DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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) 1, 3, 4, and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka (US 20070073196 A1).
For claim(s) 1, 3, and 4, Tanaka teaches A center of gravity control support device and method [entire disclosure – see at least abstract] comprising:
one or more sensors [11] configured to measure a change in a center of gravity position of a standing posture of a user;
one or more processors, [3] configured to, in a case where the center of gravity position deviates from a predetermined range, generate a tactile stimulation signal for applying tactile stimulation to the user in accordance with a direction that deviates from the predetermined range; [¶¶63-67][the use of ‘in a case where’ as a transitional phrase in claim(s) 1 and 3 from makes this limitation a conditional limitation; as such, the device of Tanaka need only teach a device which has a structure equally capable of performing the claimed conditional function and the method of Tanaka need only teach the non-conditional limitations of the claimed method; see MPEP § 2111.04 for conditional limitation interpretation]
and one or more thermoelectric elements [31a-n] configured to convert the tactile stimulation signal into the thermal stimulation and present the thermal stimulation to a sole of a foot of the user [¶18, ¶¶63-67]
Tanaka fails to teach the thermal stimulation at or below 15°C. However, it is noted that Applicant has failed to provide details of criticality or unexpected results in the specification with regard to the particularly claimed lower temperature range. Therefore, it would have been within the skill of the art, through routine experimentation, to realize the optimum thermal stimulation at or below 15°C. (“Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235). See MPEP § 2144.05(II).
For claim(s) 6, Tanaka teaches
wherein an application of the thermal stimulation causes a flexion reflex in the user that shifts the user's center of gravity in a direction opposite to a location of the presented thermal stimulation. [since Tanaka teaches the thermal stimulation in ¶16 and ¶63, then the device of Tanaka is capable of achieving the functional result in claim(s) 6]
For claim(s) 7, Tanaka teaches
wherein the one or more thermoelectric elements comprise (i) a first thermoelectric element arranged at a location corresponding to a base of toes of a left foot of the user, (ii) a second thermoelectric element arranged at a location corresponding to a base of toes of a right foot of the user, (iii) a third thermoelectric element arranged at a location corresponding to a heel of the left foot of the user, and (iv) a fourth thermoelectric element arranged at a location corresponding to a heel of the right foot of the user. [Fig(s). 4-5]
For claim(s) 8, Tanaka teaches
wherein the thermal stimulation is applied to a location on the sole of the foot that corresponds to the direction that the center of gravity position deviates from the predetermined range. [Fig(s). 4-5]
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka in view of Wilson (US 9829311 B1).
For claim(s) 5, Tanaka fails to teach the sensors comprising strain gauges forming a bridge circuit. However, consider that Tanaka does teach in ¶62 and ¶105 the use of load cells / load sensors in the system.
Wilson teaches a postural assessment system [Fig(s). 1] comprising strain gauges in a bridge circuit. [col. 12 ll. 15-35]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was filed to modify the load cells / sensors of Tanka to incorporate the strain-bridge configuration of Wilson in order to improve measurement accuracy and efficiency. As motivated by Wilson cols. 1-2.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new bases of rejection nor combination of references being used in the current rejection.
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).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN S MELHUS whose telephone number is (571)272-5342. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday | 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Robert Chen can be reached on 571-272-3672. 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.
/BENJAMIN S MELHUS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights