruction for the at least one or more settings/operating parameter of the first exercise apparatus/machine and the at least one or more settings/operating parameter of the first exercise apparatus/machine is being controlled/adjusted to provide the reduced performance level/reduced exercise intensity).
Liang is silent about transmission of the instruction for the at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus, to the first exercise apparatus being over at least one network.
Regarding claims 1, 16 and 20, Jayalath teaches a method/an apparatus/a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which, when executed by a processing system including at least one processor (Figs. 1-5C, ¶ [26], since the exercise feedback system processes and analyzes signals received and generates a comparison to a reference and performs corrective action when necessary, a processing system including at least one processor has to exist), cause the processing system to/comprising:
generating/generate, by the processing system, an instruction for at least one setting of a first exercise apparatus (150) to implement a reduced performance level for at least one of: a performance of a physical activity via the first exercise apparatus or a performance of at least a second physical activity via the first exercise apparatus (¶ [42], [44], [47], the exercise feedback system generates instructions for altering the device setting 232 to increase or decrease weight or resistance (or incline) settings of the exercise equipment 150);
implementing/implement, by the processing system, the reduced performance level via a transmission over at least one network (140) to the first exercise apparatus (150) of an instruction for the at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus, wherein the first exercise apparatus is to apply the at least one setting according to the instruction to effect the reduced performance level (Fig. 1, ¶ [19], [24], [33], [40], [42], [45], [50], [57], [60], [64]-[65], [75], [77], [81], [83], the system environment includes an exercise feedback system 100, a client device 110, athletic garment 130 and exercise equipment units 150 that are all communicatively coupled together via a network 140, where the connected exercise equipment units 150 receive control instructions generated based on outputs of other system components, in order to automatically adjust equipment settings in relation to a training goal. Control of the connected exercise equipment 150 can thus be implemented through mobile devices (e.g., mobile devise that operate as controllers for connected exercise equipment 150), through the cloud (e.g., via network 140)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liang’s invention wherein transmission of the instruction for the at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus, to the first exercise apparatus is over at least one network as taught by Jayalath in order to enable a user use different exercise machines at different locations, thereby providing a more efficient overall system for users.
Regarding claims 2, 17 and 22, Liang in view of Jayalath teaches the method comprising/wherein the instructions, when executed by the processing system, further causes the processing system to: directing/direct the user to engage in the first biometric output level for the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus (Liang: Fig. 5, ¶ [41]-[43], [45], [52]).
Regarding claims 3, 18 and 23, Liang in view of Jayalath teaches the method comprising/wherein the instructions, when executed by the processing system, further causes the processing system to: directing/direct the user to engage in the first performance level for the performance of the physical activity via the first exercise apparatus (Liang: Fig. 5, ¶ [41]-[43], [45], [52]).
Regarding claims 4 and 19, Liang in view of Jayalath teaches wherein the directing/wherein the instructions which cause the processing system to direct the user to engage in the first performance level comprises/include instructions which cause the processing system to: selecting/select at least a first setting of the first exercise apparatus, wherein the at least the first setting comprises at least one of: a first resistance level; a first weight load; a first distance displacement; a first maximal angle; a first incline level; or a first speed (Jayalath: [63], [70], [76]).
Regarding claim 5, Liang in view of Jayalath teaches wherein the generating the instruction for the user to engage in the reduced performance level comprises selecting at least a second setting of the first exercise apparatus, wherein the at least the second setting comprises at least one of: a second resistance level that is less than the first resistance level; a second weight load that is less than the first weight load; a second distance displacement that is less than the first distance displacement; a second maximal angle that is less than the first maximal angle; a second incline level that is less than the first incline level; or a second speed that is less than the first speed (Jayalath: ¶ [63], [70], [76]).
Regarding claim 6, Liang in view of Jayalath teaches wherein the first biometric data and the second biometric data both comprise at least one of: pulse data; breathing rate data; pupil dilation data; perspiration rate data; blood oxygen saturation level data; or temperature data (Liang: ¶ [18], [23], [38], [40]-[44], the first and second biometric data can comprise pulse data/heart rate).
Regarding claim 7, Liang in view of Jayalath teaches wherein the plurality of performance levels comprises: levels of speed; levels of distance; levels of distance displacement; levels of angular contraction; levels of time of performance; levels of repetitions per weight; or levels of repetitions per resistance (Jayalath: ¶ [76], [79]).
Regarding claims 8 and 21, Liang in view of Jayalath teaches wherein the generating/the instructions which cause the processing system to generate the instruction for the user to engage in the reduced performance level for the performance of the at least the second physical activity via the first exercise apparatus comprises/includes instructions which cause the processing system to: mapping/map the first performance level for the physical activity to a corresponding first performance level for the at least the second physical activity and wherein the reduced performance level is a lesser performance level as compared to the first performance level for the at least the second physical activity (Liang: ¶ [18], [29], [43], instruction for the user to engage in the reduced performance level for the performance of the second physical activity via the first exercise apparatus can be generated by adjusting a menu of exercise to engage in reduced performance level/intensity, in which the adjusted menu would cause the user to engage a second physical activity having a first performance level/intensity that is a reduced performance level/intensity compared to the first performance level/intensity of the physical activity. As such, the first performance level for the physical activity has to be mapped to a corresponding first performance level for the at least the second physical activity in order to enable adjusting the menu for the user to be engaged in a reduced performance level using the first exercise apparatus).
Regarding claim 9, Liang in view of Jayalath teaches wherein the first physical activity comprises a first type of a resistance exercise or a weightlifting exercise and wherein the at least the second physical activity comprises at least a second type of resistance exercise or a second type of weightlifting exercise (Liang: ¶ [20]).
Regarding claim 12, Liang in view of Jayalath teaches the method further comprising: transmitting an additional instruction to an endpoint device of the user (Liang: ¶ [24], [52]; Jayalath: Figs. 1 and 2B, ¶ [41], [65], [77], [79], [81], [87]-[88], [90]-[91], user device 125/client device 110, is considered an endpoint device of the user, providing feedback to the user 120 may be performed via a user device 125 through a network 140, the training plan 410 may be communicated to the user 120 via a user device 125).
Regarding claim 14, Liang in view of Jayalath teaches wherein the processing system is a processing system of an endpoint device of the user, wherein the method further comprises: presenting additional instruction as at least one of: an audio output or a visual output via the endpoint device (Liang: ¶ [24], [52]; Jayalath: Figs. 1, 2B, 4, 5B-5C, ¶ [41], [65], [77], [79], [81], [87]-[88], [90]-[91], user device 125/client device 110, is considered an endpoint device of the user).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang in view of Jayalath as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Volosin et al. (US 2021/0035674 A1).
Liang in view of Jayalath is silent about presenting, in response to the detecting that the first biometric output level of the user is at the elevated level for the user at the first performance level, a query to the user as to whether the user is affected by a physiological limitation; and obtaining an indication from the user that the user is affected by the physiological limitation, wherein the reduced performance level is selected for the user in response to the obtaining of the indication from the user that the user is affected by the physiological limitation.
Regarding claim 15, Volosin teaches a method comprising: presenting, in response to the detecting that the first biometric output level of the user is at the elevated level for the user at the first performance level, a query to the user as to whether the user is affected by a physiological limitation; and obtaining an indication from the user that the user is affected by the physiological limitation, wherein the reduced performance level is selected for the user in response to the obtaining of the indication from the user that the user is affected by the physiological limitation (¶ 323]-[324]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liang’s invention in view of Jayalath with presenting, in response to the detecting that the first biometric output level of the user is at the elevated level for the user at the first performance level, a query to the user as to whether the user is affected by a physiological limitation; and obtaining an indication from the user that the user is affected by the physiological limitation, wherein the reduced performance level is selected for the user in response to the obtaining of the indication from the user that the user is affected by the physiological limitation as taught by Volosin in order to enable use of the device for rehabilitation purposes and prevent the user from over-exerting and potential injuries.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-9, 12 and 14-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Response to arguments regarding 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection:
In response to Applicant’s arguments regarding rejection of the independent claims 1, 16 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 101, stating: “Transmitting an instruction to cause an exercise apparats to automatically implement a reduced performance level via at least one setting of the exercise apparatus is quite different from aurally or verbally announcing to a user what to do”, the Examiner would like to mention that the claim as currently recited, does not include such limitations regarding the exercise apparatus automatically implementing a reduced performance level via at least one setting in response to an instruction being transmitted to it. As such, applicant is arguing narrower than claimed.
In response to applicant’s further argument stating: “a processing system generating an instruction for at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus to implement a reduced performance level and then implementing the reduced performance level via a transmission over at least one network to the first exercise apparatus of the instruction for the at least one setting of the firs exercise apparatus, wherein the first exercise apparatus is to apply the at least one setting according to the instruction to effect the reduced performance level are simply not operations that can be performed in a human mind. For instance, a human mind cannot implement a reduced performance level via a transmission over at least one network to the first exercise apparatus of the instruction for at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus, as now recited in the present independent claims”, the Examiner would like to mention the followings. As shown previously an above, generating an instruction for at least one setting of the first exercise apparatus to implement a reduced performance level, can still be performed through, mentally determining a change or adjustment needed for at least one setting of the exercise apparatus to reduce the performance level (i.e. determining a lower speed for the exercise apparatus, or change their exercise intensity or exercise to a less intense one through providing lower resistance, incline, weight, etc., or changing exercise from running to walking). With respect to implementing the reduced performance level via a transmission of the instruction, can also be performed, for instance, by aurally or verbally, announcing such instructions to a user or writing, via a pen and paper, such instruction and placing it on the exercise machine for a user to manually change the at least one setting on the exercise apparatus based on the instruction received. As such, these limitations, as drafted are processes that, under broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind and/or via pen and paper, but for the recitation of generic computer components (i.e. a processing system, a network) and conventional exercise apparatus (first exercise apparatus). That is, other than reciting “by the processing system”, “over at least one network” and “to the first exercise apparatus”, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For e